Economists Are Surprisingly Partisan

Libertie76 said:

You act like every externality is purposely and willingly done. For instance how do you calculate equilibrium in supply and demand efficiently if there's an externality no one knows about? And then use the same practice of production in a different area without calculating the effect of an externality on the original production practice?

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

1. Yeah ... because it wasn't a point ... It's as stupid as asking "how do you prevent crime if you're gonna have Law." ....

2. Oh I'm sorry, do I really need an article to show you that the police force, the fire Department and the NHS are not private for profit buisinesses???

3. .... What? What the **** are you talking about? THE POLICE SERVICE THE FIRE SERVICE AND THE NHS ARE NOT PRIVAT FOR PROFIT BUISINESSES ... there is no market for the cops ... there is no market for fire services ... they are PUBLIC SERVICES.

4. Production less Waste =/= more Revenue less expenses ... sorry ... if I dump all my Waste in the river that's more Waste .... but it's less expense than if I take care of it ... sometimes producing less means higher prices, sometimes it means not over producing i.e. more Revenue ...

This is ecnomics 101 ... if you don't understand this basic Maxim of economics (much less externalities) I don't know what you're doing tryint to have a discussion on an economics forum.

6. More Advanced sell Phones are being produced to make a profit ... THAT'S IT ... do you really think People on Board rooms sit around thinking "How can we help poor People" .... no they are thinking how can we maximize profit ....

For ****s sake you really understand NOTHING about economics do you?

7. Yes there are more doctors ... but Guess who needs a doctor ... EVERYONE .... who needs hedge fund managers, a very very Select few super Rich People ....

This is simple supply and demand ... every one has a demand for doctors, very few People have a demand for hedge funde managers.

Why are hedge fund managers so wealthy? Because they Control all the Capital and the People who demand them are super Rich People.

This is again.

Economics 101.

8. It isn't a misconception ... it's not a cost to the producer or the buyer so it's not counted ... that isn't a misconception ... it isn't an inefficiency for capitalism ... just for society, but society isnt' a factor in capitalism, there's only one factor and one factor only ... Profit.

9. No it's that it NEEDS constant Growth .

Libertie ... this is getting really tiresome ... please read about externalities for a while ... please read a economics 101 book, seriously, then come back.



1. Exactly ... look at trends right now.

2. He didn't create the Iphone 2 because of competition, he created it to make more profit ...

But remember ... every componant in the smart phone, (at least almost all), developed in the state sector.

Worker being efficient doesn't mean Production is efficient for the worker ....

Click to expand...

Libertie76 said:

1. Ending markets is the fundamental basis for socialism. If you have socialism with black markets the same problems socialist critics of capitalism point out happen in capitalism will happen in socialism. Such as a doctor accepting bribes and payments with products no longer socialising production

2. No an article about deregulation

3. How do the local governments know the rate to pay police officers? They based it on the market. You're confusing basing price rates on markets with a for profit industry

4. Why would you want to produce less to increase revenue? Please explain this to me? The only reason someone would do this is because they have a monopoly and can, other wise they will be driven out of the market

6. Yes they make profit, but they want it to be affordable as well. Why? Because they want to wished the market and expand their product for more buyers. This means they are targeting the lower class of society with New efficient products.

7. You act like a doctor isn't a wealthy profession, however the reality is like I said you go to any town in the United States there will be multiple doctors for people to choose fRom. How many hedge fund managers will be in every town? Now lets reverse the roles there is only a few doctors but a lot of hedge fund managers how high do you think the managers would be paid abd how high do you think the doctors will be paid?

8. Society is a factor in capitalism because you can't profit without it. If society falls will the rich be able to profit.

9. Which is a good thing, not bad.

Because you do not back anything you say up with any rationale argument just name calling abd qUestion dodging

1. Yes underground media is becoming more popular then anything because the Media is lying to people

2. He profits through competition in the market. Meaning he had to attempt to make a better phone then LG and other brands, which is by advancing new technology through competition to produce more efficiency. Fundamental building blocks were created by militaries, but what does the milItary do? Pay people based on the actual market value in order to produce defense technology. Steve jobs took technology and made it efficient for the consumer which impacted economic growth and efficiency greatly. He then expanded the original one based on competitors.

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

You don't hold anyone accountable, you stop it, you make the People who live With the consequences of it be the ones who have a say over it.

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

1. No it isn't .... for goodness sakes stop making up ****.

2. I'll do you one better Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy: Joseph E. Stiglitz: 9780393338959: Amazon.com: Books

3. That wasn't the question was it, the question wasn't payment, it was Production, they don't use the market to distribute police protection or fire protection, or anything neither does teh NHS ... it's really not difficult.

