[Info-vax] HP stopping VMS paper documentation ?

[JF Mezei]

George Cook wrote:
> Arguing against leftist dogma is futile, so I will respond no more after
> this.  Kool-Aid has no antidote.

This isn't a question of finding an antidote. It is a question of
finding the right balance. This isn't black or white, it is a grey area.



> No.  Government taxing and borrowing directly reduces prosperity, while
> government spending creates very little prosperity. 


The lesson learned from the 1929 crash is quite simple: government MUST
play a role to soften the impact of recessions to prevent depressions.
This is accomplished through social spending to ensure the poor still
spend some money during such times to support the economy.

That is why even the USA has some social securty safety net.

How this spending should be done during recessions is the big question.
And it should not be designed to be a permanently important part of an
economy.

> major drag on the creation of prosperity is the main reason that
> government should be no bigger than needed to provide for security and
> basic infrastructure.

The problem is that historically, the parties that call for small
government end up being the biggest spenders and the biggest growers of
debts. And this is not in the USA only. We have this in Canada too.

One of the major problems happens when a party spends your tax dollars
helping large corporations be more profitable instead of helping the
people who are poor.  This is especially true when large corporations
now tend to create more jobs abroad which means your tax dollars are
helping create jobs in China and India.


> War (Irag or otherwise) has no relation to wasteful and economically
> destructive domestic spending. 


Excuse me ?  Spending your tax dollars abroad to kill and destroy
doesn't help the funareal industry in the USA, doesn't help the
construction industry in the USA and doesn't build any infrastructure in
the USA.

war is wasteful spending no matter way you look at it. I may be
necessary when you are attacked, but when you unilaterally decide to
attack a country because you don't like the colour of the tie its leader
is wearing, there is absolutely no economical benefit to the attacking
country, except to the makers of bombs and ammunition.