6 ms·

What makes you say the "chigago-libertarian ideology" is not credible, let alone "inflicted misery" on people?

emodendroket 8y ago
https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/17/news/economy/us-middle-class-basics-study/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/17/news/economy/us-middle-clas... > Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food > Nearly 51 million households don't earn enough to afford a monthly budget that includes housing, food, child care, health care, transportation and a cell phone, according to a study released Thursday by the United Way ALICE Project. That's 43% of households in the United States.
- throwaway37585 8y ago
  How is this relevant to my question? This is a classic case of "I'm going to cite bad statistics and blame X without explaining its causal relevance or why not-X would be better."
  - emodendroket 8y ago
    For instance, in a social democracy you could have supports in place such that people unable to afford housing, food, or healthcare could be provided with those things, whereas in our system the amount of assistance available is quite small and often gated by onerous or humiliating procedures, meaning a high level of precarity for the 43% of households which can't really afford those things (let alone deal with a large, unexpected expense).
    - throwaway37585 8y ago
      One of the most important lessons of economics is that “good intent” does not always mean “good results”. Do you have any reason to believe that higher taxes and spending will lead to better outcomes, or higher net societal welfare? Consider how U.S. education spending per student has ballooned over the last few decades, while outcomes have stayed flat (and in some cases deteriorated).
      - knuththetruth 8y ago
        >Do you have any reason to believe that higher taxes and spending will lead to better outcomes, or higher net societal welfare? Not the parent, but how about all of Western Europe? As much as economics wants to tout itself as a science, when confronted with real world examples of what works, tested in real countries over the past 75 years, it just retreats into some dressed-up version of American Exceptionalism to explain the failing of its own prescriptions.
        throwaway37585 8y ago
        > Not the parent, but how about all of Western Europe? You're going to have to be more specific. What about "all of Western Europe"? > As much as economics wants to tout itself as a science Is this going to be a game of definitions? What qualifies as a "science", in your view? Do you consider sociology to be a science? Psychology? Ecology? Geology? Anthropology? Archaeology? History? Linguistics? > tested in real countries over the past 75 years Which 75-year-old policies are you referring to, exactly? > it just retreats into some dressed-up version of American Exceptionalism What you could possibly mean by economics being a "dressed-up version of American Exceptionalism" is honestly a complete mystery to me. > to explain the failing of its own prescriptions. Which prescriptions are you referring to?
        knuththetruth 8y ago
        You said: “Do you have any reason to believe that higher taxes and spending will lead to better outcomes, or higher net societal welfare?” ...And the historical example of Western European social democracies like France, Germany, and the Scandinavian states prove this. >Which 75-year-old policies are you referring to, exactly? Nationalized healthcare, massive investments in public transportation and education, higher welfare floors and labor protections.
        throwaway37585 8y ago
        Interesting that you mention that. Relative to the size of its wealth, the U.S. spends a disproportionate amount on health care. Even as a high income country, the U.S. spends more per person on health than comparable countries. Total health expenditures per capita, U.S. dollars, PPP adjusted, 2016 [1]: United States: $10,348 Switzerland: $7,919 Germany: $5,550 Netherlands: $5,385 Austria: $5,227 Belgium: $4,839 France: $4,600 United Kingdom: $4,192 See [2] for a breakdown by country of government/compulsory healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP: https://imgur.com/a/BzaVX6w https://imgur.com/a/BzaVX6w. The U.S. comes out on top, by far. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe the problems with U.S. healthcare won't be solved by pouring more money into it, but rather by addressing systemic issues with the way it works? Regarding education: The United States spends more than other developed nations on its students' education each year... Spending, of course, only tells part of the story and does not guarantee students' success. The United States routinely trails its rival countries in performances on international exams despite being among the heaviest spenders on education... The average first-year high school teacher in the United States earns about $38,000. OECD nations pay their comparable educators just more than $31,000... Among all educators, U.S. payrolls are competitive. The average high school teacher in the United States earns about $53,000, well above the average of $45,500 among all OECD nations. [3] The United States spent $12,300 per FTE student at the elementary/secondary level, which was 29 percent higher than the average of $9,600 for OECD member countries reporting data... At the postsecondary level, total government and private expenditures on education institutions as a percentage of GDP by the United States (2.7 percent) were higher than the OECD average (1.6 percent) and were higher than those of all other OECD countries reporting data. [4] Again, has it ever occurred to you that maybe the problems with U.S. education won't be solved by pouring more money into it, but rather by addressing systemic issues with the way it works? [1] https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-spending-u-s-compare-countries https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-... [2] https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm [3] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-education-spending-tops-global-list-study-shows/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-education-spending-tops-glob... [4] https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cmd.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cmd.asp
