|
screaden posted:Is there a layman's writeup about why bringing the deficit "back to black" is misunderstood/doesn't work/isn't needed? From an economical standpoint I don't understand it. When the government uses the mortgage analogy, they usually use one that most people understand, ie Principal + Interest, when in actuality the economy works like an Interest-Only mortgage. In the former, the mortgagee is expected to pay regular interest along with a part of the principal, on the assumption that over a period of time they pay the whole thing off and own it outright. In the latter, the mortgagee can keep just paying interest and never reduce the principal, but this only works if both the bank and the mortgagee agree that they can do that. If the mortgagee can't pay the interest, the bank forecloses, takes the asset and sells it, and in many cases this is what happens. Also if the mortgagee decides they don't want to own the property anymore, they can sell it themselves and if they can, make money on the difference in price from when they bought to when they sold.note: this only works in a rising market. Where it falls down is that mortgagees, who are almost always people, have a limited lifespan, and banks know this, so they prefer the first one, because over time there is less chance they will lose money either way. Governments aren't people though, they are assumed to be immortal with an infinite lifespan. When you can borrow money against an infinite lifespan, you don't need to worry as-much about the principal, you can just focus on how much interest you can pay, and the amount of interest a government can pay is entirely dependent on how much revenue they can spare to pay interest versus funding services and other things. Where the argument comes from is around what is the right mix of revenue generation required to pay the interest we already have to pay, and how much we can expect to generate, and who/what/where we should focus on getting that revenue. Ideally paying down the principal means a lower interest payment, but while we're focused on paying it, people die, or starve, or go homeless, or hurt others, etc, etc. Injustice happens. Government spending = Government revenue - interest - % principal payments
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 21:14 |
|
|
hooman posted:I do wonder if Australia could pursue an eradication scenario (some states seem like they are already there) and then force every entrant to 2 week quarantine until we have a vaccine. Who knows which choice causes less harm. What makes you think a vaccine will ever be developed?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 04:57
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:What makes you think a vaccine will ever be developed? What makes you think it won't?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:00
|
|
|
hooman posted:I do wonder if Australia could pursue an eradication scenario (some states seem like they are already there) and then force every entrant to 2 week quarantine until we have a vaccine. Who knows which choice causes less harm. Even if it doesn't last quite as long as until a vaccine is found, it's likely all entrants face mandatory 2 week quarantine until either they have a clear pass (immunity tested etc) or come from a country with congruent or stronger border controls and quarantine rules (like nz).
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:01
|
|
|
screaden posted:Is there a layman's writeup about why bringing the deficit "back to black" is misunderstood/doesn't work/isn't needed? From an economical standpoint I don't understand it. A couple of main arguments that get brought up. 1. The first is that when interest rates are low governments can borrow money cheaply. Government spending doesn't disappear from the country (unless they're spending it all on overseas purchases like military equipment) but goes into the national economy and grows it. When looking at things like building infrastructure, governments will usually look at the return on investment. If the new road/train/whatever will cause more economic activity that ultimately results in the government getting more tax than they spent, then it's a win. So if you can borrow money cheaply now sure it has to be paid back at some point but when that time comes you can do it from the extra revenue you have received. Conservatives are fond of comparing national budgets to a business, and businesses often borrow money for this exact reason. 2. So if the government can spend to grow the economy why not do even more of it? Or even just print more money? Well inflation is a dangerous thing. If there is no spare capacity in the economy for growth then all that extra money could just end up competing for the same amount of resources, leading to price rises. The power of exponential growth in this scenario is what can then lead to catastrophic hyper-inflation. There is a theory though that when the economy is operating under capacity (such as it is likely to do for a good few years after this whole hosed situation) then that government spending can not lead to inflation as instead of just adding to demand, it actually stimulates increased supply as well. ***Not an economist, I've probably made mistakes in the above***
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:08
|
|
|
The only type of economists the government actually listen to are the bad ones.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:14
|
|
|
Jonah Galtberg posted:What makes you think it won't? The multiple medical experts who say a vaccine may not be created and if it is, probably won't be effective. Life can't shut down until there's a vaccine. That will take several years.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:15
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:The multiple medical experts who say a vaccine may not be created and if it is, probably won't be effective. Post them
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:19
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:A couple of main arguments that get brought up. Also good, and yes interest rates are predicted to remain low and long. The days of having a bank account sitting there naturally earning 5% are long gone, and this mainly benefits people, businesses and governments who can borrow with enough credibility to say they can either pay it back or at least service the interest.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:20
|
|
|
Experts agree melting down about the virus really is better if you use video game analogies or quote fictional characters when you're constantly running back in here to grind your axe.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:25
|
|
|
The main issue with economics is that it's really, really difficult to not let bias enter the argument when discussing models and theories, in particular your own bias. As soon as an economist starts referring to "fairness" and "inequality" they are introducing concepts with a particular ethical or moral slant, and unfortunately those nebulus definitions can be twisted towards the direction the people paying for the analysis want. For example, fairness can be used to say "its unfair to people in poverty to not get help when they need it" vs "it's unfair somebody who worked hard for their fortune has to give it away in taxes".
