US Government Shutdown

[mystic64]

No, tis not so simple that all money spent is productive. Money is all about resource allocation. Taxpayers work for money which the government takes in taxes. Gov then spends it, which directly benefits the recipients, but not necessarily the taxpayers who worked for it & paid it in the first place. And then, how the money is spent has great effect. If gov spends $1B to build a bridge to nowhere, is this as useful as spending it on science research & education?
These paintings contribute no real economic value. They're just politicians' vanity pieces.

Well, the working folks that built the bridge would would disagree with you. "A politicians' vanity pieces." Actually Revolt, if the art belongs to the US government, then it is an investment with a potential for future return.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, the working folks that built the bridge would would disagree with you.

Of course.
But we all know what short sighted & greedy folk they are.

"A politicians' vanity pieces." Actually Revolt, if the art belongs to the US government, then it is an investment with a potential for future return.

Would you spend your own money on this 'art'?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

What? Agreement?
We're now boring the peanut gallery.

I'm sure you'll say something "Revolting".....and it will end up getting my Liberal Spidy Scenes up.....

 

[mystic64]

Of course.
But we all know what short sighted & greedy folk they are.


Would you spend your own money on this 'art'?

Sir Revolt , (Mystic watching the peanut gallery closely) As an employer your job is/was bottom line and profit. This means cheap labor is the route to go. A desperate work force works in your favor and a work force that has options does not work in your favor. As an employer your first choice is to cut back their options.

Would I buy the art? No, I would put the money in to feeding America's hungry childern.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

No, tis not so simple that all money spent is productive.

True...

Money is all about resource allocation.

I can agree with this.

Taxpayers work for money which the government takes in taxes. Gov then spends it, which directly benefits the recipients, but not necessarily the taxpayers who worked for it & paid it in the first place.

True...It depends on what the money is being spent on.

And then, how the money is spent has great effect.

True...

If gov spends $1B to build a bridge to nowhere, is this as useful as spending it on science research & education?

I don't know if it is "as useful as spending it on science education"....but to the general contractor, sub-contractors and other tradesmen working the project it's very useful. In many cases these contractors live in or near where they're working and they in turn spend money they received back into the local economy. It might have suppose to be a bridge to somewhere but the contractors and subs have no control over those budgetary matters...yet they still need to get paid for the work they've done....which for the most part has the cyclical effect of going right back to other businesses for goods and services.

These paintings contribute no real economic value. They're just politicians' vanity pieces.

I can see what you mean here...but then again if they are government property the government can turn around and sell the artwork. (See: Detroit Art Collection Bankruptcy Plan on Drawing Board - WSJ.com)...

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't know if it is "as useful as spending it on science education"....but to the general contractor, sub-contractors and other tradesmen working the project it's very useful. In many cases these contractors live in or near where they're working and they in turn spend money they received back into the local economy. It might have suppose to be a bridge to somewhere but the contractors and subs have no control over those budgetary matters...yet they still need to get paid for the work they've done....which for the most part has the cyclical effect of going right back to other businesses for goods and services.

To build a bridge to nowhere is of no economic value. People no doubt liked being paid for labor & materials, but if the end result isn't useful, then it's wasted. Only wealth was transferred. Compare this with building a bridge which reduced commuting time for people, & saved perhaps 1 million man hours each year. This is something of real value, & not just mere make-work money transfer from taxpayers to favored contractors.

I can see what you mean here...but then again if they are government property the government can turn around and sell the artwork. (See: Detroit Art Collection Bankruptcy Plan on Drawing Board - WSJ.com)...

To 'invest' in collectibles is a dubious use of taxpayer money.

I begin to see why the lefties love big gov spending, & favor tax increases. In their eyes, there is no such thing as waste.
It's the spending itself which matters, rather than getting value for it.
But consider this: There are always limits to gov budgets. Are vanity paintings the best use of the money?
Could things like health care or food for poor kids be a better use, while still plowing the money back into the economy?

 

[Revoltingest]

Would I buy the art? No, I would put the money in to feeding America's hungry childern.

Good idea!

 

[Dirty Penguin]

To build a bridge to nowhere is of no economic value. People no doubt liked being paid for labor & materials, but if the end result isn't useful, then it's wasted.

To an extent I agree but it hardly negates the fact that money was paid to the contractors and subs and in turn these blue collar worker put money back into the local economy. Don't think that I for one moment am advocating such wasteful spending because I'm not. And again...no one working such a project thought it would be a bridge to nowhere...workers probably assumed they were building to completion. If it becomes a bridge to nowhere in the end it's most likely due to mismanagement at the governmental level.

To 'invest' in collectibles is a dubious use of taxpayer money.

I happen to agree with you which makes your next statement of attempting to pigeon hole "lefties" as big government spenders ludicrous because I'm not advocating the government invest in art work. I worked for many years at the National Gallery Of Art here in DC and much of the art work the federal government owned. Many of the pieces..such as sculptures and some paintings were on display. Other exhibits were from private collections that were briefly displayed. All of it was open to the public and the gallery made a profit for doing so. There are other instances where the government has acquired art work, as we have been discussing, and I totally agree with you that in those cases they have no business doing so because it is a waste of money.