4. Because producing more would produce more cost but less Revenue ... it happens all the time, OPEC countries are not limiting oil proudction because prices have dropped ... and no monopoly conditiosn are not the only conditions, simply lack of a large enougn market, higher cost for more Production ... there are tons and tons of factors ... this is buisiness 101.

6. They want to make a profit PERIOD ... if being affordable makes it profitable so be it ... if it doesn't, so be it ... again the ONLY factor that matters is profit ....

7. Yeah being a doctor you make good Money, not nearly as much as a hedge fund manager. You're completely ignoring demand ... in every town EVERYONE needs doctors, in most town NO ONE needs hedge fund managers and only in a few towns a very small amount of very Rich People need hedge fund managers .....

You're just talking nonsesnse and completely ignoring basic aspects of economics.

8. But that's an externality ... Companies don't try to save society, they profit from it.

9. No ... a system which cannot function without constant compound Growth (in a finite planet) is a bad thing.

1. No it's because the state sector developed the internet [emoji14].

2. He has to make a New iphone every couple years to keep making profit ... plain and simple, it isn't competition ... BTW; the Technology again, COMES FROM THE STATE SECTOR ....

State sector is not for profit and Public.

you throw around the term "market value" but I dont' think yo uknow what it means.

will you please .... please read about externalities and what they are ... I'm not going to continue this discussion unless you have actually read and understood what an externality is.

Click to expand...

Federalist said:

So in your system, if a factory is emitting co2, you shut down the factory? Who does that, the government?

Click to expand...

Libertie76 said:

1. How do you socialize production with the existence of markets?

2. Ok someone who blames Reagan for the sub prime mortgage recession, then over looks how the Fed kept the interest rates at a low percent then spiking up the percent then dropping it down to less 1 percent within 6 months. Apparently that had nothing to do with the recession. Now please show me which deregulations

3. How can they hire more police if they don't have the money in resources? Where do they receive their resources? Tax dollars? How many dollars do they? Based on population. It's based on the market yes

4. Exactly they're not limiting the oil because they are producing more. When you have more production in the market you make more money in return

6. It's only profitable if society deems it. This is easy to understand

7. Everyone needs food too, corn is the most produced vegetable yet a can of corn costs 40 cents, why?

8. No it's the market, explain charities then if companies don't want to save society.

9. ... HOw? It's better then a constant non moving economy

1. The military created the internet the private sector privatized it and now it's much more efficient

2. Yes and what happens after making the new iPhone? Technology becomes more efficient.

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

1. I don't see why you couldn't ....

2. Taking Down the seperation between Investment and Commercial banks for example ....

3. I don't think you know what a market is ... just because Money is involved doesn't mean it's "the market" here's the Points, the NHS, the police, the fire Department are all NOT FOR PROFIT Public institutions.

4. No, actually they do limit Production .... so as to keep the prices high, meaning you can make more profit With less cost.

6. not society .. PEOPLE WITH MONEY ... you seam to not know the difference between Democracy and plutocracy.

7. Because it's subsidized heavily by the state.

8. Charities are not part of Capitalism ... they are not for profit industries ... charities don't come up in corporate Board meatings.

9. the option is not betwee an economy that MUST grow 3% compound every year and an economy that never grows, it's between a cancer economy, that must grow 3% every hear compound, and an economy that can adjust based on what society needs.

1. It isn't more efficient .... the private sector didn't innovate that much when it came to the actual hardware of the internet ... if the Public kept the actual internet hardware Public, we could have had much much lower taxes.

2. That sentance doesn't really make sense.

Again ...

Now then lets put this where we left off.

you claim externalities are not real because the market would take care of them, without explaining how ... then when you try and explain how you pretend an externality is a cost to the Company ... thus showing you have NO IDEA what an externality is.

When it comes to system problems such as cutting labor costs to maximize profit leading to a lack of aggrigate demand ... you then claim that Companies would never lay off People because they want to maximize Production (no matter what), thus showing yo uhave no idea how buisinesses work ...

Those 2 issues that I brought up are COMPLETELY untouched by you, COMPLETELY.

Click to expand...

