GOP wins: Fed Spending doesn’t create jobs

No kidding, it doesn’t, as we can see from this story here (click) where Utah officials are expressing no concern at all about Utah losing any jobs if a transportation spending bill gets held up in Washington.

No sir, federal spending never creates jobs, that is the Tea Party/GOP mantra. All fed spending does is create more nanny state attitudes, dependence, and a lack of initiative and free will on the part of the recipients.

So what if 9,000 jobs disappear? They weren’t really jobs! God only knows what they were, but it doesn’t matter because they soon will be gone, unless Washington acts, and we all know how well that will work out.

In other news, Gov. Rick Perry is giving a speech any second now (click) turning down any and all federal aid or funds to help fight wildfires that have already destroyed 1000 homes in Texas, the state he has intimated should be independent of the US because of all that horrible federal spending.

Hey Gov, how’s that independence working out for you?

Share
This entry was posted in Blogging the Rambler. Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to GOP wins: Fed Spending doesn’t create jobs

  1. Owain says:

    Why does the Federal government need to collect the gasoline taxes, adding a layer of government that soaks of tax revenue unnecessarily?

    Here’s a suggestion. The Feds currently collect a gasoline tax of 18.4 cents per gallon. Eliminate that tax. Utah could then impose a state gasoline tax of 18.4 cents per gallon, making this a revenue neutral change to the consumer. Utah could then set its own priorities when it comes to infrastructure development/maintenance, and not have to go to the Federal Government, hat in hand. I figure there would be an enormous cost savings to be had from eliminating much of what would now be an unnecessary Federal department.

    This is not to say that all Federal involvement would be eliminated, but instead of managing everything from the Federal level, the Department of Transportation would primarily serve a coordination function rather than a primary management function. It’s not as if the Federal Government is doing such a damn fine job on this as things stand.

    Less government, better use of tax dollars, more control at the local level. Sounds like a good idea to me, but it does pretty much eliminate this as a source of overwrought hand wringing on the part of CT. Not to worry. I’m sure Charles can find something else over which to hyperventilate.

    • ctrentelman says:

      this assumes that the revenues utah would raise through its own 18 cent a gallon tax would equal what the feds spend here on highways with funds raised through the federal 18 cent a gallon tax.

      Utah is a very big, sparcely populated state, long roads between points are expensive to build. I haven’t run the numbers, but I bet you it would take a lot more than 18 cents a gallon for utah to build and/or maintain interstate highways on its own.

    • BrianUtah says:

      And we all know that UDOT is not corrupt. Does anyone remember the millions given to the losing bidder?

    • willbike says:

      Utah certainly needs federal money to maintain roads. However if the Utah government is put in charge of its own budget their would no longer be money laying around for UDOT to pay off the bidder that it didn’t want to win. Poor management of taxpayer money could be controlled that way. Yes, we have poor and maybe even unethical management of transportation funds at the state level. There are several examples.

      The idea that local and state governments can, will, or currently do anything better than the federal government is a fantasy.

      • efialtis says:

        I don’t think he is saying that the state is doing thing better or less corrupt, only that we would remove a layer of government from the equation…
        That brings a net savings in tax revenue.
        Do the same thing with the Department of Education, Social Security, and other programs… get the Feds and their bureaucracy out of it, and realize a smaller deficit and less debt…
        It is easier to control what happens at the State Level of Government than at the Federal Level, so we might make headway toward fixing the greed, graft, and corruption that plagues our Government…

    • willbike says:

      I just looked through the rest of the comments owain and it looks like the only one who is about to hyperventilate is you. Good god man get a hobby.

    • Owain says:

      As an update to this old post, it seems that a new bill has been introduced in Congress to implement this idea.

      http://blogs.standard.net/rob-bishop/2011/09/16/ten-bills-to-strengthen-tenets-of-constitution/
      ” H.R.1737: The Surface Transportation and Taxation Equity Act or State Act
      Brief Description: The STATE Act returns primary responsibility for transportation and infrastructure projects back to the states without any additional cost to the taxpayer. This legislation would increase the revenue available to States while enabling them to prioritize projects based on safety, traffic needs, and improved commerce without being subject to federal mandates. The STATE Act accomplishes this by granting states the ability to opt out of the federal transportation program through increasing their gas taxes while simultaneously reducing the federal gas tax by the same amount. “

    • Owain says:

      An update to an old post.

