Paying People Not To Work Saved Millions Of Jobs
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
Ironic isn't it? Wages are going up, the price of food is going down (in comparison to income) and most people are broker than ever and no one can figure out what the problem is- at least not the idiots in charge of the economy, the banks, or running the country.
New? Hardly.
If I have no money, I can't buy food. If I have money, I can buy food. I can buy many things if I have money, and nothing at all if I have none. Welfare in this case is a non-price determinant of demand, and it's not a new concept in economics at all.
I'm surprised that this would be controversial at all.
hence the reason that 'sole suppliers' become big ole targets for private sector companies.
Sure it was, but that doesn't change the historic facts that most folks had more savings and had far less debt hanging over their heads
Add in import taxes and tariffs and it makes your argument even stronger.
However, the big 'but' in this scenario is that elements of the agri sector was forced by gvt to sell below market value. Now that the Wheat Board is defunct, look for grain-related products to begin swinging based on the actual supply/demand forces
Only if you seek to promote a welfare economy.... In the end, someone has to pay the piper, just ask Greece how that's working out for them
Actually taxslave real price of housing isn't up all that much when you compare houses today to "houses" like I was raised in. The biggest drawer of electricity was the 100 watt light bulb in the kitchen. The was linoleum but no rugs. Gas isn't up all that much in real terms, when I was earning $15 a day, gas was 45 cents a gallon. Taxes are up, I still remember the income tax I paid on my first pay cheque with the gov't.......................$28.15, which I thought was deplorable! That was after 3 weeks work.
Of course in those days we didn't spend money we didn't have!
That might be what it is "called" alright! -
The net gain to the economy is still NIL.
In the 50's 60's 70's did you have a cable bill, internet bill, cell phone bill and security bill? Do the math on how much those four cost a year.
Why would it change for the better? They've always been spot prices out of Chicago and not undervalued. Now I get hosed on shipping.
Last edited:
"Demand" is only a word, as I've said before to advance the economy there are only two ways to do it, you have either mine something or kill something, all other activity just spreads money around. When you are handing out welfare it is actually a negative, you are paying bureaucrats to track it, distribute it etc.
Exactly it's called spending money we can't afford or don't have.
Maybe but when I lost my job after 26 years because my company folded, they paid me to go back to school and retrain. There were probably 20 of us in class. I was shocked to discover that some had already taken a similar program. How could this be I wondered. Well some people are professional system milkers. I would guess that out of 20 maybe four of us actually got jobs out of it. The others wandered back to what they were doing prior to. I think that is just wrong.
Of the 8 million jobs lost in the 2008 Depression fewer the 4 million have returned. You can bet that most of those are low payed and transient service work without benefits, security or pensions. Benefits to the unemployed is only a way to ensure social peace at this point.
Unemployment Benefits, though, is NOT the issue.. the issue is the utter pathetic failure of the entire Free Market paradigm.. Free Trade, Monetarism (free trade in currency and credit ), privatization, de-regulation.
Cutting the deficit is a NON issue. It will be IMPOSSIBLE to cut spending fast enough in a collapsing economy to reduce the debt.. and the U.S. and Canada's economy are up to their neck in this self inflicted economic suicide.
The only solution to this is GOVERNMENT.. specifically GOOD government serving the NATIONAL interest.. which flies in the face of these libertarian EUNUCHS who are now in control of the the so-called 'Conservative' movement.. but which is little more than Resurgent Classic British Economic and Social Liberalism.. that of Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Thomas Malthus.
Unemployment Benefits, though, is NOT the issue.. the issue is the utter pathetic failure of the entire Free Market paradigm.. Free Trade, Monetarism (free trade in currency and credit ), privatization, de-regulation.
Cutting the deficit is a NON issue. It will be IMPOSSIBLE to cut spending fast enough in a collapsing economy to reduce the debt.. and the U.S. and Canada's economy are up to their neck in this self inflicted economic suicide.
The only solution to this is GOVERNMENT.. specifically GOOD government serving the NATIONAL interest.. which flies in the face of these libertarian EUNUCHS who are now in control of the the so-called 'Conservative' movement.. but which is little more than Resurgent Classic British Economic and Social Liberalism.. that of Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Thomas Malthus.
