Slows down? How do "economies" slow down? Why are more jobs good? Why are less jobs bad? Isn't just living a job? And aren't most jobs related to polluting the environment, anyway? Who are we working for in America? Where are we trying to get the economy to race to. Is there a finish line?
Honest to goodness, I don't know what this all means.
at least your honest. sorry but I still like wiki...
In the absence of a job when a person needs one, can make it difficult to meet financial obligations such as purchasing food to feed oneself and one's family, and paying one's bills; failure to make mortgage payments or to pay rent may lead to homelessness through foreclosure or eviction. Being unemployed, and the financial difficulties and loss of health insurance benefits that come with it, may cause malnutrition and illness, and are major sources of mental stress and loss of self-esteem which may lead to depression, which may have a further negative impact on health.
Lacking a job often means lacking social contact with fellow employees, a purpose for many hours of the day, lack of self-esteem, mental stress and illness, and of course, the inability to pay bills and to purchase both necessities and luxuries. The latter is especially serious for those with family obligations, debts, and/or medical costs, where the availability of health insurance is often linked to holding a job. Dr. M. Harvey Brenner and others have shown that rising unemployment increases the crime rate, the suicide rate, and causes a decline in healthiness.[1] However, during the Great Depression, when unemployment rates exceeded 20% in many countries, the crime rate did not increase.[citation needed] Because unemployment insurance in the U.S. typically does not even replace 50% of the income one received on the job (and one cannot receive it forever), the unemployed often end up tapping welfare programs such as Food Stamps — or accumulating debt, both formal debt to banks and informal debt to friends and relatives. Higher government transfer payments in the form of welfare and food stamps decrease spending on productive economic goods, decreasing GDP.
Some hold that many of the low-income jobs aren't really a better option than unemployment with a welfare state (with its unemployment insurance benefits). But since it is difficult or impossible to get unemployment insurance benefits without having worked in the past, these jobs and unemployment are more complementary than they are substitutes. (These jobs are often held short-term, either by students or by those trying to gain experience; turnover in most low-paying jobs is high, in excess of 30%/year.[citation needed]) Unemployment insurance keeps an available supply of workers for the low-paying jobs, while the employers' choice of management techniques (low wages and benefits, few chances for advancement) is made with the existence of unemployment insurance in mind. This combination promotes the existence of one kind of unemployment, frictional unemployment.
Another cost for the unemployed is that the combination of unemployment, lack of financial resources, and social responsibilities may push unemployed workers to take jobs that do not fit their skills or allow them to use their talents. That is, unemployment can cause underemployment (definition 1). This is one of the economic arguments in favor of having unemployment insurance.
This feared cost of job loss can spur psychological anxiety, weaken labor unions and their members' sense of solidarity, encourage greater work-effort and lower wage demands, and/or abet protectionism. This last means efforts to preserve existing jobs (of the "insiders") via barriers to entry against "outsiders" who want jobs, legal obstacles to immigration, and/or tariffs and similar trade barriers against foreign competitors. The impact of unemployment on the employed is related to the idea of Marxian unemployment. Finally, the existence of significant unemployment raises the oligopsony power of one's employer: that raises the cost of quitting one's job and lowers the probability of finding a new source of livelihood.
Economic benefits of unemployment
Unemployment may have advantages as well as disadvantages for the overall economy. Notably, it may help avert runaway inflation, which negatively affects almost everyone in the affected economy and has serious long-term economic costs. However the historic assumption that full local employment must lead directly to local inflation has been attenuated, as recently expanded international trade has shown itself able to continue to supply low-priced goods even as local employment rates rise closer to full employment.
The inflation-fighting benefits to the entire economy arising from a presumed optimum level of unemployment has been studied extensively. Before current levels of world trade were developed, unemployment was demonstrated to reduce inflation, following the Phillips curve, or to decelerate inflation, following the NAIRU/natural rate of unemployment theory.
Beyond the benefits of controlled inflation, frictional unemployment provides employers a larger applicant pool from which to select employees better suited to the available jobs. The unemployment needed for this purpose may be very small, however, since it is relatively easy to seek a new job without losing one's current one. And when more jobs are available for fewer workers (lower unemployment), it may allow workers to find the jobs that better fit their tastes, talents, and needs.
As in the Marxian theory of unemployment, special interests may also benefit: some employers may expect that employees with no fear of losing their jobs will not work as hard, or will demand increased wages and benefit. According to this theory, unemployment may promote general labor productivity and profitability by increasing employers' monopsony-like power (and profits).
