jganetsk

21 ms·

151.
by jganetsk 10y ago
It's totally misleading to think of the economy as a pond holding a fixed quantity of water. The water level does change, and sometimes you need to make waves to do it. For this, you should read Paul Krugman's babysitting co-op a
152.
by jganetsk 10y ago
I agree with basic income, but most analyses of it are backwards. For most of history, governments addressed unemployment by starting wars. By shipping off to war, the unemployed temporarily get a job. They either come back dead or ready to
153.
by jganetsk 10y ago
This article's criticism of the "Automation Argument" is correct. There's nothing fundamentally new happening. Basic income can be justified as a Keynesian fiscal stimulus policy. I would argue that basic income is the &
154.
by jganetsk 10y ago
The same thing happened to me. My thoughts: "I don't understand why this bed is shaking. Does this Japanese bed have some sort of massage mode that got triggered somehow? Silly me, if it had a massage mode, I would have noticed el
155.
by jganetsk 10y ago
"That’s one reason why I’m so optimistic about the future: the constant churn of scientific progress. Think about the changes we’ve seen just during my presidency. When I came into office, I broke new ground by pecking away at a Black
156.
Splunking Kafka at Scale(blogs.splunk.com)
4 points by jganetsk 10y ago|0 comments
157.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Well, you are right that capital has had net outflow http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/kill-sto...
158.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Every IPO is a company issuing stock to raise capital.
159.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Warren Buffett says it's OK, and has an excellent explanation for this. If I recall correctly: imagine you take all the investors in the US economy and put them in a room. Divide the room in halves. One side contains all the active inv
160.
by jganetsk 10y ago
There is totally a causal relationship between profits and investment: either you reinvest the profits or you don't. And if a huge pile of profits rolls your way... you might not be able to reinvest all of it. Yes, you are right, it ca
161.
by jganetsk 10y ago
There is not much investment because profits are quite high. Companies don't have an incentive to reinvest when they can instead just reward shareholders. Perhaps what we need is more competition to drive profits down. Decreasing wealt
162.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Except for reserve requirements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_requirement#United_Sta... And once the reserve requirement is maxed out, the only thing that can permit more private money creation is central bank
163.
by jganetsk 10y ago
The distribution of savings has little to do with it. The savings glut is caused by secular stagnation [1]. There is not much investment happening in our economy (savings and investment are two sides of the same coin). Since the 70s, there
164.
by jganetsk 10y ago
There are many levels of cause and effect. Central banks use open market operations. When they want interest rates to go down, they print money and buy debt on the open market until the rates reach their target. This new money is the cause.
165.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Yes, there's a massive savings glut. But a big part of that is due to central banks. If they tightened up monetary policy, interest rates go up, and investors would start getting better returns. But central banks are afraid to raise i
166.
by jganetsk 10y ago
This is called helicopter money: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_money It sucks because it is irreversible. This is unnecessary. Just have the government finance UBI. After all, people like Larry Summers, with
167.
by jganetsk 10y ago
So, in other words... you agree with me. We cannot absorb "near infinite" demand. Rather, it's the opposite: demand might even have a finite upper bound! But this is neither true, nor does it need to be. Economics is all abou
168.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Citations needed. I don't see any fundamental change in scarcity of resources in the last few years. Additionally... to say that nearly every industry can absorb almost infinite demand for their products is absurd. Near infinite claims
169.
by jganetsk 10y ago
There was no genocide of the Canaanites. That's myth, not historical fact. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Joshua#Historical_and_... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ancient_Isra
170.
Millions in U.S. Climb Out of Poverty, at Long Last(nytimes.com)
61 points by jganetsk 10y ago|45 comments
171.
Inflation Surges – CPI Less Food and Energy Rises 2.3%(bls.gov)
2 points by jganetsk 10y ago|0 comments
172.
by jganetsk 10y ago
That assumes they remain being developers as they age.
173.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Current set of coders will continue to age, but they may also stop identifying as coders. Maybe because of ageism.
174.
by jganetsk 10y ago
The primary reason for the median age in Google and Facebook being so low is that the median age for programmers is low Are you sure you have the cause and effect going in the right direction? It could be that the median age for programme
175.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Do you have any data demonstrating this will happen?
176.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Paul Graham
177.
by jganetsk 10y ago
You would do neither. Instead, you would do C) borrow to buyback stock. http://www.wsj.com/articles/share-buybacks-the-bill-is-comin...
178.
by jganetsk 10y ago
UBI comes from tax money though. If the idea behind UBI is that people don't need to go work, and won't go buy McDonalds anymore, then tax income is going to plummet. If tax income plummets, what pays for UBI ? People will still
179.
by jganetsk 10y ago
Instead of measuring GDP as our metric, measure how much basic income can be generated without causing inflation. Rising basic income levels with stable GDP and stable prices (or even falling) is utopia.
180.
by jganetsk 10y ago
The S&P 500 growth means that companies are confident enough in their future cash flow that they will borrow money against that to buyback their own stock. This has been a trend since the 80s. We are living in situation where, instead o

More ›