      I was interested to see a guest editorial in the paper this morning written by US Rep Chaffetz, US Sen Lee, Utah Rep Lockhart, Utah Rep Dougall, and Utah Rep Hughes proposing my suggestion to eliminate Federal gas taxes, and replace them with local state taxes, eliminating several layers of unnecessary beaurocracy.
      http://www.standard.net/stories/2011/09/28/bring-gas-tax-home

      They did a very good job of justifying the proposed change. Read the whole thing (RTWT), as they say on the intertubes…

  2. Howard Ratcliffe says:

    Gov Perry has a method to his madness. He proposes Texas should secede from the Union. To create the Dialectic for this Social Security, Medicare, Federal Pension stealing scheme Perry will try to fund the now $5Billion tab for Texas drought and wildfire damages with Texas funds which are non-existent. States cannot print money, so Perry will lead the exodus from the United States; his state raped, pillaged, scorched and given back to Mexico. A familiar tactic to anyone familiar with the Punic Wars; Ron Paul is familiar as he has been in Congress since the $8Billion swindle called the Super Conducting Super Collider. Dov Zakheim is familiar as he is presiding over the Committee on Iraq and Afghanistan War fraud searching for the missing $60B; he was Texas Comptroller for Gov Bush Jr and DOD Comptroller for Pres Bush Jr who said $2.3T was missing on 9/10/2001.
    It’s called Scorched Earth Policy and the US has been using it for a very long time; just ask people in Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Japan living in their US created nuclear waste dumps; Depleted Uranium is not depleted; it’s highly radioactive for a very long time.

    • Owain says:

      Depleted Uranium does not pose a significant radiation hazard, which is why it’s called ‘depleted’. The human body poses a greater radiation hazard than depleted Uranium due to the natural levels of radioactive Carbon 14 and Potassium 40.

      If you were to shingle your house with depleted Uranium, you would receive less radiation per day than you would otherwise, because the DU would block the normal radiation you receive from cosmic rays.

      If you’d like to know the the actual risk associated with DU, rather than the shit you just make up, here is a report from the World Health Organization on the subject.
      http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/

      • Howard Ratcliffe says:

        Depleted Uranium munitions were used by Bush Sr in Gulf WarI, by Clinton in Bosnia, by Bush Jr in Gulf War II and Afghanistan, by Obama in Libya.
        Depleted Uranium is depleted to the point where use in a reactor is not feasible deadly to human beings. Handling DU shells does not post the risk, but when DU goes pyrophoric exiting gun barrels or welding holes in tanks before blowing the turrets off, it mixes with dust forming sub-micron size particulate matter. This enters the food and water supply where it lodges in Lungs, Kidneys, Livers and Bones causing the million+ uranium related deaths and fetal cancers prevalent in Iraq and Afghanistan.
        Stop the foul language and do some research; there is very good reason the UN has banned the use of DU; it’s an indiscriminate WMD that lasts nearly forever.

        • Owain says:

          You didn’t follow the link to the WHO report, did you? If you had, you would have read, “No reproductive or developmental effects have been reported in humans.”

          Sorry if you don’t like the harsh language, but unless you can supply a link to back up your claims, I still think you are just making shit up.

          Contrary to what you might think, I’m not trying to convince you of anything. You are either willfully stupid, or just dishonest. However, since it’s pretty easy to demonstrate that you are either willfully stupid or dishonest, it helps others who read posts here to recognize that about you, and to take it into account with respect to anything else you post. Rule of thumb: Any post by Howard Ratcliffe is the best argument available against anything Howard Ratcliffe might espouse, so do carry on. “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” – Napoleon Bonoparte

          Steven Den Beste had a good run down on this subject years ago. For those who wish to learn something on the subject, I highly reccommend it. It beats willful disinformation. http://www.denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/09/RadiationcontaminationinI.shtml

          • tom says:

            Well Owain, sure looks like you have Howard’s number!

            And Howard, please explain just how this is in any way analogous to the Punic wars.

  3. ctrentelman says:

    regarding your idea about the gas tax, why should I run the numbers? It’s your idea, it’s your job to prove it.

  4. Owain says:

    It’s your blog post, Charles. In the article YOU LINKED, it says, “Congress has until the end of the month to pass a new extension of the Surface Transportation bill, which divvies up federal gas taxes to local jurisdictions…”. Well, is that a problem or isn’t it? Is there a better way to perform this function, or isn’t there? You’re the one who brought it up, so how about it?

    Maybe you should have done your homework on the subject before subjecting us to yet another chicken-little ‘the sky is falling’ episode. You should bring a little ‘value added’ analysis to the game, you know, instead of just regurgitating someone else’s work.

  5. laytonian says:

    9,000 jobs in Utah will be lost. That will have a domino effect on other jobs, as those consumers will lose their spending power.

    It’s obvious that Owain, Howard and the other perpetual Tea Party bow-downers do not have to worry about jobs. How much government money are you all taking in? Retired military? VA? Federal retirement? Social Security? SSI? SSDI? Medicare?

