5 ms·

You are ignoring the key premise here. I am not saying that loans, bonds or debt are universally and unconditionally a bad idea. Please re-read what I wrote.

You are ignoring the key premise here. I am not saying that loans, bonds or debt are universally and unconditionally a bad idea. Please re-read what I wrote. I think it is very clear, no need to repeat myself.

SamReidHughes 11y ago
> Issuing debt (or accepting debt) should be the absolute last resort This does seem very clear, you don't need to repeat yourself. I am disagreeing with that and stating that debt is a most natural and appropriate way to fund certain things. Whether they are efficient or not.
- rebootthesystem 11y ago
  Are you saying you are OK with issuing bonds for a project that might waste, say, 75% of the funds? If so, can you explain why? Where is the threshold for you? And, finally, why is it that you don't think it would be sesnible to demand that capital be used efficiently? Just curious.
  - SamReidHughes 11y ago
    > And, finally, why is it that you don't think it would be sesnible to demand that capital be used efficiently? You don't need to make up lies about what I think. You'd find it's much more interesting to talk to the real me instead of the imaginary me you've concocted.
  - industriousthou 11y ago
    Would you be okay with spending cash on a project with 75% waste? I mean, I get that debt exacerbates the cost, but I think waste/fraud is a just a different topic than optimal debt levels. I've done construction work for large private contractors in the nuclear energy field and the level of waste there was off the charts as well. I didn't work in management or accounting or anything, but I get the impression that certain types of large, complex, organizations are intrinsically inefficient. I don't know why, but maybe it's more costly and time consuming to try and root out the waste? We should definitely try to improve this! But it's a really difficult management/planning problem without a clear solution and in the mean time, we still need to make choices about spending and that might mean taking on debt. I don't really understand economics well enough to have a strong opinion on the article, but I believe the point was that higher debt levels might be better, regardless of how the money is spent.

SamReidHughes 11y ago

> Issuing debt (or accepting debt) should be the absolute last resort This does seem very clear, you don't need to repeat yourself. I am disagreeing with that and stating that debt is a most natural and appropriate way to fund certain things. Whether they are efficient or not.

rebootthesystem 11y ago
Are you saying you are OK with issuing bonds for a project that might waste, say, 75% of the funds? If so, can you explain why? Where is the threshold for you? And, finally, why is it that you don't think it would be sesnible to demand that capital be used efficiently? Just curious.
- SamReidHughes 11y ago
  > And, finally, why is it that you don't think it would be sesnible to demand that capital be used efficiently? You don't need to make up lies about what I think. You'd find it's much more interesting to talk to the real me instead of the imaginary me you've concocted.
- industriousthou 11y ago
  Would you be okay with spending cash on a project with 75% waste? I mean, I get that debt exacerbates the cost, but I think waste/fraud is a just a different topic than optimal debt levels. I've done construction work for large private contractors in the nuclear energy field and the level of waste there was off the charts as well. I didn't work in management or accounting or anything, but I get the impression that certain types of large, complex, organizations are intrinsically inefficient. I don't know why, but maybe it's more costly and time consuming to try and root out the waste? We should definitely try to improve this! But it's a really difficult management/planning problem without a clear solution and in the mean time, we still need to make choices about spending and that might mean taking on debt. I don't really understand economics well enough to have a strong opinion on the article, but I believe the point was that higher debt levels might be better, regardless of how the money is spent.