Lets just say it: The 1% took all our fucking money! Deflation looms.

[Benvolio]

Much government spending goes back into the economy. We have not often had a scarcity of resources, so I do not see competition by the government as limiting private consumptions.
The decades of deficit spending have put vast amounts of currency and government obligations into circulation. I think it eventually must result in a rapid inflation, perhaps triggered when other countries and people become reluctant to accept the dollar. As it is, the lack of another world currency has allowed the dollar to remain strong relative to other currencies.

 

[Kulindahr]

It appears to me that state and local enactment of building codes is consistent with provisions included in the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution, which [particularly through subsequent interpretation] allow the states to enact legislation designed to protect public health, welfare, and safety.

OTOH, I can think of places in Appalachia where such codes might be somewhat unrestrictive or even nonexistent.

How does it enhance public health, welfare, and safety to make housing so expensive that many people will never be able to dream of having their own, and in turn allowing rent lords to charge more than a free market would allow?

We could easily have a tiered system that would provide perfectly healthy and safe housing for poorer people. When cities try to get more "affordable housing" and what they mean is houses that cost $180k to $225k, it is not in any way providing for the welfare of people. And when people who own land want to put up housing at a price of $40k per unit for low-wage workers, or group housing for the homeless at under $10k per unit, and the housing is perfectly safe and healthy but the local jurisdiction insists on requirements that triple and quadruple the cost -- or just flat-out say "No" -- then government is working against the common welfare.

Case in point: a local businessman who owned an empty store with high ceilings wanted to open it up to semi-homeless people by letting them park their decrepit tiny trailers etc. inside, he was told he couldn't do that because the structure wasn't rated for storage on the one hand, and that it had insufficient restroom facilities on the other, it was totally bogus: that store roof was required by code to be actually stronger than for a storage facility, and the restroom facilities were required to be able to serve a population of two hundred-plus over twenty hours a day while the total habitation under his plan would have been sixty -- but no exceptions could be made in line with common sense.

Government all too often IS the enemy.

 

[Kulindahr]

Are you saying budgets should be balanced across all economic cycles?

Counter-cyclical government expenditure is an essential macroeconomic tool in periods of recession or fragile growth.


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/po..._10/why_arent_the_deficit_fetishis052530.php#

"Across all economic cycles".

Makes me think of ditching the notion of requiring each year to be balanced but requiring that any given period of ten years be. Would that allow counter-cyclical spending to fit into a balanced budget scheme?

 

[Kulindahr]

Is it illogical?

To what extent is the economy driven by demand?

GOP economic thinking is illogical, because it denies that economics is driven by demand. Unfortunately, the only way it can be driven by anything other than demand is if techniques of brainwashing are used to convince the people they need and want things that would have no interest in -- in other words, demand stimulated artificially by applying coercion to the market.

 

[kallipolis]

GOP economic thinking is illogical, because it denies that economics is driven by demand. Unfortunately, the only way it can be driven by anything other than demand is if techniques of brainwashing are used to convince the people they need and want things that would have no interest in -- in other words, demand stimulated artificially by applying coercion to the market.

Isn't that what advertising attempts?

 

[Benvolio]

GOP economic thinking is illogical, because it denies that economics is driven by demand. Unfortunately, the only way it can be driven by anything other than demand is if techniques of brainwashing are used to convince the people they need and want things that would have no interest in -- in other words, demand stimulated artificially by applying coercion to the market.

It is silly to try to simplify economics as you do. Demand of course, is an element, but not the only one. How much demand was there for cell phones in 1980? None, because they did not exist. So demand often does not exist until the supply is available. If a company offers a new cell phone for $1000, it probably will sell a few. If it offers them for $10 the demand will be huge.

 

[EastMed]

Much government spending goes back into the economy. We have not often had a scarcity of resources, so I do not see competition by the government as limiting private consumptions.
The decades of deficit spending have put vast amounts of currency and government obligations into circulation. I think it eventually must result in a rapid inflation, perhaps triggered when other countries and people become reluctant to accept the dollar. As it is, the lack of another world currency has allowed the dollar to remain strong relative to other currencies.

Conservatives have been hysterical about inflation for the last 6 years, for entirely political reasons.

 

[kallipolis]

Conservatives have been hysterical about inflation for the last 6 years, for entirely political reasons.

Well noted...with deflation a major problem for the economies of the European Union...

 

[opinterph]

GOP economic thinking is illogical, because it denies that economics is driven by demand. Unfortunately, the only way [the economy] can be driven by anything other than demand is if techniques of brainwashing are used to convince the people they need and want things that would have no interest in -- in other words, demand stimulated artificially by applying coercion to the market.

I’m not sure I understand your statement regarding the stimulation of demand in the economy by artificially applying coercion. It might help if you provide an example.

 

[opinterph]

We have not often had a scarcity of resources, so I do not see competition by the government as limiting private consumptions.

A nation’s resources include its “human capital.” With respect to the United States, I view that resource as finite.

 

[Kulindahr]

I’m not sure I understand your statement regarding the stimulation of demand in the economy by artificially applying coercion. It might help if you provide an example.

