Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by xile View Post
    That's a given, people will go out and spend money on completely utterly and useless things and then whine about how others do it. I know people who spend 100+ a month on things like alcohol, or 300+ a month on clothes, and then they go around acting like ppl who buy other things are stupid.
    Difference is can you spend the money or not. If you got $10,000 in your pocket, $100 (in a whole month) is pretty much nothing. Then again if you have $50 and have to take loan to buy alcohol for $100, there's an issue.
    Last edited by Thes; 2011-09-21 at 10:15 PM.

  2. #22
    Fluffy Kitten Dacien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    9,069
    Quote Originally Posted by xile View Post
    Then move to a different country
    I prefer to hold my government's feet to the fire to try to improve my country. I don't jump ship when things get bad. Not that I'm in any financial position to do so.

  3. #23
    Because it's my money they took that they're wasting.
    I paypal will let me send 1/1 millionth of a penny I'll recoop you your share of the cost.

  4. #24
    I remember my Gov teacher telling us about 500$ cigarette trays on submarines

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Thes View Post
    Difference is can you spend the money or not. If you got $10,000 in your pocket, $100 (in a whole month) is pretty much nothing. Then again if you have $50 and have to take loan to buy alcohol for $100, there's an issue.
    It's infinitely more complicated than that, say they have 50 dollars and they take a loan out to buy alcohol for 60 dollars, that 60 dollars is spent and then in turn because they government makes profit from those employed (the people they are paying to serve them alcohol) etc, etc, they gain that money back at a small rate, maybe theyll make back 58 dollars of what they spent, yes they'll be 2 dollars in debt, but at the same time some guy will also have a job. All this thread does is prove that people have absolutely no understand of how the whole job market works. The reason we are in debt isn't because of "wasteful" spending, its the migration of jobs and ridiculous amount of machine technology that has put millions out of work, that coupled with the growing need for more specalized educated jobs.

  6. #26
    It's selfishness. No one cares about the consequences of anything unless it directly impacts them. I would never throw away money on muffins that are a thousand percent overpriced, because I actually have to work for my money. It's a shame that my money is taken away through taxes so they can just throw it away. I need money for basic needs...it would go to better use if they just let me keep it. I know that a good portion of tax dollars does go towards things that we actually need such as infrastructure but come on, this is ridiculous.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Remilia View Post
    Only thing I find 'wat' is the cookies and muffins.

    $76 per person restaurant isn't that unheard of, is it expensive? Yes, however it isn't that unheard of in the restaurant industry. If you want a very good example, go to Las Vegas, you can see $100-200 per person there.
    It is when you're telling people that money is running out and everyone has to "tighten their belts" and make sacrifices.

  8. #28
    Fluffy Kitten Dacien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    9,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    I paypal will let me send 1/1 millionth of a penny I'll recoop you your share of the cost.
    Well these are only the costs we know about. And how does this speak to the financial prudence of government?

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by xile View Post
    It's infinitely more complicated than that, say they have 50 dollars and they take a loan out to buy alcohol for 60 dollars, that 60 dollars is spent and then in turn because they government makes profit from those employed (the people they are paying to serve them alcohol) etc, etc, they gain that money back at a small rate, maybe theyll make back 58 dollars of what they spent, yes they'll be 2 dollars in debt, but at the same time some guy will also have a job.
    You are acting as though it is in a vacuum though, and that it is a choice between them getting 16 dollar muffins catered or not eating. They could simply get some cheaper muffins and not have them catered. Still giving a business profit and giving them jobs, but saving some money in the process.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacien View Post
    Well these are only the costs we know about. And how does this speak to the financial prudence of government?
    They're spending money to companies that in turn allow for those companies to employ more people in theory. What would u want them to do with the money they save?

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Dacien View Post
    Well these are only the costs we know about. And how does this speak to the financial prudence of government?
    I'm willing to go up to a dollar, higher than that and I should talk to my girlfriend first.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerion View Post
    You are acting as though it is in a vacuum though, and that it is a choice between them getting 16 dollar muffins catered or not eating. They could simply get some cheaper muffins and not have them catered. Still giving a business profit and giving them jobs, but saving some money in the process.
    Saving money as a government does nothing, your goal isn't to save money and stagnate wealth, it is to actually help create jobs so that people can buy more things and in turn provide more tax revenue. Them saving doesn't really help at all. Yes they can go buy 4 dollar muffins, but who is to say that by buying those 16 dollar muffins they don't create more tax revenue to counter the cost of them and in turn allowing more people to be employed at a higher rate than the 4 dollar muffins. You're implying it takes the exact number of ppl to make 4 dollar muffins as it does the 16 dollar muffins and that includes the food and the ppl who make it and the ppl who cater. I mean in the end you're dealing with a massive research equation that begs the question which provides a better economic impact buying the 4 or 16 dollar muffins, because in the end both of the choices stimulate jobs its just a matter of how much. My issue is ppl seeing the 16 dollar muffins and utterly forgetting that maybe the 16 dollar muffins cost more because they require more work overall and in turn employing several more actual employees at a higher rate.
    Last edited by xile; 2011-09-21 at 10:29 PM.