I begin to see why the lefties love big gov spending, & favor tax increases. In their eyes, there is no such thing as waste.

You have no idea what we favor....especially if this is a response to what I said. I just said I don't favor our government collecting art for the simple pleasure of collecting art....and I've agree that in a lot of cases it's a waste. In others it's not. You've read plenty of my post advocating government agency consolidation and/or elimination as well as reducing and/or eliminating various tax expenditures...as well as cuts in order to fund other areas of the government.....and none of that requires new taxes to be signed into law.

It's the spending itself which matters, rather than getting value for it.
But consider this: There are always limits to gov budgets. Are vanity paintings the best use of the money?

Heck no...and I've agreed with you that it isn't.

Could thingis like health care or food for poor kids be a better use, while still plowing the money back into the economy?

Sure...and it should be obvious that, that is a better use of the money. I actually support the idea of healthcare and food for the poor...and paying for it without signing any new taxes into law.....:sad:

 

[Revoltingest]

Oh, you never get my playful taunting!
But still, there is a grain of truth in my stereotyping of lefties.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Oh, you never get my playful taunting!
But still, there is a grain of truth in my stereotyping of lefties.

Actually more than just a grain of truth but not all of us aren't like that. I'm so tired of hearing one of my fellow lefties say "raise taxes"....I'll be the first to admit that I'm not interested in tax hikes. I'd actually like to see my state and sales taxes cut but that's wishful thinking. The federal government needs a serious budget overhaul....a line by line audit.......:yes:

 

[Revoltingest]

You're doing it again....being agreeable.

 

[Falvlun]

Oh please DP, don't posture and act like this is what is really going on. You mean they list 2 or 4 places they suppose they looked for a job.

A person who made 40 bucks an hour will not take a 20 dollar an hour job because they draw a check and make the same money. Most likely they will not take a 25 dollar an hour job because tha would be like making 5 dollars an hour.

Now if you drop their unemployment, they will take the 25 dollar an hour job.

I will tell you what, anyone who has drawn 26 weeks and takes a poloygraph that they have actually searched for employment each and every week and passes can get 99 weeks, how about that?

I would say 95% of the people who draw unemployment lie.

Be honest, you know they lie about job searches.

I am pretty cynical about this too. Unemployment is simply too scam prone.

 

[Falvlun]

Yet another news item which tells me that government has plenty of money....
Senators introduce bill to crack down on 'lavish' portrait expen - DC News FOX 5 DC WTTG
They can't just take a photo for under $100?
No, they need paintings of themselves for tens of thousands of dollars.
These corrupt royal wannabes are so out of touch with the real world.

If Republicans came out to slash the funding for this stuff, I'd be on board. Instead, they come out with plans to slash funding for SNAP, social security, and medicare.

 

[Revoltingest]

If Republicans came out to slash the funding for this stuff, I'd be on board. Instead, they come out with plans to slash funding for SNAP, social security, and medicare.

Vanity paintings of themselves is so much more important, eh?

 

[mystic64]

Vanity paintings of themselves is so much more important, eh?

Something to put in the idiot gallery. I wonder if they are going to picture them sipping tea, raised pinky finger and all? Maybe fiddling while the US burns? They will probably all get reelected because you are not important unless there is an oil painting of you.

 

[Revoltingest]

Something to put in the idiot gallery. I wonder if they are going to picture them sipping tea, raised pinky finger and all? Maybe fiddling while the US burns? They will probably all get reelected because you are not important unless there is an oil painting of you.

What a ridiculous picture you paint!
No.....they're wearing powdered wigs, satin knickers, & putting a pinch of snuff into their dainty little nostrils.

 

[mystic64]

What a ridiculous picture you paint!
No.....they're wearing powdered wigs, satin knickers, & putting a pinch of snuff into their dainty little nostrils.

Tobacco means they are paying taxes. I don't think the tobacco would be a part of the picture. Mr. Revolt you are just being whimsical .

 

[MysticSang'ha]

If they're going to waste $40,000 on art vanity paintings, they might as well go all out and hire lap dancers instead. Or to be specific....ballet lap dancers.

I'm still trying to see how to get dance into the game of being royal commodities.

 

[mystic64]

If they're going to waste $40,000 on art vanity paintings, they might as well go all out and hire lap dancers instead. Or to be specific....ballet lap dancers.

I'm still trying to see how to get dance into the game of being royal commodities.

I don't know I think that your suggestion would probably shut down the govenment again and I think that Ms Chrossfire would be upset about that also .

 

[mystic64]

I think that raising the minimum wage would just create more of a mess. What needs to be done is to lower tha maximum wage. If the maximum wage was lowered everything would eventually solve itself. And because there are more of us than there are of them, and the US is a Democracy where the majority rules, the concept is doable.

And I suppose that we could hire Mr. Revolt as a consultant on what to do with the extra money. With a cap on his wage of course.