[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Things You Thought Today - Antigone - Oct 31, 2020 - 4:02pm
 
Happy Halloween Yall! - Antigone - Oct 31, 2020 - 3:42pm
 
Trump - R_P - Oct 31, 2020 - 2:49pm
 
2020 Elections - R_P - Oct 31, 2020 - 1:31pm
 
COVID-19 - R_P - Oct 31, 2020 - 1:26pm
 
Anti-War - R_P - Oct 31, 2020 - 12:32pm
 
Marijuana: Baked News. - Ohmsen - Oct 31, 2020 - 12:32pm
 
Celebrity Deaths - sirdroseph - Oct 31, 2020 - 12:14pm
 
The Obituary Page - Ohmsen - Oct 31, 2020 - 11:38am
 
New President Music - Lazy8 - Oct 31, 2020 - 10:27am
 
Play the Blues - sirdroseph - Oct 31, 2020 - 10:02am
 
Looting & vandalism isn't protest - Ohmsen - Oct 31, 2020 - 8:59am
 
Joe Biden - Ohmsen - Oct 31, 2020 - 8:38am
 
Just Time Lapse - Ohmsen - Oct 31, 2020 - 8:20am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Ohmsen - Oct 31, 2020 - 7:56am
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - miamizsun - Oct 31, 2020 - 7:40am
 
The Dragons' Roost - miamizsun - Oct 31, 2020 - 7:29am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - Oct 31, 2020 - 6:59am
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Oct 30, 2020 - 8:59pm
 
Trump Lies - Manbird - Oct 30, 2020 - 7:45pm
 
Outstanding Covers - ptooey - Oct 30, 2020 - 5:40pm
 
KarmaKarma Sweepstakes - kcar - Oct 30, 2020 - 1:27pm
 
Things that piss me off - Isabeau - Oct 30, 2020 - 12:47pm
 
Name My Band - Isabeau - Oct 30, 2020 - 12:45pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Oct 30, 2020 - 9:52am
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Ohmsen - Oct 30, 2020 - 8:36am
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - Oct 30, 2020 - 7:28am
 
codec - Ohmsen - Oct 30, 2020 - 6:04am
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - sirdroseph - Oct 30, 2020 - 5:39am
 
Message To Lucky - miamizsun - Oct 30, 2020 - 4:30am
 
The Dragon's Roots - miamizsun - Oct 30, 2020 - 4:24am
 
Media Bias - miamizsun - Oct 30, 2020 - 3:56am
 
Automotive Lust - R_P - Oct 29, 2020 - 9:10pm
 
Have you planned your Halloween costume yet?? - miamizsun - Oct 29, 2020 - 6:34pm
 
Canada - haresfur - Oct 29, 2020 - 3:41pm
 
Two questions. That's it. I promise. - kcar - Oct 29, 2020 - 3:39pm
 
Supreme Court: Who's Next? - R_P - Oct 29, 2020 - 3:05pm
 
Questions. - pigtail - Oct 29, 2020 - 10:49am
 
Photos you have taken of your walks or hikes. - Antigone - Oct 29, 2020 - 6:05am
 
NEED A COMPUTER GEEK! - miamizsun - Oct 29, 2020 - 4:20am
 
Can't sleep - westslope - Oct 28, 2020 - 10:07pm
 
Add a "Modern mix" - darrio - Oct 28, 2020 - 6:59pm
 
what the hell, miamizsun? - oldviolin - Oct 28, 2020 - 6:10pm
 
Today in History - miamizsun - Oct 28, 2020 - 4:27pm
 
HALF A WORLD - oldviolin - Oct 28, 2020 - 8:53am
 
TWO WORDS - rgio - Oct 28, 2020 - 6:57am
 
Baseball, anyone? - miamizsun - Oct 28, 2020 - 4:31am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Oct 27, 2020 - 7:21pm
 
how do you feel right now? - kurtster - Oct 27, 2020 - 6:23pm
 
VTuner drop Radio Paradise’s main mix? - BillG - Oct 27, 2020 - 3:56pm
 
Environment - Ohmsen - Oct 27, 2020 - 2:39pm
 
Recommended documentaries - Ohmsen - Oct 27, 2020 - 2:33pm
 
Republican Party - Steely_D - Oct 27, 2020 - 1:28pm
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Oct 27, 2020 - 11:45am
 