Economics for Dummies
Page 1; may I quote?
In an economic downturn, Widgets Limited, may be losing money, but will maintain operations and it's skilled workforce, because selling off equipment or laying off employees is a loss of capital which certainly will exceed operating losses given the limited duration of the economic downturn.
Discuss
Page 1; may I quote?
In an economic downturn, Widgets Limited, may be losing money, but will maintain operations and it's skilled workforce, because selling off equipment or laying off employees is a loss of capital which certainly will exceed operating losses given the limited duration of the economic downturn.
Discuss
Widgets Limited can operate only as long as the bank account is in the green and/or the bank lends them cash to fund operations. Once those dry-up, there is no choice but to close the doors.
While Widgets Limited can live off of savings and other non-core assets, the critical factor is that the demand for their widgets must exceed a level that will provide positive cash flow... anything short of that is simply deferring their eventual fate of going titters
First the laying off of employees is not loss of capital which is why that is usually the first thing to be cut. Employees have a value to a company in order to meet revenue targets but when there is no revenue, then they are a liability, financially speaking.
A company can only maintain operations to meet sales demands or else they're left with inventory they'll need to sell at a loss.
That said, it can be costly to lay off, in the long run, if a downturn is expected to be of short duration as there is a cost to rehiring/retraining.
And if a company is selling off it's assets, that's pretty much when the writing is on the wall.
Economics for Dummies
Page1; paragraph 2
While Widgets Limit can use cash reserves, issue bonds or more common/preferred shares, or lay off some workers, to tide them over during the downturn, there is a vested interest in government to help maintain the skilled workforce through employment -insurance benefits. When the downturn is over, taxes on profitable domestic manufactures and salaried workers will replenish the money dispersed previously to ease the burden on individuals and in supporting business. Governments should not let the iron-hand wreak havok, but must smooth out the sine wave of boom and bust.
This will be on the exam.
PS to SLM
Skilled labour is as real a form of capital as the Wigetmaster 400.
Supplementary reading on the role of education in raising and maintaing human capital in an industrial state.
http://faculty.washington.edu/te/papers/res96.pdf
Page1; paragraph 2
While Widgets Limit can use cash reserves, issue bonds or more common/preferred shares, or lay off some workers, to tide them over during the downturn, there is a vested interest in government to help maintain the skilled workforce through employment -insurance benefits. When the downturn is over, taxes on profitable domestic manufactures and salaried workers will replenish the money dispersed previously to ease the burden on individuals and in supporting business. Governments should not let the iron-hand wreak havok, but must smooth out the sine wave of boom and bust.
This will be on the exam.
PS to SLM
Skilled labour is as real a form of capital as the Wigetmaster 400.
Supplementary reading on the role of education in raising and maintaing human capital in an industrial state.
http://faculty.washington.edu/te/papers/res96.pdf
If there is no demand for fools gold, then mining fool's gold is a fools errand. Some minerals are in more demand than others. Lithium for example, until the next generation of batteries, maybe magnesium, replace them. Much economic activity takes place because competent managers are aware of the market demand for their product...
Demand is very real. It's not just a word.
Yes, lets just get rid of Old Age Security already. It's quite negative to all those seniors who are receiving it. They certainly don't spend it on anything useful. No businesses could possibly benefit from the money given to seniors to buy food. [/purple font]
The economy would definitely benefit by encouraging the elderlu to take long walks in the snow. The non-productive should be eliminated.
That certainly fits my companies model right now. A tough year in the animal health division, but the corporation is doubling down and even increasing our R&D budget, because cannibalizing the capital means cannibalizing future sales. Eat the losses in the short term to ensure the long term health -har har- of the company looks good.
Some other companies in this market have taken a hatchet to their R&D divisions, but thankfully the corporation I work for has a longer vision than the next quarter, or even the whole year. In fact we actually performed better than expected, in part due to the continued investment from the leadership, though what was expected was still a loss. Investors rewarded us and our price is actually higher even though the financials in the past year are weaker than the previous year.