jswinghammer

7 ms·

31.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Yes they can. This is because we can discuss what higher prices do-invariably they cause market actors to seek substitutes. If you push a $15 minimum wage it stands to reason that there would be demand for any machinery that would allow for
32.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Say would tell us something else-that supply is paid for with supply. Ultimately math cannot make you richer-you need to produce more to consume more.
33.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Ford and a lot of other thinkers thought this way but a basic understanding of how things are actually produced and paid for would tell us that high wages are not what causes prosperity but rather high wages are a sign of prosperity. In a w
34.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
The basic issue is that economics is not an empirical discipline but rather a deductive one. You cannot test anything in isolation because you cannot have a control. All economists can say is "If you do X when nothing else changes Y
35.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
And anyone who has done any serious reading of economics is well aware that Smith is hardly considered authoritative on any subject in economics. His only insights are almost word for word copies from Cantillon. I'm not the biggest fan
36.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Nothing he said is out of line with what a lot of classical liberals were saying throughout the 19th century and they were refining ideas that basically go back to Aristotle. If echoing their thoughts qualifies one to be a pseudo-intellectu
37.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
The issue with that comment was that you were introducing off topic points that weren't previously discussed or defined. You mentioned assistance while mentioning "in isolation" as the basis for my analysis which is the only
38.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
None of what you said is coherent to me but I withdraw my comment that you rightly described as needlessly provocative and apologize for it.
39.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
It would a stretch to equate the current state of climate science with the current state of physics in terms of the reliability of its' predictive models.
40.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
With the series of exposes about the shortcomings of the peer review process it seems odd to lean on that very much. This seems particularly true since this topic is so politically charged and there would be virtually no funding available f
41.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
I think the commenter is referring to the "Little Ice Age" which we do have a substantial amount of evidence for. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age It would suggest that the climate fluctuates even
42.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
What you described is not wealth as the question was posed. They are all lifestyle choices that wealth enables.
43.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Yes.
44.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Income does not rise with the cost of consumer goods. Why is it that people feel so much poorer now than they did 30 years ago? The reason that inflation is a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich is that the poor do have small savin
45.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
No offense but it sounds like we'd better off without you working. If you think minimum wage laws don't harm anyone you're terribly mistaken. They invariably hurt marginal and low skilled workers. The very people you aim to h
46.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Is there an argument there?
47.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Of course not. They're just people responding to incentives to make the best choices they can. I don't judge anyone on welfare or not.
48.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Inflation is a redistribution scheme of the poor to the rich and from savings to spenders. Life becomes a lot simpler when we just eliminate all these schemes and just let people solve problems for themselves. This expectation that you can
49.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
That's basically all nonsense. If I have money and really feel like the poor are going to take it then I can buy security or just move far out into the country. Rich people were far less secretive in the past than they are now (for a v
50.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
1. would probably work better in a basic income world because in theory the resulting boom and bust cycle would cause less distress because people would have something more to fall back on. Eventually this has to end but in the long run we&
51.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
The reason is no longer true but it was true that corporations needed more educated workers to perform certain tasks and college graduates were relatively rare. Most of the college graduates in my parents' generation were gainfully emp
52.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Yes. Sometimes he's good but definitely not on this topic.
53.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
It does that anyway. The currency itself would be stable and there would be no guessing games about what was going on with monetary policy since there would be no policy to discuss.
54.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
The government could keep currency stable by simply not permitting more to be created. Done. That's not the intention. The intention is to make sure the banks can loan out as much as they want when they want and then get bailed out whe
55.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
No but if you reduce the quality of my lemons then yes you did do something akin to theft. That's what inflation does it. It debases the quality of money. Inflation can't continue in a free market forever because eventually a cras
56.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Evidence suggests that it they are correct but the part you are missing is that the whole point of the system is to bail out the large banks when their bets go bad. All in the name of the people. Whoever they ever are.
57.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
19th century America is close enough and the results astounded the entire world.
58.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
He's an Austrian economist and yes he like all of them saw this coming in 2001 and maybe earlier.
59.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Tell me again about that across the board improvement: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-02/top-1-got-93-of-inc...
60.
by jswinghammer 13y ago
Right. There's no way to disprove theories that are tested in this way. Proponents of the theories being tested could always say that the attempt wasn't large enough, that the officials didn't believe enough in the policy, th

More ›