1
   

If You Had To Make A Choice....

 
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 12:05 pm
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Did you know that the US Federal gov't is the biggest employer in this country?

No, it is not. For instance, the construction industry employs several times more people than the Federal government. So does the manufacturing industry. As does the financial and real estate industries.

As an industry, the Federal government with under 2.5 million employees, (including the Post Office) is way, way down the list in employing Americans.



LoneStarMadam wrote:
Did you know that the federal gov't has a very good chance at growing even bigger? That is socialism


No, that is NOT socialism. Most industries are growing bigger, and have been growing bigger, since the United States came into existence. That is why out GDP keeps going up and up-and average of 3.3% a year since 1950.

You say the chance the Federal government may grow bigger is socialism. Okay, if the construction industry keeps growing bigger, are we living in constructionism?

If the financial industry keeps growing bigger, are we living in financialism?

If the information industries, like computers and software, keep growing bigger, are we living in informationism?

If your answer to the above three questions is yes, then we are going to have to start living under therapyism, because everyone is going to crack up trying to figure out how many isms we're living under.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 12:13 pm
kelticwizard wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Did you know that the US Federal gov't is the biggest employer in this country?

No, it is not. For instance, the construction industry employs several times more people than the Federal government. So does the manufacturing industry. As does the financial and real estate industries.

As an industry, the Federal government with under 2.5 million employees, (including the Post Office) is way, way down the list in employing Americans.


I didn't realize the construction and manufacturing industries were all one company. That is definitely news to me.


Quote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Did you know that the federal gov't has a very good chance at growing even bigger? That is socialism


No, that is NOT socialism. Most industries are growing bigger, and have been growing bigger, since the United States came into existence. That is why out GDP keeps going up and up-and average of 3.3% a year since 1950.

You say the chance the Federal government may grow bigger is socialism. Okay, if the construction industry keeps growing bigger, are we living in constructionism?

If the financial industry keeps growing bigger, are we living in financialism?

If the information industries, like computers and software, keep growing bigger, are we living in informationism?

If your answer to the above three questions is yes, then we are going to have to start living under therapyism, because everyone is going to crack up trying to figure out how many isms we're living under.


One could say that 3.3% is almost 4%, huh?

Your post makes no sense. How can you compare what LSM is discussing with what you are trying to say here?
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 12:16 pm
kelticwizard wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Did you know that the US Federal gov't is the biggest employer in this country?

No, it is not. For instance, the construction industry employs several times more people than the Federal government. So does the manufacturing industry. As does the financial and real estate industries.

As an industry, the Federal government with under 2.5 million employees, (including the Post Office) is way, way down the list in employing Americans.



LoneStarMadam wrote:
Did you know that the federal gov't has a very good chance at growing even bigger? That is socialism


No, that is NOT socialism. Most industries are growing bigger, and have been growing bigger, since the United States came into existence. That is why out GDP keeps going up and up-and average of 3.3% a year since 1950.

You say the chance the Federal government may grow bigger is socialism. Okay, if the construction industry keeps growing bigger, are we living in constructionism?

If the financial industry keeps growing bigger, are we living in financialism?

If the information industries, like computers and software, keep growing bigger, are we living in informationism?

If your answer to the above three questions is yes, then we are going to have to start living under therapyism, because everyone is going to crack up trying to figure out how many isms we're living under.


See McGentrix post for the explanation.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 12:45 pm
The hypothetical conclusions kw comes to are based on the same preposterous premise of LSM's original question.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 12:55 pm
McGentrix wrote:
I didn't realize the construction and manufacturing industries were all one company. That is definitely news to me.

So when did I say they were?

The Federal government is an industry by itself. It is also the only entity in that industry. As such, we are free to look at it as a single entity, or as an industry.

I am sure that both you and LoneStarMadam have read many, many articles over the years where entire industries are treated as employers. How many times have you read something like , "the insurance industry is the largest employer in such and such a place", or "the pharmaceutical industry employs (blank) workers in the state", or "the oil industry is the largest employer in this section of the state", etc. Yet almost all industries contain many different companies-but that does not make it unusual for people to commonly talk of the entire industry as an employer.

Lone Star Madam is trying to make the Federal government appear huge, by saying it is the largest employer in the country, full time employees counted. I am sure this is true. But since it is also an industry, I decided to take the other common perspective and point out that as an industry, the Federal government employs far, far fewer people than a number of other industries. Which is also true.


McGentrix wrote:
One could say that 3.3% is almost 4%, huh?

No, one could not. In a different thread, I tried to give one of your sources, and you, the benefit of the doubt when he claimed that GDP growth was edging up on 4.0%. As proof, you posted a figure of 3.8% growth in the "current dollar" GDP. To keep from splitting hairs, I graciously granted you the notion that 3.8% was close to 4.0%, in order to deal with the more important fact that the higher "current dollar" figure for GDP growth is never given without explanation-instead the real GDP growth figure is given. In this case, the real GDP growth figure was 2.0%.

Exactly how you figure this adds up to my saying 3.3% is almost 4 percent is a mystery.


McGentrix wrote:
Your post makes no sense. How can you compare what LSM is discussing with what you are trying to say here?


Well, I just did. And I didn't pull any fast ones, either. It is very, very common to talk of an industry with many different companies as a single employer, as I did here.

LoneStarMadam, this answers you as well.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 01:12 pm
kelticwizard wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
I didn't realize the construction and manufacturing industries were all one company. That is definitely news to me.

So when did I say they were?

The Federal government is an industry by itself. It is also the only entity in that industry. As such, we are free to look at it as a single entity, or as an industry.


kelticwizard wrote:
No, it is not. For instance, the construction industry employs several times more people than the Federal government. So does the manufacturing industry. As does the financial and real estate industries.


