🚀 go-pugleaf

dunnett@mala.bc.ca (Malcolm Dunnett) wrote:


>   However all of this is irrelevant to the original posters thesis.
>His argument rests on presuming that the services delivered by civil
>servants are of no value to the economy. One must conclude
>that if said services (police, hospital care, education, ferries, etc )
>were to be delivered by the private sector they would similarly be
>contributing nothing to the economy, so the private sector workers
>engaged in those activities would similarly not be paying any taxes.

Sir I really have to wonder about you ability to read and comprehend a
subject. My post was about the money civil servants call income tax. 

>   If you look at the original post I think it becomes clear that the
>author considers only people involved in the direct fabrication of
>goods to be contributors to the economy and all the rest, presumably
>including computer programmers and management consultants :-), to 
>simply be leeches living off the fruits of other peoples labour. It's
>hardly worth debating economics with someone who so totally fails to
>grasp what it's all about.

Perhaps this is clear to you but i would be surprised if other than
civil servants see this point of view. By the way I am an industrial
programmer. I have contributed greatly to the production of goods in
this country and others by my programming. If you drive a Chev or GMC
truck, either of 2 new cars produced by Ford in 1995, the Chrysler Neon,
Hondas, and many other automobiles, use some types of medical equipment,
etc. you are using my work.  Other in filling out forms and creating
havoc for the general public as a means to justify your job with
government, what have you contributed to the country this year? 


I am amazed at how many people attempt to attack the poster personnaly,
and/or hijack the subject to fit their own agenda, when they cannot
present facts to dispute the subject.

Best regards
Jim