Optimal unemployment has also been defended as an environmental tool to brake the constantly accelerated growth of the GDP to maintain levels sustainable in the context of resource constraints and environmental impacts. However the tool of denying jobs to willing workers seems a blunt instrument for conserving resources and the environment -- it reduces the consumption of the unemployed across the board, and only in the short-term. Full employment of the unemployed workforce, all focused toward the goal of developing more environmentally efficient methods for production and consumption might provide a more significant and lasting cumulative environmental benefit and reduced resource consumption. If so, the future economy and workforce would benefit from the resultant structural increases in the sustainable level of GDP growth.
Slows down? How do "economies" slow down? Why are more jobs good? Why are less jobs bad? Isn't just living a job? And aren't most jobs related to polluting the environment, anyway? Who are we working for in America? Where are we trying to get the economy to race to. Is there a finish line?
Honest to goodness, I don't know what this all means.
You need a job to put food on the table.. Less jobs = bad for many.
That could be changed as well. By eliminating our current tax system and installing something along the line of the Fair Tax we could create and environment in this country suitable for manufactoring jobs to return.
I've read up some on the fair tax, and I don't see how that would make it any better for manufacturing jobs here. Labor here would still be much more expensive for a company, and especially with the companies who are based offshore and pay next to nothing in taxes, would the money they'd save on payroll tax alone be enough to justify paying the higher wages?
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Slows down? How do "economies" slow down? Why are more jobs good? Why are less jobs bad? Isn't just living a job? And aren't most jobs related to polluting the environment, anyway? Who are we working for in America? Where are we trying to get the economy to race to. Is there a finish line?
Honest to goodness, I don't know what this all means.
Economics is very complex and there are a ton of contributing factors that can slow down an economy, a recession. You want to have more jobs which equals to less unemployment. Also not all jobs are related to polluting the environment and to even think that is just fucking horse shit. As much as you may hate the idea we need money to survive. To put a roof over our head, heat our homes, buy clothing, medicine, food. Without jobs we loose the ability to purchase these necessities.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
A result of the bio-fuel revolution in agriculture is that world carryover or reserve stocks of grains have been plunging for six of the past seven years. Carryover reserve stocks of all grains fell at the end of 2006 to 57 days of consumption, the lowest level since 1972. Little wonder that world grain prices rose 100 per cent over the past 12 months. This is just the start.
That decline in grain reserves, the measure of food security in event of drought or harvest failure -- an increasingly common event in recent years -- is pre-programmed to continue going as far ahead as the eye can see. Assuming modest world population increase annually of some 70 million people over the coming decade, especially in the Indian subcontinent and Africa, the stagnation or even decline in the tonnages of feed corn or other feed grains including rice that is harvested annually as growing amounts of bio-ethanol and other bio-fuels displaces food grain, in fact means we are just getting started on the greatest transformation of global agriculture since the introduction of the agribusiness revolution with fertilizers and mechanized farming after World War II. The difference is that this revolution is at the expense of food production. That preprograms exploding global grain prices, increased poverty and malnutrition. And the effect on gasoline import demand will be minimal.
Prof. M.A. Altieri of Berkeley University estimates that dedicating all USA corn and soybean production acreage to bio-fuels would only meet 12 per cent of gasoline and 6 per cent of diesel needs. He notes that though one-fifth of last year's corn harvest went to bio-ethanol, it met a mere 3 per cent of energy needs. But the farmland is converting at a record pace. In 2006 more than 50 per cent of Iowa and South Dakota corn went to ethanol refineries. Farmers across the Midwest, desperate for more income after years of depressed corn prices, are abandoning traditional crop rotation to grow exclusively soybeans or corn with dramatic added impact on soil erosion and needs for added chemical pesticides. In the US some 41 per cent of all herbicides used are already applied to corn. Monsanto and other makers of glyphosate herbicides like Roundup are smiling on the way to the bank.
"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday."
-The Duke
Economics is very complex and there are a ton of contributing factors that can slow down an economy, a recession. You want to have more jobs which equals to less unemployment. Also not all jobs are related to polluting the environment and to even think that is just fucking horse shit. As much as you may hate the idea we need money to survive. To put a roof over our head, heat our homes, buy clothing, medicine, food. Without jobs we loose the ability to purchase these necessities.
No need to get angry. I'm not doubting the reality of money for you, but I'm one of those that can take it or leave it...for the most part, not completely.
I've read up some on the fair tax, and I don't see how that would make it any better for manufacturing jobs here. Labor here would still be much more expensive for a company, and especially with the companies who are based offshore and pay next to nothing in taxes, would the money they'd save on payroll tax alone be enough to justify paying the higher wages?
Yes coupled with any import tarrifs that they pay to ship there goods here. It wouldn't be the case for everyone but for some companies it would definitely be cheaper to keep/move manufactoring to the US. It's not only the payroll tax that they would be saving on but the embedded taxes on materials that they purchase to run their business.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I don't really consider fishing a job, but I guess it is to some. Fishing puts food on the table.
