Skip to main content

View Diary: View From the Ground: Oakland City Workers' Strike Amidst BART Carclasym. (38 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The private sector pays... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soros

    ...for the public sector all the time 100% of the cost.

    Look at Detroit as an example of a place with a 'strong' public sector and weak private sector.

    All income to a city or state comes from private activity. Except in very few cases, all income comes from private economic activity, usually sales of exportable goods and services. You can have all the government you want, but when the local factory packs up and leaves town, you are screwed.

    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

    by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 08:59:03 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The private sector pays 9% of the federal revenues (0+ / 0-)

      Which is down from 26% in the booming 1950s.

      The Office of Management and Budget's data show the exact opposite of your claim. Huffpo put it in chart form, for the numerically challenged

      40% is in the form of income taxes paid by the public, and another 35% are the payroll taxes paid by the public.

      Both public and private sectors provide economic activity. The payee who pays payroll and income taxes can be employed by either public or private sector. School teachers, firefighters, public works employes, town clerks, mayors, military service members, and so on all pay income and payroll taxes. All of those income taxes are being paid entirely due to public sector spending.  Even those living entirely on unemployment benefits are paying income tax on those benefits.

      So 75% of federal revenues come from the people who are getting paid, regardless of who pays them.

      Parroting right wing talking points is different from providing citations. Please provide citations for your claims.

      •  Re (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        soros
        40% is in the form of income taxes paid by the public, and another 35% are the payroll taxes paid by the public.
        All of this is paid for by corporations and similar private economic activity. No corporations: no income tax, no payroll tax, nothing. If your local factory leaves town, all of these revenue sources vanish. Regardless of who actually writes the check, the ultimate source of all of these funds is private economic activity. Public activity is supported from private activity, which pays all the bills all the time.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 09:29:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What an enlightening citation (0+ / 0-)

          Still refusing to provide any data to back up your claims. I don't blame you, since actually linking to your sources would get you bounced.

          It's utterly ludicrous to imply that the private sector is the only source of income in a community.  Do you really expect anyone to believe that if a factory leaves town, the town then magically has no firefighters, teachers, police, town clerks, etc.? Really? They all just "poof!" disappear?

          Since literally everyone in the country lives in a community that has lost private employers over the years, you'll have a hard time convincing them that their towns completely folded up and disappeared in the aftermath.

          •  Re (0+ / 0-)
            It's utterly ludicrous to imply that the private sector is the only source of income in a community.  Do you really expect anyone to believe that if a factory leaves town, the town then magically has no firefighters, teachers, police, town clerks, etc.? Really? They all just "poof!" disappear?
            Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. With no private sources of income your town dries up and blows away.
            Since literally everyone in the country lives in a community that has lost private employers over the years, you'll have a hard time convincing them that their towns completely folded up and disappeared in the aftermath.
            Yeah, because nearly all towns and cities have more than one private employer. But the fewer private jobs there are, the harder it is to maintain those services, until they all vanish.

            It is impossible to have a town with only police, fire, health care, etc and no export industries. How do you propose to do it? Tell me how the town buys toilet paper from the outside world...?

            (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
            Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

            by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 06:37:47 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Links? (0+ / 0-)

              You're still missing citations.

              In the mean time, this discussion isn't about whether or not there should be any private sector, it's about your claim that the public sector CANNOT act before the private sector.

              You have still failed to provide any links in support thereof.

              I've provided data from the OMB that shows your "100%" claim to be completely false. Here's a link showing that government spending in the Great Depression got the economy moving again.

              Total expenditures on WPA projects through June 1941, totaled approximately $11.4 billion. Over $4 billion was spent on highway, road, and street projects; more than $1 billion on public buildings, including the iconic Dock Street Theater in Charleston, the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles, and the Timberline Lodge on Oregon's Mt. Hood.
              And
              The Public Works Administration (PWA), part of the New Deal of 1933, was a large-scale public works construction agency in the United States headed by Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes. It was created by the National Industrial Recovery Act in June 1933 in response to the Great Depression. It built large-scale public works such as dams, bridges, hospitals, and schools. Its goals were to spend $3.3 billion in the first year, and $6 billion in all, to provide employment, stabilize purchasing power, and help revive the economy.
              There were also the Social Security Act, the institution of Unemployment insurance, the National Labor Relations Act, and the Fair Labor Standards Act, plus the creation of the Resettlement Administration (RA), the Rural Electrification Administration (REA), rural welfare projects sponsored by the WPA, National Youth Administration (NYA), Forest Service and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), Tennessee Valley Authority, Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA), National Recovery Administration, and so on. In addition, there were a number of laws passed to rein in the financial industry's excesses, and end private wealth hoarding.

              Most of the funding came from the government printing money, and using it to pay people. Those people then bought toilet paper, among other things, with that money. Ironically, the businesses that provided the toilet paper and other things couldn't tell the difference between the money from the government programs and the money from private employers, and gladly accepted both forms.

              Once again, I'd like to see links to any proof of any kind that any of your claims in the thread could hold any weight whatsoever.

              Alas, since we both know you can only find such "proof" at right wing think tanks, we also both know you can't post the links, since it'll result in instant application of the ban hammer. You've been having too much fun promoting this moronic winger tripe here in the great orange den of lefties to let yourself be banned so easily.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site