tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post2939965473440360212..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: Hoover Economics – Czech StyleUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-41254017825834981342009-03-31T10:39:00.000-04:002009-03-31T10:39:00.000-04:00Thanks for your feedback Trucker.Yep. The "produc...Thanks for your feedback Trucker.<BR/><BR/>Yep. <I>The "product or service" being sought at present is "income".</I> 'Real' income, that is.Myrtle Blackwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07427043367624101075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-29050010202138942212009-03-30T18:15:00.000-04:002009-03-30T18:15:00.000-04:00Brenda Rosser said..."Wouldn't you say that most w...Brenda Rosser said...<BR/><BR/>"Wouldn't you say that most world economies are facing 'excess aggregate demand' of the wrong type of product or service??"<BR/><BR/>Yes. The "product or service" being sought at present is "income". If income is to be from wages then per hour wages must be better distributed across the population and so too the purchasing power. Many, if not most, people would rather work less (hours) and consume less. The 30 hour work week and national health insurance are the correct address to this problem.<BR/><BR/>The ridiculous claim that people seek jobs is exposed for what it is. Nobody _WANTS_ a stinkin job. What one wants is income and the "job" (labor) is the cost of that income.TheTruckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10346127768102862741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-6119375109982744702009-03-30T14:28:00.000-04:002009-03-30T14:28:00.000-04:00In 2002 I was appalled at the fact that Republican...In 2002 I was appalled at the fact that Republicans did not lose the House of Representatives. That is when I started my investigation into government structure and our electoral system. I was already aware of the games played in the precincts by the Republicans but I simply could not believe that the counts would have been close enough to allow the theft. I just could not believe that the American people were than damned stupid. In the current phase of the analysis, 6 years later, I am of the opinion that ignorance, rather then stupidity, accounts for the successes of the latter day Republican party. And I mention this here because I feel strongly that all conservatism is supported by an overdose of the "work ethic" and the admonishment of idleness that comes with Republican moralizing. The true intent of this "thou shalt work 2 jobs" is to keep the people occupied and ignorant. If government were to reduce the hours of work then many people would cure themselves of the ignorance and turn their minds to reducing the need for labor still more (no sane person _LIKES_ toil). <BR/><BR/>Given time to think and reflect, the people would more fully understand how the current leaders (Republican and Democrat alike) are nothing more than lobby suck ups. Many people would come to understand _REAL_ economics and be able to see past the neoclassical tap dancing; to see the shaft they are getting from the lobbyists and the politicians alike.<BR/><BR/>Idle hands may be the Devil's workshop, but those minds set free from toil are the bastion of enlightened progress. It is the conservative desire for political power and the fear of losing such political power that is the major impediment to cutting the work week in the United States. Power is zero sum.<BR/><BR/>And the primary cure for this malady is a major expansion of the membership of the House. Such an expansion dramatically reduces electoral district size and places the, so called, representatives logically (if not physically) closer to those being represented. As representatives are more representative of the people then so too are they less representative of the lobby. You will note that all the nations that have decent "safety nets" also have very good per capita representation in the lower house, or popular branch, of the government. In the USA 1 representative lords it over 700 thousand people. In the UK it is one rep per 100k or so and in Scandinavia only 15-20k are forced to share one vote on the laws. IN smaller constituencies, those that vote for big business at the expense of the people find themselves in the street.TheTruckerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10346127768102862741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-91488786301259231052009-03-30T09:39:00.000-04:002009-03-30T09:39:00.000-04:00Dean Baker's stimulus proposal wouldn't have the p...Dean Baker's <A HREF="http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/europes-solution-take-more-time-off/#dean" REL="nofollow">stimulus proposal</A> wouldn't have the policy externalities Krugman worries about.Sandwichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11159060882083015637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-76560349852000527212009-03-30T08:08:00.000-04:002009-03-30T08:08:00.000-04:00..If the European economy were currently facing ex...<I>..If the European economy were currently facing excess aggregate demand, this call to adhere to the Stability and Growth Pact would make sense.... </I><BR/><BR/>Wouldn't you say that most world economies are facing 'excess aggregate demand' of the wrong type of product or service?? <BR/><BR/>The head of the IPCC is urging citizens to reduce their consumption in order to have a chance to enjoy a habital planet in the future. What an extraordinary thing to say!<BR/><BR/>His words, however, convey nothing new. The alarm keeps ringing whilst Krugman and fail to constantly qualify their banal statements to fit the current horrendous predicament: our warming and drying planet drowning in greenhouse gases, other industrial toxins.<BR/><BR/>Yet the constant urgings for 'consumption' go on. <BR/><BR/>'Economy' never did mean the wasteful frittering away of time, energy and resources. <BR/><BR/><I><B>Global warming could cut the human population to 1 billion</B> said Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. if the buildup of greenhouse gases and its consequences pushed global temperatures 9 degrees Fahrenheit higher than today — well below the upper temperature range that scientists project could occur from global warming — Earth’s population would be devastated….at certain “tipping points,” higher temperatures could cause areas of the ocean to become deoxygenated, resulting in what he calls “oxygen holes” between 600 and 2,400 feet deep. These are areas so depleted of the gas that they would badly disrupt the food chain...</I><BR/><BR/>Scientist: Warming Could Cut Population to 1 Billion<BR/>By James Kanter<BR/>http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/13/scientist-warming-could-cut-population-to-1-billion/Myrtle Blackwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07427043367624101075noreply@blogger.com