moorhosj 8y ago
Lowest unemployment rate since 1969 [1] coupled with negative real wage growth [2] is an indicator that our current ideology (low taxes, limited regulation) is broken. [1] https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/01/news/economy/may-jobs-report/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/01/news/economy/may-jobs-repor... [2] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.nr0.htm
- throwaway37585 8y ago
  > Lowest unemployment rate since 1969 > an indicator that our current ideology... is broken Read the very article you linked to: The jobless rate ticked down to 3.8% in May, another sign of the strong economy and tight labor market. That tied the lowest unemployment rate since 1969. Since then, the only other time unemployment was this low was in April 2000. "It fell for all the right reasons. We had more people coming into the labor market. We saw employers digging deeper into the pool of unemployed," said Josh Wright, chief economist at the software firm iCIMS. The jobs report painted a picture of an economy with opportunities for almost everyone. Black unemployment fell to a record low, and the gap between black and white unemployment shrank to the narrowest ever measured. Job openings are at a record high, and businesses are hungry for workers. That has helped underrepresented Americans find jobs. The unemployment rate among African-Americans and Asian-Americans has been steadily declining. It has also dropped among low-education workers and even teenagers. Over the past year, the unemployment rate among 16- to 19-year-olds has fallen from 14.1% to 12.8%. Not to mention you haven't established the connection to "low taxes, limited regulation" that you claim. Others could equally claim the problem is that taxes and regulation are too high. This is a classic case of "I'm going to cite bad statistics and blame X without explaining the causal connection with X or whether the alternative would be better."
  - emodendroket 8y ago
    > Others could equally claim the problem is that taxes and regulation are too high. They could do so, but they'd probably somehow have to account for the fact that both taxes and regulation are substantially lower than periods of broader prosperity.
f00_ 8y ago
first thing that came to mind was how anti-communism played out in vietnam, chicago boys of chile, and the contras in nicaragua you could also argue the underdevelopment of the third world by washington consensus (free market) policies oh and banking/finance deregulation (pre/post-glass-stegall) of the great depression, s&l crisis, and the most recent financial crisis i really don't know how to feel about milton friedman, i like the negative income tax and he support georgism. he's really a liberal, but such a huge spokes person for the seemingly detrimental policies enacted after the collapse of keynesianism in the 70s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOeWoSFIEbI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOeWoSFIEbI
- throwaway37585 8y ago
  > first thing that came to mind was how anti-communism played out in vietnam, chicago boys of chile, and the contras in nicaragua What does this have to do with the Chicago school or libertarianism? > you could also argue the underdevelopment of the third world by washington consensus (free market) policies I have no idea where you got this from. The evidence indicates the complete opposite. Free markets and free trade are a boon to developing countries. China's economic liberalization reforms (agricultural decollectivization, privatization of industry, elimination of price controls, protectionist policies, and regulations) lifted millions out of abject poverty. India's economic liberalization reforms (making the economy more market-oriented, expanding the role of private investment, reducing import tariffs, deregulation of markets, reduction of taxes, and greater foreign investment) similarly led to a vast reduction in poverty and extraordinary economic growth, particularly in sectors opened to competition. > the seemingly detrimental policies enacted after the collapse of keynesianism in the 70s Which policies are you referring to, and why do you think they were detrimental? Regarding the Great Depression, I suggest you read what Friedman had to say about it.
  - f00_ 8y ago
    literally the chicago boys, and right-libertarianism of reagan-thatcher how about russia's market reforms? tell me about that deng xiaoping liberalized china's economy, but now the greatest example of a capitalist economy is totalitarian and run by the state it's not like india became independent from britain, and used state intervention to develop their economy and protect industries with tariffs. oh wait friedman said the contraction was the result of bad fed policy, idk what you mean. he was literally a Keynesian when he wrote a monetary history pls make more unqualified generalizations

https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/17/news/economy/us-middle-class-basics-study/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/17/news/economy/us-middle-clas... > Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food > Nearly 51 million households don't earn enough to afford a monthly budget that includes housing, food, child care, health care, transportation and a cell phone, according to a study released Thursday by the United Way ALICE Project. That's 43% of households in the United States.