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:28
|
|
|
Can't get over how cool it is that the coalition can throw workers the smallest of bones and then fret constantly about taking it away as soon as possible. Partlt on the basis that "the answer is not spending more or spending forever" while actively encouraging Australians to go out and spend more. NSW Liberal MP Jason Falinski said there were growing questions over whether the wage subsidy was justified and suggested it should be tied to when schools go back. Purk fucked around with this message at 05:33 on May 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:30
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616 I guess we just have to get used to having our kids at home more then...
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:32
|
|
|
Coronavirus antibodies historically don't last for more than 12 months so herd immunity is also pointless. Everything is pointless. Throw open the gates. I have a son.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:33
|
|
|
I am torn in my thinking of this. On one side, is it the experts paving the way for this to happen? Sufficient safe guards and hospital capacity to handle it? Hopefully! But I can't shake the feeling of that it's almost like unfurling the MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner and starting up with the high-5s and handjobs.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:34
|
|
|
JBP posted:Coronavirus antibodies historically don't last for more than 12 months so herd immunity is also pointless. Everything is pointless. Throw open the gates. I have a son. The economy is inflexible and does not respond to market and demand signals ever
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:35
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:What makes you think a vaccine will ever be developed? The strategy of mitigation rather than eradication is based on the assumption that a vaccine will be developed. So that's the underlying assumption that my post used. If there's no long term immunity and as such no vaccine if we don't go for eradication then it rolls around every year then I guess we get to find out what a world looks like where 15% of the over 65s die from COVID every year. EDIT: and a small but not insignificant percentage who aren't that. hooman fucked around with this message at 05:39 on May 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:36
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:The multiple medical experts who say a vaccine may not be created and if it is, probably won't be effective. Plenty have said this, and plenty of others have said that it can be done. The answer is that we just don't know yet, and we won't know until we either succeed in making a vaccine (that works and doesn't kill people by accident), or research confirms that the virus is mutating fast enough that immunity is temporary.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:36
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:I guess we just have to get used to having our kids at home more then... See, what you're trying to do is paint me as a terrible father who can't handle having a child at home, when instead what's happened - along with hundreds of thousands of other parents - is that I've had to work from home, and educate/parent a special needs child at the same time. Please tell me why you think full time specialist carers should not exist, and if they do exist, why we should not pay them? Please also add an explanation for why you think the Carers Payment and Carers Allowance should be abolished.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:37
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616 Just as I thought, a bunch of links from websites that make money on finding the most sensationalist spins that don’t even mean what you think they do
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:40
|
|
|
hooman posted:The strategy of mitigation rather than eradication is based on the assumption that a vaccine will be developed. So that's the underlying assumption that my post used. The really fun question is how susceptible people are to dying from it if they catch it a second time having already caught it previously and suffered some of the lung scarring that seems to be fairly commonplace even in mild and asymptomatic cases.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:41
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:See, what you're trying to do is paint me as a terrible father who can't handle having a child at home, when instead what's happened - along with hundreds of thousands of other parents - is that I've had to work from home, and educate/parent a special needs child at the same time. The government should be making more allowances to support people in your situation. I don't think anyone here is arguing that fact. Taking the needs of your situation and applying it to the entire population is painting with far too broad of a brush. I hope this explanation helps as to why you are getting push back from this thread when you demand all schools be opened because of the harm it is causing to your child. edit: gay picnic defence posted:The really fun question is how susceptible people are to dying from it if they catch it a second time having already caught it previously and suffered some of the lung scarring that seems to be fairly commonplace even in mild and asymptomatic cases. I thought about adding that, but it fell into the "too unknown" category.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:41
|
|
|
hooman posted:The government should be making more allowances to support people in your situation. I don't think anyone here is arguing that fact. The schools are opening because the Victorian chief health officer says it is safe. I don't see what's wrong with that.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:43
|
|
|
Jonah Galtberg posted:Just as I thought, a bunch of links from websites that make money on finding the most sensationalist spins that don’t even mean what you think they do I see you are in favour of the Feds de-funding the ABC?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:44
|
|
|
There's lots more people in the city and I am concerned they're gonna stop taking this seriously
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:44
|
|
My first car was a stick
|
