You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

2
25

[–] Yukonman 2 points 25 points (+27|-2) ago 

I'm not a supporter of it.

People use to have to save money for a rainy day. Now they depend on social benifits to cover them in the event of a job loss.

This provides a disincentive to save. We can find causation on the data series that proves Marginal Propensity to Save decreases as social benifits increase.

This becomes a problem, under the Solow Growth Model long run economic growth depends on a high MPS.

This hurts us in the long run and drives the inequality rate up. The largest factor for personal wealth and financial improvement is the individuals savings rates and the saving rates of their parents.

If we look at countries that have had the highest growth, it's the countries that have the highest marginal propensity to save.

Now counties in Europe have found ways around increasing savings rate while managing social benifits but it's not something the US does and as a result the policies hurt our economy and inflict a system of economic stagnation on individuals.

Source: Masters in Economics

0
2

[–] jaceame 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I can see that you are focused on self-management. It is obvious that people must learn self-control and have consequences for their actions. What is your opinion of socialized medicine? Or do you prefer affordable insurance driven by competition?

0
6

[–] Yukonman 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Socialized medicine has always rewarded an economy with positive benifits by helping to ensure a healthy labour force and mentality.

The externalities given from it outweigh the costs in a cost-benifits analysis

0
0

[–] whitehawk ago 

I disagree with you. Having lived through the Saving and Loans, the 1980 recession and on and on we go. The structures of society benefit Corporations and Individuals, the Freerider mentality that policies and regulations should only benefit Corporations is short sighted. North America is reeling from Reaganomic ideology, there is so much 'trickle up' economics that Money is sitting idle and the utopian idea that Companies would invest the money has faltered. What a lot of people don't understand is some of the poorest countries in the World have the largest discrepancy of income. If Economics were measured to the medical field, it would have corpses laying around and constantly piling up. The 2008 bailouts are the cornerstone that Economic hasn't a clue what's going on, or how to build a solid system. The first book people should have to read for Economic degrees is Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets. That way at least they would understand, that Economic theory has no relevance in reality.

0
0

[–] Yukonman ago 

It has tons of relevance in reality. It's not perfect it's a weird science. We can't test hypothesis in the lab, we can only go off real world data that has tons of variables like random chance. But have an idea of the general direction to go is better than walking blind.

4
-4

[–] vacvape 4 points -4 points (+0|-4) ago  (edited ago)

Source: Masters in Economics

That's like a feminist with a degree in sociology. People used to ride horse and buggy too. You are ignorant to the world beyond that. We're so far away from "incentive to save" discussions it's just fucking hilarious.

0
0

[–] Yukonman ago 

So you're saying we shouldn't talk about economics because the make weathermen look good?

Yeah there's lots of flaws and it's not perfect but that's why we engage in academic discussions to help better understand all variables.

I could be completely wrong but and I'm not saying to take my word for this. Come up with your opposing facts and hypothesis'. Work towards finding a middle ground. When two peopl with directly opposing views come together in economics the truth is usually in the middle.