Applying psychological manipulation to get people to spend money on things they don't need when there are things they do need they then can't afford is coercion.

 

[Kulindahr]

A nation’s resources include its “human capital.” With respect to the United States, I view that resource as finite.

Not to mention that we haven't "had a scarcity of resources" because we have treated the world as our preserve, even toppling fairly elected governments to get our way.

 

[hotatlboi]

Americans are no more evil than the Chinese. Their rise out of oppression has been assured by American investment in the country.

This happened to us. We grew, and then we started to outgrow ourselves (not logistically, but our comparative advantage decreased as the Chinese market expanded. They can out produce is at a better price.). Now we can simmer over low heat, so the best thing that we can do is not throw a fit. The health of the U.S. is dependent on China replacing us at some point. We can't handle it. Our economy can't handle us prevailing over the Chinese (for at least two fundamental reasons). This happens whenever a country moves from production to service. Things look bleak for a while.

There's no point in trying to "beat" China. That would only ensure the end of the US. Forget what you call one world bullshit. America can't survive if we try to take back our spot. It would be a Pyrrhic victory. America's best bet for continued prosperity is to go with the flow.

Chauvinism will be the end of the US. Americans aren't evil. America isn't evil (though that's debatable). To grow, we had to embrace our prowess. To continue to grow, we've named a successor (through investment) and China will dominate finances some time in the future. We are a falling superpower. The Cold War accelerated our fall (and its end just about put it into a spiral, which just happened to appear to be blissful at the time). It was a huge expenditure. It also helped grow our economy in other ways. Smaller ones. But ultimately the Cold War was a double edged sword. Now that the tension is over and the U.S. economy is exhausted (it got a second wind after the end, but it's slowing), it's time that another country come to replace our production.

It's all part of a cycle. It's not fair; it's economics. In fact, it looks shitty at this stage when we're still unsure about China. It will smoothen out once China comes into its own. It's stopped the hypergrowth and will recede somewhat as the Chinese slowly realize that they have a say in government. It will get ugly. Ultimately, I'm hopeful that the Chinese people are successful. There's a billion of them. They WILL have a voice. The best thing we can to help ourselves (and help the world in the process) is to let them find it.

China's substantial population advantage always offered them an assured first place as soon as they found ways to effectively develop all that human capital. Now that they have started doing that, they are on the road to the lead position.

 

[opinterph]

I’m not sure I understand your statement regarding the stimulation of demand in the economy by artificially applying coercion. It might help if you provide an example.

Applying psychological manipulation to get people to spend money on things they don't need when there are things they do need they then can't afford is coercion.

So what’s a representative example of that manipulation?

 

[Telstra]

Because import is much cheaper than locally made products,
What is the solution ?

 

[bankside]

In the case of the US (and other countries) government also delivers value, efficiency, et cetera in exchange for government debt.

The point I was attempting to make is that persistent government consumption in excess of tax revenue thwarts private enterprise and reduces opportunities for citizen consumption in the marketplace. Whatever quantity of resources a country possesses is ultimately finite when considered in relation to the opportunity cost associated with the time value of those resources.

well i sort of agree, but debt is debt.

$10 000 of government debt per capita invested in bridges and roads and infrastructure may help elevate the economy to new levels of productivity.

$10 000 of private debt per capita spent on drunken vacations to vegas and brittney spears box set cd collections may not ultimately result in a higher-performing economy.

My point is that government debt assigned to each of us as taxpayers is not necessarily any worse than the private debt that a consumer might have taken on instead if the government hadn't been "thwarting those opportunities for citizen consumption."

Sometimes the most effective thing for citizens to do with their creditworthiness and earning power is to come together as a community and borrow money through their governments.

 

[opinterph]

Is cheaper always the best way to associate value?

 

[Kulindahr]

So what’s a representative example of that manipulation?

They happen several times an hour on TV.

 

[Kulindahr]

Because import is much cheaper than locally made products,
What is the solution ?

Incomes that allow people to purchase quality would be a start.

And NfP organizations to tell people the quality of products.

 

[Kulindahr]

well i sort of agree, but debt is debt.

$10 000 of government debt per capita invested in bridges and roads and infrastructure may help elevate the economy to new levels of productivity.

I experienced that today, driving a highway that while it's the fastest way between the two points I was dealing with can't be negotiated at much more than an average of 40mph. Just fifteen or twenty million bucks could raise that to 50mph, which would not only seriously enhance the value of the route to business and travelers but would save fuel with vehicles traveling at more efficient velocities.

Oh -- and it would yield a road without so many crosses along it.

$10 000 of private debt per capita spent on drunken vacations to vegas and brittney spears box set cd collections may not ultimately result in a higher-performing economy.

My point is that government debt assigned to each of us as taxpayers is not necessarily any worse than the private debt that a consumer might have taken on instead if the government hadn't been "thwarting those opportunities for citizen consumption."

Sometimes the most effective thing for citizens to do with their creditworthiness and earning power is to come together as a community and borrow money through their governments.

Interesting. Unfortunately, politicians like to borrow money on behalf of the citizens to build their own empires and occasionally go blow up other countries.