Rush Limbaugh says Government is not supposed to create jobs...is this true?

Question

This couldn't be more untrue! Rush, Sean Hannity,Neil Boortz and Mark Levin all say the same thing in an attempt to make you believe this non-fact. What is fact is that any successful Nation evolves around a sound and active government. Seriously, I ask you...how many private companies do you know that would not exist without government contracts? Does this question not get the ball rolling in your head? WHat Rush and Co. have been trying to cram down your throats makes no sense at all. It is our tax dollars that pay Boeing to develop new planes and helicopters and the salaries of everyone involved. When the government gives a state money for new schools or new roads its our tax dollars that pay those companies and their workers that the state hires to do said work on those schools and roads for the next how ever many years. Whether you Sean Hannity, Republican die-hards have a hard time digesting this, everything evolves around our governments both state and local. They do create jobs and supported the creation of many American companies. And take a listen next time you listen to Sean Hannity, Rush, Boortz and Levin....let me know when they tell you just what all those billions of tax dollars are supposed to be used for. A senseless, undeclared war where we as Americans get nothing?

Answer 1

I don't march to the drumbeat of Limbaugh and other Republican shills. But neither do I follow leftist rhetoric. On this one, I side more with Limbaugh. However, I wouldn't say "supposed". That is a subjective term. Rather, I will make this concrete. I do not want the government to create jobs. I believe that society functions better under conditions of liberty in which individuals form voluntary associations.



The profit mechanism serves a vital function by providing signals to society what goods are most urgently needed. In a free society (not necessarily describing ours), entrepreneurs must provide the best products at the lowest cost (i.e. making efficient use of scarce resources) to earn profits. Those best able to do this earn profits and so command greater resources. In this way, a market economy pushes capital into the most efficient hands.



When government commands resources, it does not have the profit mechanism to guide its edicts. Oh sure, people make money. Some people amass great fortunes, as you say, serving government contracts. But these fortunes are not the result of freely set market prices. Rather, they come out of political and bureaucratic processes.



Political pull guides the allocation of resources. Yes, what you say is true. When the government assigns a contract, builds schools or roads; or under takes other projects, economic activity springs up around those projects. But your position seems to be that society would stagnate if the government didn't endorse those contracts. Do you really think so?



In a deep sense, the current crisis is due to just the kind of intervention that you praise. The government has guided economic activity to greater or lesser extents in many industries, and we are reaping the results. People have become rich because they could suck at the teat of government. But they were not producing anything of real value. The market is reacting to economic realities.



You also recognize the "senseless, undeclared war" that is championed by Republicans. I join you in denouncing war. But do you not realize that it is the other side of the coin? You want the welfare state. Republicans want the warfare state. In the grand tradition of compromise, we get both. The same mechanism that guides the economic activity that you want (which I have already argued is a bad idea) seeks and funds war.



In fact, people become very rich from war too. To some people, it is an absolute stimulus. How could you not want that? You praise Boeing. You do know that they make lots of revenue off of defense (sic) contracts. Don't you realize how many jobs are created to wage "senseless, undeclared war"? You should be thanking our wise leaders for promoting war so that we could gain all the advantages of economic activity that springs up around it.



Or we could allow liberty to flourish in our culture. We could let individuals choose the activities that they wish to undertake and the employment that they wish to create.

Answer 2

Your statement is not what Rush or any of the other conservative talk show hosts have said. What they said is that government cannot create jobs. And that is a fact.



All government can do is hire people to work for the government. What new jobs does government create, notice the word CREATE, to hire those people? NONE!



When was the last time that any government invented anything thereby creating a new job? When was the last time government created a new type of service that created a new, never before done job?



Your response about government contracts is basically ignorant. The private sector created the job/service, and the government found it extremely useful to the government. Hence, a government contract was formed between the private company and the government. But the government did not CREATE the job/service.



And I know this from personal experience with environmental investigations. My father created the service for a few law firms and the government found the service useful. At that point, the government established contracts for service, but that was years after the service was well established in the private sector.

Answer 3

Government is most efficient at creating bureaucratic jobs, the type of jobs where it takes 10 to do the work of 1.



Let's look at how government creates "private sector" jobs in one of the sectors you selected, aviation.



The government issues a call, an invitation for competition to develop a new air supremacy fighter to replace our aging fleet. The companies spend their own and borrowed capital and come up with some outstanding designs. The prototypes represent hundreds of millions of dollars at risk. The government selects one and plans to purchase 4,000 units. The company spends money to up fit for the planned production run. The upfront costs are tremendous and the company calculates the cost of each unit based on the total units the government has promised to buy. It calculations show that the company can remain viable with the price of each unit being $5 million.



The government rethinks how many units it's willing to buy, comes back to the company with a reduced promise of buying only 2,000. Now, the company has to reprice its product at $10 million.



The "added cost" further causes the government to rethink its order.



