ST Alpha - "question for economic types. Isn't spending millions on campaigns good for the economy? -- nm" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Login
Create Account

Search Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...

RSS Feed

Hosting by DigitalOcean

Support ST on Ko-Fi

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 159

question for economic types. Isn't spending millions on campaigns good for the economy? -- nm

Posted by loosilu (aka loosilu2) Jul 11 '12, 11:28

(No message)

Responses:

For certain section of the economy, yes. But it's misallocation of consumption. -- nm - Roger More Jul 11, 11:42
it gives a small boost to a very tiny sector of the country. Overall it's not a great way to spend all that cash -- nm - decline Jul 11, 11:33 12
- let's say m ost of the donors would have kept it in savings instead. -- nm - loosilu Jul 11, 11:34 11
  - or for all we know most donors would have spent it on numerous things spread out in many sectors of the economy. - decline Jul 11, 11:37
  - yup. It is paying advertisers, newspapers, ad companies, etc. Then they have to spend it on salaries and stuff, and the beat goes on -- nm - Beaker Jul 11, 11:35 9
    - but salaries aren't increased dramatically (especially compared to the amount spent) in those industries during election years - decline Jul 11, 11:39 7
      - Yes and no. Salespeople make better commissions, and people that might have been fired get to keep their jobs. -- nm - Reagen Jul 11, 11:42 4
        
        until Nov. 2nd. -- nm - decline Jul 11, 11:44
        
        right it's like a busy season when those types of companies know they will need extra staff around for -- nm - Beaker Jul 11, 11:43 2
        
        "Dear Obama....how many spots do you want?" "Dear Mr. Romney, how many spots do you want?" - Will Hunting Jul 11, 11:44 1
        
        It's not as totally simple as that. - Reagen Jul 11, 12:01
      - the campaigns themselves hire tons of people. -- nm - loosilu Jul 11, 11:41 1
        
        Most are volunteers -- nm - Will Hunting Jul 11, 11:42
    - (in the swing states) -- nm - con_carne Jul 11, 11:38
It's not a matter of good or bad but a degree of how good. Billions spent on TV ads doesn't put many people to work -- nm - TWuG Jul 11, 11:30 28
- the people who work at those tv stations and advertising production companies would probably beg to differ. -- nm - znufrii Jul 11, 11:32 24
  - Aside from all that...the stations are forced to make time for political ads from both sides of the aisle...at the expense of legitimate sponsors who - Jim Jul 11, 11:48 1
    - TV stations raise their rates, though. According to one measure, by as much as 50 per cent this election season -- (link) - con_carne Jul 11, 11:54
  - Thoese people were pretty much working in the first place. - Will Hunting Jul 11, 11:36 7
    - yup. It's not like the tv/radio stations hire a ton of extra people to play the extra ads. -- nm - decline Jul 11, 11:38
    - you live in the DC area. You know there's a whole economy that springs up every four years around the election. -- nm - loosilu Jul 11, 11:38 5
      - Yes, mostly built on volunteers. - Will Hunting Jul 11, 11:41 4
        
        You are right in the last PP, but to those I would add phone banks, technology (servers), and whoever produces those campaign web videos -- nm - con_carne Jul 11, 11:49 3
        
        much better to have money go into jobs that are not as seasonal -- nm - zork Jul 11, 11:56 2
        
        You know, I'm thinking that, with technology in 2012, campaigns are able to accomplish a lot more than before by hiring less bodies -- nm - con_carne Jul 11, 11:59 1
        
        yet they require more money than before. curious. - zork Jul 11, 12:01
  - In the swing states, you mean -- nm - con_carne Jul 11, 11:36
  - wouldn't you rather that money somehow go to transit or healthcare? -- nm - zork Jul 11, 11:34 10
    - yes, but that wasn't the original question. -- nm - znufrii Jul 11, 11:35 1
      - "is it good for the economy?" "there are better ways to spend the money" -- nm - zork Jul 11, 11:42
    - but it is coming from donors, not the Govt. -- nm - Beaker Jul 11, 11:35
    - in fantasy land sure, but in reality that's not the choice. -- nm - loosilu Jul 11, 11:34 6
      - This is getting away from the point, but strictly speaking, the TV stations that benefit will be paying taxes on their profits... -- nm - con_carne Jul 11, 11:37 1
        
        (or income, rather) -- nm - con_carne Jul 11, 11:37
      - sure it is. you can decide to donate to a politician or a hospital fund, etc. -- nm - zork Jul 11, 11:35 3
        
        Mr. & Mrs. Wealthy Socialite probably already give to that. -- nm - loosilu Jul 11, 11:37 2
        
        Don't forget about corporations. They are able to cut big checks to the RNC and the SuperPACS, if not so much to the Romney campaign itself -- nm - con_carne Jul 11, 11:44
        
        so? they can give more there and do not have to give to the politician. Obviously they are giving to the pol's for their personal gain. - zork Jul 11, 11:41
  - this. Then they spend the money on more stuff. The Circle of Life... -- nm - Beaker Jul 11, 11:33 1
    - The Multiplier Effect - znufrii Jul 11, 11:36
- gotta pay for two seasons of Survivor and TAR somehow. Think of how bad our lives would be without that. -- nm - zork Jul 11, 11:32 2
  - Panem et circenses! -- nm - Reagen Jul 11, 11:33 1
    - *finger to nose* -- nm - zork Jul 11, 11:39
Have you seen how bad politicians are at spending money? - Will Hunting Jul 11, 11:29
I'm sure there are much more beneficial things to spend the money on. -- nm - zork Jul 11, 11:28

Post a message top

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.