CelestialScribe posted:See, what you're trying to do is paint me as a terrible father who can't handle having a child at home, when instead what's happened - along with hundreds of thousands of other parents - is that I've had to work from home, and educate/parent a special needs child at the same time. People here don't think these things, they just don't want a small number of cases such as yours to be given priority over the good of society as a whole.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:44
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:People here don't think these things, they just don't want a small number of cases such as yours to be given priority over the good of society as a whole. Take it up with the Victorian chief health officer, who until yesterday was this thread's hero.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:46
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:The schools are opening because the Victorian chief health officer says it is safe. I don't see what's wrong with that. I think you have confused what I was saying with someone else's argument. I haven't said anything about Victorian chief health officer. I was specifically talking about when you were demanding the schools open despite it being against the expert advice.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:48
|
|
|
At the “ignore the idiot poster and move on” point tbh, nobody’s going to magically give him a brain by posting at him
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:49
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:People here don't think these things, they just don't want a small number of cases such as yours to be given priority over the good of society as a whole. I want these small number of cases to be dealt with appropriately and all these people to be helped. We can help those who need it and act in the best interest of society at the same time. Like how we can still have schools with appropriate social distancing for those who can't do distance education, as well as allowing teachers who corona is likely to kill (or kill their partners) to work from home. They can support students who are likely to die from corona. We can do all these things to help all members of society. I mean theoretically we can do them, in actuality, the LNP will poo poo down the throat of both groups. 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:51
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:54
|
|
|
Thanks for the responses folks
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:55
|
|
|
Unless I'm missing something I think some of this is misdirected - I haven't heard any scientific evidence that says we should not proceed with the steps laid out by the federal government aside from a bunch of well warranted caveats around social distancing, restaurants and cafe restrictions etc
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:57
|
|
|
hooman posted:I want these small number of cases to be dealt with appropriately and all these people to be helped. We can help those who need it and act in the best interest of society at the same time. Like how we can still have schools with appropriate social distancing for those who can't do distance education, as well as allowing teachers who corona is likely to kill (or kill their partners) to work from home. They can support students who are likely to die from corona. We can do all these things to help all members of society. Sure, but whinging here about how unfair life is when those things didn't happen and demanding schools open up despite the risks to both kids and teachers (and the broader community) isn't the correct response. If living with your kid while working from home is too hard, just sedate your kid. If businesses can go into hibernation I'm sure children can too.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:57
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:People here don't think these things, they just don't want a small number of cases such as yours to be given priority over the good of society as a whole. Actually we can do good for society and give priority to cases like these and deal with a pandemic all at the same time if we focused our energies towards it!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:57
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:Actually we can do good for society and give priority to cases like these and deal with a pandemic all at the same time if we focused our energies towards it! Yes, but fighter plane go ZOOM
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 05:59
|
|
|
Jobs, and Growth.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 06:00
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:If living with your kid while working from home is too hard, just sedate your kid. If businesses can go into hibernation I'm sure children can too. children go zzzzzz
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 06:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 21:14 |
|
|
abigserve posted:Unless I'm missing something I think some of this is misdirected - I haven't heard any scientific evidence that says we should not proceed with the steps laid out by the federal government aside from a bunch of well warranted caveats around social distancing, restaurants and cafe restrictions etc My understanding is that it depends on what the goals are. If your aim is to eradicate the virus then you need to maintain the lockdowns until there's no more community transmission and the only new cases are the people getting picked up at the airports. There is clearly community transmission still happening in Vic and probably NSW so they're either given up on eradication as a goal or have caved into pressure from the Feds or various business groups or parents who want their kids out of the house. If the goal is to suppress the virus and play whack-a-mole with the outbreaks as they happen then there is nothing wrong with what is happening now. I guess the concerns with the second approach are that if the virus is in fact eradicated in places like SA and WA, then are they going to be willing to potentially undo the hard work by letting people travel from states where there is still community transmission happening? How about NZ? Travel there and throughout the pacific region was one of the things Scotty from Marketing was spruiking, but I can't see the Kiwis opening their borders to countries where there's still active cases happening after all the sacrifices they made with their level 4 lockdown.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 06:06
|
|