Libertie76 said:

1. Explain how you can socialize production with markets

2. How did the ending of glass Steagall create the subject prime mortgage crisis 9 years later

3. They need a market to base the value of the dollar on, such as they are required to pay people a certain amount of money based on an outside market value

4. Only Occurs in a perceived monopoly

6. Again look at cell phones and home phones is that society or a couple rich people

7. Yes certain companies are subsidized however why is corn so cheap? Ok why is cheese so cheap in France?

8. Charities are a result of capitalism a charity wouldn't exist in socialism, this concept puts a damper on your argument that capitalism is inherently evil

9. How can socialism possibly adjust when they're is absolutely no way to gather the information in order for the economy to adjust? How do the people know when they hit equilibrium in socialism

10. The internet isn't taxed in the United States. Apple abd Microsoft advanced the technology, marketism and capitalism opened up industrialization in places like Japan. Competition in the market advances technology,give me one incentive to advance technology in socialism and who decides which project deserves resources abd which doesn't and how

How do externalities cause society to pay for them rather then the business owner? And how socialism Sikhs prevent this? Also explain why it's not economic to have externalities.

I apologize that you ignore my responses and insult me instead of actually understanding economical theory.

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

what argument that capitalism is inherently evil? Where the hell did I say that? And no Charities are not a result of capitalism, they are People who outside of capitalism (i.e. not in the for profit system) care for those who are hurt by Capitalism.

I'm going to og directly to the externalities and teh Whole point of this Exchange from the begining.

Externalities is a name for COSTs (or benefits), which are not taken by the buyer or seller in a market transaction but are a result of the market transaction, so by definition, society has to take care of it.

So there are many examles, pollution is an obvious one, when a Collection of factories pump out pollution into a city, they don't have to pay for the eventual damage, neither do the buyers of their Product, but the cost is there.

Heres another one (this happened a couple years ago), a real one, when Goldman sachs buys a ton of grain futures the ones selling grain futures to them, and goldman sachs, are not affected (that much) by the huge spike in price for Food in, say India, where People might starve to Death, but People starving to Death in India is not part of the economic deal done by goldman sachs and sellers of grain futures.

These externalities are maximized, any cost that a Company has from doing buisiness, that Company would prefer not to pay for it, wouldn't they? So they try and externalize it constantly.

Explain why it's not economic to have externalities? That's kind of a vague question, economic for whome?

This is a HUGE problem for capitalism.

Now we have a related problem, systemic issues With capitalism.

One example is the idea of trying to suppress labor costs, every Company would rather pay less for labor to get the same or more result than more for labor, so you have a downward pressure on wages, if they are successful, and manage to push Down wages, or not hire more staff and instead produce more With less, then you save Money, the problem is when many other Companies do it, then you have in the Whole economy, less People With disposable Income, i.e. less demand ... when you have less demand less People are buying stuff, meaning Companies have to save MORE Money on labor in order to make a profit.

These were the 2 origional issues, issues which you havn't dealt With at all. Hell the first one you still to this day havn't understood ...

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

what argument that capitalism is inherently evil? Where the hell did I say that? And no Charities are not a result of capitalism, they are People who outside of capitalism (i.e. not in the for profit system) care for those who are hurt by Capitalism.

I'm going to og directly to the externalities and teh Whole point of this Exchange from the begining.

Externalities is a name for COSTs (or benefits), which are not taken by the buyer or seller in a market transaction but are a result of the market transaction, so by definition, society has to take care of it.

So there are many examles, pollution is an obvious one, when a Collection of factories pump out pollution into a city, they don't have to pay for the eventual damage, neither do the buyers of their Product, but the cost is there.

Heres another one (this happened a couple years ago), a real one, when Goldman sachs buys a ton of grain futures the ones selling grain futures to them, and goldman sachs, are not affected (that much) by the huge spike in price for Food in, say India, where People might starve to Death, but People starving to Death in India is not part of the economic deal done by goldman sachs and sellers of grain futures.

These externalities are maximized, any cost that a Company has from doing buisiness, that Company would prefer not to pay for it, wouldn't they? So they try and externalize it constantly.

Explain why it's not economic to have externalities? That's kind of a vague question, economic for whome?

This is a HUGE problem for capitalism.

Now we have a related problem, systemic issues With capitalism.

One example is the idea of trying to suppress labor costs, every Company would rather pay less for labor to get the same or more result than more for labor, so you have a downward pressure on wages, if they are successful, and manage to push Down wages, or not hire more staff and instead produce more With less, then you save Money, the problem is when many other Companies do it, then you have in the Whole economy, less People With disposable Income, i.e. less demand ... when you have less demand less People are buying stuff, meaning Companies have to save MORE Money on labor in order to make a profit.

