- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 79,903
- Reaction score
- 20,981
- Location
- I love your hate.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Let me know when you start to make sense.:roll:
***yawnn*** obviously I wasted my time again, trying to engage you. Oh well.
You just made an argument that gas guzzlers and junkers should remain on the roads so that small businesses can repair them and sell them gas. You certainly are not afraid of looking foolish, I'll give you that.
I do not see a parallel with this cute story. the government is offering a cash incentive to owners of vehicles known to be the worst polluters. The cash incentive represents only about 10% of the value of a new car. The stimulus is sufficient to encourage people to buy new cars, helping the economy, and also junk their polluting vehicles, which also helps the economy in the long run.
As a libertarian, I understand you would be against any sort of government involvement whatsoever under any circumstances, but perhaps even you can recognize this program is doing some good.
You need to ask yourself where the government got the cash to offer. It comes from you and me. Our government feels they know better how to use that hard earned cash from our wallets than we do.
The other question you need to ask yourself is, what will the car companies and dealers do when the program is over? What will be peoples incentive to buy cars then? I would guess that there are a lot of people that just participated in this program that were considering buying a new car in the next few months or year from now but with then incentive bought it now. That takes even more future sales away.
Mark my words, Obama and the liberals or the car companies will be coming back to congress in a few weeks or months asking for yet more money for this program.
You just made an argument that gas guzzlers and junkers should remain on the roads so that small businesses can repair them and sell them gas. You certainly are not afraid of looking foolish, I'll give you that.
Apparently Government isn't gonna suspend clunker program. Faux is hammering away on that program. Like their, and Republican, criticisms that Guvnamint run health care will bring ruin, the gang that says NO is copping large amounts of green in their efforts to gain traction against a program that is obviously building buyer confidence and sending product flying out the door.
Like their Health care hand wringing and dooms saying they are lying and being hypocrites at the same time. With their health care claim they were offered the chance to vote against Medicate, a single payer government run health care program and they ran the other way voting 100% in favor of Medicare.
Now, when offered the opportunity in the House of Representatives to vote their consciences about half of the republican minority voted to add funds to the Clunker program.
Way to go guys.
Yeah! How foolish to want those jobs to survive, so they can pay taxes on those salaries. That's completely foolish, when we can kill those jobs and raise taxes on everyone else that does have a job, then turn around and take that same tax revenue and pay unemployment to those who have lost their jobs. Works for me!
Why is it that most Libbos don't have a clue about how things work in the real world?
Oh, because I want Hummers off the road means I want to kill small business? Please, how can I even have a conversation with someone who makes such ridiculous claims?
Well, if what you want puts people out of work, then what you want doesn't mean jack. I'm one of those idiots that, for some crazy reason, wants this country to prosper and for the economy to grow...call me crazy, but I actually live off the economy.
Let explain it to you like this: if you remove a product from the market, then the people who produce that product no longer have a job. There goes your beloved tax revenue that you want to use to support the Welfare Class.
So if we add cars to the market, then we add jobs? Thanks for the support!:2wave:
...remove a product from the market, then the people who produce that product no longer have a job. There goes your beloved tax revenue that you want to use to support the Welfare Class.
No, simply adding cars to the market doesn't creates jobs. Producing goods and services that meet market demands creates jobs.
...die from cancer produced by polluted air caused by a product removes a jobholder and an income from the economy.
What makes a welfare class?
Other's Greed!
:doh
No, simply adding cars to the market doesn't creates jobs. Producing goods and services that meet market demands creates jobs.
What spin? I don't care if I support Muslims. I'm not threatened by buying items from China or buying oil from the Middle East. It's a global economy and I don't believe that every Muslim is some radical extremist trying to kill me. The way some Conservatives feel about Muslims though...
Creating demand for products creates jobs.
I didn't realize new cars were invincible. Our kids are going to be paying for the stimulus package right? If all of the cars on the market are breaking down now (providing jobs for contemporary mechanics) but new cars don't break down, you're proposing having less jobs for our children? Since the next generation is going to be paying for the stimulus package, why not set them up with jobs in the future when the cars we sell today are going to be breaking down?
:spin::spin::spin:
The government cannot "create demand" for a product. They can promote a produce thru incentives, but they cannot create demand.Creating demand for products creates jobs.
To much drama in that one. I don't think that it's credible to say that car ehaust causes canser, yet.
Lazy ass people who are encouraged to live on the government tit, creates a welfare class. You're really reaching, if you say that people are on welfare is the fault of rich folks.
You can't create demand. Now, that is foolish. Only the market can create demand
.
The government cannot "create demand" for a product. They can promote a produce thru incentives, but they cannot create demand.
The consumer market creates demand based on a number of factors. Need, cost, the amount of disposable income available and the value one places on the good or service in question are factors involved in creating product demand. Having the government confiscate money from one group of people and then offering it to another group of people to guide their product choice is not creating demand. It is incentivizing a market already with a demand with confiscated money.
The only rigging of the supply and demand chain is by our government. All things being equal and without government interference, the laws of supply and demand work. If there is a demand for an item with resources available to purchase the item, the market will respond by producing more of the item.Rich folk aren't to blame. They pray and tithe. They are the good guys. Its those who who don't look right, don't act right, don't eat right, aren't educated, they're to blame.
If there are ten items and there is money enough to buy nine items what is the expected outcome if the field is a fair one?
At least one guy doesn't get an item. Is he lazy because he either hasn't the money or the item? Or is the supply demand ratio such that some must be without items.
Some things don't require generated demand, the demand is constant. If it is rigged that some are favored for positions is is not reasonable to conclude that some of those not favored will not get jobs if since there cannot be enough supply in a market economy.
Rich folk aren't to blame. They pray and tithe. They are the good guys. Its those who who don't look right, don't act right, don't eat right, aren't educated, they're to blame.
If there are ten items and there is money enough to buy nine items what is the expected outcome if the field is a fair one?
You buy nine items. It's called, "prioritizing", which means if you have to choose between a can of beans for supper and a 6-pack of beer, you buy the beans.
At least one guy doesn't get an item. Is he lazy because he either hasn't the money or the item? Or is the supply demand ratio such that some must be without items.
Some things don't require generated demand, the demand is constant. If it is rigged that some are favored for positions is is not reasonable to conclude that some of those not favored will not get jobs if since there cannot be enough supply in a market economy.
Dude "you" ARE the market. Who would have bought a million ShamWOW's without some idiot creating demand?
If I confiscate enough money from one individual to provide 1000 people with enough money to meed their needs (demands) I am generating demand from taxes. Your model fails because you don't correct for units (buying and using).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?