Murder, rape and robbery keep the prison industry going, but that doesn’t mean they’re good for the economy.
The “Broken window fallacy” is a fallacy because it ignores the cost of breaking the windows.
Or, put it another way, all those folks who are building replacement windows could instead be building windows for new houses, or doing other productive things that actually add to the economy, instead of just treading water.
Not really GQ material. Let’s give it a go in Great Debates.
This strikes me as being a dishonest and destructive version of welfare. Rather than just handing them money, you’ll make people do a makework job that they don’t want and that there is no demand for, a job that apparently just gets in people’s way. It’s not so much giving them a job, as it is making them go through a ritual so you don’t have to admit that it’s just welfare.
Or just raise the price of gasoline to compensate like they do in New Jersey and Oregon where the gas stations have not gone out of business.
Gas stations near PDX.
And maybe not even that. New Jersey has the cheapest gas in the nation and Oregon is the cheapest on the west coat.
I think our society needs to simply accept that not everybody has the skills to command a living wage on the free market. The solution is not to create a bunch of useless busy work and pay people for it. That’s about as usefull as paying people to dig holes and fill them back up again. Nor should we condemn these individuals to extreme poverty and suffering. Why not just dispense with the charade and just hand out checks to the poor? We’re way too attached to the Work Ethic in this country. Work is good only if it’s actually usefull for something. Forcing poor to do useless busy work just wastes their time, which could be used to get an education and learn usefull skills.
My solution to poverty is a basic income: The government gives every individual, without any condition or test of income, a sum of money sufficient to meet their basic needs.
Maybe that is because their gas taxes are relatively low. Oregon’s isn’t really low, just much lower than anyone else on the west coast. New Jersey is the third lowest in the country.
It is. (I’m from Jersey). But I have seen attendants on the rest stops and in border areas turn a blind eye to people with out of state plates getting out and starting the pump. Though the last time I was home I hopped out out of habit at the guy started yelling by the time I rounded the car.
I’d have been filled up and back on the road by the time he actually got over to me. I would so not want to have required gas attendants all the time.
Why do they mandate that someone else has to pump your gas?
As to the OP, I agree with (I never thought I’d say this) Der Trihs. Not only is this makework but, unless there is a good reason to have attendants, the government has no business telling a company that it MUST hire people to perform a task.
On the positive side, if we require all states to have the gas attendant pump gas, it will save Oregonians the embarassment of, when traveling to other states, sitting in their cars at the pumps expectantly waiting for the attendant who will never come.
Obviously if “shortage” spikes are eliminated from the chart that shows cost of gas over time, the line is going up.
Okay, I see your point and I now agree that it is a ritual I came up with to not have to admit the welfare issue.
Even knowing that, which bill is more likely to pass in the United States?
Require gas to be pumped by attendants.
Raise tax on gas to give to the jobless.
What is your suggestion to create over a million jobs for low skilled workers?
Reinstitute the draft and double the size of the US Army?
Infrastructure repair and upgrades? Surely there’s low skilled work involved in that, and it needs to be done. Or for that matter how about just picking up litter. Something that actually needs doing.
Not exactly true at all. Over time, gas adjusted for inflation has been going down. See the wiki article (it’s the easiest example I could find, using inflation adjust dollars as opposed to real dollars) here.
In terms of hours worked (another way to adjust for inflation, as people’s work has become more valuable over time, even gas station attendants), see here. (note: this is old, but I get a kick out of it every time I read it). (Warning: .pdf).
Why should they need to work? If we, as a market, can’t demand anything from them, then, I, as hater of all taxes, would rather see a tax increase take care of them. I don’t mind government involvement for picking up trash (as suggested by Der Trihs), which, the more I think about it, is a real good idea. Keeping roads and streets clean should be a government responsibility. Though, I might have some concern for garbage and recycling companies who might otherwise want to expand into/create that industry. But, since the government will mostly likely be the only customer, and dealing with goverenment contracts is a huge fucking hassle, I don’t mind government managing the industry on this one.
Sorry, I was pointing to the nominal cost line. And using inflation adjusted dollars, you kind of point out that gas is cheap, so if the price went up to cover the cost of the attendants, it would still be cheap.
Picking up trash is a pretty cool idea. The CCC could be renewed and people could go in and thin the forests of underbrush to reduce severity of forest fires. Excellent idea. I forgot about that.
As for re-instating the draft, I heard a news story last week where the US Services hit all of their recruiting goals, so no need for a draft.
It may be some of the workers, but many employers are also part of this problem. If you have skills and 20 years experience as an engineer, it is pretty hard to get hired as a burger flipper or wrench jockey.
It also does not hurt that NJ has some very large refineries right in the state that supply New York and a good stretch of New England. That keeps shipping costs way down.