|
I watched that Richard Wolff interview about Chinese Socialism. He pointed out that China had been an economy dependent on exports, until when the US market crashed out (which time? 2000? 2008?) they decided that was dangerous and so to fix that they created a huge domestic market for all their products by raising wages. Uh, how did China do that? What was the mechanism of raising wages? Was it literally passing minimum wage laws onto all the regions? Was it by the semi-"make-work" projects he talked about to build tons of extra housing that won't be needed for decades? How else does a country go about raising wages for everyone 4 to 5 times, on extremely short notice (especially if it was in response to 2008)? What he said about extra housing matches what I saw the couple times I visited; every single urban block seems like it's under construction simultaneously. It also casts the Chinese investment in US real estate in a new light. When Chinese investors invest in new Chinese real estate, they are helping the working class, because that's who the vacant housing is eventually meant for, but in the US the vacant urban housing they're buying up was exclusively built for the purpose of creating artificial housing scarcity to fuedalistically rule over the working class; bulldozing public housing buildings that can hold hundreds of people to sell luxury condos at much greater cost for just dozens of inhabitants.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:32 |
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I love them successfully gambling that no one would ever stomach to eat more than 500 dollars worth of their terrible food. id actually gamble that the heads of the company know its unsustainable and that they'll just liquidate everything and flee after giving themselves huge bonuses for increasing quarterly profits
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
Also my wife just pointed out to me that a huge number of people work for the Chinese government compared to the US because they have actual public works, so they could at least move up the average by raising wages on that portion of their workers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:27
|
|
|
theyre selling only 50 lifetime pasta passes. theyll lose money on them in exchange for buzz which makes them an ad
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
< 26k
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Dumb Lowtax posted:I watched that Richard Wolff interview about Chinese Socialism. He pointed out that China had been an economy dependent on exports, until when the US market crashed out (which time? 2000? 2008?) they decided that was dangerous and so to fix that they created a huge domestic market for all their products by raising wages. Dumb Lowtax posted:Also my wife just pointed out to me that a huge number of people work for the Chinese government compared to the US because they have actual public works, so they could at least move up the average by raising wages on that portion of their workers. turns out when most of your domestic economy is directly controlled by the state you can just do stuff like this without having to worry about quarterly returns or Big Number because it makes your entire actual economy better at the cost of a few accounting tricks
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Didn't all the new skyscrapers start popping up in China around 2008 or before? I guess that wasn't connected to the US recession then, because Wolff was talking more about things that benefit the worker, and skyscrapers are not one of them (even though the upper part of the Chinese economy was probably booming enough for skyscrapers well before the US recession hit)? \/\/\/ I'm talking about timing though, pre 2008 -- how much of the modern Chinese worker's rise was connected to the party's response to the US recession like Wolff says, versus how much had already been happening before the US recession hit? Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Aug 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
Dumb Lowtax posted:Didn't all the new skyscrapers start popping up in China around 2008 or before? I guess that wasn't connected to the US recession then, because Wolff was talking more about things that benefit the worker, and skyscrapers are not one of them (even though the upper part of the Chinese economy was probably booming enough for skyscrapers well before the US recession hit)? Being employed building stuff is good for construction workers. Also the workers that produce the raw materials.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
Dow doing that thing where it takes a dive on monday and then it claws back up the rest of the week? Getti g pretty sick of this poo poo. Ready for the wheels to come off. Been facing to bloodshed so long I don't remember how to face anywhere else
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:45
|
|
|
Over Easy posted:Dow doing that thing where it takes a dive on monday and then it claws back up the rest of the week? Getti g pretty sick of this poo poo. Ready for the wheels to come off. Been facing to bloodshed so long I don't remember how to face anywhere else I mean, it finds a lower resting place each week it feels. The day of reckoning will be in October as is tradition. Then Brexit will punch what's left the world economy in the gut.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
