Is it because the public schools have failed us? Or is zowie right, his narcississtic personality disorder (did I spell that right, zowie?) just doesn't permit him to think rationally?

In any event, he's using the old nonsense that the politicians use to justify supporting Nintendo with new stadiums, sports teams, and whatever. If he has even a very BASIC idea of economics, he'd know better. Is he that ignorant, or just can't give up his subsidies?

"It's not a question of heroes and problems. It's a question of cost vs. benefits. It's conceivable that for every dollar spent subsidizing ridesharing on the main arteries during rush hour congestion, the Puget Sound gets back $3 to the economy." And it's conceivable that the Sun will super-nova this afternoon too, but I doubt it.

"Ridesharing facilitates the ability of people to live where housing is cheaper." Good for them.

"Thus, the pool of available employees is expanded." No, it just permits greater dispersion of the population. Not necessarily a bad thing (unless you're in the anti urban sprawl camp), but not a particularly good thing for society either. Simply a CHOICE which those who are willing to pay for are welcome to.

"This is a positive development for companies like Microsoft, Boeing, etc." Not particularly. They are competing in a national (heck, a global) economy for workers with the right skills.

"Likewise, the employees make more money than they otherwise could have if they chose to work where the housing is affordable." No, they are making the same amount of money. They may be spending less on housing, but probably not. They may well just be getting a bigger and better house than they would if they lived in downtown Seattle. Not necessarily bad or good, unless you are in the camp that believes that bigger less efficient houses with bigger yards are environmentally unsound. Personally, I see it as your choice.

"Hence, the jobs and the growth of business might have taken place in some other region of the country." I don't know that you've demonstrated this. In debate or logic, "hence" usually means you've demonstrated something. You haven't. But suppose for the sake of argument that you had. If the problem in this area is growth induced, why would avoiding a further influx of new residents with new infrastructure requirements be a bad thing? Might be able to avoid building those apartments in Renton that are going to scare away the nesting Blue Herons. What's the problem with letting Southern California have the rest of the growth?

"So, for example, the community subsidizes me by as much as $1000.yr., let's say. But, I end up making $10K more per year than I otherwise would have working closer to home. Result is $2800 more goes to the federal government - $1500 in income taxes and $1300 in payrill taxes (split between the employer and employee). Let's be optimistic, and assume that $2500 of that makes its way back to the state of Washington. Also, I have an extra $7K in discretionary income. Let's say I save $3K of it, leaving me with $4K to pump into the economy. " I can certainly see where this is a good deal for you. You have someone else pay your infrastructure costs so you can live on an estate in the country. Why is this a good deal for the REST OF US as opposed to letting the job go to someone else who pays his OWN way, may live in closer proximity to work, and will pay the SAME taxes that you would?

"Only a bozo would pass up a deal like that. As far as I can tell, Boeing, Microsoft, and other big employers love ridesharing." Which is of course why there is a state law to MAKE them do it, and state and local bureaucracies to enforce that law. The reality is that none of these companies gives a rat's rear about these laws. They care about the bottom line.

"The smaller companies know that when Boeing, Microsoft, etc. are prospering, they prosper, too." Don't tell me, tell the Justice Department.

"Those of us who commute, day in and day out, can see the full Park'n'Rides." Bought and maintained with other peoples taxes, and now permanently off the tax rolls.

"We can see the full buses." Bought and maintained with other peoples taxes, and being amortized away every minute.

"We can see vanpools like mine, which often have more than 10 people." Same as above.

"And many of the people are going to good paying jobs." Which would imply they could afford to pay for their OWN transportation.

"Good paying jobs means more tax revenue." which the JOB generates, not the vanpool.

"More tax revenue can lead to government surpluses." Or more government spending.

"Government surpluses can lead to lower interest rates. Lower interest rates leads to rising wealth in the stock market, assuming it can coexist with low unemployment."

GOLLY MATT, you think the stock market will collapse if we don't fund your vanpool?

Go take Economics 101 at your local junior college.

-- Mikey (m_alworth@olympusnet.com), May 03, 2000

Answers

You have one too many "s"es in it, Mikey, but I believe it's the latter. From the criteria:

http://www.mentalhealth.com/dis1/p21-pe07.html

5. has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

This is going to make it REAL difficult for old Matt to be able to rationally debate any issue where he has a conflict of interest. In other areas, he may be quite capable. But his sense of entilement will never allow him to believe he isn't entitled to everything he can get from society, and a whole lot more.

zowie

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 03, 2000.

to Mikey: About a month ago, I pointed out the potnetially devastating conequences of higher gas prices on the stock market. Needless to say, Craig rejected my hypothesis, and not one of you came to my defense.

