3 ms·

A scholarship is an educational subsidy. Should we issue a moratorium on scholarships? Should we discontinue subsidies for solar energy companies? How about the

A scholarship is an educational subsidy. Should we issue a moratorium on scholarships? Should we discontinue subsidies for solar energy companies? How about the billions in R&D tax subsidies that we give to pharmaceutical/industrial/healthcare companies each year to develop new drugs, treatments, and machinery? The market doesn't always know what is right. To be more specific: the market is short-sighted and greedy, and can self-destruct an economy if left unregulated. We need to subsidize activities that have large costs in the short term, but return more over the long run to society. Or else they won't happen.

Retric 11y ago
Should we issue a moratorium on scholarships? State funded 'generic' scholarships simply rise the cost of tuition. Good state schools are a much better use of funds as they drive down for profit education costs to be cost competitive. Schools can easily offer scholarships at minimal costs as a form of price discrimination, but public scholarships tend to simply result in administrative bloat. Should we discontinue subsidies for solar energy companies? Yes, instead we should tax CO2 production instead of subsidizing two industry's. see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality How about the billions in R&D tax subsidies that we give to pharmaceutical/industrial/healthcare companies each year to develop new drugs, treatments, and machinery? These should also be stopped, it's fine to fund public R&D but private R&D has terrible ROI. Drug companies spend more on advertising than R&D and really don't need help. For a solid example, the US could have a 10 year strategic food reserve for 1/10th the cost of current agro subsidies that directly result in massive health issues. PS I agree that markets are often inefficient, but subsidies then to be horrible ways to correct them. Taxes tend to be much more efficient.
- roymurdock 11y ago
  Taxes and subsidies are two sides of the same coin. They are often used in conjunction to achieve specific policy ends. If you are pro taxes, you are pro subsidies. Perhaps not on the specific, case-by-case basis, but overall you are arguing for free market distortion through the yin and yang of government policy. I won't address your specific points as everyone has different opinions on policy, but no one has the data to rigorously defend their opinions. I simply want to refute the notion that we can allow free markets to allocate all resources within the economy.
  - Retric 11y ago
    Ok we can side step the specific examples and I agree with your point. But, at the meta level I still think taxes are generally a better solution independent of policy. Taxes are much more scalable than subsidies. AKA if A is better for society than B but B is cheaper to produce then taxing B can balance things fairly easily with consumers paying society for the external costs. But, subsidizing A is an unbound cost, adds administrative overhead, and promotes consumption of A and or B. The downsides of Taxes is there often regressive, but for something like alcohol, pollution, or speeding societal costs are often independent from a persons net worth.
- briandear 11y ago
  Taxing CO2! Then how would we breathe! Think of the effect on laborers that breathe more strenuously than the rest of us. They be impoverished! On a serious note, you're implying that CO2 has a deleterious effect. Any scientific studies to back that claim?
  - DanBC 11y ago
    > Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them.
  - Retric 11y ago
    Any scientific studies to back that claim? Sure, let me count them... OMG "It's Over 9000!!!" PS: Ask a dumb question... http://dragonball.wikia.com/wiki/It's_Over_9000 http://dragonball.wikia.com/wiki/It's_Over_9000!
- briandear 11y ago
  Ending federal student loans would do more to reduce higher Ed inflation than anything else. It's unpopular because the people smart enough to understand economics aren't the ones continuing to vote for expanded federal loans.
jvm 11y ago
If you want more people being educated, you should subsidize education. If you want more R&D, you should subsidize R&D. If you want more people living in burn zones, you should subsidize living in burn zones. I think I join most Americans in saying that I'd rather more people be educated, I'd rather have more R&D, and I wouldn't rather more people live in burn zones.

Retric 11y ago

Should we issue a moratorium on scholarships? State funded 'generic' scholarships simply rise the cost of tuition. Good state schools are a much better use of funds as they drive down for profit education costs to be cost competitive. Schools can easily offer scholarships at minimal costs as a form of price discrimination, but public scholarships tend to simply result in administrative bloat. Should we discontinue subsidies for solar energy companies? Yes, instead we should tax CO2 production instead of subsidizing two industry's. see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality How about the billions in R&D tax subsidies that we give to pharmaceutical/industrial/healthcare companies each year to develop new drugs, treatments, and machinery? These should also be stopped, it's fine to fund public R&D but private R&D has terrible ROI. Drug companies spend more on advertising than R&D and really don't need help. For a solid example, the US could have a 10 year strategic food reserve for 1/10th the cost of current agro subsidies that directly result in massive health issues. PS I agree that markets are often inefficient, but subsidies then to be horrible ways to correct them. Taxes tend to be much more efficient.

roymurdock 11y ago
Taxes and subsidies are two sides of the same coin. They are often used in conjunction to achieve specific policy ends. If you are pro taxes, you are pro subsidies. Perhaps not on the specific, case-by-case basis, but overall you are arguing for free market distortion through the yin and yang of government policy. I won't address your specific points as everyone has different opinions on policy, but no one has the data to rigorously defend their opinions. I simply want to refute the notion that we can allow free markets to allocate all resources within the economy.
- Retric 11y ago
  Ok we can side step the specific examples and I agree with your point. But, at the meta level I still think taxes are generally a better solution independent of policy. Taxes are much more scalable than subsidies. AKA if A is better for society than B but B is cheaper to produce then taxing B can balance things fairly easily with consumers paying society for the external costs. But, subsidizing A is an unbound cost, adds administrative overhead, and promotes consumption of A and or B. The downsides of Taxes is there often regressive, but for something like alcohol, pollution, or speeding societal costs are often independent from a persons net worth.
briandear 11y ago
Taxing CO2! Then how would we breathe! Think of the effect on laborers that breathe more strenuously than the rest of us. They be impoverished! On a serious note, you're implying that CO2 has a deleterious effect. Any scientific studies to back that claim?
- DanBC 11y ago
  > Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them.
- Retric 11y ago
  Any scientific studies to back that claim? Sure, let me count them... OMG "It's Over 9000!!!" PS: Ask a dumb question... http://dragonball.wikia.com/wiki/It's_Over_9000 http://dragonball.wikia.com/wiki/It's_Over_9000!
briandear 11y ago
Ending federal student loans would do more to reduce higher Ed inflation than anything else. It's unpopular because the people smart enough to understand economics aren't the ones continuing to vote for expanded federal loans.

jvm 11y ago

If you want more people being educated, you should subsidize education. If you want more R&D, you should subsidize R&D. If you want more people living in burn zones, you should subsidize living in burn zones. I think I join most Americans in saying that I'd rather more people be educated, I'd rather have more R&D, and I wouldn't rather more people live in burn zones.