GAO On Broadband: Please Listen To Us. For Once. Please. > Gov't and clear goals don't belong in the same sentence

reply to wifi4milez

Re: Gov't and clear goals don't belong in the same sentence

When the gov't does it, there is ALWAYS waste.

reply to SLD

reply to SLD

reply to footballdude

footballdude
There's no doubt that many (if not most) corporations are run by greedy people that would sell everything good and wholesome for a buck. There's also no doubt that many (if not most) politicians - especially at the federal level - are greedy people looking out solely for their own careers and back pockets who will sanction absolutely anything that's politically expedient, regardless of how badly people get hurt.

reply to Bit00
Our national budget is in such debt precisely because the government has to fix the horrible situation created by the completely irresponsible deregulation of various industries by the Bush administration.

If you knew anything about Keynesian economics you would understand why the government has to pass these stimulus funds to jolt our economy out of the gutter.

On the flip side, once the economy recovers Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to be fiscally responsible.

Even if corporate profit is "earned" (cough monopolies cough), all that profit is essentially a DRAIN on our economy. The money isn't spent. It simply goes into offshore bank accounts where it becomes some sort of rainy day fund for the corporation, or pads rich people's coffers. Every dollar that the government spends actually goes back into the economy, even creating jobs and the like.

The most efficient scenario are for little government interference while corporations make zero profit overall. However, history has shown time and time again that this never happens. When the government lets rich people run amok, they abuse their power.

Wrong, the government debt was $10,000,000,000,000.00 LONG before there was any hint of a recession and both Republican and Democratic Congresses contributed hugely to it every year. Recession or not, Obama and the Pelosi politburo had their agenda to spend hundreds of billions, he said as much during the campaign, long before the state of the economy reached what it did around the time of the election.

And doubling that debt to $20T won't do anything but cause hyper inflation.

You can't "stimulate" yourself out of recession nor borrow yourself out of debt. The 1930's proved that. And even considering WWII spending, we were in a much better position before and after in terms of debt control and within a few years after WWII, national debt after a percentage of GDP was cut sharply. Obama has ZERO plan to cut spending, NONE, and the CBO projects Obama to DOUBLE our national debt in just 10 years and ever INCREASING deficits. Yeah, he will double in just 10 years a debt that took 30 years to make.

What we had 2 or 3 years of surpluses under a Republican controlled Congress with Clinton over the last 30 years.

The track record or fiscal irresponsibility of both parties is well established. You are a fool if you think for a second that Obama and the Pelosi politburo would actually cut spending, under ANY circumstance. They are the party of government engorgement and make fiscal liberal Bush look like a piker when it comes to deficits.

You want to see Obamanomics? Just look at California. We have been practicing hard core Obamanomics for about 10 years now with it's origins starting with the state employee unions gutting the Gann limits.

Obama will have America insolvent by the end of his first term if he doesn't knock off the pure pork spending 'cause the Chinese are close to done loaning us money for liberal largess.

You will NEVER have fiscal responsibility when you have a single party controlling the legislature and executive branch, Dem or Rep. Only when you have opposition will have have any remote chance of restrained spending.

We NEED government gridlock.
--
POKE 65495,1

reply to footballdude
I never said that corporations waste much. I said they reap much larger profits when possible than the gov't will waste.

Nobody has "shown" anything. And if you read my argument, it is simply that the gov't can provide services at lower cost to its citizens than a private corporation can because there is no profit to consider. Plain and simple. If you "guys" want to make more of it than that, then have fun, but I'm tired of arguing points that others are fabricating and claiming that I wrote such.

Your argument is based solely on the "Theory" that since the government has no profit incentive, it can produce goods at a lower price than a profit driven private business. In "theory" that seems reasonable until you realize that since the government has no competition, it also has no "incentive" to produce ever MORE efficiently. REALITY proves this.

And reality also proves that free markets don't work the way you claim either.