Page 9 of 10 [ 158 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next


What to do about unemployment?
Produce More Crap 8%  8%  [ 4 ]
Raise Retirement Age 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
Lower Retirement Age 4%  4%  [ 2 ]
Lower Minimum Wage 6%  6%  [ 3 ]
Raise Minimum Wage 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
Government to hire more people 13%  13%  [ 6 ]
Negative Income Tax 10%  10%  [ 5 ]
Quantitative Easing 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
Quantitative Tightening 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Start a Big War 17%  17%  [ 8 ]
Other (specify) 35%  35%  [ 17 ]
Total votes : 48

aussiebloke
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Oct 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,407

06 Sep 2012, 7:47 pm

AardvarkGoodSwimmer wrote:
On jobs, I think we are handling the transition from a manufacturing economy to a post-manufacturing economy poorly.


Good point though they had nearly 3 decades to make it right . :roll:


_________________
Theirs a subset of America, adult males who are forgoing ambition ,sex , money ,love ,adventure to sit in a darkened rooms mastering video games - Suicide Bob


Last edited by aussiebloke on 06 Sep 2012, 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

06 Sep 2012, 7:57 pm

what amazes me is that we still cling to very high work hours a week compared to the manyfold increase in productivity.

its as if someone somewhere wants to maximize something.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


StuckWithin
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 221
Location: My mind

06 Sep 2012, 11:08 pm

VIDEODROME wrote:
Ending the wars and Foreign Aid is one of the few things I think could help. That includes the drug war and paying for all those bases around the world.

Use that money domestically for productive things like infrastructure, but especially find ways to create innovation by working with the private secter.

Some people consider war time a strong booster to the economy but I have doubts about that.

Logically, when things are not as they should be at home, then yes, funds should be directed to improving the home situation. It's probably more complicated than that in the real world, and withdrawing, say, foreign aid might have unwanted consequences in that other less savory players will step in and begin influencing volatile regions - and that could have even worse consequences.

Wish it was simple, but things rarely are.

There's lots that could be done, but people and power being as they are, most of it likely won't be done.


_________________
AQ: 40 EQ: 7 SQ: 43


StuckWithin
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 221
Location: My mind

06 Sep 2012, 11:11 pm

aussiebloke wrote:
The secret of Germany’s success, says Klaus Kleinfeld, who ran the German electrical giant Siemens before taking over the American aluminum company Alcoa in 2008, is “the social contract: the willingness of business, labor and political leaders to put aside some of their differences and make agreements in the national interests

Very smart approach. Reasonable and balanced, and it works.

And yet Germany continues to be the butt of jokes in the Anglo world, doesn't it? That's dumb if you ask me.


_________________
AQ: 40 EQ: 7 SQ: 43


AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,660
Location: Houston, Texas

06 Sep 2012, 11:46 pm

aussiebloke wrote:
AardvarkGoodSwimmer wrote:
On jobs, I think we are handling the transition from a manufacturing economy to a post-manufacturing economy poorly.


Good point though they had nearly 3 decades to make it right . :roll:

I just wish my fellow citizens, and I mean both my fellow Americans and my fellow world citizens, were as knowledgeable about economics as about sports. And also patient and willing to accept that there may not be an immediate answer, but we might need to go with trial and error in a medium way.



SavageMessiah
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 202
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, US

06 Sep 2012, 11:54 pm

The real truth is, nothing can be done about unemployment. This is because you can't create enough jobs to keep up with population growth.

To say anyone has a legitimate right to work is a fallacy, because the probability of becoming employed at all is constantly decreasing.

If anyone deserves anything, it will be to die from disease when the Earth becomes either elbow-to-elbow with people -or- when every available resource to sustain life has been exhausted.

I suppose all you could really hope for is for people to stop reproducing when their backs are against the walls to the point where their own health is continuously in peril. Then, and only then, can a constant base quality of life be maintained.


_________________
AQ: 42
aspie-quiz: 151 / 47


AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,660
Location: Houston, Texas

07 Sep 2012, 12:07 am

Oodain wrote:
what amazes me is that we still cling to very high work hours a week compared to the manyfold increase in productivity.

its as if someone somewhere wants to maximize something.

Excellent point. And plus the gimmick of people on 'salary' being pressured to work 50, 60, or more hours a week.

For each two people working 60 hours a week that could actually be three jobs. :jocolor:



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 Sep 2012, 7:58 am

SavageMessiah wrote:
The real truth is, nothing can be done about unemployment. This is because you can't create enough jobs to keep up with population growth.



If that is so, then we have to learn two things:

Moderating our population increase. By the way that is not so applicable in the U.S. Our population is only 300,000,000 or so but our birth rate is near equilibrium. Our increase is from immigration both legal and illegal.