In response to the Great Recession the CCP had to fulfill the promise of stability and increasing prosperity to the Chinese people so they set lending targets for their banking system which was directed into the real economy while also telling regional parties to develop and diversify their local economic areas meaning as export led factories were shuttered as global trade stopped there was adequate guaranteed capital and labour free within China to redirect and re-educate millions of people into new, more advanced economic activity with the political motivation to make it happen. This was absolutely a response to ensure internal stability but it was also part of a longer term strategy to cultivate the worlds largest middle class and so become the global consumer market it is today, with all the soft power and economic clout that provides rather than just the global factory it was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:If I hear one more lawyer bring up the Laffer curve in a political argument I'm going to throw an economics book at someone. The funniest thing about the laffer curve is that even taking it at 100% face value it gets into diminishing returns and even losses very quickly. Like the Reagan tax cuts from a top marginal of 70 to 50 are a 30% loss in revenue*, then from 50 to 30 is a 40% loss and so on. Surely we're past the maximum on the curve by now! * obviously not gross revenue just the chunk of revenue granted by the highest margin but you get the math in general
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/dril/status/1077066806114668545 from thread https://twitter.com/jaredcrubin/status/1160643962677239808
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 20:05
|
|
|
Pancakes posted:Upon reviewing the docket, these people are crackpots abusing the system to avoid utility shut offs. They’ve never gotten a discharge in any of their cases. One time all they had to do was take a second credit counseling class, which is often free or at worst $25, and never took it. There’s a pro se help desk for people filing bankruptcy, these people are just refusing to make use of it. Sounds like a rational approach to being stuck in a rigged capitalist system. Goodspeeed you crackpots, may you never pay any of your bills. gently caress that bullshit
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 20:16
|
|
|
It's like Number is trying to cross the 26,000 line as many times as it can.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:It's like Number is trying to cross the 26,000 line as many times as it can. That Simpsons Australia/America scene and we’re all waiting for someone to punch the number in the face and make it stop.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 20:35
|
|
|
Don't go so far back around that everything an impoverished person does is 11th dimensional chess
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
Does China have any real incentive to make a deal with Trump? They don't really need to wait out the whole US economy in this trade war, just Trump's presidency. Prolonging or even escalating the trade war probably results in him out on his rear end and his opponent will likely make ending the trade war a point of their platform. I think they'd likely only make a deal before the election if Trump offered them a lopsided deal just so he could tweet about "winning' the trade war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 20:54
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I'm halfway convinced that econ101 is just some psy-op to misinform as many people as possible about how economics works. Particularly law and business students since they are the ones most likely to never get to delve any deeper.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
Rex-Goliath posted:it's really disappointing because the radical shift in thinking required to accomplish what he lays out, while very possible, will require our leaders across the world to actually grow a spine and stand the gently caress up. i think he deliberately doesn't mention how incredibly difficult it will be to pull off when so much of the world is now effectively hostage to the right wing insanity machine for the sake of focusing on what our goal and focus should be. he also sort of deliberately doesn't mention the 'we have to get this done in 12-15 years' and that this shift will take multiple decades if we're being optimistic are at odds with each other but again- what other choice do we have these leaders whose profits aren't directly dependent on climate change worsening have had literal decades at this point to do something with alarmist warning and them annually going to self-aggrandizing meetings like davos show clearly where their priorities lie
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
like, they had to crush classical economics and decry its foundations as naive or debunked b/c the claims and the implications were very troubling for capitalists, often with prominent classical economists themselves heavily criticizing certain rentier capitalist activities, so they could fund and create a neoclassical school
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Rated PG-34 posted:we talked a bit itt about the decoupling of energy consumption from economic growth being touted by neoclassical econ idiots. this article is a good distillation by some physicist of why it's all bullshit and capitalism will doom us all Pro read.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:like, they had to crush classical economics and decry its foundations as naive or debunked b/c the claims and the implications were very troubling for capitalists, often with prominent classical economists themselves heavily criticizing certain rentier capitalist activities, so they could fund and create a neoclassical school yeah even the chud turbo capitalists back in the day were like, "slaves and colonies yeah that's great, that's infinite growth forever for ya, just you know make sure you don't allow the creation of indolent rent seekers because that will literally destroy the whole thing" Marx gave credit where credit is due to Smith for this but his overriding point that rent seeking is literally the entire foundational premise in the first place meant that obviously he was right once again
