Wonder what the socialist democrats are really up to? Hang on... it's scary.

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed.

Thanks for your support for this left wing policy since you have nothing but gossip and other forms of fallacy instead of Any form of Valid, rebuttal.

 

So maybe it's time to cut sending

 

Could you develop that a bit more? I'm not sure of the reasoning that went into it.

 

You ought to support sensible left wing policy that actually makes capital sense;

a simple cost of living adjustment for Labor, along with solving simple poverty and some help with social costs.

The right wing has nothing but hearsay and soothsay, and repeal.

 

Well perhaps you can post any major breakthroughs in basic science thst have emerged from private sector research.

And of course your question about the government making a profit is a straw man arguement since no one has said, nor does any rational thinker expect the government to make a profit. That isn't the government's function which is why the results of the government funded basic research are turned over to private enterprise.

 

the automobile the television the refrigerator the internet computers cell phones smartphones phones in general, it would be hard to find a breakthrough that didn't happen in the private sector.

it isn't the strawman because I didn't say that anyone said that. I was explaining the government does not create wealth it only confiscates it.

Basic research isn't the function of the government.

 

A person whose mind works as it should can examine things in a full spectrum, be balanced and fair in judgment, has no trouble correcting themselves where they find they are wrong. They can be adamant about a position, but not close-minded. When people start with belligerence they are telling you they intend to reject your point without the balance and fair part.
They have built a defense before they know what it for, because it's a possible threat to what they already think, which they have no intention of changing. To such people the discussion must always be adversary- in order for them to "win", you must lose. If it's not their idea, or concurring with their idea, or in some way crediting them for the idea, then supporting it is losing- giving in. Surrender of the ego. They can't afford to do that.

This is often the guy who goes about solving a problem by starting out with posture that tends to be aggressive or offended- trying to get an advantage before the discussion starts. That makes things adversary from the start. It's logical to become adversary when it's clear that the partner approach won't work. It's stupid to be the one preventing it. Such people never really win, despite what they tell themselves.

This is psychology, how people's mind think. Not what, but how; that is the mechanism that controls and limits the "what". It's sub-conscious program, not conscious thinking they are aware of. Damned hard to change.

We have a lot of people like that in today's society. and it's getting worse.

 

Lately, we seem to be agreeing on some things. Nice change. And this is another one.

 

Government can recover costs on a not-for-profit basis.

In my opinion, the Government should be directing corps of engineers to build new infrastructure and new cities.

 

Actually the internet, computers, cell phones, smart phones all come from the basic research funded totally or in part by the government. Not sure if the government had a role in developing the internal combustion engine but it probably did. And since the government does fund the basic research that results in these industries it certainly does result in a great deal of wealth creation.

And what exactly do you think is the function of government?

 

free phones come from Government not charity.

 

I doubt your claims

Regulate interstate commerce, maintain a national military and regulate standards of measurement. Nothing more.

 

You can doubt all you want but facts do not agree.
Most truly new technology usually has initially come from the government or government funding, for the reason of risk. There is "usually" too much risk for private industries to research truly new unique ideas that is unless the government is funding that company. For example lockheed martin is working on nuclear fusion. Not sure if anything will come out of it (that goes back the original problem of risk). The internet is an example. The government came up with the initial framework and technology, then private industry optimized it and made it what it is today. Same goes for space technology.

 

I saw no facts only claims

Bullshit.

this is complete bullshit.

I still smell bullshit.

 

I'm guessing you have no response then. Disappointing.

 

Well considering that you are responding to my response it's kind of laughable that you would pretend you didn't see it it's the little chunk inside the quote box.

My response is two parts.
First, your claims are not facts no matter how many times you say they are.

Second, they are bullshit.

Present evidence for your claims or I can dismiss them without evidence.

That's exactly what you saw me do.

 

Labor being paid fifteen dollars an hour generates more revenue and creates more in demand.

 

That little chunk inside your quote was a complete lie and the rest said nothing, so that's why I said you gave no response. The internet was created by the military (the government), and saying it's not a fact does not somehow make it so. Also, my "facts" are the rules of for profit business. Long term extreme risk research ventures like getting an actually brand new technology off the ground are hardly ever viable without external not for profit funding. Yes there are exceptions but they are few and far between and yes, it doesn't have to be the government that provides the funding.

 

no it was complete honesty.

falsely because clearly I did.

My response was to dismiss your claims. Since you made them without evidence I can dismiss them without evidence.

I still dismiss your claims.