Second, we have to get used to the idea of carrying a portion of our population. If the economy cannot generate a sufficient number of cash paying jobs, then we have to learn to put the people not paid cash to work doing useful things without a salary or wage. If we can learn not to equate such a state with laziness or idleness or bad intentions we can relieve a good deal of our social stress.

I am a geezer. I have not done wage labor for over ten years (I am retired). But I do a lot of volunteer work. There is plenty that needs to be done and being useful is much more desirable than being useless. And no one has accused me of being lazy or parasitic. I am a chronic volunteer. I consider the opportunity to do useful stuff a gift.

We are all fellow travelers on the road of life. What is wrong with making life easier for each other? You give and you get. If things are allowed to follow a natural course they will even out.

ruveyn



Oldout
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Age: 73
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,539
Location: Reading, PA

07 Sep 2012, 8:51 am

Thank you Rev. ruveyn.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 Sep 2012, 8:54 am

Oldout wrote:
Thank you Rev. ruveyn.


Make that Reb instead of Rev and I will take it as a compliment.

ruveyn



Jojoba
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 7 Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 260

07 Sep 2012, 9:33 am

Well, was reading this morning that the latest jobs report is out. Once again it's another disappointing report. Sadly, safe to say what we have been doing to create jobs has not been working. New ideas are needed.

"Jobs, Jobs, Jobs"

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... jobs-jobs/

snippet from Walter Russell Mead's sight:

Quote:
...There is a small ray of comfort for the White House in the headline jobless figure; the report won’t be seen as an unmitigated disaster. At least the headline number went down, but the commentariat will focus relentlessly on the deep economic weaknesses the numbers reveal. Slow job growth is the worst possible area of weakness right now, and the disappointing August numbers on top of the downward revision for July are, from the Democratic point of view, a major buzz kill. Add to that that the average number of jobs created in 2011 is now below the average level for 2010, and the narrative of a slow but developing recovery has been holed below the waterline — at least until another month brings another set of numbers and, possibly, a more hopeful message.
We will have to wait another few days to see whether the Democratic convention moved the needle on the polls. But the economic background of the fall campaign has now been established in a way the White House cannot welcome. Whatever we are doing hasn’t worked yet; it’s not even close....



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

07 Sep 2012, 11:44 am

ruveyn wrote:
SavageMessiah wrote:
The real truth is, nothing can be done about unemployment. This is because you can't create enough jobs to keep up with population growth.



If that is so, then we have to learn two things:

Moderating our population increase. By the way that is not so applicable in the U.S. Our population is only 300,000,000 or so but our birth rate is near equilibrium. Our increase is from immigration both legal and illegal.

Second, we have to get used to the idea of carrying a portion of our population. If the economy cannot generate a sufficient number of cash paying jobs, then we have to learn to put the people not paid cash to work doing useful things without a salary or wage. If we can learn not to equate such a state with laziness or idleness or bad intentions we can relieve a good deal of our social stress.

I am a geezer. I have not done wage labor for over ten years (I am retired). But I do a lot of volunteer work. There is plenty that needs to be done and being useful is much more desirable than being useless. And no one has accused me of being lazy or parasitic. I am a chronic volunteer. I consider the opportunity to do useful stuff a gift.

We are all fellow travelers on the road of life. What is wrong with making life easier for each other? You give and you get. If things are allowed to follow a natural course they will even out.

ruveyn


while such a sytem in theory should work there is one major barrier, often what is usefull(that really is important, no one wants to spend their time doing something utterly useless)
isnt needed in the quantities where it can satisfy even 4% unemployment, this means that if one insits on constructive work being done by these people then it needs to happen at a private company, a private company that now receives workers for free for up to 3 months at a time, this in turn means that they have little incentive to hire unskilled workers which in turn means there are more that need a "productive placement".

if one could find a solution to that it would definately be a big leap forwards.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

07 Sep 2012, 12:54 pm

Oodain wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
SavageMessiah wrote:
The real truth is, nothing can be done about unemployment. This is because you can't create enough jobs to keep up with population growth.



If that is so, then we have to learn two things:

Moderating our population increase. By the way that is not so applicable in the U.S. Our population is only 300,000,000 or so but our birth rate is near equilibrium. Our increase is from immigration both legal and illegal.

Second, we have to get used to the idea of carrying a portion of our population. If the economy cannot generate a sufficient number of cash paying jobs, then we have to learn to put the people not paid cash to work doing useful things without a salary or wage. If we can learn not to equate such a state with laziness or idleness or bad intentions we can relieve a good deal of our social stress.

I am a geezer. I have not done wage labor for over ten years (I am retired). But I do a lot of volunteer work. There is plenty that needs to be done and being useful is much more desirable than being useless. And no one has accused me of being lazy or parasitic. I am a chronic volunteer. I consider the opportunity to do useful stuff a gift.