    It’s easy to complain, when it’s not your goose. But it will be your goose, sooner or later.

  6. Howard Ratcliffe says:

    http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/extremedeformities.html
    This one is pictures of Iraq DU birth defects
    http://www.thewe.cc/…/depleted_uranium_iraq_afghanistan_balkans.html
    This one is Afghanistan and Balkan birth defects
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2374 -
    This one is a general article on DU
    video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2356294432956497061
    This link is to Lauren Moret’s DVD \Beyond Treason\ on the effects of DU

  7. Owain says:

    thewe.cc appears to be a conspiracy theory web site. The existance of birth defects is undisputed. Why do you believe DU causes birth defects when the World Health Organization disputes this? Because thewe.cc says so? If you accept them as an authority, then no doubt you’ll take at face value this claim that Obama is a psychopath http://thewe.cc/weplanet/news/americas/us_politics/obama.html. They even reveal that he faked his birth certificate, and they offer PROOF!!1!

    How about this one. thewe.cc claims that Obama was able to be elected President through the use of mass hypnosis. Explains a lot, doesn’t it? Doesn’t it?? http://thewe.cc/weplanet/news/americas/us_politics/obama-2.html

    They say a lot of nasty things about our President, but hey, they are your authority, right? You wouldn’t have picked a bunch of no credibility propaganda sites to prove your point, would you?

    Yeah, I think you would. For example, according to Wikipedia, Michel Chossudovsky, the editor of the Centre for Research on Globalisation web site that you link, http://www.globalresearch.cc, “Chossudovsky was listed as one of Canada’s nuttiest professors “whose absurdity stands head and shoulders above their colleagues.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky

    The Howard Ratcliffe Rule of Thumb is alive and well.

    In the meantime, I’ll be waiting for a link to a reputable scientific organization.

    Still waiting.

    • efialtis says:

      “How about this one. thewe.cc claims that Obama was able to be elected President through the use of mass hypnosis. Explains a lot, doesn’t it?”

      Yes, yes it does…

      LOL!!!

  8. joe says:

    I guess the government didn’t help build the railroads or the internet or the space program or any of that stuff.

  9. Buy in Ogden says:

    Charles: Let’s use Owain’s argument on another issue which has been overlooked by anti-Fed people (including Hatch). Using his logic that taxes for transportation should not go to the Feds but should be handled by Utah (which by the way gets about what it puts in versus Alaska which gets 3.6 times what they put in but that’s OK, screw them), does he also believe Utah should return the close to $1 billion spent removing nuclear waste from going into the Colorado River? After all, the waste was generated in Utah and remains in Utah. Or, does he think the folks in Texas or any other state should help us out here? That $1 billion certainly couldn’t have created any jobs in Utah. And, who does it really benefit? Well, (besides us): Arizona, California, Nevada, and Mexico? They certainly don’t want their water source polluted by nuclear waste. How can the argument that shared sacrifice and benefits from a national viewpoint be so berated?

  10. Owain says:

    Interesting proposal. What nuclear waste was produced in Utah? We don’t have any nuke power plants here I’m aware of (which doesn’t mean a lot, since there’s a lot I’m not aware of). If that waste was generated by Utahns soley for the use of Utahns, you might have a point. Where did that waste come from, exactly?

    • ctrentelman says:

      owain — the waste referred to is uranium mine tailings outside of Moab which were piled up there in the 1950s when people thought, I guess, that radioactivity was good for you or made your hair grow thicker, or something, because where it is located, on the banks of the Colorado River a mile outside of Moab on the way to Arches Ntl. Park, is endangering millions of Colorado River water users from Moab on south, including much of southern Utah although, you could argue that most people in St. George are old anyway, so old age will probably get them before radiation does.

      The tailings were mined in Utah by corporations registered in Utah that were operated by Utahns and hired Utahns (or people working in Utah, anyway, depending on how they met the residency requirements), refined in Utah by Utahns, and are left over after the higher-grade uranium they contained was sold to the government by Utahns or at least by people operating in Utah under the regulatory oversight of the Utah Government, such as it was. The still-radioactive mine tailings were then dumped in Utah by those same Utahns, so the argument could be made that the safe removal of those tailings to a place where they won’t leech into the drinking water of the entire Las Vegas-Los Angeles metro area is entirely the responsibility of Utahns, they being the creators of the problem and, thus, liable for the damages.

      Kinda makes you wish someone was watching the mine operators a bit more closely, does it not? Ah, those glory days when federal regulation didn’t get in the way of free enterprise! Look at all the jobs they created.

