If we have a slowly inflating currency, that is fine as long as the goods and services that we provide keep in line with that. Meaning that the value of those goods remains stable with regard to other goods. But we don't actually need that inflation effect, it's mostly a feel good thing to make people think like their work is being valued more than last year. In a completely theoretically sense, if the work that gets paid $10 today got paid $10 in five years the economy wouldn't care. But the person who is doing that same job does care.
This is why a small and constant level of inflation was not opposed even by free market-ists like Milton Friedman, at least I think that's why he supported it.
Member of the Owlluminati!
Does it really matter if unemployment goes down when 60% of the new jobs created are minimum wage jobs? A ton of "middle class" jobs left this country and went overseas. That is why unemployment is looking slightly better but the economy is staying stagnant. You can't replace jobs paying $40,000 a year with jobs paying $20,000 a year and expect things to go back to normal.
wow, it seems like as long as I stay out of it you guys will voice some really constructive and insightful commentary and Ideas, thank you.This is the basis of our democrasy and there is no issue we cant overcome as long as we keep communication open and respectful.
a couple of thoughts. One of the greatest economic stimulus weve ever seen was the first GI bill for returning WW2 veterans, It produced a whole generation of Bachelor and Masters degreed professionals in an era when a HS diploma was enough to make a good living.
This sent the economy and general standards of living soaring for many americans.
Now this increased compensation did infact as some are pointing out start a dominos effect in raising costs etc, based on a greater disposable income, but heres the thing about that, we are ALWAYS in a state of adjustment,either up or down, the trick is to try and create circumstances where we are leveraged against the growth rather then the other way around which is what happens when we allow wages and compensations to stagnate.Rather then wait for prices to come up to our ability to pay,(which is not painfui at all) we are waiting for prices to come down to our new reality(which is much,slower as buisness is far more reluctant to give up earnings then they are to try and increase them.)
secondly,getting caught up in the word "free" is counter productive.however costs are controlled showed be addressed without bringing the whole free market debate straight into the middle of it.
Our success has made the criteria for entrance into the midlle clas more and more difficult and costly.
Masters degrees are now what HS diplomas were in the 50s, Graduating with 100k in debt isnt isolated to med and Law schools.
Part of the issue,IMO is as I said requiring ceratin lower level classes.In an age when we have computers damn near attached to our arses, what benefit is a study of US history for those entering into chemical engineering.
Information held in your Mind is in no way any more relevant of effective then the "storage devises" we are walking around with all day(lol).
In addition, I know a whole lot of degreed individuals that couldnt name the capitals of the states without looking them up! so what the hell is the point, besides yet another revenue generating device in our economy.
We have become so wealth obsessed that we see a potential market every where we look,this averice has gotten in our way IMO.
Making college less expensive and more focused on very specific job skills would elevate workers once again into a higher median income.There is no doubt that the market would adjust and there would be SOME comsumables that a higher margine could be extracted fom, but the goal is ,as I said to stay ahead of the wave,not behind it.
Most Importantly is the merging of these conflicting ideologies to reach an understanding of how we can move forward.
The country is unemployed, the workers say, well you gave my job to an overseas economy.
The buisness says, we didnt do that, the market did, your future is in a "higher level" of economy(just as we went from Farming ,to manufacturing,to service, and now Tech).
Both are true.
Neither is wrong.
its like a couple walking down the street with those T-shirts that say Im with stupid with an arrow pointing the other way.
At some point there must come a consensus that providing people with better job skills increases economic growth and in the long term benefits Buissness goals,AND by allowing manufacturing to move overseas to the .30 cents an hour chinese worker is a benefit in cheap and more goods in the market,AS LONG AS PEOPLE ALL HAVE JOBS.
one cannot exist for long without the other.
Last edited by stephkyle7; 02-05-2013 at 12:01 AM.
2.) Existing student loan debt is a whole other issue. Personally, I support all current student debt being forgiven(again, if the student already achieved a degree and certain standards. I don't want to pay for people who partied and flunked out of college). I need to research more on cost for this, but still a good point.
3.) Good point here. Tuition overall has tripled since the 80s, and doubled since 2000. The cost absolutely has to be put under control. The money is being directed to administrators who have little influence on students, rather than increased salary to the teachers, programs/tools for students, etc. How we fix this brings up all sorts of legal issues. To me, this is perhaps the greatest impediment for implementing my idea. We need to somehow impose or incentivize tuition limits without the government stepping all over these private institutions.
Obviously there are a ton of details that would have to be worked out in order for this to be implemented, however I believe that "not having enough money" certainly is not a reason why hardworking students from any background or class cannot achieve a quality, higher education for free.
Can you cite an example where deflation benefited employment rather than simply benefiting banksters and the investment class? Those latter types, having sucked up all the benefits of growth in our economy for decades, seem to be doing pretty well. Meanwhile you seem to be calling for further decreases in wages on top of flat wage growth since about 1974. IMHO, that is exactly the opposite of what a consumer-spending-driven economy needs, and would result in a depression.
A riot, said Martin Luther King, is the language of the unheard.
Is onerous regulation that force the abandonment of US manufacturing in favor of foreign manufacturing in the least bit responsible for the unemployment problem?
Bill Parcells: "You are what your record says you are."
Member of the Owlluminati!
i support the idea of offering tax incentives for companies that bring jobs back to America. i also support the idea of raising the minimum wage. strong middle class = strong America.
Regulation is a nice "boogeyman" but youd have to be specific ,which people generally never are when discussing that topic.most regulation is born of bad behaviour,no one is sitting around thinking up new ways to screw buisnesses,that is a ridiculous assertion from many in certain media sources.
Also ,someone mentioned earlier about wages being lowered and thus attracting a different cpool of applicants and this dynamic is very important to acknowledge,where once we were producing Civil engineers to build better roads and Bridges, or Mechanical engineers to staff skunk works and douglas, or chemical engineers to work in oil, now ALL the money has been subverted into speculation,derivative markets and enourmously complicated financial instruments ,which in the final analysis is an attempt to contrive a series of equations so complex no one has a chance in the world of untangling ,and thus allows for people to practice dishonest transactions withhout reprissal, thats where all the greatest minds are now spending their time(lol).Thats some f ed up sh..