All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Socialism Experiment
2/27/2013 7:37 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/27/2013 7:32:00 PM (view original):
Throwing more money at it hasn't fixed the economy.   That's the current plan.
Spending has actually leveled off. Had it continued with the same slope it would be over $4 trillion a year. Vanishing tax revenues are what created the large deficit.
2/27/2013 8:11 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 2/27/2013 7:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/27/2013 7:30:00 PM (view original):
Oh, I see what confuses you.  I didn't answer the way you wanted me to with a number.

I'll try to reword for you.

If I have the confidence in our government to not raise my taxes to create revenue for their out of control spending, I'd be more inclined to increase my expenses.  As it stands, I don't think they can do it.  I think my personal taxes and my business taxes will increase in order to increase government revenue to fund their projects. 

So the answer is no amount. There is no amount the government can lower the deficit that would make you want to hire someone you don't need.

So you're saying that your hiring decisions are not based on the amount of the deficit.
No, that's what you're saying.  You'd love for me to say but  I didn't.

Get someone smarter to read, and explain, my response to you. 

2/27/2013 8:15 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 2/27/2013 7:30:00 PM (view original):
Red line spending, blue line tax revenue. When it comes to the deficit, spending isn't the problem. The ****** economy that caused tax revenues to tank, is.

Fix the economy and most of the deficit goes away.


One could argue that even if it looks fairly constant, a spending trend that results in over a 100% increase in 12 years has a legitimate claim to being part of the problem.
2/27/2013 9:09 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/27/2013 8:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/27/2013 7:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/27/2013 7:30:00 PM (view original):
Oh, I see what confuses you.  I didn't answer the way you wanted me to with a number.

I'll try to reword for you.

If I have the confidence in our government to not raise my taxes to create revenue for their out of control spending, I'd be more inclined to increase my expenses.  As it stands, I don't think they can do it.  I think my personal taxes and my business taxes will increase in order to increase government revenue to fund their projects. 

So the answer is no amount. There is no amount the government can lower the deficit that would make you want to hire someone you don't need.

So you're saying that your hiring decisions are not based on the amount of the deficit.
No, that's what you're saying.  You'd love for me to say but  I didn't.

Get someone smarter to read, and explain, my response to you. 

So there's a magic deficit level that will make you want to hire employees you don't need?

Awesome. What is it?
2/27/2013 9:11 PM
Posted by dahsdebater on 2/27/2013 8:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/27/2013 7:30:00 PM (view original):
Red line spending, blue line tax revenue. When it comes to the deficit, spending isn't the problem. The ****** economy that caused tax revenues to tank, is.

Fix the economy and most of the deficit goes away.


One could argue that even if it looks fairly constant, a spending trend that results in over a 100% increase in 12 years has a legitimate claim to being part of the problem.
Ok, I can see that. But then this isn't an "Obama's a crazy socialist" problem. The spending level is a systematic problem that needs to be dealt with in the long term.
2/27/2013 9:40 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 2/27/2013 9:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/27/2013 8:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/27/2013 7:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/27/2013 7:30:00 PM (view original):
Oh, I see what confuses you.  I didn't answer the way you wanted me to with a number.

I'll try to reword for you.

If I have the confidence in our government to not raise my taxes to create revenue for their out of control spending, I'd be more inclined to increase my expenses.  As it stands, I don't think they can do it.  I think my personal taxes and my business taxes will increase in order to increase government revenue to fund their projects. 

So the answer is no amount. There is no amount the government can lower the deficit that would make you want to hire someone you don't need.

So you're saying that your hiring decisions are not based on the amount of the deficit.
No, that's what you're saying.  You'd love for me to say but  I didn't.

Get someone smarter to read, and explain, my response to you. 

So there's a magic deficit level that will make you want to hire employees you don't need?

Awesome. What is it?
Why would anybody hire employees they don't need?
2/27/2013 9:59 PM
They wouldn't. Demand is the problem, not the deficit.
2/27/2013 10:03 PM
Then the premise to your question is flawed.

Don't you think that consumer confidence and willingness to spend (i.e. demand) is impacted by a continuously rising national debt?

Do you think the current political climate, in which nothing is being done besides blame and finger pointing, is a positive influence on consumer confidence?

2/27/2013 10:38 PM
No, to both questions.
2/28/2013 9:11 AM (edited)
Posted by tecwrg on 2/27/2013 9:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/27/2013 9:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/27/2013 8:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/27/2013 7:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/27/2013 7:30:00 PM (view original):
Oh, I see what confuses you.  I didn't answer the way you wanted me to with a number.

I'll try to reword for you.

If I have the confidence in our government to not raise my taxes to create revenue for their out of control spending, I'd be more inclined to increase my expenses.  As it stands, I don't think they can do it.  I think my personal taxes and my business taxes will increase in order to increase government revenue to fund their projects. 

So the answer is no amount. There is no amount the government can lower the deficit that would make you want to hire someone you don't need.

So you're saying that your hiring decisions are not based on the amount of the deficit.
No, that's what you're saying.  You'd love for me to say but  I didn't.

Get someone smarter to read, and explain, my response to you. 

So there's a magic deficit level that will make you want to hire employees you don't need?

Awesome. What is it?
Why would anybody hire employees they don't need?
I guess badluck didn't find a smart person to explain it to him.

I'll answer your question first, tec, and maybe you can explain to him.

Most companies are overstaffed.  They do this to cover for vacations, sick days, basic incompetence, peak demand periods, etc, etc.   If they weren't, boards like this would go silent at noon on Tuesdays except for three unemployed dudes and a night shift worker.   So, in reality, they have employees they don't need already.   But, if you're not overstaffed, you'd hire an employee you don't need in anticipation of the need.    Say your business makes $1000 day.   You have a new contract on the line that will begin next month.   You'll make $1200 a day and your already thin staff will be overworked.  So, in order to properly serve your new customer, you'll need to add a worker.  You hire someone a month in advance for training and evaluation.  They make $100 a day.  You've "wasted" $2000(20x100) in overstaffing but you'll make that back in 10 days next month and your new customer, or old customers, will not suffer because your new employee will be fully trained.   That's a simplified version dealing with set numbers, employees and customers.   That's not real world, in most cases, but it's why a business would hire an employee they don't need.

Now, applying this to badluck's micro-question, there is no magic number.   I don't deal with specific numbers like that because that's not how it works.  So it's a confidence level in our government.   Both for me and for my customers and even their customers.  So this is the answer:

"If I have the confidence in our government to not raise my taxes to create revenue for their out of control spending, I'd be more inclined to increase my expenses.  As it stands, I don't think they can do it.  I think my personal taxes and my business taxes will increase in order to increase government revenue to fund their projects."

And that's why an increasing deficit bothers people and affects business/consumer confidence. 

2/28/2013 9:28 AM
I did answer the question, genius.

If you hire employees for a new contract or to cover breaks, then you think you need the employee.
2/28/2013 9:35 AM
I didn't ask you a question, did I?   I told you to find a smart person to explain my answer to your question to you.    You obviously didn't do that because you repeated your question for the 10th time.
2/28/2013 9:52 AM
Tec's question, smart guy.
2/28/2013 9:54 AM
There is no deficit level that will make you hire an employee you don't need.

But a high deficit also doesn't stop you from hiring an employee that you do need.
2/28/2013 9:55 AM
TEC!!!!  Would you please explain my answer to badluck?   He just can't comprehend what I'm saying because I didn't answer it the way he wanted.
of 45
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Socialism Experiment

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.