Quote:
Originally Posted by woj
How about spend that $$ on more productive projects at home? For example, instead of lets say buying a few tanks or military aircraft, spend that $$ to replace all the old public buses in Chicago? It would cost exactly the same in both $$ terms, and labor requirements... so there would be no net employment loss...  |
Agreed... Makes sense to most people... But it's federal spending that's the issue and buses in Chicago is city money... Cutting federal spending to balance the budget, reduce the debt etc. does not put money into the system.. It puts people out of work.. Directly from the loss of jobs, or through not buying as many pencils which puts people out of work in the pencil factories. All those people have less money to pay in taxes to the states.. There's less money for city programs like replacing those buses.. All those people spend less money... Businesses make less and thus can't hire more people.. It's one big intertwined mess.
The only way to accomplish something like that would be government funded/run projects. But no one wants the government to do that sort of thing. And we've seen how effective it is to just give business some money to do that stuff themselves. That's worked out really well over the last couple years. I guess they could get the money to the city/state through "earmarks".. But no one wants those either. Everyone wants smaller government and less spending to just magically happen.