      As it is, the federal government — through socialist cost sharing methods that I am sure would make the founding fathers shreek with anger — is paying for the tailings’ removal, thus reinforcing Utahns’ status as nanny-state supplecants who are being made ever more dependent instead of being forced to stand on their own two feet and raising that extra billion on their own.

      • Owain says:

        Thanks, Charles. That’s what I suspected, but Buy in Ogden didn’t specify the source of the waste, which is why I asked.

        I suspect that the uranium ore was mined by Utahns, but for use in the production of nuclear weapons by the US Government, which were intended for the defense of the entire nation. If that is the case, then I would submit that using Federal taxes to mitigate the resulting problems is perfectly valid.

        Sure, I wish that the program had better oversight back in the 50′s, but at the time, the dangers were not properly understood.

        In the same way, a number practices at Hill AFB that resulted in a variety of pollution hazards that were poorly understood at the time. This pollution is now being cleaned up under the supervison of the Federal government rather than by the local government, which is as it should be, don’t you agree?

  11. Federal Unemployment says:

    It has occurred to me that when the Utah legislature flat turned down the extra Federal unemployment compensation extension, that they want Utah’s unemployment rate to appear smaller than it really is. There is no job growth in Utah, and the unemployed are really, really not able to get a job (except for telemarketers), so when their unemployment runs out, they will either go into their savings or take telemarketer jobs (money, yes, but not nearly enough, and a horrible work environment) while continuing to apply for jobs. The problem is that for every job, there are at least 31 applicants. The unemployed workers are not lazy, just unemployed but as long as they are not getting unemployment compensation, they disappear from Utah’s unemployment numbers, making Utah’s unemployment rate appear smaller than it really is. The legislators stated at the time they refused the Federal unemployment money that they thought it was time the unemployed got back to work. Well, the unemployed do, too, if only there were enough jobs available that paid even as much as unemployment compensation pays, but there are not. Shame on Utah for that.

    • Owain says:

      I’m having a hard time parsing your post. If an unemployed person takes a job, even if it’s not the job they would prefer (telemarketer, as per your example), then they are no longer unemployed, which is good. They no longer have to be supported by tax dollars in the form of unemployment checks, and instead are paying taxes instead of consuming them, which was exactly the reason why the Utah legislature turned down the extension of Federal unemployment funds. We need people to be a contributor to the economy, not a parasite.

      Sounds like things are working as intended. Way to go, Utah!
      Paying people to not work results in a lot of people who are content to sit around and not work. Telemarketing may not be your ideal choice of a job, and the working conditions may not be ideal, but it does provide a paycheck for doing something other than sitting on your ass.

      Sounds to me like someone is trying to justify to themselves why they should remain on unemployment rather than take an available paying job. I’m having a hard time drumming up much sympathy.

      • Federal Unemployment says:

        I’m not sure why you would think anyone would want you to drum up any sympathy. It just makes one wonder if this was done to skew the unemployment rate percentages in Utah to make Utah’s economic status appear to be better than it really is.

        • Federal Unemployment says:

          I just checked, and unemployment compensation is taxable so these people are contributing.

          • Owain says:

            So, your solution to our fiscal crisis is a variation on the South Park Gnomes underwear financial model? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_(South_Park)

            1) Put everyone on unemployment, thus increasing the number of taxpayers.

            2) ?

            3) PROFIT!

            Brilliant! Wish I had thought of it…

          • Federal Unemployment says:

            I have no solution to our financial crisis at all, do you? AGAIN, the point is that the true percentage of unemployment in Utah is incorrect. I won’t go so far as to say it is manipulated, but thinking people would wonder that. Do you have another unrelated paranoid comment to share?

          • Owain says:

            Whatever the solution is, the fact that people collecting unemployment pay taxes on that income isn’t helping. Since that is the case, why did you mention it in the first place?

  12. Drifter says:

    Of course the answer is MORE government right Charles?
    you are a fool to continue to do nothing but espouse MORE government.
    Waste and fraud which under Obama has exploded.
    Of course we can’t talk bad or we end up on the watch list.
    Wake up!

  13. Howard Ratcliffe says:

    dubroom.org/articles/0007a.htm
    Another link to DU hazards.
    Ingestion of DU is a different animal than handling a DU shell.

  14. Howard Ratcliffe says:

    Just in time for George Soros’ Day of Rage Sept 17 on Constitution Day, the Federal Reserve gave a blank check to the Eurozone to borrow as many US dollars as they want. Interest on the increased dollars paid by US taxpayers of course and every dollar printed devaluing the US dollar proportionately. How’s that for creating jobs?

  15. Gary Otto says:

    And you’re trusting the people to police themselves. Please…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>