|
ColoradoCleric posted:Lol if you think anyone in DnD understands economic policy Always go more left Keynes is good so just nationalizing everything is even better
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 17:11 |
|
|
Veskit posted:I don't know if anyone does or doesn't, but if you do and you have an area of expertise let me know cause I'll have questions at least! Especially with inflation. Well, ask before this turns into another marxism thread, I might as well see if I'm able to answer it Typo fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Sep 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Veskit posted:What's a reasonable amount of inflation that the US market could tolerate in the sense of not collapse everything quote:and wouldn't it be a way bigger gently caress you to the top 1% than to the wages of the many that it'd slightly downgrade through their effective wages? quote:What would happened if Obama came in and gave a target of 5% inflation over the year? Besides, the whole he doesn't control inflation thing, the big question is whether you can even reach 5% inflation per year. Japan has being trying to induce inflation for over a decade with no success.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Veskit posted:
quote:Also it should help with unemployment? Don't the large banking institutions and financial sectors want low inflation? In theory, yes inflation helps with unemployment, but it's not an ironclad law anymore. The entire phenomenon of stagflation in the 1970s was high rate of inflation and high rate unemployment existing simultaneously and thus demonstrating that the old philip's curve (which states that there is a straight trade-off between employment and inflation) is faulty. But int he current economic climate yes, inflation would help with unemployment. The big problem is that just because central bank wants inflation, doesn't mean that it appears. Japan for instance aggressively pushed monetary expansion in the 1990s, but all everybody did with the money was put it into savings accounts instead of buying consumer goods with it. Thus you don't get inflation even when you print money. Typo fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Sep 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Veskit posted:So is the best monetary policy to use to curb a wealth gap between the top and bottom inflation because it'd devalue the items that have generated this wealth Inflation essentially depreciates liquid savings and assets, which poor people are going to hold a lot more than rich people as a percentage of their total net worth. In that sense, an overly high rate of inflation hurts the poor more than the rich. quote:and because marginal propensity to save that the lower income brackets is so low? (at least in america) Or do you run into the problem of getting the money downstream? Or is there a way to do it that I'm missing? Marginal propensity to save don't matter as much as the way people choose to save: poor people rarely have diversified stock portfolios and holds their savings in cash, rich people tend to have their savings in things that are not cash and hence don't get devalued with inflation. Typo fucked around with this message at 04:12 on Sep 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Yeah. Seems like when you're starting out dirt poor, initial gains are relatively easy, you're getting all the low-hanging fruit, plus you can copy the examples of countries who industrialized before and learn from their mistakes. The closer you get to the cutting edge, the harder it gets to eke out more progress. This is an actual economic concept known as convergence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergence_(economics) This is why Cambodia has 10% annual growth whereas the US would have trouble pulling 4%
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:This only works if you assume away the fact that poor countries have lovely institutions which prevent them from growing properly. Poor countries with really awful institutions grow pretty fast too, India and Egypt pre-2011 are two examples. quote:Latin America has been stagnant relative to the top tier developed countries for decades and decades, for example Argentina, which is arguably the best example of lost economic potential in Latin America, is pretty much a first world country.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 17:11 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Juicing is a different way of saying "Cooking the books" I don't think even the Chinese central government knows how fast the country is actually growing because local officials have an incentive to inflate growth figures so they get promoted.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 03:18
|
|