These were the 2 origional issues, issues which you havn't dealt With at all. Hell the first one you still to this day havn't understood ...

Click to expand...

Libertie76 said:

You fOrgot to answer how we socialize production with markets

And, how did ending glass Steagall create the sub prime mortgage crisis

Click to expand...

Then why should we risk our lives for such a drastic change if it's not evil and less efficient

Click to expand...

That's not an externality what it is is Indian agriculture solely reliant on U.S. grain. An externality would be Goldman Sachs opens a bank on farmland that a farmer's cattle used to roam and now the cattle aren't getting enough exercise and dies. Who is responsible the bank or the cattle.

Click to expand...

If I run a nation solely reliant on Saudi oil then saudi Arabia gets nuked that's not an externality that's lack if market competition. Let me ask you this, if you're example is an externality, how does socialism stop these things from occurring while maintaining individuals freedom

Click to expand...

We don't really see mass market lay offs unless a serious recession or more commonly an advancement of technology. Please give me an example of this occurring for no reason behind it. Without a scandal or without technology advancement. And again how does socialism maintain jobs and advance technology at the same time

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

1. You buy and sell commodities ....

2. It mades sub prime Mortgages viable as a profitable Investment.



It's not less efficient, it just changes who it's efficient FOR ...

Also when you say "evil" I don't know what you mean by that.

Also because if you don't change it you'll end up destroying the economy ... and the enviroment.



No ... for ****s sake ... you don't know what an externality is, I just explained it to you, neither of those Things are externalities, they are all COSTs and benefits that are to the buyers and sellers ...

No deal With ACTUALY externalities ... like the ones I presented ... or just for goodness sakes look up what one is.



That isn't an externality at all ... for goodness sakes, you are really really trying desperately to avoid the issue arn't you?



Recessions happen very often because of shrinking markets, i.e. less workers With disposable Income .... I just explained it.

This is REALLY getting sad ... you're avoiding the issues completely .... look if you can't deal With them, just say so.

Click to expand...

Libertie76 said:

1. Having a market creates social class division. The allowance of markets create social class divide which means socialism with markets is inefficient in it's duties of ending class division

2. Please explain how

3. Externality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia go ahead and read the link and explain to me how I am wrong when I tell you the externality makes it inefficient in calculating price

4. If you look at the history of recessions in the United States it happens after a directed market regulation. Every single one. As I said, mass market lay offs happen after an advance in technology

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

1. No it doesn't not necessarily.

2. Because they could use other People's Money for risky Investments.

3. You havn't explaioned how it makes it inefficient .... inefficient for whome?

4. You're completely ignoring the argument here ....

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

1. No it doesn't not necessarily.

2. Because they could use other People's Money for risky Investments.

3. You havn't explaioned how it makes it inefficient .... inefficient for whome?

4. You're completely ignoring the argument here ....

Click to expand...

Libertie76 said:

1. If I save more then you and trade smarter I have would be in a separate social class

2. The ending of glass steagall didn't cause this to happen. In fact the fact that commercial banks were able use investment securities lessened the blow of the financial crises

3. For both parties, the producer is inefficient in their ability to create a equilibrium, and the consumer because they are paying an extra amount of money for something that they are unaware of

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

1. Except we both have Access to the same Capital and Resources ... class isn't defined as having omre or less Money, it's Access that matters.

2. Actually the crisis couldn't have happened without the repeal of glass stegall.

3. It's MORE efficient for both parties becuase a cost is being externalized ... that's the Whole point of an externality .... No, they are paying LESS Money, because they are not paying for the cost of externality.

And you've COMPLETELY ignored the systemic argument,

it doesn't require mass layoffs at all, it's an internal contradiction in capitalism .... now deal With it ...

Click to expand...

RGacky3 said:

1. Except we both have Access to the same Capital and Resources ... class isn't defined as having omre or less Money, it's Access that matters.

2. Actually the crisis couldn't have happened without the repeal of glass stegall.

3. It's MORE efficient for both parties becuase a cost is being externalized ... that's the Whole point of an externality .... No, they are paying LESS Money, because they are not paying for the cost of externality.

And you've COMPLETELY ignored the systemic argument,

it doesn't require mass layoffs at all, it's an internal contradiction in capitalism .... now deal With it ...

Click to expand...

Paschendale said:

Reality, including the realities of economics, have a well documented liberal bias. To the educated, politics follow the facts. That's why the vast majority academics are liberal. The more one knows, the more one understands, the more one leans left.

Click to expand...

Federalist said:

Reality has a well documented leftist bias? What?

Click to expand...