Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Thursday, October 27, 2016
  • 1olderbutwiser1

    What would straighten out the whole country is for government employees and contractors to work for 20-40% less than private enterprise pays their employees. The cost of doing business would decrease dramatically, we would again be internationally competitive, and then have regulation-free zones as well as tax-free zones for start-ups. This would result in government people wanting to work in free enterprise jobs, so the one and only regulation that would be necessary, is that no ex-government employees could be hired into free enterprise, the engine of prosperity. Let them languish just as the noose has been put on free enterprise, a turn-around can only be appropriate. Think American, realize government is here to serve us, not rule us. Remember, November is not that far away. It must be, THE NOVEMBER TO REMEMBER.

    • Lola Johnson

      If you were to institute such a draconian cut in pay for government workers, then, of course, you would also limit corporate profits to 10% or less. Right? Right?

      • 1olderbutwiser1

        Not necessarily. Many corporations today have far less than 10% profit anyway. You must be a gov employee who would of course feel that we must REGULATE profits to less than 10%. What we really need is a balanced budget amendment, where most of gov is eliminated or downsized, and American ingenuity will earn whatever it can earn in a freely competitive market. A VAT tax on dumped imported junk goods might help as well. It sure has helped Germany. The problem here is spending-happy libs in gov who would then want to apply even more taxes on domestically produced goods. We have long passed our limit on justifiable and maintainable taxation, notice that our gov expenditures at the fed level are 3 times the incoming taxes. Has daylight dawned on you that we are beyond any semblance of reality in gov expenditures? The camel is bucking.

        • Jim Myers

          Of course, balanced budgets are always the rage until the Reagan, Bush clones come into power. Then its “SPEND, BABY, SPEND!

          Because, deficits don’t matter, (DICK Cheney), until there is a Democrat in the White House.

        • awakenaustin

          The older is indisputable, the wiser is questionable. So your main response is to accuse one who disagrees with you of being a government employee? As with much of the rest of your comment it was illogical and irrational. You answered her clearly rhetorical question, as if it were a substantive position she really held as if there were any connection at all between being a government employee and thinking corporate profits should be limited.
          You grabbed the 3 to 1 expenditures to taxes-revenue figure out of thin air.
          Germany’s VAT tax has almost nothing to do with the soundness, or the lack thereof, of its economy. A VAT is a national sales tax. Which means people would be paying it and it would fall most heavily on those earning the least. U.S. tax rates are lower than Germany’s. Our taxes are substantially below Germany’s and most other nations as a percentage of our gross domestic economic production.

          Your opinions, which you are entitled to, are fact free and fatuous.

          • 1olderbutwiser1

            I said VAT on imported dumped junk, not domestically produced goods. Last year, 75% of the deficit was spent by means of our printing press, not tax revenue. Check the facts. Our gov spending is not maintainable. Add in all the bond issues locally for gov construction and rebuilding of gov structures only 30 years old, some even newer, you must certainly see the wasteful spending, and it’s by stealing from our children and grandchildren that these charges must be repaid. I am a man, do not believe in stealing from my children. You perhaps have a rosy view of those actions. I sincerely doubt you have any idea the shape this country is in.

          • johninPCFL

            I don’t think you understand what a VAT (value-added tax) is. What you’re describing is an import tariff.
            A VAT is a tax added at multiple points in a manufacturing process so that inventory valuations and final product costs are “pre-taxed” before delivery to the distributor or end user. It’s used primarily by governments to assure that tax revenues can’t be cheated (by claiming false inventory valuation) or delayed (by paying the taxes only after products have shipped.)
            An import tariff is assessed by a country to increase the cost to its consumers of an externally manufactured product, usually to protect an internal industry that cannot produce the product at comparable cost (usually due to labor or material prices.)

          • 1olderbutwiser1

            Yes, I was mis-spoken, I believe. However, when Germany did this on bicycles from China, they called it, I believe, a VAT.

          • RobertCHastings

            Oh, now you have a problem with rebuilding our infrastructure. Tell that one to the survivors of the Interstate bridge that collapsed in Minneapolis a couple of years ago. And, while you are at it, you need to get a more realistic idea of how much has been spent on infrastructure updating over the past decade compared with how much corporate welfare has been doled out.

    • Justin Napolitano

      You do know that you are out of your mind, don’t you?

    • ralphkr

      As a former government employee I just wish that my pay had been raised to 20-40% less than private enterprise paid. I was able to increase my $25K per annum to $35K by working holidays and 6 days a week from time to time when the job needed it. When I was doing the same job ramrodding the same size crew (55 to 70) I got $75K per annum working 5 days a week with paid holidays off. The big difference between government and private enterprise was that government pay checks never bounced (sometimes they did not show up for a few weeks but they never bounced when they did show up) but checks from major companies had a distressing habit of bouncing.

      Proof that government employees get less than private employees is easily demonstrated by comparing the much higher costs of private schools, prisons, etc. compared to what the same entities cost to run before being privatized. Of course, the major difference is that the boss of a major government entity might get paid $200K per annum while the equivalent private enterprise job shall be paid multiple millions of dollars plus bonuses no matter how poorly he does the job. .

      • 1olderbutwiser1

        My state boasts of the savings they have had by privatizing different prisons. I see the fed gas tax just went up, about a doubling, not a 3% increase, or anything like that. With the big money you were making working for private industry, why in the world did you so willingly become a gov worker? Your statements defy any logic at all as to why you would make that decision. Gargantuan sums are spent making roads with overpasses etc being so architecturally appealing yet a squandering of the money, it shows the goal of gov is to hire as many as possible at the highest wage possible to accomplish the least possible when viewed in the long term. Why not pay the wage scales paid by private enterprise? The lousy retirement paid by free enterprise.? The volume of work performed by dollar spent as free enterprise.? Study after study shows the inefficiency of gov , yet you defend them and claim they work for peanuts? Yet for some mysterious reason you in your lifetime, chose to work for 1/3 to 1/2 of the pay?

        • ralphkr

          So, older & definitely not wise, your state brags that they are saving money by privatizing the prisons, If that is true then they are the only state that has saved money but it is far more likely that the state politicians are busy hiding the true costs as they are pocketing gargantuan kick-backs from the prison operators.

          In my case, I was an early ‘victim’ of privatizing. A private company hired me and most of my crew for 2 to 3 times what we had been paid by the gov’t to do the same work. In less than 3 years the work crew had doubled and there were now 4 supervisors plus 8 assistants instead of one supervisor but the work load had not increased.This was back in the glory days of great private pensions and free health insurance. Other differences between working for the government and for private industry included my normal “8” hour workday was normally 10 hours and often more for 8 hours pay but while working for a private contractor if I was held up 15 minutes after my normal quitting time I would charge for 2 hours O.T (normal practice). Both government and private employees got their pay on Friday BUT government employees worked 8 hours on Friday while private employees quit after 4 hours but still got paid for 8 hours.

          Further proof of your ignorance is your criticism of making overpasses, etc. architecturally appealing as squandering of money while ignoring the fact that it costs no more to build an attractive bridge or building than to build an ugly one and often costs less.

          I must say that if the goal of government is to hire as many as possible then the government has definitely failed at attaining that goal as there are fewer government employees today than there were in 1962 but the duties of government employees have greatly expanded since 1962 so we must be getting a real bargain there..