Do you also raise your own livestock for your milk and butter, grow your own vegetables, spin your wool into yarn, weave your yarns into fabrics, create clothes from your fabrics, fell your trees to provide shelter and heat, generate your own electricity to power the computer that you build out of semiconductors of your own design and manufacture so you can post here?
Somewhere along the line, even if you don't have a job, your'e probably relying on someone who is for some good or service.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I ignore it for a while and when I get back to it he is stuck somewhere, but I just fling him in another direction... If there was only one of these for Cheney
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
No need to get angry. I'm not doubting the reality of money for you, but I'm one of those that can take it or leave it...for the most part, not completely.
Money is real for everyone unless you live off the grid and off the land. Money is not the most important thing in the world to me but providing for my children is; food, clothing, healthcare, shelter. In order for me to provide any of that to my children, and for myself, I need money. In order to obtain money, legally, I need a job. When the economy slows down people tend to spend less on luxury good. this causes companies to cut operations cost in order to meet profit projections. The quickest way to cut overhead is by unloading some jobs. I work in an industry that lives and dies by the market. When our economy is strong and the consumer is spending money my clients have money to afford my services on the other hand when the economy is down and consumers no longer have that disposable income my clients no longer have the money to employ me. So the strength and weakness of our economy should be important to everyone because it affects us all, unless you are a hermit or live in some nature commune.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Do you also raise your own livestock for your milk and butter, grow your own vegetables, spin your wool into yarn, weave your yarns into fabrics, create clothes from your fabrics, fell your trees to provide shelter and heat, generate your own electricity to power the computer that you build out of semiconductors of your own design and manufacture so you can post here?
Somewhere along the line, even if you don't have a job, your'e probably relying on someone who is for some good or service.
I don't really consider fishing a job, but I guess it is to some. Fishing puts food on the table.
There are waaay too many people in the world to to be able to do everything yourself. Unless you have the convenience and skills to live out in the wilderness, billions would starve if we all had to fend for ourselves at this point. Only the fortunate would survive before things balanced out.
Seriously, there are only so many squirrels in my neighborhood to eat before I would starve.. and If I moved to places I could hunt, so would billions. Good luck with that... At this point, you have to pay for food. Thats why we have specialized farms for crops and live stock. Special technology requires little work to produce lots of food.
Money is real for everyone unless you live off the grid and off the land. Money is not the most important thing in the world to me but providing for my children is; food, clothing, healthcare, shelter. In order for me to provide any of that to my children, and for myself, I need money. In order to obtain money, legally, I need a job. When the economy slows down people tend to spend less on luxury good. this causes companies to cut operations cost in order to meet profit projections. The quickest way to cut overhead is by unloading some jobs. I work in an industry that lives and dies by the market. When our economy is strong and the consumer is spending money my clients have money to afford my services on the other hand when the economy is down and consumers no longer have that disposable income my clients no longer have the money to employ me. So the strength and weakness of our economy should be important to everyone because it affects us all, unless you are a hermit or live in some nature commune.
Sorry, you must have had one of those internal resets. Just to catch you up, you were wondering why it is bad if the market tanks, the economy craters and people don't have jobs.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Sorry, you must have had one of those internal resets. Just to catch you up, you were wondering why it is bad if the market tanks, the economy craters and people don't have jobs.
Well, if this is the best that you can come with I'll have to hope somebody with a little more education on the matter makes a post.
There are waaay too many people in the world to to be able to do everything yourself. Unless you have the convenience and skills to live out in the wilderness, billions would starve if we all had to fend for ourselves at this point. Only the fortunate would survive before things balanced out.
Seriously, there are only so many squirrels in my neighborhood to eat before I would starve.. and If I moved to places I could hunt, so would billions. Good luck with that... At this point, you have to pay for food. Thats why we have specialized farms for crops and live stock. Special technology requires little work to produce lots of food.
Alright. So I guess the market is part of civilized society.
I need more, though. I think I already knew this part.
Alright. So I guess the market is part of civilized society.
I need more, though. I think I already knew this part.
Go to barnes and Nobles and pick up any book that describes the principles of economics. We could sit here all day for the next year discussing economics and still not cover it all.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Well, if this is the best that you can come with I'll have to hope somebody with a little more education on the matter makes a post.
Do you work?
If you answered "yes", do you spend that money on food, shelter and luxury things like internet access?
If you answered "no", then who pays for your food, shelter and luxury things like internet access?
While the economy is incredibly complicated, at it's most basic level, if the economy goes in the tank, people loose jobs... when people loose jobs, they can't get shelter or food for themselves and their families...
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
If you answered "yes", do you spend that money on food, shelter and luxury things like internet access?
If you answered "no", then who pays for your food, shelter and luxury things like internet access?