throwaway37585 8y ago
How is this relevant to my question? This is a classic case of "I'm going to cite bad statistics and blame X without explaining its causal relevance or why not-X would be better."
- emodendroket 8y ago
  For instance, in a social democracy you could have supports in place such that people unable to afford housing, food, or healthcare could be provided with those things, whereas in our system the amount of assistance available is quite small and often gated by onerous or humiliating procedures, meaning a high level of precarity for the 43% of households which can't really afford those things (let alone deal with a large, unexpected expense).
  - throwaway37585 8y ago
    One of the most important lessons of economics is that “good intent” does not always mean “good results”. Do you have any reason to believe that higher taxes and spending will lead to better outcomes, or higher net societal welfare? Consider how U.S. education spending per student has ballooned over the last few decades, while outcomes have stayed flat (and in some cases deteriorated).
    - knuththetruth 8y ago
      >Do you have any reason to believe that higher taxes and spending will lead to better outcomes, or higher net societal welfare? Not the parent, but how about all of Western Europe? As much as economics wants to tout itself as a science, when confronted with real world examples of what works, tested in real countries over the past 75 years, it just retreats into some dressed-up version of American Exceptionalism to explain the failing of its own prescriptions.
      - throwaway37585 8y ago
        > Not the parent, but how about all of Western Europe? You're going to have to be more specific. What about "all of Western Europe"? > As much as economics wants to tout itself as a science Is this going to be a game of definitions? What qualifies as a "science", in your view? Do you consider sociology to be a science? Psychology? Ecology? Geology? Anthropology? Archaeology? History? Linguistics? > tested in real countries over the past 75 years Which 75-year-old policies are you referring to, exactly? > it just retreats into some dressed-up version of American Exceptionalism What you could possibly mean by economics being a "dressed-up version of American Exceptionalism" is honestly a complete mystery to me. > to explain the failing of its own prescriptions. Which prescriptions are you referring to?
        knuththetruth 8y ago
        You said: “Do you have any reason to believe that higher taxes and spending will lead to better outcomes, or higher net societal welfare?” ...And the historical example of Western European social democracies like France, Germany, and the Scandinavian states prove this. >Which 75-year-old policies are you referring to, exactly? Nationalized healthcare, massive investments in public transportation and education, higher welfare floors and labor protections.
        throwaway37585 8y ago
        Interesting that you mention that. Relative to the size of its wealth, the U.S. spends a disproportionate amount on health care. Even as a high income country, the U.S. spends more per person on health than comparable countries. Total health expenditures per capita, U.S. dollars, PPP adjusted, 2016 [1]: United States: $10,348 Switzerland: $7,919 Germany: $5,550 Netherlands: $5,385 Austria: $5,227 Belgium: $4,839 France: $4,600 United Kingdom: $4,192 See [2] for a breakdown by country of government/compulsory healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP: https://imgur.com/a/BzaVX6w https://imgur.com/a/BzaVX6w. The U.S. comes out on top, by far. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe the problems with U.S. healthcare won't be solved by pouring more money into it, but rather by addressing systemic issues with the way it works? Regarding education: The United States spends more than other developed nations on its students' education each year... Spending, of course, only tells part of the story and does not guarantee students' success. The United States routinely trails its rival countries in performances on international exams despite being among the heaviest spenders on education... The average first-year high school teacher in the United States earns about $38,000. OECD nations pay their comparable educators just more than $31,000... Among all educators, U.S. payrolls are competitive. The average high school teacher in the United States earns about $53,000, well above the average of $45,500 among all OECD nations. [3] The United States spent $12,300 per FTE student at the elementary/secondary level, which was 29 percent higher than the average of $9,600 for OECD member countries reporting data... At the postsecondary level, total government and private expenditures on education institutions as a percentage of GDP by the United States (2.7 percent) were higher than the OECD average (1.6 percent) and were higher than those of all other OECD countries reporting data. [4] Again, has it ever occurred to you that maybe the problems with U.S. education won't be solved by pouring more money into it, but rather by addressing systemic issues with the way it works? [1] https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-spending-u-s-compare-countries https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-... [2] https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm [3] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-education-spending-tops-global-list-study-shows/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-education-spending-tops-glob... [4] https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cmd.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cmd.asp

