• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Your view: Food Stamps and Unemployment

Do you believe Pelosi about Foodstamps and Unemployment?


  • Total voters
    23
But people don't keep putting their money into vending machines that keep eating their money.



People make mistakes, I am perfectly willing to admit that as most libertarians do/should. However, I do not admit that they keep making the same mistake over and over again. It is the fact that people learn from their mistakes and engage only in those behaviors that are mutually beneficial in the long term that allows capitalism to function. If people were to make the same decisions that make them worse overall, then I would agree with you. However, people don't keep engaging in the same action that has made them worse off over and over again. They will eventually change and try something else that does benefit them.

750px-Price-Earnings_Ratios_as_a_Predictor_of_Twenty-Year_Returns_%28Shiller_Data%29.png


As this chart shows, people DO continue to make the same mistakes over and over again. It shows that stocks with high P/E ratios, generally in exciting new industries, are bad investments (in other words, they're overpriced). Yet people continue to bid these stocks up to astronomical prices, decade after decade, with some sort of new justification why this time is different.

The best stocks are the boring, undervalued stocks. Tobacco, processed foods, paper, etc.

phattonez said:
As an aside, how could irrational people force irrational people to act rationally? Just a tangential criticism that I don't want to get to involved in, but is interesting to me.

Because the specific areas in which people are irrational are pretty predictable. Once you know the types of irrational behavior that people are inclined to engage in, it becomes easier to understand it and prevent it.
 
Last edited:
750px-Price-Earnings_Ratios_as_a_Predictor_of_Twenty-Year_Returns_%28Shiller_Data%29.png


As this chart shows, people DO continue to make the same mistakes over and over again. It shows that stocks with high P/E ratios, generally in exciting new industries, are bad investments (in other words, they're overpriced). Yet people continue to bid these stocks up to astronomical prices, decade after decade, with some sort of new justification why this time is different.

The best stocks are the boring, undervalued stocks. Tobacco, processed foods, etc.

And these are the same people making the same mistakes? And people don't seem to be losing money on most of these deals, so I don't see what the real problem is.

Because the specific areas in which people are irrational are pretty predictable. Once you know the types of irrational behavior that people are inclined to engage in, it becomes easier to understand it and prevent it.

But wouldn't the irrational people in government be just as succeptible to the same error?
 
And these are the same people making the same mistakes?

Does it matter? The market, at any given point in time, is just the set of transactions that people engage in. Whether it's the same people or different people making the mistakes is irrelevant...it shows that the market is not rational and the people participating in it are not rational.

phattonez said:
And people don't seem to be losing money on most of these deals, so I don't see what the real problem is.

Irrelevant. If people were behaving rationally, there would be no correlation between the P/E ratio of a stock and its rate of return. All the stocks would be priced "correctly" to produce (on average) the market's required rate of return. But that isn't what we see. Instead, we see excited investors who want a piece of the Next Big Thing losing their minds and overpaying for dubious stocks...and doing it again decade after decade.

phattonez said:
But wouldn't the irrational people in government be just as succeptible to the same error?

Not if they understand behavioral economics. For example, I'm sure there are areas where I'm just as irrational as anyone else...but the fact that I know that stocks with low P/E ratios are better investments than those with high P/E ratios means that I'll probably do better than the average investor. Same with government officials; once they understand the specific areas in which people are likely to behave irrationally, it becomes easier to prevent or mitigate it, if necessary.
 
Last edited:
Does it matter? The market, at any given point in time, is just the set of transactions that people engage in. Whether it's the same people or different people making the mistakes is irrelevant...it shows that the market is not rational and the people participating in it are not rational.

It's completely relevant. If it's different people then people learn from their mistakes. If it's the same people then that supports you.

Irrelevant. If people were behaving rationally, there would be no correlation between the P/E ratio of a stock and its rate of return. All the stocks would be priced "correctly" to produce (on average) the market's required rate of return. But that isn't what we see. Instead, we see excited investors who want a piece of the Next Big Thing losing their minds and overpaying for dubious stocks...and doing it decade after decade.

But your conclusion that this proves irrationality depenends on the assertion that these are the same people doing that over and over again. If you can't prove that then you haven't proven anything. You've only shown an interesting market phenomenon that potential investors should know before they start to invest.

Not if they understood behavioral economics. For example, I'm sure there are areas where I'm just as irrational as anyone else...but the fact that I know that stocks with low P/E ratios are better investments than those with high P/E ratios means that I'll probably do better than the average investor.

But most new investors don't know that, and so would make the mistake. That doesn't make them irrational, it may make them ignorant, but not irrational.
 
I love Pelosi. She has a big war chest and she’s kinda ditzy but she knows how to turn the thumb screws like a true dominatrix, even if she is a bimbo.
 
Why do you have to 100% agree or 100% disagree? I don't think I've ever 100% agreed with someone in my entire life :S

I'd appreciate "mostly agree" and "mostly disagree" options, but I guess it's too late now.
 
Back
Top Bottom