Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
¡¡¡Tema cerrado!!!
Asunto: »Political & economic ideologies (communism, capitalism et
world bank is enough?
That's a wrong indicator because person employed is not a parameter precise enough for measuring productivity. Persons can put in different levels of work in creation of output. To compare the actual productivity of workers when they actually do work, we need GDP per hours worked. Any questions?
read again, that's wht I wrote of YOUR speech.
You are the one who should read again. You first wrote that my example is stupid. Then you wrote that it is false. That's why I told you to make up your mind because stupid and false are not synonyms. Then I also gave you an example how Bagnai's thesis are not stupid but false.
So, could you please finally explain what is wrong with my very simple and true example? My bet is that you won't because there is nothing wrong in it. Otherwise you would already point at this imagined mistake.
the debtor THAT repays everything is a good one or not?
So why to blame him?
???
Lol, you know nothing..
Well, unlike you, I know how to discuss without insults and I answer questions and explain whytheses are wrong. Maybe you know how to do that but don't want to reply which is much worse than knowing nothing.
No I only show you HE AGREES with me (and everyone else except you) about the crisis causation.
Crises in private sectors get resolved. Bad debtors go bankrupt and new ones take their business. Bad public debt just creates endless agony. Subprime crisis is over. And this one will be when countries stop spending undeserved money because they exhausted their credit capacity.
I'm wasting time with you..
I am not your problem. You are wasting time in general.
That's a wrong indicator because person employed is not a parameter precise enough for measuring productivity. Persons can put in different levels of work in creation of output. To compare the actual productivity of workers when they actually do work, we need GDP per hours worked. Any questions?
read again, that's wht I wrote of YOUR speech.
You are the one who should read again. You first wrote that my example is stupid. Then you wrote that it is false. That's why I told you to make up your mind because stupid and false are not synonyms. Then I also gave you an example how Bagnai's thesis are not stupid but false.
So, could you please finally explain what is wrong with my very simple and true example? My bet is that you won't because there is nothing wrong in it. Otherwise you would already point at this imagined mistake.
the debtor THAT repays everything is a good one or not?
So why to blame him?
???
Lol, you know nothing..
Well, unlike you, I know how to discuss without insults and I answer questions and explain whytheses are wrong. Maybe you know how to do that but don't want to reply which is much worse than knowing nothing.
No I only show you HE AGREES with me (and everyone else except you) about the crisis causation.
Crises in private sectors get resolved. Bad debtors go bankrupt and new ones take their business. Bad public debt just creates endless agony. Subprime crisis is over. And this one will be when countries stop spending undeserved money because they exhausted their credit capacity.
I'm wasting time with you..
I am not your problem. You are wasting time in general.
Well, that (GDP per hours worked) is not a great indicator either. One also has to take into account the size of the different markets (high tech vs. basic production for instance) as some markets produce more GDP per hour while others require a lot of work for some GDP. Norway being so high for instance could partially be explained by their oil reserves.
That being said, claiming 'GDP per working person' as an indicator of productivity is just complete nonsense.
That being said, claiming 'GDP per working person' as an indicator of productivity is just complete nonsense.
Exactly. That's what I am trying to explain to el pupe this whole time. Wage share is a parameter that shows the structure of the economy in terms of work or capital intensity. More capital intense economies have lower wage share. Norway is most probably also a good example. I am only not sure how much work intense the extraction of oil actually is.
Crises in private sectors get resolved.
with public money.
for the rest. Please just read and study some before answering.
with public money.
for the rest. Please just read and study some before answering.
It's a pity your sense of irony is rather poor. Because it's indescribable, the irony you're showing here.
Spending public money does not resolve a crisis. It only prolongs the crisis. Saving companies that should have gone broke because of bad management and/or strategy is not helping the economy. In contrary, it's creating moral hazard.
For an economy, it is of vital importance that good management/strategy is rewarded with profits, and bad management/strategy gets punished with bankruptcy. It's all about incentives.
Spending public money does not resolve a crisis. It only prolongs the crisis. Saving companies that should have gone broke because of bad management and/or strategy is not helping the economy. In contrary, it's creating moral hazard.
For an economy, it is of vital importance that good management/strategy is rewarded with profits, and bad management/strategy gets punished with bankruptcy. It's all about incentives.
If a private company is worth saving, this will be proved by private investors' interest to take it over. Why wouldn't a company's healthy competitor want to take it over if the company has a business worth of saving and further development? If it doesn't have that, then it should be dismembered through bankruptcy so that at least its creditors save some of their assets.
This is so simple that it hurts. And it works like a charm. Unless politicians start to tamper with it by making individual choices about who gets saved. And they usually choose to save those with best political stakes for their own private interests. Or just simply those that bribe them.
(editado)
This is so simple that it hurts. And it works like a charm. Unless politicians start to tamper with it by making individual choices about who gets saved. And they usually choose to save those with best political stakes for their own private interests. Or just simply those that bribe them.
(editado)
It's just like "Boo capitalism, boo! Boo politicians, boo!" without any alternative.
I support people who oppose the establishment, but simply opposing the establishment is not enough. It's like Beppe Grillo. A quarter of the Italians voted for him, and what did he intend to do? Nothing. Coward.
I support people who oppose the establishment, but simply opposing the establishment is not enough. It's like Beppe Grillo. A quarter of the Italians voted for him, and what did he intend to do? Nothing. Coward.
Spending public money does not resolve a crisis. It only prolongs the crisis. Saving companies that should have gone broke because of bad management and/or strategy is not helping the economy. In contrary, it's creating moral hazard.
well, I'm not going to contradict you.