We are all fellow travelers on the road of life. What is wrong with making life easier for each other? You give and you get. If things are allowed to follow a natural course they will even out.

ruveyn


while such a sytem in theory should work there is one major barrier, often what is usefull(that really is important, no one wants to spend their time doing something utterly useless)
isnt needed in the quantities where it can satisfy even 4% unemployment, this means that if one insits on constructive work being done by these people then it needs to happen at a private company, a private company that now receives workers for free for up to 3 months at a time, this in turn means that they have little incentive to hire unskilled workers which in turn means there are more that need a "productive placement".

if one could find a solution to that it would definately be a big leap forwards.


I disagree that there are not enough "useful" things for people to do. The issue is that the benefits of certain activities are not immediately seen as worthwhile in a purely monetary framework. The free market is all about trade between individuals on the basis of perceived mutual benefit. If a trade of a good/service is not perceived as mutually useful and beneficial to both parties in a direct sense it generally will not occur. However, there are a lot of things which improve society (and thus individuals living in said society) that are not easily subject to direct analysis on a purely individual level in terms of individual reward/usefulness, especially not in a purely monetary way. It simply isn't possible to put a simple price tag on everything. It doesn't always have to be on the national level, but some form of collectivism on some level is always needed where markets fail. It's pretty clear to me that in the post-industrial age the free market fails at providing everyone the means to live with some semblance of happiness and purpose. Having a large segment of unemployed forced to live "on the dole" and treated as unworthy parasites is detrimental to the whole of society. It creates strife and animosity that will put the whole capitalist system at risk. Huge class divisions create more friction that tears at the fabric of society. This kind of friction is even more dangerous in the modern age of mass access to information and communication. This isn't the 1930's anymore.



AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,660
Location: Houston, Texas

07 Sep 2012, 5:29 pm

SavageMessiah wrote:
. . . This is because you can't create enough jobs to keep up with population growth. . .

Okay, so admittedly the Chinese authoritarian methods seem to "work." But what might work most of all is expanding educational opportunities for women, because then women tend to delay starting families and tend to have smaller families.

Social security is also an effective way to coax people to have smaller families.

(And an additional problem with the authoritarian methods, besides the obvious, is the ramp-up time. Whereas with methods like more college opportunities for women, you can start imperfectly right away.)



AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,660
Location: Houston, Texas

07 Sep 2012, 5:46 pm

And then there's philosopher Derek Parfit and the man who wrote the letter in to The Times, saying he didn't agree with their praising a drop in teen births, because his Mom was a teenager when she gave birth to him and he was glad he had a chance to live. That is, he would have waived his rights.

So, Parfit talked about the 'Absurd Conclusion' and the 'Repugnant Conclusion,' both taken to extreme like philosophers often do, but on the general idea of whether a small population or a big population leads to more total happiness. But if we take a medium possibility, like say a world population like 30 billion where each person lives an average of sixty years, that might make for more total happiness than we have right now. Each of the thirty billion may be glad that he or she has gotten a chance to live.

What I take from this is the deeply optimistic conclusion that we may be doing okay, that what we have right now may be an eminently winnable game.



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

07 Sep 2012, 5:47 pm

marshall wrote:

I disagree that there are not enough "useful" things for people to do. The issue is that the benefits of certain activities are not immediately seen as worthwhile in a purely monetary framework. The free market is all about trade between individuals on the basis of perceived mutual benefit. If a trade of a good/service is not perceived as mutually useful and beneficial to both parties in a direct sense it generally will not occur. However, there are a lot of things which improve society (and thus individuals living in said society) that are not easily subject to direct analysis on a purely individual level in terms of individual reward/usefulness, especially not in a purely monetary way. It simply isn't possible to put a simple price tag on everything. It doesn't always have to be on the national level, but some form of collectivism on some level is always needed where markets fail. It's pretty clear to me that in the post-industrial age the free market fails at providing everyone the means to live with some semblance of happiness and purpose. Having a large segment of unemployed forced to live "on the dole" and treated as unworthy parasites is detrimental to the whole of society. It creates strife and animosity that will put the whole capitalist system at risk. Huge class divisions create more friction that tears at the fabric of society. This kind of friction is even more dangerous in the modern age of mass access to information and communication. This isn't the 1930's anymore.


you might disagree and it might be true(i think it is as well, at least in the context described), where you live, here in denmark the previosuly described situation is very real,
the previous government (and current, havent done anything about it, just as bad) did some very odd things to our benefits system, the money received for educating yourself is today less than what you get for doing nothing, personally that pisses me off considering how much time one can spend on education, sometimes far above a full time job here in denmark.

the benefits themselves are at a fair and livable level for most parts of the country(its individual between counties), yet no such regulation and adjustment is employed for the states educational benefits, somethign that most definately has a value towards society.

one cant use education as a end all be all solution due to the costs involved and the ineffectiveness with unwiling learners, community projects are a great way to contribute but sometimes that too can be more expensive than parking people or ensuring that they produce tax revenue however indirect, so i think the state opted for the latter two where possible, even if its wrong.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.