Economics Discussion Thread

[The Ides of March]

That is a political system, not an economic one.

It's both.

[Taihei Tengoku]

That is a political system, not an economic one.

It's both.

It clearly puts the primacy of political arrangements (who can associate with who and how) before you even address, if at all, emergent patterns in exchange.

[Trumptonium]

I took a look at this and it seems to confirm the earlier comrade's claim that the USSR was middle of the road in terms of growth.

And no better than the tsars ::::---DDDD

So .. no reasons for anyone from the West utilising those services?

They're hedges against confiscation and capricious governments--to the extent that a Western government signals confiscation and caprice Westerners have reasons to use them.

Pretty pointless, in a hypothetical mass confiscation of wealth by Western governments, particularly the West, the cash assets hoarded in tax havens become virtually useless. One can imagine they simply wouldn't be legal tender in physical, and simply untransferable in cable.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Which is why they are denominated in currencies least likely to be confiscated, i.e. the US dollar.

[Janszoonia]

Why are there so many Keynesians/Marxists that play this game? I guess it's because you get to do something that you can't in real life, which is build socialism that works.

[Dejanic]

Why are there so many Keynesians/Marxists that play this game? I guess it's because you get to do something that you can't in real life, which is build socialism that works.

Keynesian economics is about improving Capitalism and has nothing to do with Socialism. Pretty much every developed nation in the world utilizes some form of Keynesian economics and the vast majority of mainstream economics are Keynesian/Post Keynesian/New Keynesian (some form of Keynesian). That was a terrible example.

Yeah nice dig at Socialism, I could say that same for the supporters of Austrian economics who are just as unlikely to hold any sort of sway in "real life" as us Socialists and are just as politically irrelevant (more so actually,) and as removed from the mainstream.

[Janszoonia]

Why are there so many Keynesians/Marxists that play this game? I guess it's because you get to do something that you can't in real life, which is build socialism that works.

Keynesian economics is about improving Capitalism and has nothing to do with Socialism. Pretty much every developed nation in the world utilizes some form of Keynesian economics and the vast majority of mainstream economics are Keynesian/Post Keynesian/New Keynesian (some form of Keynesian). That was a terrible example.

Yeah nice dig at Socialism, I could say that same for the supporters of Austrian economics who are just as unlikely to hold any sort of sway in "real life" as us Socialists and are just as politically irrelevant (more so actually,) and as removed from the mainstream.

Everytime an industry is privatized, it improves. For example, SpaceX is doing a much better job than NASA because it is a private business. If this were done for everything, as Austrian Economists propose, there would be a massive economic benefit.

Also, the only way to improve capitalism is to privatize more. "Improve" in Keynesian means that the government should fund certain businesses over others.

[Dejanic]

Keynesian economics is about improving Capitalism and has nothing to do with Socialism. Pretty much every developed nation in the world utilizes some form of Keynesian economics and the vast majority of mainstream economics are Keynesian/Post Keynesian/New Keynesian (some form of Keynesian). That was a terrible example.

Yeah nice dig at Socialism, I could say that same for the supporters of Austrian economics who are just as unlikely to hold any sort of sway in "real life" as us Socialists and are just as politically irrelevant (more so actually,) and as removed from the mainstream.

Everytime an industry is privatized, it improves. For example, SpaceX is doing a much better job than NASA because it is a private business. If this were done for everything, as Austrian Economists propose, there would be a massive economic benefit.

Cool that had nothing to do with me pointing out that Keynesian economics have nothing to do with Socialism (it's literally an economic theory that's based upon improving Capitalism), and that Austrian economics are completely removed from the mainstream.

NASA's budget has gone down yearly, but I'd hardly say it achieves less than SpaceX. Moreover, SpaceX relies heavily on government subsidies/funding as well as government paid contracts. So a terrible example.

[Janszoonia]

Everytime an industry is privatized, it improves. For example, SpaceX is doing a much better job than NASA because it is a private business. If this were done for everything, as Austrian Economists propose, there would be a massive economic benefit.

Cool that had nothing to do with me pointing out that Keynesian economics have nothing to do with Socialism (it's literally an economic theory that's based upon improving Capitalism), and that Austrian economics are completely removed from the mainstream.

NASA's budget has gone down yearly, but I'd hardly say it achieves less than SpaceX. Moreover, SpaceX relies heavily on government subsidies/funding as well as government paid contracts. So a terrible example.

I admit that Keynesian economics has nothing to do with socialism, in fact, it is a combination of the worst parts of socialism (government control of the market) with the worst parts of capitalism (inherent inequality).
Also, this is why privatization works, and yes, I am aware that it is Prager. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xg4Uq1W4L8

[VoVoDoCo]

cor·po·rat·ism
ˈkôrp(ə)rəˌtizəm/Submit
noun
the control of a state or organization by large interest groups.