Of course, it turned out I was quite prophetic, and trillions in paper profits dissipated. So, my track record is quite enviable.

So, yes, ironically, if region chooses not subsidize ridesharing, the local economy will suffer. Why am I right? Well, there are TRILLIONS of reasons to listen to what I have to say.

You can laugh all you want. I'm not claiming I'm entitled to anything. But clearly, enabling me access to a better paying job means more money for the region. At the same time, the employers have jobs that they have difficulty filling if folks have to pay an exorbitant price for a 2000 square foot home. That's not a country estate by any stretch of the imagination.

Please explain, Mikey, how having someone do the job in Southern California is good for the Puget Sound.

As for any narcissistic personality disorders I may exhibit, maybe it's not a disorder if my prognostications are worth TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS!!!!

-- Matthew M. Warren (mattinsky@msn.com), May 04, 2000.

"to Mikey: About a month ago, I pointed out the potnetially devastating conequences of higher gas prices on the stock market. Needless to say, Craig rejected my hypothesis, and not one of you came to my defense. "

Could be because not one of us believe you are other than a blithering idiot.

"Of course, it turned out I was quite prophetic, and trillions in paper profits dissipated. "

Couldn't have had anything to do with the Fed raising interest rates, I wouldn't imagine.

"You can laugh all you want. "

Don't worry, we are. With or without your consent.

Mikey

-- (m_alworth@olympusnet.com), May 04, 2000.

"At the same time, the employers have jobs that they have difficulty filling if folks have to pay an exorbitant price for a 2000 square foot home. That's not a country estate by any stretch of the imagination."

"As for any narcissistic personality disorders I may exhibit, maybe it's not a disorder if my prognostications are worth TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS!!!! "

From the same reference given above

1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements) 2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

Now if you were REALLY that brilliant and successful, you probably wouldn't be living in a 2000 square foot home and car-pooling to work, now would you? That's what's meant by expecting to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements.

zowie

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 04, 2000.

And IF he were that brilliant, and he could make such incredible stock market predictions, he wouldn't need his job and wouldn't be taking up space during the commute.

Poor Matt....

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), May 04, 2000.

to Zowie: You write: "Now if you were REALLY that brilliant and successful, you probably wouldn't be living in a 2000 square foot home and car-pooling to work, now would you? That's what's meant by expecting to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements."

Actually, I'm a tightwad. So, no matter how much wealth I accumulate, I would just sock it away. So, you're wrong on this. My brilliance and success do not necessarily strongly correlate with my lifestyle choices.

The point I made to Craig is that ridesharing may have far greater positive consequence to the Puget Sound economy than he (or any of you) realizes.

But, the times are a changing, since, due to I-695, there will be difficulty in expanding ridesharing. Hence, its relative usefulness will fade away.

You'll be happy to note that I'm not advocating higher taxes to fund expanded ridesharing.

-- Matthew M. Warren (mattinsky@msn.com), May 04, 2000.

"Actually, I'm a tightwad. So, no matter how much wealth I accumulate, I would just sock it away. "

That being the case, we would NOT see the multiplier effect of putting money into the economy because, instead of spending it and distributing it through the economy, old tightwad Matt would just put it in his sock. Therefore, society would be better served by taking away his (society provided) van and his (society provided) HOV lane, and forcing him to devote more of his income to transportation, which will put money in the economy and engage the multiplier effect, as opposed to merely giving the cash a bad case of tinea pedis.

zowie

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 04, 2000.

I realize you guys are having some fun, but won't all this attention just make Matt worse?

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), May 04, 2000.

"I realize you guys are having some fun, but won't all this attention just make Matt worse? "

Possibly, but I doubt it. His delusions of adequacy became delusions of grandeur years ago. I don't think they will ever get better, but it's not likely they can get much worse.

Besides, narcissistic personality disorder patients think too much of themselves and too little of anyone who might criticize them to have their feelings hurt.

But we're really not doing this for fun, we can keep him posting here and decrease his posting that clutters up otherwise interesting threads.

zowie

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), May 04, 2000.