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
is there an orb color for this https://twitter.com/TheStalwart/status/1161011251847335936 poty fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Aug 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:30
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:Does China have any real incentive to make a deal with Trump? They don't really need to wait out the whole US economy in this trade war, just Trump's presidency. Prolonging or even escalating the trade war probably results in him out on his rear end and his opponent will likely make ending the trade war a point of their platform. Nope. Unlike the US they have a population that still remembers a lower standard of living, has no pesky elections, and suppresses the hell out of them as a matter of course. The US has a lot more to lose going toe to toe with them. Sure, our standard of living has been gradually getting worse, but we won't abide a sudden drop like that. We pride ourselves on an illusion of prosperity and hate when that's pierced. That would cost Trump the election, at which point China can negotiate favorable terms with someone more reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:The funniest thing about the laffer curve is that even taking it at 100% face value it gets into diminishing returns and even losses very quickly. Like the Reagan tax cuts from a top marginal of 70 to 50 are a 30% loss in revenue*, then from 50 to 30 is a 40% loss and so on. Surely we're past the maximum on the curve by now! I can't seem to find the plot right now, but as a descriptive model, the Laffer curve is very accurate for the US economy during the 60s-early 70s, passably accurate for the US economy from the late 70s to late 80s, and laughably useless for the US economy from the 90s to today. At the very moment of it's triumph, it became worthless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:43
|
|
|
poty posted:is there an orb color for this lmao the kirchners were just mild social democrats. capitalists arent even willing to accept that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:lmao the kirchners were just mild social democrats. capitalists arent even willing to accept that. the crash and capital strike when Bernie wins is gonna be incredible
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:52
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:I can't seem to find the plot right now, but as a descriptive model, the Laffer curve is very accurate for the US economy during the 60s-early 70s, passably accurate for the US economy from the late 70s to late 80s, and laughably useless for the US economy from the 90s to today. At the very moment of it's triumph, it became worthless. Ha no. Cause there's one thing laffer never admitted. If one rich person hits the entirely hypothetical 99% tax bracket and gives up，plenty of competitors would step up and sell to meet product demand in whatever field that was. There's even a bit economic incentive to beat the competition for monopoly power even if brackets got above 100%.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:I can't seem to find the plot right now, but as a descriptive model, the Laffer curve is very accurate for the US economy during the 60s-early 70s, passably accurate for the US economy from the late 70s to late 80s, and laughably useless for the US economy from the 90s to today. At the very moment of it's triumph, it became worthless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
 lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
poty posted:is there an orb color for this Hahaha Lmao Yes YES TAKE MY POWER BERNIE, crash the loving markets 15 months from now
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:55
|
|
|
maybe part of the problem was their stock market sextupled in 3 years
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
looks like a return to the mean
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:57
|
|
|
nice
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 21:58
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:yeah even the chud turbo capitalists back in the day were like, "slaves and colonies yeah that's great, that's infinite growth forever for ya, just you know make sure you don't allow the creation of indolent rent seekers because that will literally destroy the whole thing" I mean the fundamental difference between Smith and Marx is that Marx figured the laborers would get so pissed off they'd revolt and Smith figured the whole thing would freeze into hyper feudalism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
Tulip posted:I mean the fundamental difference between Smith and Marx is that Marx figured the laborers would get so pissed off they'd revolt and Smith figured the whole thing would freeze into hyper feudalism. If you have a bootlicker society like the US the Smith outcome seems pretty likely rn
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 22:05
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DLBiller/status/1160881161809408000 hmm
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
there are warning signs flashing everywhere but whatever number dont care
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:32 |
|
|
poty posted:https://twitter.com/SamRo/status/1160960399975550976 I love pasta soup and bread so honestly if I had 500 bucks I might have gone for this 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 22:28
|
|