Great guitar faces - GINRUSH - Oct 27, 2020 - 11:27am
 
david bromberg - Antigone - Oct 27, 2020 - 6:09am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Oct 26, 2020 - 7:27pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Oct 26, 2020 - 4:59pm
 
::odd but intriguing:: - miamizsun - Oct 26, 2020 - 4:42pm
 
New Zealand - R_P - Oct 26, 2020 - 3:09pm
 
Favorite Quotes - westslope - Oct 26, 2020 - 2:04pm
 
Films you're excited about. - oldviolin - Oct 25, 2020 - 7:06pm
 
Rock Movies/Documentaries - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 25, 2020 - 6:29pm
 
Philosophy (Meaty Metaphysical Munchables!) - oldviolin - Oct 25, 2020 - 3:02pm
 
Quick! I need a chicken... - oldviolin - Oct 25, 2020 - 2:54pm
 
How's the weather? - haresfur - Oct 25, 2020 - 2:25pm
 
What's that smell? - Antigone - Oct 25, 2020 - 9:49am
 
De onde você ouve a Radio Paradise? Cidade/Local no Brasil - crishtiane - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:33pm
 
RPeeps I miss. - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 24, 2020 - 9:51pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Oct 24, 2020 - 5:01pm
 
More reggae, less Marley please - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:22am
 
What The Hell Buddy? - oldviolin - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:17am
 
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone - oldviolin - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:10am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:09am
 
Music Videos - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 9:50am
 
Index » Internet/Computer » The Web » Economix Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 198, 199, 200  Next
Post to this Topic
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Oct 23, 2020 - 9:33am

 black321 wrote:
 sirdroseph wrote:
 
no one has to read that story to know the truth: of course it hurt mfg workers. 
question is, did it help the economy, beyond the stock market?
certainly helped us all buy more cheap trinkets,
that we and our economy are now addicted to.
 
It's now a problem, because someone else is better at it/benefits more.
black321

black321 Avatar

Location: An earth without maps
Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 23, 2020 - 6:52am



 sirdroseph wrote:
 

no one has to read that story to know the truth: of course it hurt mfg workers. 
question is, did it help the economy, beyond the stock market?
certainly helped us all buy more cheap trinkets,
that we and our economy are now addicted to.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 23, 2020 - 2:40am

Economists on the Run

Paul Krugman and other mainstream trade experts are now admitting that they were wrong about globalization: It hurt American workers far more than they thought it would.


R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Sep 16, 2020 - 11:56pm

The 'free market' manifesto that broke America and led to Trumpism
Ohmsen

Ohmsen Avatar

Location: Valhalla
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 20, 2020 - 11:13am

Rabobank: The Response To The Fed's Minutes Make You Feel Many People Are Gargling The Bong Water

"We have to explain to the public far better why we are buying the assets of cash-rich mega companies that does nothing to help struggling SMEs and those on Main Street who can’t borrow, and which also exacerbates both irrevocable market and real economy distortions, such as it is."


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 18, 2020 - 5:07am

 rexi wrote:


 miamizsun wrote:

if you're looking for a lay up, try the economics dept at university of missouri at kansas city

they're very well versed in mmt  (fullwiler, etc.)

good luck

{#Wave}
 

Thanks, but they are not (or no longer) my cup of tea. Loud bunch (with the possible exception of Fullwiler) who, more importantly, commit a number of fundamental errors.
 

so kelton, keen and the like are out?

maybe inet

not sure where you are or who you may want to connect with

i need clues

look out your window and tell me what you see

peace
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 18, 2020 - 2:55am

 rexi wrote:


 miamizsun wrote:

if you're looking for a lay up, try the economics dept at university of missouri at kansas city

they're very well versed in mmt  (fullwiler, etc.)

good luck

{#Wave}
 

Thanks, but they are not (or no longer) my cup of tea. Loud bunch (with the possible exception of Fullwiler) who, more importantly, commit a number of fundamental errors.
 