moorhosj 8y ago

Lowest unemployment rate since 1969 [1] coupled with negative real wage growth [2] is an indicator that our current ideology (low taxes, limited regulation) is broken. [1] https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/01/news/economy/may-jobs-report/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/01/news/economy/may-jobs-repor... [2] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.nr0.htm

throwaway37585 8y ago
> Lowest unemployment rate since 1969 > an indicator that our current ideology... is broken Read the very article you linked to: The jobless rate ticked down to 3.8% in May, another sign of the strong economy and tight labor market. That tied the lowest unemployment rate since 1969. Since then, the only other time unemployment was this low was in April 2000. "It fell for all the right reasons. We had more people coming into the labor market. We saw employers digging deeper into the pool of unemployed," said Josh Wright, chief economist at the software firm iCIMS. The jobs report painted a picture of an economy with opportunities for almost everyone. Black unemployment fell to a record low, and the gap between black and white unemployment shrank to the narrowest ever measured. Job openings are at a record high, and businesses are hungry for workers. That has helped underrepresented Americans find jobs. The unemployment rate among African-Americans and Asian-Americans has been steadily declining. It has also dropped among low-education workers and even teenagers. Over the past year, the unemployment rate among 16- to 19-year-olds has fallen from 14.1% to 12.8%. Not to mention you haven't established the connection to "low taxes, limited regulation" that you claim. Others could equally claim the problem is that taxes and regulation are too high. This is a classic case of "I'm going to cite bad statistics and blame X without explaining the causal connection with X or whether the alternative would be better."
- emodendroket 8y ago
  > Others could equally claim the problem is that taxes and regulation are too high. They could do so, but they'd probably somehow have to account for the fact that both taxes and regulation are substantially lower than periods of broader prosperity.

f00_ 8y ago

first thing that came to mind was how anti-communism played out in vietnam, chicago boys of chile, and the contras in nicaragua you could also argue the underdevelopment of the third world by washington consensus (free market) policies oh and banking/finance deregulation (pre/post-glass-stegall) of the great depression, s&l crisis, and the most recent financial crisis i really don't know how to feel about milton friedman, i like the negative income tax and he support georgism. he's really a liberal, but such a huge spokes person for the seemingly detrimental policies enacted after the collapse of keynesianism in the 70s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOeWoSFIEbI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOeWoSFIEbI

throwaway37585 8y ago
> first thing that came to mind was how anti-communism played out in vietnam, chicago boys of chile, and the contras in nicaragua What does this have to do with the Chicago school or libertarianism? > you could also argue the underdevelopment of the third world by washington consensus (free market) policies I have no idea where you got this from. The evidence indicates the complete opposite. Free markets and free trade are a boon to developing countries. China's economic liberalization reforms (agricultural decollectivization, privatization of industry, elimination of price controls, protectionist policies, and regulations) lifted millions out of abject poverty. India's economic liberalization reforms (making the economy more market-oriented, expanding the role of private investment, reducing import tariffs, deregulation of markets, reduction of taxes, and greater foreign investment) similarly led to a vast reduction in poverty and extraordinary economic growth, particularly in sectors opened to competition. > the seemingly detrimental policies enacted after the collapse of keynesianism in the 70s Which policies are you referring to, and why do you think they were detrimental? Regarding the Great Depression, I suggest you read what Friedman had to say about it.
- f00_ 8y ago
  literally the chicago boys, and right-libertarianism of reagan-thatcher how about russia's market reforms? tell me about that deng xiaoping liberalized china's economy, but now the greatest example of a capitalist economy is totalitarian and run by the state it's not like india became independent from britain, and used state intervention to develop their economy and protect industries with tariffs. oh wait friedman said the contraction was the result of bad fed policy, idk what you mean. he was literally a Keynesian when he wrote a monetary history pls make more unqualified generalizations