Apr 5, 2011 -- 9:07AM, Captainmarvel wrote:

Even though your still wrong...it seems nothing less than 100 percent governement workforce will be satisfactory.I mean,wouldnt 100 percent government labor for everything be the cheapeast way to go? Using your matrix it would.(untill nothing got done and the French says Mr. Obama Tear this Wall Down.

 Isnt that what business owners want? Walmart and the entire fast food industry count on the government to feed,house and provide medical care for their employees through food stamps,section 8 and emergency room care. Thats why their products are so cheap. You already paid for them whether you shop there or not.

Apr 5, 2011 -- 9:21AM, Captainmarvel wrote:

WoW! Thats so Very enlightened! So how come at Every turn it seems the left wants MORE government?NEVER LESS.

LOL! Maybe for the same reason the right wants more power for the oligarchs, NEVER LESS.

So,give some examples of what governmnent agencies you would prefer to be abolished! Or...ummmm,can you not think of any that should be.

The CIA.

Apr 5, 2011 -- 9:04AM, Bodean wrote:

If the states acted in accordance with the normal rules that govern business, I'd say that those who argue "labor cost are equal" would be correct.  But the truth of the matter is, they do not operate according to the same rules.

Business has to operate within budget, with revenue determined by the amount of incomming revenue, vs liabilities.  States on the otherhand, do not have an "income revenue stream" ... they have taxes ... a never ending supply of taxes.  If they need more money, they raise taxes.

One only need to compare the salaries for teachers in the puiblic schools vs private schools to see this facade that labor cost are equal ...

"So what gives when you look at public-school and private-school teachers? The National Center for Education Statistics puts it this way: Using 2007-2008 data (the latest available), the average "total school-year and summer earned income" for public school teachers was $53,230 . The equivalent for private-school teachers was $39,690.

That's a whopping $13,540 differential on salary alone"

NOPE ... labor cost are not equal.

I would much rather pay that difference in salary and feel that higher quality teachers are being attracted to teach other people how to be productive members of society who don't feel a need to burglarize my house or carjack my loved ones than pay full salary retirement for single term elected Federal politicians, which is a far higher expense.

Funny how nobody crying crocodile tears about budgets ever mentions that, eh?

Apr 5, 2011 -- 9:04AM, Bodean wrote:

If the states acted in accordance with the normal rules that govern business, I'd say that those who argue "labor cost are equal" would be correct.  But the truth of the matter is, they do not operate according to the same rules.

Business has to operate within budget, with revenue determined by the amount of incomming revenue, vs liabilities.  States on the otherhand, do not have an "income revenue stream" ... they have taxes ... a never ending supply of taxes.  If they need more money, they raise taxes.

One only need to compare the salaries for teachers in the puiblic schools vs private schools to see this facade that labor cost are equal ...

"So what gives when you look at public-school and private-school teachers? The National Center for Education Statistics puts it this way: Using 2007-2008 data (the latest available), the average "total school-year and summer earned income" for public school teachers was $53,230 . The equivalent for private-school teachers was $39,690.

That's a whopping $13,540 differential on salary alone"

NOPE ... labor cost are not equal.

Public entities work with in a budget. School districts that run over budget have to lay off employee or close certain activities, Cities  lay off worker and  delay contracts , States close  down activities and lay off  employees.  Even the military cuts employees, cuts training and closes activities. In the military was fund manager on two occasions. I had to manage within the budget, I denied certain activities, had project officers cut costs and delayed other expenditures.  I have been on field training exercises with a Mech infantry   unit  where MRE’s were used instead of field kitchen rations,  Where the soldiers went leg instead of mounted and Ina Armor unit when a exercise  was converted to a simulation center  exercise instead of field exercise   to save fuel, rations, maintenance costs .   A deployment to NTC was cancelled. 

 The government deficit is a result of CONGRESSIONAL  non restraint  rather Government employees 

Apr 5, 2011 -- 9:44AM, Captainmarvel wrote:

Even Building Bombers creates Jobs!...or don't they count cause you dont like em!

 

That doesn't really count because building a bomber only create jobs once--at government expense.

An airliner or air cargo plane built by the same workers in the same factory creates wealth--and jobs--for years afterwards.