Sorry, the only economist I know is on the other side of the bench.
rexi

rexi Avatar

Location: far out
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 18, 2020 - 2:29am



 miamizsun wrote:

if you're looking for a lay up, try the economics dept at university of missouri at kansas city

they're very well versed in mmt  (fullwiler, etc.)

good luck

{#Wave}
 

Thanks, but they are not (or no longer) my cup of tea. Loud bunch (with the possible exception of Fullwiler) who, more importantly, commit a number of fundamental errors.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 17, 2020 - 7:42am

 rexi wrote:


 miamizsun wrote:


not a formal economist but put up a link

what do you have to lose?
{#Wink}
 

My virginity anonymity. :-) Let‘s see. I‘m primarily looking for qualified feedback and maybe some connections.
 
if you're looking for a lay up, try the economics dept at university of missouri at kansas city

they're very well versed in mmt  (fullwiler, etc.)

good luck

{#Wave}
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 16, 2020 - 11:57pm

 rexi wrote:


 miamizsun wrote:


not a formal economist but put up a link

what do you have to lose?
{#Wink}
 

My virginity anonymity. :-) Let‘s see. I‘m primarily looking for qualified feedback and maybe some connections.
 
{#Lol}
rexi

rexi Avatar

Location: far out
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 16, 2020 - 1:25pm



 miamizsun wrote:


not a formal economist but put up a link

what do you have to lose?
{#Wink}
 

My virginity anonymity. :-) Let‘s see. I‘m primarily looking for qualified feedback and maybe some connections.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 16, 2020 - 6:37am

 rexi wrote:
Are there any (monetary) economists who hang out here who would be interested in reading a paper?
 

not a formal economist but put up a link

what do you have to lose?
{#Wink}
rexi

rexi Avatar

Location: far out
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 16, 2020 - 2:06am

Are there any (monetary) economists who hang out here who would be interested in reading a paper?
rexi

rexi Avatar

Location: far out
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 4, 2020 - 2:32am



 westslope wrote:


 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

err..  I think that is precisely the point.  ergo redistribution.
 

Targeting inequality is a really, really bad idea in my opinion.

 

The article is neither about targeting inequality nor about eliminating it. Economic modelling / theorizing is about finding simplified (=modelled) mechanisms, to the extent that they exist, which can help explain and predict human behaviour and subsequent outcomes of commercial / material interactions.

Equilibrium theory, which you might think of as a mathematical version of the famous 'invisible hand', is a common such model. It predicts that a 'free market' will tend reach a stable state (=equilibrium) if an economy is fulfills certain criteria (perfect competition). Under such conditions, inequality is the result of differing capabilities of the agents involved. Or, it is the result of some friction or imperfection in the Competition department. Policy is then about managing those imperfections. But the message is clear, if things were perfect, as the model envisions, then the world would be, at least potentially, a better place. 

This new model (there are many others) now suggests that maybe this hands-off idea of perfection is nonsense. At least it is mathematically perfectly feasible to argue that a system of sequential trades may not be self-equilibrating at all. The important distinction between these two models, as I see it, is that, in the latter, trades takes place sequentially in time. So it makes a difference whether you win or lose the first toss. A x 1.2 x 0.8 =/= A x 0.8 x 1.2. In equilibrium models, all trade takes place in an instant of time, or outside of time, if you like. Changes to the system, and thus a dynamism over time, are introduces by adding 'random shocks' to an otherwise static system. Of Course, both are just models to which one must then add that awful imperfection called reality.

Now, when you say targeting inequality is a bad idea, you have to be aware of what your underlying assumption is. Do you assume that, if, say no redistributive tax is levied, outcomes will reflect the actual virtue of the economic agents involved? In that case you're in line with the equilibrium models mentioned above. Or, do you assume that, without redistribution, outcomes may be pretty much arbitrary and depend a lot on when and where you happend to be born, how much you inherited, and a bunch of other happenstances? In that case, you are more in line with the latter model.

The question is, which model has more predictive power? Which can be made to fit better with reality? And can not redistributing really be qualified as not targeting an outcome? If you see someone struggling in the water, do you intervene or not? That depends on what you think is happening. If the person is in the act of drowning, then non-intervention is the act of targeting death. If, however, you assume that bodies have a natural tendency to stay float and each individual may choose freely whether to S splash about frantically, then, whatever the outcome, non-intervention might be considered an act of granting the swimmer his freedom of expression, the outcome of which is fair by definiton. If he dies, he had it coming... In either case, you are targeting something based on your belief of what's 'actually' going on.


NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 3, 2020 - 12:41pm

 westslope wrote:


 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

err..  I think that is precisely the point.  ergo redistribution.
 

Targeting inequality is a really, really bad idea in my opinion.

 
It is not about targeting inequality. It is about keeping the wheel in balance.

Given that every modern nation has some form of redistribution of wealth I think the historical record is on our side on this one. Moreover, those countries that do it wisely are also among the best performers globally and that is not even factoring in softer factors like social cohesion, quality of life, crime rates, etc.

I would love to see what relative GDP per capita would look like if you stripped off the top percentile of each country's population.
I suspect that those countries with a more socially oriented welfare policy would outperform those countries pursuing more "free market" models. 
 
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Aug 3, 2020 - 11:52am



 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

err..  I think that is precisely the point.  ergo redistribution.
 

Targeting inequality is a really, really bad idea in my opinion.

NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 3, 2020 - 10:36am

 westslope wrote:
Please name me one economy in the world with no "inequality".  
 
err..  I think that is precisely the point.  ergo redistribution.
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Aug 3, 2020 - 8:55am

Please name me one economy in the world with no "inequality".  


rexi

rexi Avatar

Location: far out
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 3, 2020 - 12:24am


Is Inequality Inevitable?

Wealth naturally trickles up in free-market economies, model suggests



(…)

If you simulate this economy, a variant of the yard sale model, you will get a remarkable result: after a large number of transactions, one agent ends up as an “oligarch” holding practically all the wealth of the economy, and the other 999 end up with virtually nothing. It does not matter how much wealth people started with. It does not matter that all the coin flips were absolutely fair. It does not matter that the poorer agent's expected outcome was positive in each transaction, whereas that of the richer agent was negative. Any single agent in this economy could have become the oligarch—in fact, all had equal odds if they began with equal wealth. In that sense, there was equality of opportunity. But only one of them did become the oligarch, and all the others saw their average wealth decrease toward zero as they conducted more and more transactions. To add insult to injury, the lower someone's wealth ranking, the faster the decrease.


This outcome is especially surprising because it holds even if all the agents started off with identical wealth and were treated symmetrically. Physicists describe phenomena of this kind as “symmetry breaking” <see The Physics of Inequality below>. The very first coin flip transfers money from one agent to another, setting up an imbalance between the two. And once we have some variance in wealth, however minute, succeeding transactions will systematically move a “trickle” of wealth upward from poorer agents to richer ones, amplifying inequality until the system reaches a state of oligarchy.

(...)

We find it noteworthy that the best-fitting model for empirical wealth distribution discovered so far is one that would be completely unstable without redistribution rather than one based on a supposed equilibrium of market forces. In fact, these mathematical models demonstrate that far from wealth trickling down to the poor, the natural inclination of wealth is to flow upward, so that the “natural” wealth distribution in a free-market economy is one of complete oligarchy. It is only redistribution that sets limits on inequality.

The mathematical models also call attention to the enormous extent to which wealth distribution is caused by symmetry breaking, chance and early advantage (from, for example, inheritance). And the presence of symmetry breaking puts paid to arguments for the justness of wealth inequality that appeal to “voluntariness”—the notion that individuals bear all responsibility for their economic outcomes simply because they enter into transactions voluntarily—or to the idea that wealth accumulation must be the result of cleverness and industriousness. It is true that an individual's location on the wealth spectrum correlates to some extent with such attributes, but the overall shape of that spectrum can be explained to better than 0.33 percent by a statistical model that completely ignores them. Luck plays a much more important role than it is usually accorded, so that the virtue commonly attributed to wealth in modern society—and, likewise, the stigma attributed to poverty—is completely unjustified.



R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jul 10, 2020 - 2:16pm

"We should abandon the WTO and work with free nations to build a new international system that actually puts American workers first"


U.S. finalizing federal contract ban for companies that use Huawei, others
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 198, 199, 200  Next