That's what you said. The federal government is a single employer. We don't have several federal governments competing with each other like there is in the construction, finance and real estate industries. Therefore your whole thesis is non-applicable. LSM stated that the "US Federal gov't is the biggest employer in this country" and you countered with some nonsense about industries... Makes no sense at all kw.

Quote:
I am sure that both you and LoneStarMadam have read many, many articles over the years where entire industries are treated as employers. How many times have you read something like , "the insurance industry is the largest employer in such and such a place", or "the pharmaceutical industry employs (blank) workers in the state", or "the oil industry is the largest employer in this section of the state", etc. Yet almost all industries contain many different companies-but that does not make it unusual for people to commonly talk of the entire industry as an employer.

Lone Star Madam is trying to make the Federal government appear huge, by saying it is the largest employer in the country, full time employees counted. I am sure this is true. But since it is also an industry, I decided to take the other common perspective and point out that as an industry, the Federal government employs far, far fewer people than a number of other industries. Which is also true.


The federal government is not an industry. That is why your comparisons do not work.


Quote:
McGentrix wrote:
One could say that 3.3% is almost 4%, huh?

No, one could not. In a different thread, I tried to give one of your sources, and you, the benefit of the doubt when he claimed that GDP growth was edging up on 4.0%. As proof, you posted a figure of 3.8% growth in the "current dollar" GDP. To keep from splitting hairs, I graciously granted you the notion that 3.8% was close to 4.0%, in order to deal with the more important fact that the higher "current dollar" figure for GDP growth is never given without explanation-instead the real GDP growth figure is given. In this case, the real GDP growth figure was 2.0%.

Exactly how you figure this adds up to my saying 3.3% is almost 4 percent is a mystery.


McGentrix wrote:
Your post makes no sense. How can you compare what LSM is discussing with what you are trying to say here?


Well, I just did. And I didn't pull any fast ones, either. It is very, very common to talk of an industry with many different companies as a single employer, as I did here.

LoneStarMadam, this answers you as well.
[/quote]

Thank you for the response. It was calm and well thought out and not full of venom. I believ you over-reacted though towards LSM statemnt to mean more then she intended. It was an off hand statement and I seriously doubt she thought it would create this much discussion.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 02:31 pm
McGentrix:

Okay, the Federal Government is not really an industry, in the sense that it is not created to make a profit, tec.

But it is a sphere of economic activity, people spend their entire working lives going to work for it, so it shares some things in common with industry.

I believe LoneStarMadam composed her post to try to emphasize the size of the Federal Government, by pointing out that more people work for it than any single company.

I could point out that with 2.5 million employees, (including the Post Office), that is not huge in a country such as ours which has a full time workforce of over 120 million people. But instead of using dry statistics, I just decided to use the common presentation of quoting industries as a whole and pointing out that there are many industries which employ quite a few more. Just as a means to give the picture perspective

Just as the Federal government is a sphere of economic activity, so is the construction industry, financial industry, etc, and these private spheres are each individually larger than the Federal sphere. Most people in this country work for private industry, not the Federal government. This proves that we are not in a socialist system, for in a socialist system most people would be working for the government.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 03:07 pm
The Federal Gov't is the largest employer iin this country
About to get bigger too & it is socialism, I don't care how one spells it, also the federal gov't is into construction too.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 03:07 pm
deleted
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Dec, 2006 03:41 pm
LoneStarMadam wrote:
The Federal Gov't is the largest employer iin this country
127 million full time employed in 2005, the Federal government employs 2.5 million of them. Including the Post Office. More people may work for the Federal Government than any one company, but less than 2% of the workforce works for the Federal Government.

LoneStarMadam wrote:
About to get bigger too & it is socialism,
And the construction industry is about to get bigger too. Is that constructionism?

And the financial industry is about to get bigger too. Are we living in financialism?

The information industry, like computers and software, is about to get bigger too. Are we living in informationism?




LoneStarMadam wrote:
I don't care how one spells it, also the federal gov't is into construction too.
Apparently not too many of them, because the Federal government only employs 2.5 million workers to do everything it does, while the construction industry employs several times that amount to just do construction.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2006 01:21 am
Perhaps, Lone Star Guy's question should have been" do you prefer Socialism, Communism or Anarchy?"
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Dec, 2006 11:05 am
"Some people age like fine wine, others age like milk"[/B]
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Dec, 2006 09:53 pm
Re: If You Had To Make A Choice....
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Would you choose socialisim, communism, or democracy?

I 'd choose a LIBERTARIAN REPUBLIC,
elected democraticly ( like the one established by the Founders of the USA ),
wherein the only permissible form of gun control
is MANDATORY armament of each citizen who is able to lift a gun
( with training therefor in schools )
and that Republic being funded ONLY by sales taxes
( at an equal rate for everyone )
and from importation tarriffs.

That Republic wud be established
upon the economic basis of a l'aissez faire free market,
and fonetic spelling.
David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Dec, 2006 10:08 pm
Roxxxanne wrote:
Perhaps, Lone Star Guy's question should have been" do you prefer Socialism, Communism or Anarchy?"

That 's quite an interesting question, Roxxxanne;
no more standing in line at the Dept. of Motor Vehicles.
However, I wonder as to the stability and durability of anarchy.

In the face of such violent depredations
as have been demonstrated thru out history,
wud the citizens clamor for the " safety in numbers "
that results from collective defenses from
domestic predators ( e.g., robbers n murderers ),
and from such alien predators,
as pirates, or the Vikings.

It is handy to have an entity to coin money
( not meaning fiat money ), and to enforce voluntary contracts.


Thoughts about that ?
David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 07:03:23