I only say that in EU and un USA public money saved private companies (banks and financial/insurance companies).
That is a FACT. So it can't be denied..
The crisis in private sevtor is not ended yet. Some of its symptoms were hided. Some loss was covered.
well, I'm not going to contradict you.
I only say that in EU and un USA public money saved private companies (banks and financial/insurance companies).
That is a FACT. So it can't be denied..
The crisis in private sevtor is not ended yet. Some of its symptoms were hided. Some loss was covered.
This is so simple that it hurts. And it works like a charm. Unless politicians start to tamper with it by making individual choices about who gets saved. And they usually choose to save those with best political stakes for their own private interests. Or just simply those that bribe them.
I disagree (*), but it's very little important.
It's more interesting that the govs of Ireland, USA, Germany, Spain, Greece, Holland, and another lot of ... saved banks with public money.
And that ECB, IMF, W.bank and almost every private financial company agreed with it.
(*)you can inform about why in every macroeconomics manual.
I disagree (*), but it's very little important.
It's more interesting that the govs of Ireland, USA, Germany, Spain, Greece, Holland, and another lot of ... saved banks with public money.
And that ECB, IMF, W.bank and almost every private financial company agreed with it.
(*)you can inform about why in every macroeconomics manual.
It's just like "Boo capitalism, boo! Boo politicians, boo!" without any alternative.
ahahah.
your prejudices are stupid.
I'm for Italy out from euro cage. That's an alternative.
I'm not against "politicians", but against euro-slave politicians.
And for sure I'm not against market and capitalism. I only know they have some flaws.
I support people who oppose the establishment, but simply opposing the establishment is not enough. It's like Beppe Grillo. A quarter of the Italians voted for him, and what did he intend to do? Nothing. Coward.
I wonder where you take your information from ..
(btw Grillo is very disappointing in euro question.. he's still at "bad public spending, wrong politicians choices, state stealing" and a lot of other amenities like that...
still is interesting to know italians don't continue to vote politicians that are killig italy)
Reality is a bit more complex than what you think it is, kids.
(editado)
ahahah.
your prejudices are stupid.
I'm for Italy out from euro cage. That's an alternative.
I'm not against "politicians", but against euro-slave politicians.
And for sure I'm not against market and capitalism. I only know they have some flaws.
I support people who oppose the establishment, but simply opposing the establishment is not enough. It's like Beppe Grillo. A quarter of the Italians voted for him, and what did he intend to do? Nothing. Coward.
I wonder where you take your information from ..
(btw Grillo is very disappointing in euro question.. he's still at "bad public spending, wrong politicians choices, state stealing" and a lot of other amenities like that...
still is interesting to know italians don't continue to vote politicians that are killig italy)
Reality is a bit more complex than what you think it is, kids.
(editado)
I only say that in EU and un USA public money saved private companies (banks and financial/insurance companies).
That is a FACT. So it can't be denied..
It's not the private sector that decided to use public money.
The crisis in private sevtor is not ended yet. Some of its symptoms were hided. Some loss was covered.
Unfortunately, the crisis has not ended yet. Because the problems caused by the public sector were that serious and even more, they are continuing doing to do so ("we need more government regulations in the financial sector").
That is a FACT. So it can't be denied..
It's not the private sector that decided to use public money.
The crisis in private sevtor is not ended yet. Some of its symptoms were hided. Some loss was covered.
Unfortunately, the crisis has not ended yet. Because the problems caused by the public sector were that serious and even more, they are continuing doing to do so ("we need more government regulations in the financial sector").
Unfortunately, the crisis has not ended yet. Because the problems caused by the public sector were that serious and even more, they are continuing doing to do so ("we need more government regulations in the financial sector").
i disagree, but I will not discuss it here. Because I think you don't want to see the flaws of your ideology.
I only want to remark that the private companies were saved by public money SO there must be a bigger public budget, more taxation etc.
On the other side if you let companies fail, you'll have loss distributed and failing chains.., lot of workers that lose job, less taxation revenues and welfare state expenses (inoccupation wages, ricollocation etc), SO there must be a bigger public budget, more taxation etc.
that's the reality. EVERY big private crisis lead to a public money "saving".
Except for the tale of the "ideal" society where citizen are left starving for the sake of the "market" ideology and the purity of the its rule working.
i disagree, but I will not discuss it here. Because I think you don't want to see the flaws of your ideology.
I only want to remark that the private companies were saved by public money SO there must be a bigger public budget, more taxation etc.
On the other side if you let companies fail, you'll have loss distributed and failing chains.., lot of workers that lose job, less taxation revenues and welfare state expenses (inoccupation wages, ricollocation etc), SO there must be a bigger public budget, more taxation etc.
that's the reality. EVERY big private crisis lead to a public money "saving".
Except for the tale of the "ideal" society where citizen are left starving for the sake of the "market" ideology and the purity of the its rule working.
that's the reality.
No. That's your view on the current situation.
There is no room for more taxation. 54% of the GDP (in Belgium) going trough the government is more than enough!
Except for the tale of the "ideal" society where citizen are left starving for the sake of the "market" ideology and the purity of the its rule working.
Yes, I like starvation. It's awesome. Laughing at poor people living in the cold streets is fun too.
No. That's your view on the current situation.
There is no room for more taxation. 54% of the GDP (in Belgium) going trough the government is more than enough!
Except for the tale of the "ideal" society where citizen are left starving for the sake of the "market" ideology and the purity of the its rule working.
Yes, I like starvation. It's awesome. Laughing at poor people living in the cold streets is fun too.
It seem to me a mutatio controversiae.