3
4

BadEconomics Discussion Thread, 03 October 2015 (self.badeconomics)

AutoModerator[M] が 投稿 - stickied post

Welcome to the consolidated automated discussion thread. New threads will be posted every XX hours! You praxxed and we answered!

Chat about any bad (or good) economic events. Ask questions of the unpaid members. Remember to use the NP posts and whatnot.

全 25 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]Adamscage 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

What are some of the best arguments for and against healthcare being privatized?

[–]grevemoeskrHumans are horses! 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

Quick question: Will low wage jobs wages converge towards the level of unemployment benefits?

Or asked in another way: Will lowering unemployment benefits have long run effects on the labour participation rate?

[–]CutlasssI am the Lord your Gold 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Someone at CATO has been making the argument to reduce welfare and unemployment benefits in order to drive more people into the workforce. So at least someone already thinks we're at the point where low wages discourages work effort.

But if you want to encourage more labor force participation, then raising wages and making jobs more available is the way to go.

However, you have to understand that this is a small part of the labor force. It's not the experience most of the people working.

[–]grevemoeskrHumans are horses! 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I assume by "we" you mean USA, right? Not that I think findings in USA don't apply other places, but I wonder how well it translates to places where both minimum wages and unemployment benefits are higher?

As for your last point, I realize that, but the government here seems to think all the world, or at least Denmarks, ills is cured if just the lazy slackers gets off the couch. I'm just wondering what the long run effects will be of lowering unemployment benefits, or as they say, "making it more profitable to work"

[–]zzzzz94clueless paid shill monkey 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

To the second one yes of course. Raising unemployment benefits in any way will decrease labor participation and/or employment by some degree, and the reverse will do likewise.

[–]a_s_h_e_nA stable currency, like bitcoin 3ポイント4ポイント  (4子コメント)

shot in the dark: anybody know anything at all about the Czech economy?

[–]somegurkWhy doesn't modern medicine use more leaches? 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

.. ye make some decent beers.

[–]a_s_h_e_nA stable currency, like bitcoin 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

not czech myself but damn is the beer here excellent

[–]somegurkWhy doesn't modern medicine use more leaches? 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Bit more serious what are you interested in, doubtful I can help but I'm curious now.

[–]say_wot_againConfirmed for Google bigwig 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes. You better Czech yourself before you wreck yourself.

[–]EsoteriCola"I have some serious economics training" 3ポイント4ポイント  (4子コメント)

I quite enjoyed this post on /r/cringe

[–]zzzzz94clueless paid shill monkey 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

this comment in that link about economists

[–]say_wot_againConfirmed for Google bigwig 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Kinda standard tbh

[–]grevemoeskrHumans are horses! 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Economics is very different because it relies on human action (and interaction). Human choices are not like physics. A person might act one way at one time, but do something very different based on their past experiences or present circumstances. It is as such impossible to run an economic "experiment" because you cannot rely on reproducible human actions nor can you reset the conditions to a default state and run the experiment over and over to validate your results. Without the possibility of experimentation, there can be no predictive value in the study of economics.

edit: linked a good book on the subject

I promise, the only thing I edited here is the link to the post

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Humans aren't Markov Chains => empiricism don't real

[–]Grenshen4pxTwirling towards freedum!! 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Is there any consensus on when the next recession(Within the US) is going to occur and how?

I read some stuff that claimed the next recession would occur in the housing market(again?) and then there were charts like this that shows its not possible given how emasculated the housing market has been since 2008.

https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/HOUST

[–]somegurkWhy doesn't modern medicine use more leaches? 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

If we could predict recessions with any great accuracy they wouldn't happen. Where are you reading this stuff? they may have a point or maybe not.

[–]CatFortuneにゃんぱす! 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

Let's say you were a worker making a low to minimum wage with no credited education, a family to support, yada yada — basically, you're the poster boy for Bernie Sanders supporters — except for two things: first, you have all your current economic knowledge. Second, regardless of your actual ability to be objective, assume you want to responsibly balance your well being with sound economic pragmatism.

Question: Does this change any of your view on anything regarding economics or political economy at all? If so, how?

[–]BUTWHYNOTZOIDBERGTranscedential Virgo Trotskyist 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

With the knowledge I have now? i've always kind of viewed "good policy" as taking a veil of ignorance, except instead of the emphasis on "fairness," more centered around outcomes that make the most amount of people better off.

So, whether i'm in that "world," or the current one, as long as I have the same knowledge: I wouldn't favor his policies, even if they were in favor of my self-interest, because i'd have a decent idea that what he's aiming to propose doesn't make us best off (stupidly high minimum wages, their unintended consequences, anti-free trade, etc.)

[–]CutlasssI am the Lord your Gold 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Not really. The president alone does not determine economic policy. Whoever is elected president will almost certainly have a Republican Congress to deal with. So may not even be able to tinker around the edges. But a Sanders win would change the terms of debate on a lot of issues in the country. And pretty much all in a positive direction. I don't think he would be a successful president. Because he'd face too much unthinking opposition. But for the last 40 years the political and economic debate has been between whether we move a little further to the right, or a lot further to the right. Not moving to the right hasn't even been on the ballot. Sanders would at least put a choice up there.

[–]BUTWHYNOTZOIDBERGTranscedential Virgo Trotskyist 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

That's not really the discussion he was trying to get at. Assume Sanders can perfectly put forth whatever policy options he prefers.

The discussion is more about your individual morality than it is economic: take the stance that Sander's policy might not be the best policy for the economy, so that it has some unintended consequences/bad outcomes. His policy, however, favors you.

Do you vote for him?

[–]CutlasssI am the Lord your Gold 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

For all it's problems, it's superior to anything any Republican would try to do. So yes.

[–]say_wot_againConfirmed for Google bigwig 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

There's a really interesting Vox.com article right now about the political perspectives of Silicon Valley people. But I'm not here to tell you to read the article; I'm her because this graph (https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/oA0n-sur_WmRfEtTG1gEUe4N47A=/1000x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4106410/Screen_Shot_2015-09-29_at_9.11.01_AM.0.png) was really depressing. Like, seriously? A minority of libertarians support free trade?

[–]Nottabird_Nottaplane 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I like how /Tech Founder/ it's own political ideology.

[–]grevemoeskrHumans are horses! 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lemme try a quick prax here

  1. Human action is purposeful

  2. 3rd world workers take lowers wages

  3. That drives down American wages

  4. Libertarians are American workers

  5. Free trade and competition between American and 3rd world workers leads to lower wages for libertarians

  6. Q.E.D. End the Fed. #Rand2016