Paul Krugman is Still Selling a Fake Alien Invasion as a Boost to the Economy
- Thread starter JamesL
- Start date
I'm not saying what my opinion on that expenditure is, but it does not matter. Government spending can and does create jobs. As for efficiency, do you think a private, for-profit national defense would be more efficient? Remember, the definition of efficiency is not just about minimizing expense, it's about minimizing expense while achieving an end.
The end being achieved in the private sector is profit, and because they can't bail themselves out, or borrow forever, or print money - only the strong, EFFICIENT companies survive. If a govt job doesn't produce a profit then it is a tax payer funded liability, and once the job/dept/agency is created it seems there is no getting rid of it.
Defense is the grayest area between the public and private sectors IMO. The contractors ARE private companies, but the military itself cannot be because of the potential conflicts of interest. It would almost certainly be more efficient financially if it were fully privatized, but would it be more capable of serving its purpose.. I don't think so.
You don't want to say whether you support a larger defense spending budget? Ole'!
And yes, I think a private, for-profit national defense company would absolutely be more efficient as it has to make a profit. Don't confuse the inefficiency of the government overpaying these contractors with the contractors being inefficient.
Honestly, I didn't know the answer to that and had to look it up. The difference is, you know whether you support cutting defense or not. You just like dodging questions because you know your answers will conflict what you're trying to argue. It's the Ricter M.O.
But to answer your question (because I looked it up), here you go, El Matador...(sarcasm on)
http://www.yixingteapotsale.com/teaname.htm
You, however, know that if you say you are for cuts in defense, then job cuts have to come with that. But you know that conflicts with your "cut spending" argument, so you avoid answering the question. But if you say you are FOR a larger defense budget, then that goes against your liberal philosophy as a whole, and associates you with more of a neo conservative, which you despise.
A liberal always is in conflict because the values they supposedly support never truly reach the conclusion they want them to (in the real world). This is why they dodge answering questions that are uncomfortable, or paint the asker with a label. I'm surprised you didn't call me racist for asking such a question.
It's the believe part that you guys don't get.. just cause Krug believes in an economy based on fantasy doesn't mean the majority of the pop will. Consumers would spend more $$ if they had it in their pocket, and that would be viable if the fed/state/muni govts could keep their spending under control.. which really is the only major threat to the US economy.