  13. #33
    Yes, let's have McDonalds cater for government meetings. Good God have some perspective, people. This isn't some friendly brunch among friends.

  14. #34
    Let us whine about catered snacks at some random government conference. This will clearly eliminate the national debt.

    This kind of horse shit story is something for local news at best.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by xile View Post
    It's infinitely more complicated than that, say they have 50 dollars and they take a loan out to buy alcohol for 60 dollars, that 60 dollars is spent and then in turn because they government makes profit from those employed (the people they are paying to serve them alcohol) etc, etc, they gain that money back at a small rate, maybe theyll make back 58 dollars of what they spent, yes they'll be 2 dollars in debt, but at the same time some guy will also have a job. All this thread does is prove that people have absolutely no understand of how the whole job market works. The reason we are in debt isn't because of "wasteful" spending, its the migration of jobs and ridiculous amount of machine technology that has put millions out of work, that coupled with the growing need for more specalized educated jobs.
    Hurp derp, I do understand how job market works, but I was just answering that other guys more individualized post and not taking part in the thread as a whole.

    Oh and for that "ridiculous amount of machine technology", you need to remember that if having a machine in place of a worker is more profitable, then of course the employer will have machine instead. I know I would. Sucks for the employee, but what can you do.

  16. #36
    Fluffy Kitten Dacien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    9,069
    Quote Originally Posted by xile View Post
    They're spending money to companies that in turn allow for those companies to employ more people in theory. What would u want them to do with the money they save?
    Goverment should butt out of the private sector. Lower taxes on small businesses if they want to make themselves useful in that regard.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    I'm willing to go up to a dollar, higher than that and I should talk to my girlfriend first.
    I'm sure our cut of total wasted government spending is more than that.


    $20. Talk to her.

  17. #37
    Goverment should butt out of the private sector.
    Government should only use food the government grows itself.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Thes View Post
    Hurp derp, I do understand how job market works, but I was just answering that other guys more individualized post and not taking part in the thread as a whole.

    Oh and for that "ridiculous amount of machine technology", you need to remember that if having a machine in place of a worker is more profitable, then of course the employer will have machine instead. I know I would. Sucks for the employee, but what can you do.
    I'm not blaming the companies lol. I mean i'm all for companies trying their hardest to maximize their profits, i'm vehemently against people who think that the government should let companies do whatever they want because i realize how companies want to act, they want to ship all production facilities to other countries and provide as much machine operated work as possible, it's absolutely in their best interest as a company. Hence why i could most definately see this country becoming one that starts to employ a more educated job area, where we see the world split into two, the 1st world companies dealing with all the complex and higher up procedures due to education, and the third world countries dealing with all the production side. I'm not blaming the companies i'm just saying that the reason we have so much unemployment is much more complicated than saying, well the government is wasteful.

    ---------- Post added 2011-09-21 at 10:34 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Dacien View Post
    Goverment should butt out of the private sector. Lower taxes on small businesses if they want to make themselves useful in that regard.




    I'm sure our cut of total wasted government spending is more than that.


    $20. Talk to her.
    Why?? People are always like, the government is killing the private sector, even though most private sector business are absolutely destroying their previous profits. The reason small businesses are dying is because places like walmart and mcdonalds make it impossible for small businesses to compete, not because of too much taxation on them. Small business can't compete because walmart can go and buy mass products in bulk from exclusive deals across seas. and even if they can compete with their prices that they won't, it won't matter because right now there is more than enough supply of products to meet the demand. companies aren't going to hire people just because unless there is an incentive.
    Last edited by xile; 2011-09-21 at 10:41 PM.

  19. #39
    Moderator Remilia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Avatar:鉄花まき
    Posts
    7,487
    Quote Originally Posted by xile View Post
    Saving money as a government does nothing, your goal isn't to save money and stagnate wealth, it is to actually help create jobs so that people can buy more things and in turn provide more tax revenue. Them saving doesn't really help at all. Yes they can go buy 4 dollar muffins, but who is to say that by buying those 16 dollar muffins they don't create more tax revenue to counter the cost of them and in turn allowing more people to be employed at a higher rate than the 4 dollar muffins. You're implying it takes the exact number of ppl to make 4 dollar muffins as it does the 16 dollar muffins and that includes the food and the ppl who make it and the ppl who cater. I mean in the end you're dealing with a massive research equation that begs the question which provides a better economic impact buying the 4 or 16 dollar muffins, because in the end both of the choices stimulate jobs its just a matter of how much. My issue is ppl seeing the 16 dollar muffins and utterly forgetting that maybe the 16 dollar muffins cost more because they require more work overall and in turn employing several more actual employees at a higher rate.
    I may be wrong on this, but a using tax money to receive tax (unless it isn't tax money and then just ignore this) seems more like kicking yourself. Tax coming from the % of revenue the company receives, and so making up random numbers, spending $16 to yield $3 in taxes, ultimately you'll be gaining less and less.

    As for the $16 costing more labor and such, you'll be surprised at how little the food cost of baked goods are.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Caiada View Post
    The difference here is that the OP has a source and you have random non-clever insults.
    Know a guy that worked on Air Force One and saw them being given away. Guess you know more than someone that was on the plane/saw them given out?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •