|
Krispy Kareem posted:And the tanks. Oh, we have so many tanks. The government is absolutely bad with money. Exactly where and how they're bad with money is always what's up for debate. If I weren't so lazy, I'd do some research and put together a reddit style post from the government's perspective: US Government posted:HELP WE'RE CONSTANTLY NEEDING TO BORROW MONEY, here's our budget: Poster posted:STOP BUYING SO MANY TANKS, JESUS, YOU DON'T EVEN NEED THEM US Government posted:No, that's non-negotiable. Tankuity.
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 13:25 |
|
|
MJBuddy posted:
I agree that our current government is wasteful, but lol if you think that the Nobel Prize in Economics means anything.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Dr. Eldarion posted:... that congress keeps buying but the military is adamant that they don't actually want or need. Well you see I spend 50% of my budget on guns and tanks and giving it to my co workers if they beg me for it. Can't cut any of that. I also save 34% of it into treasury bonds while carrying 10 times my yearly income in consumer debt.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
LOL IF I RAN MY BUSINESS LIKE THE GOVERNMENT I'D BE BANKRUPT
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
Armacham posted:I agree that our current government is wasteful, but lol if you think that the Nobel Prize in Economics means anything. Have you read Ostram is this some absurd inverse appeal to authority? Krugman is a hack, but he won the Nobel for really great research too. There's a reason Hayek, in his acceptance speech, said it was irresponsible to give a Nobel to living economists who could exploit their notoriety in society. Ostram never did such things, though and was pretty a-political. E: I legitimately can't think of a horribly undeserving Econ Nobel winner. I can think of horrible snubs (Gordon Tullock told them that the Swedish economy was a poo poo show with nothing of redeeming value when they called him to finalize his selection, so they decided to go in a different direction. ) MJBuddy fucked around with this message at 17:05 on May 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:Is 'Governing the Commons' the book you're talking about? That's just it - exercising just some semblance of moderation with military spending could easily save way more money than what the GOP wanted to cut from SNAP. But nooooo... And letting the SNAP peak budget become the new normal still would've left us pretty far behind the curve in terms of how well we take care of the less fortunate.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Zool posted:The real question is how much should you charge to go bareback. That sounds about as risky a proposition as Forex trading, shorting, on margin.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
[quote="Cockmaster" post="444792226"] And letting the SNAP peak budget become the new normal still would've left us pretty far behind the curve in terms of how well we take care of the less fortunate. [/] There is a tremendous economic cost to incentivizing people to not work. Stop pretending welfare payments flourish in a vacuum. When we spend tax dollars, we really spend the value generated by productive people. That opportunity cost is rarely discussed in the left-wing bowels of the Internet, but a compelling case can be made that entitlement spending is wasteful beyond just corruption, rent-seeking, and bureaucratic waste. It can also be a crippling counter-incentive that can prevent otherwise productive value creators from reaching their potential and contributing instead of suckling the government teat, Now here comes the part where the rabid leftists insinuate that my suggestion that excessive entitlement spending can be counterproductive means I want to throw the poors in a wood chipper on HBO Live.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
High Lord Elbow posted:[quote="Cockmaster" post="444792226"] Entitlement programs have to balance the desire to help those who cannot help themselves and minimize incentives to exploit them if they're unnecessary. The proper approach is flat benefits (for whole of society) or phased benefits (and I'm not researched on how SNAP qualifies, so it may have these features? No clue). However much room for exploitation there is, I'd rather cut a dollar dedicated to killing people or producing something that's literally rusting from no use than something that might be exploited to eat more. Wasteful spending in defense has identical effects: it pulls engineers designers from productive functions to build planes no one wants or buildings to test rockets that will never be built. The people working on those projects have opportunity cost as well. I think you're being a bit too harsh on benefit programs as far as the first line of places to cut. And I'm certainly not a radical internet leftist (polar opposite).
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
Food stamps taper with income and are not nearly enough to incentivize someone not to work - they are a shoddy supplement to our inadequate minimum wage, lack of support for families requiring a non-working parent, and individuals working underpaying jobs like internships that are exploiting them for "experience building". People who exploit welfare don't make very much, unless they are government employees embezzling. My vote for allocation of government tank equity is into blanket subsidized daycare for both working and student families. It encourages production, lowers the level of welfare reliance, and helps increase class equity and movement.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
I have a story about a coworker and truck equity. We work in a manufactory so we tend to make decent money and have fairly good benefits. Coworker had bought a new chromed out truck after he got hired right before I started. Not a big deal at the time since it was his only real expense. He got a decent raise and moved to a new position last year with the potential to make even more money. Fast forward to this year. Coworker gets his girlfriend pregnant. So he has his first kid coming soon. Well most people would work more hours and try to save up in preparation, he decides that he doesn't want to work overtime except when pressed and basically starts skating by off of just 40 hour weeks (most of our shop is pulling 55 to 60), his choice but stupid in my mind. He had a nice position lined up but last month got tossed out because he was found to be doing almost 1/3 the amount of work than another worker in that position. Which put him back in his old spot, which is capped at a horrible pay rate, and from the looks of it ruined any chances to move to an area where he can start running cnc machines and make higher wages. Second week of April he comes into work driving a brand new full cab truck with all the bells and whistles. Apparently he needed to do a bit of work on his two year old one which included brakes and pads and maybe a tire or two. Instead of spending a bit to get the basic stuff handled he went and traded in his old truck for a new one. Found out what that cost him, he rolled the negative equity from his old loan which was about 25000 into the loan for the new truck. Total cost of the loan? 60000 dollars. With probably an absurd interest rate. His monthly payment is almost 600 according to him and probably more. And his insurance must be worse with how he drives. His kid is due in another week and as a right now he has almost nothing saved up between him and his girlfriend, is on a short list to be terminated, and owes more on a vehicle then I owe on my house. I see some dumb things at work but god I never thought I would see truck equity like this. edit: Fixed it a bit. Phone posting and thought I had fixed most of them UCS Hellmaker fucked around with this message at 03:32 on May 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
If you want to think about government spending, think about Washington DC. It was a malaria-infested swamp with land so worthless that neither Maryland nor Virginia wanted it. Washington DC has never produced or exported anything other than government. Now it is the wealthiest city, by median income, that the planet has ever seen. I wonder how that happened?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
D&D is the place for sophomoric political opinions, FYI
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
High Lord Elbow posted:I want to throw the poors in a wood chipper on HBO Live. You could charge people to watch on pay per view AND it would decrease entitlement spending. Good with money.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
ohgodwhat posted:D&D is the place for sophomoric political opinions, FYI
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
MJBuddy posted:However much room for exploitation there is, I'd rather cut a dollar dedicated to killing people or producing something that's literally rusting from no use than something that might be exploited to eat more. Wasteful spending in defense has identical effects: it pulls engineers designers from productive functions to build planes no one wants or buildings to test rockets that will never be built. The people working on those projects have opportunity cost as well. That reminds me of how Congress handed NASA a mandate to launch a manned mission to Mars, yet expected them to pay for it with their existing budget: http://www.vox.com/2015/2/25/8109901/mars-nasa-congress Mocking Bird posted:Food stamps taper with income and are not nearly enough to incentivize someone not to work - they are a shoddy supplement to our inadequate minimum wage, lack of support for families requiring a non-working parent, and individuals working underpaying jobs like internships that are exploiting them for "experience building". People who exploit welfare don't make very much, unless they are government employees embezzling. Plus, a while ago someone posted the results of a study comparing the economic impact of various government activities. If I remember correctly, SNAP was towards the top, generating over $2 of economic activity for every dollar spent. Defense spending was less than $1 (as were tax cuts, for what it's worth). The GOP has claimed that their stance isn't "gently caress the poor", but "a hand up, not a hand oiut". The problem there is that even with "hand up" type things, they tend to be highly reluctant to do more than the bare minimum. Their idea of "fiscal responsibility" is like buying a $500 car from some random Craigslist ad, doing next to no maintenance on it until it breaks down, and trying to pin the blame on the people who said you were making a fucktarded mistake.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Fiscal multiplier is a myth, so economic activity studies are basically garbage.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Dr. Eldarion posted:... that congress keeps buying but the military is adamant that they don't actually want or need.  And to the guy with the bad with money, new underwater truck baby on the way: Your post had so many typos that it hurt to read 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
How does a truck depreciate 25k in 2 years? 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
ohgodwhat posted:D&D is the place for sophomoric political opinions, FYI
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:How does a truck depreciate 25k in 2 years? Crash it into a tree.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
High Lord Elbow posted:[quote="Cockmaster" post="444792226"] Reminding you all this EXACTLY the same logic that was used during the Southern India famine of 1876–78, where over 5 million people died because the British empire didn't want to encourage "dependency" among the lazy people of India. Basically, you're the mustache twirling Baronet talking about how the Irish need to be taught the value of hard work during the middle of the Potato famine. golden bubble fucked around with this message at 03:29 on May 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
Sic Semper Goon posted:Crash it into a tree. His word was he put 80 thousand miles on it. I think he just got a loan he couldn't pay for in the first place. If he barely put anything down on both trucks (which is probably what happened) it explains alot.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:Reminding you all this EXACTLY the same logic that was used during the Southern India famine of 1876–78, where over 5 million people died because the British empire didn't want to encourage "dependency" among the lazy people of India. Hear me out on this, cause I know it's gonna sound crazy but i want you to listen to the whole thing: We chop up the poor and feed them to the poor. Bam, everyone has enough to eat, crime goes away, fewer people to belly ache over stupid poo poo like "I live like a third-world refugee in a developed nation" or "I'm poorly educated!"
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:Reminding you all this EXACTLY the same logic that was used during the Southern India famine of 1876–78, where over 5 million people died because the British empire didn't want to encourage "dependency" among the lazy people of India. literally exactly the same.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 04:26
|
|
|
Something Awful, a cannibalistic think tank.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:How does a truck depreciate 25k in 2 years? Driving it off the lot. Also if someone spent crazy money on a truck and it's not for work, they probably did something stupid to it like get a lift kit. Couple of years ago I was talking to a friend who handles repossessions for a local bank and he showed me one of the examples of this. There was a year old Dodge Ram in the parking lot, it had a bright lime green paint job, was lifted about 4 inches, had a bunch of random accessories and generally looked like poo poo. The previous owner was a 24 year old who worked in the oil industry, made bank until he got a DUI. Lost his job, had nothing saved up to handle payments for a few months and he lost the truck. The bank took a huge loss on the truck since no one wanted to buy it, and the bank didn't want this piece of poo poo in their parking lot.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:45
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:His word was he put 80 thousand miles on it. I think he just got a loan he couldn't pay for in the first place. If he barely put anything down on both trucks (which is probably what happened) it explains alot. How do you put 80 thousand miles on a truck in two years if you aren't using it commercially?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
You know I am just going to imagine the USA Legislature looks at buying tanks we don't need on credit, is like a redneck buying a new truck from the sketchy dealer that doesn't really credit check and just charges ridiculous interest. Yet its okay because tank/truck Equity is important and maybe we can use it to fight a war/haul something once thus justifying the expensive purchase... worst case scenario we donate it to our ally/cousin as a part of an arms deal/birthday present.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Powerlurker posted:How do you put 80 thousand miles on a truck in two years if you aren't using it commercially? Drive it from Nova Scotia to Mexico and back?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:You know I am just going to imagine the USA Legislature looks at buying tanks we don't need on credit, is like a redneck buying a new truck from the sketchy dealer that doesn't really credit check and just charges ridiculous interest. Yet its okay because tank/truck Equity is important and maybe we can use it to fight a war/haul something once thus justifying the expensive purchase... worst case scenario we donate it to our ally/cousin as a part of an arms deal/birthday present. Given that the military begged them not to, it's more like they're a car dealer who demanded Chevy make more Jeep Liberty SUVs and put a gun to people's heads and made them buy them, mark up and whole. So the legislators are good with money (pair by defense contractors to funnel tax revenue to tanks that they will later pay the defense contractors to disable), but we're bad with legislators.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 07:19
|
|
|
Powerlurker posted:How do you put 80 thousand miles on a truck in two years if you aren't using it commercially? A 50 mile commute plus business trips maybe.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:A 50 mile commute plus business trips maybe. Expensing and writing off truck equity for business travel is Good With Money unlike regular personal truck equity
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
I have a 55 mile commute, I put around 40,000 miles on my car a year. I am currently looking for better and closer employment because I could spend those two hours a day I spend commuting doing better and more worthwhile things-- like not driving. And not spending $250 a month in gas would also be nice.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
DuckConference posted:Horsechat has been spooked and now fears this thread. Poor Horsechat, thought about bees and died. (That's a rhudda quote)
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
My aunt has a horse. She bought it 15 or 16 years ago. I don't think she has ever ridden it. It basically just eats and throws horseshoes requiring the farrier to come out every other month. No idea why she had to have it. She hasn't been trail riding in the last 20 years or more and hasn't done rodeos since I was a kid. Such a waste of money and time.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Watching the Kentucky Derby for the first time ever, and all I can think about is horsechat.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 22:49
|
|
SpelledBackwards posted:Watching the Kentucky Derby for the first time ever, and all I can think about is horsechat. Horsechat is the best derail. I never roll my eyes and skip posts during horsechat, the way I do with other derails. I think every horse derail I've ever seen has produced at least one amazing story.
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Horsechat is the best derail. I never roll my eyes and skip posts during horsechat, the way I do with other derails. I think every horse derail I've ever seen has produced at least one amazing story. I think it's because no one can start bragging about how they manage THEIR horses and start a fight over which methods are more fiscally responsible. Also horse stories are the best hands down.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 13:25 |
|
|
Horsechat is fantastic because it is both on-topic and HILARIOUS. I shared those posts, now I can text the man and say "help, just thought of ants" and he's telling me poo poo like "gotta build that ...equity" Porsche in the Target parking lot...good with money? BonerGhost fucked around with this message at 00:39 on May 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 00:31
|
|