I would hardly call that an economic theory. Why is that a choice in the poll? That's more of a political issue rather than specifically economics, isn't it?

[Constantinopolis]

Everytime an industry is privatized, it improves. For example, SpaceX is doing a much better job than NASA because it is a private business.

How to be a free-marketeer in 5 easy steps:

1. Cut the funding of a state-run industry down to the bone, as the US government has done to NASA for example.
2. Watch as the industry struggles and fails.
3. Use this as an argument for why state-run industries don't work.
4. Privatize state industries.
5. Profit. (literally)

[Janszoonia]

Everytime an industry is privatized, it improves. For example, SpaceX is doing a much better job than NASA because it is a private business.

How to be a free-marketeer in 5 easy steps:

1. Cut the funding of a state-run industry down to the bone, as the US government has done to NASA for example.
2. Watch as the industry struggles and fails.
3. Use this as an argument for why state-run industries don't work.
4. Privatize state industries.
5. Profit. (literally)

If said industries were actually good at their job, they would be making money without government welfare.

[Constantinopolis]

How to be a free-marketeer in 5 easy steps:

1. Cut the funding of a state-run industry down to the bone, as the US government has done to NASA for example.
2. Watch as the industry struggles and fails.
3. Use this as an argument for why state-run industries don't work.
4. Privatize state industries.
5. Profit. (literally)

If said industries were actually good at their job, they would be making money without government welfare.

Their job isn't to make money.

The fact that capitalists judge everything by its ability to turn a profit is one of the main problems we have with you lot.

[Taihei Tengoku]

making NASA into a launch provider was a huge mistake in the long run t b h

[Janszoonia]

If said industries were actually good at their job, they would be making money without government welfare.

Their job isn't to make money.

The fact that capitalists judge everything by its ability to turn a profit is one of the main problems we have with you lot.

It is true that it is not the job of scientific organizations to turn a profit the same as a business. However, the presence of profit is what drives those organizations to innovate because companies whose job it is to turn a profit are going to make more deals with the organization that innovates the most.

[Constantinopolis]

Their job isn't to make money.

The fact that capitalists judge everything by its ability to turn a profit is one of the main problems we have with you lot.

It is true that it is not the job of scientific organizations to turn a profit the same as a business. However, the presence of profit is what drives those organizations to innovate because companies whose job it is to turn a profit are going to make more deals with the organization that innovates the most.

NASA invented the technology required to go to the Moon without having a profit motive, and it did this using computers less powerful than your average present-day smartphone.

Scientific and technological innovation, even within private companies, is only indirectly driven by the profit motive. The scientists themselves aren't in it for the profit. They are employees who get a paycheck. The profit motive doesn't motivate them. It motivates the company to give them that paycheck.

So it can be neatly replaced with anything else that might motivate someone to pay scientists to work on something. For example, the Cold War motivated the US government to pay NASA scientists to figure out a way to get to the Moon. In this case, geopolitical concerns replaced the profit motive.

[Constantinopolis]

making NASA into a launch provider was a huge mistake in the long run t b h

I... fully agree with you.

We should apologize to the inhabitants of Hell for the freak snowstorm they must be currently experiencing.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Under public choice, naked state ownership is sometimes the optimal solution--no country has yet to outsource their entire army to Blackwater.

That being said other things ought to be privatized but aren't, on net a far larger share of GDP that those that are private but shouldn't.

[Constantinopolis]

After the revolution, it is likely that capitalists will attempt to hide valuable physical assets that are small enough to be easily concealed. If we outsource the confiscation of these assets to independent contractors, do you think we will collect them more efficiently?

[Taihei Tengoku]

This is why offshore banking exists

[Constantinopolis]

So you're saying it may be best to collect the capitalists themselves and persuade them to part with their assets?

[Taihei Tengoku]

So you're saying it may be best to collect the capitalists themselves and persuade them to part with their assets?

A communist country needs to be ran like a prison to survive. If you allow free movement people get out as soon as they can.

[Constantinopolis]

So you're saying it may be best to collect the capitalists themselves and persuade them to part with their assets?

A communist country needs to be ran like a prison to survive. If you allow free movement people get out as soon as they can.

But I was only talking about capitalists, not people.

[Janszoonia]

A communist country needs to be ran like a prison to survive. If you allow free movement people get out as soon as they can.

But I was only talking about capitalists, not people.

Communists don't see capitalists as people. Communists are not people. It does not violate the NAP to kill non-humans. (How else are you going to get your McObesity?)

[Taihei Tengoku]

Very funny. Less so if you must cross the MDL in a hail of gunfire.