It now comes back to the company, complaining about the cost and promises to buy only 200. The company then readjusts the price, a price needed for the company to remain viable. It tells the government that based on the purchase of only 200, the price of each is now $100 million.



The government then uses this price and puts forth the argument that by cancelling the order, it has just saved the tax payer trillions of dollars.



The government balks at the government induced price increase and cancels the order, effectively raising the cost to the taxpayer of every new fighter already in the fleet to $1 billion, as fractionally represented by the total capital spent on the project and the resulting increase of price necessary to produce the spare parts should the orphaned fleet be called upon to do what it was designed to do.



The Pentagon is famous for buying very expensive hammers and toilet seats as represented in the accounting practices demanded by the GAO. Politicians and citizens howl at such expenditures. Then comes the day when those "hammers" are dropping JDAMs on target and are called F-117s, B-2s and the "toilet seats" are smart bombs.

Answer 4

The government DOES NOT create permanent jobs for civilians (with the exception of military service).



The governments job is to provide an atmosphere where job creation is possible. Where the limits to ones success is restricted only by ones imagination, fortitude, or ambition. Where success is looked upon as a good thing. Where those that achieve are not penalized for their efforts.

Answer 5

The federal government should not invest or take over private business. The federal government should not provide housing. The federal government should not provide food. The federal government should not provide health insurance. The federal government should not become the keeper of the people. Its purpose is to provide defense, and an opportunity to pursuit your own path. To many Americans think the federal government as their provider...this will kill the American dream.



Source(s):

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Answer 6

Yes, government contracts do serve to stimulate the private sector. But... when the private sector is contracting, taking more from their pockets to fund spending for the sake of spending only serves to push the private sector to contract more. People are still being laid off right now. The government is hiring them. Who pays for that? The private sector does. If they're funding the government employees, they won't be doing any hiring any time soon. The idea is to push the private sector to invest in employment. What's being done today won't do that.

Answer 7

The United States began without a government. It existed for quite some time with very minimal federal government.



The government never creates jobs. Government can only create work that lasts only so long as the government can continue to pay. A "job" is something that is providing a service or product that is in demand. This makes the job a long lasting thing without any money coming from government.



Government needs to maintain the foundation on which jobs will be created. That means making this country inviting for new business investment and expansion. That then causes more jobs to be created. Strangling businesses in taxes and regulations isn't how you attract more companies to invest in the country.

Answer 8

No one says that government cannot supplement the private sector. What is being said is that government cannot supplant the private sector. It is obvious that you do not understand the distinction. Additionally there are literally tens of millions of jobs in this country which are created without government funding.

Answer 9

That's what you got out of that? What they mean is that the Government should not create jobs WITHIN the government. Bigger government is detrimental to this country.But believe what you will, enjoy your freedom of speech and opinion while you still have it.Times they are a changing. We are getting the "change" America voted for like it or not.

Answer 10

A small observation, if we didn't have government Rush et al wouldn't have jobs.



I think you are correct. The government is part and parcel of the economy of the country, when its mishandled as it was during the Bush years, it affects all of us.

As we can see quite plainly now.

Answer 11

The FEDERAL government, according to the United States Constitution (which liberals hate so much), has a very limited role.



All those things you listed work best when handled at the state level.

Answer 12

The way thing are going, the Fed, State and Local Govs. are probably the largest employers. Plus they are among the few to still provide group health insurance and retirement benefits.

Answer 13

Calm down and get informed. Rush etc. thinks as do I the government should not be the payer of the jobs.



The free market should be encouraged by the government. This administration is only interested in Government spurred jobs.



This is just moving money from one government agency to another without the increase of tax revenue.

Answer 14

Yes. Please read the Constitution. The Tenth Ammendments says the government can only do what is spelled out in the Constitution.



"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Answer 15

No.



If I was making 10 million a year and didn't want to pay for the benefits I received from my country i would spout the venom Limpbrain spouts. He is familiar with the Fixed Noise/hate radio Constitution that says of the rich/by the rich/for the rich. He is not familiar with the US Constitution witch talks about the common good.



LImpbrain is a shill of the uber-rich. As long as you keep in mind that he is not on your side it is possible to listen to his lunacy and not puke.

Answer 16

Government should be only creating jobs in the military to protect the country.Government has never made a job that makes money or produces anything.

Answer 17

The government does not create jobs. It invents work.

Answer 18

Rush is a drug adled fool, pay no attn to him.

Answer 19

Your last sentence. Why is 0bama continuing it?

Answer 20

I always find it the best to start from the idea that if it is coming out of that mans mouth it is a lie.

Answer 21

The rich investor class made money on the war

They make a lot less on roads

It doesn't take long to see their agenda, you just have to chose to see it.

Answer 22

he is right



Rush had help created million of jobs = helping him chew on Viagra

Answer 23

Those guys are all ignoramuses who preach to the choir. "Megadittos Rush, megadittos..."

Answer 24

get ready to be attacked by the crazy cons