While the economy is incredibly complicated, at it's most basic level, if the economy goes in the tank, people loose jobs... when people loose jobs, they can't get shelter or food for themselves and their families...
I would think that's a reason not to believe in it, but that's just me.
Like jeff said it's not something you believe in like Santa Claus or the Yeti. It is reality. You need money to obtain the necessities, food, shelter, clothing. To legally obtain money you need to have a job. When the economy is good there are more jobs which equals less unemployed people. When the economy is bad you have less jobs which equals more unemployed people. The more unemployed people you have the more people there are who are struggling to provide the basic necessities for themselves and/or their families. Prolonged high levels of unemployment puts a huge strain on the government and may lead to an increase in taxes in order to provide for these people. That in turn puts more of a strain on the rest of society who is now forced to burden the bill. Just look at what happened during the Great Depression when the market completely bottomed out and our economy came to a skreeching halt. How many people went hungry and died? That is why the economy is important.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Comments
at least your honest. sorry but I still like wiki...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment
Impact of unemployment on society
Individual costs
In the absence of a job when a person needs one, can make it difficult to meet financial obligations such as purchasing food to feed oneself and one's family, and paying one's bills; failure to make mortgage payments or to pay rent may lead to homelessness through foreclosure or eviction. Being unemployed, and the financial difficulties and loss of health insurance benefits that come with it, may cause malnutrition and illness, and are major sources of mental stress and loss of self-esteem which may lead to depression, which may have a further negative impact on health.
Lacking a job often means lacking social contact with fellow employees, a purpose for many hours of the day, lack of self-esteem, mental stress and illness, and of course, the inability to pay bills and to purchase both necessities and luxuries. The latter is especially serious for those with family obligations, debts, and/or medical costs, where the availability of health insurance is often linked to holding a job. Dr. M. Harvey Brenner and others have shown that rising unemployment increases the crime rate, the suicide rate, and causes a decline in healthiness.[1] However, during the Great Depression, when unemployment rates exceeded 20% in many countries, the crime rate did not increase.[citation needed] Because unemployment insurance in the U.S. typically does not even replace 50% of the income one received on the job (and one cannot receive it forever), the unemployed often end up tapping welfare programs such as Food Stamps — or accumulating debt, both formal debt to banks and informal debt to friends and relatives. Higher government transfer payments in the form of welfare and food stamps decrease spending on productive economic goods, decreasing GDP.
Some hold that many of the low-income jobs aren't really a better option than unemployment with a welfare state (with its unemployment insurance benefits). But since it is difficult or impossible to get unemployment insurance benefits without having worked in the past, these jobs and unemployment are more complementary than they are substitutes. (These jobs are often held short-term, either by students or by those trying to gain experience; turnover in most low-paying jobs is high, in excess of 30%/year.[citation needed]) Unemployment insurance keeps an available supply of workers for the low-paying jobs, while the employers' choice of management techniques (low wages and benefits, few chances for advancement) is made with the existence of unemployment insurance in mind. This combination promotes the existence of one kind of unemployment, frictional unemployment.
Another cost for the unemployed is that the combination of unemployment, lack of financial resources, and social responsibilities may push unemployed workers to take jobs that do not fit their skills or allow them to use their talents. That is, unemployment can cause underemployment (definition 1). This is one of the economic arguments in favor of having unemployment insurance.
This feared cost of job loss can spur psychological anxiety, weaken labor unions and their members' sense of solidarity, encourage greater work-effort and lower wage demands, and/or abet protectionism. This last means efforts to preserve existing jobs (of the "insiders") via barriers to entry against "outsiders" who want jobs, legal obstacles to immigration, and/or tariffs and similar trade barriers against foreign competitors. The impact of unemployment on the employed is related to the idea of Marxian unemployment. Finally, the existence of significant unemployment raises the oligopsony power of one's employer: that raises the cost of quitting one's job and lowers the probability of finding a new source of livelihood.
Economic benefits of unemployment
Unemployment may have advantages as well as disadvantages for the overall economy. Notably, it may help avert runaway inflation, which negatively affects almost everyone in the affected economy and has serious long-term economic costs. However the historic assumption that full local employment must lead directly to local inflation has been attenuated, as recently expanded international trade has shown itself able to continue to supply low-priced goods even as local employment rates rise closer to full employment.
The inflation-fighting benefits to the entire economy arising from a presumed optimum level of unemployment has been studied extensively. Before current levels of world trade were developed, unemployment was demonstrated to reduce inflation, following the Phillips curve, or to decelerate inflation, following the NAIRU/natural rate of unemployment theory.
Beyond the benefits of controlled inflation, frictional unemployment provides employers a larger applicant pool from which to select employees better suited to the available jobs. The unemployment needed for this purpose may be very small, however, since it is relatively easy to seek a new job without losing one's current one. And when more jobs are available for fewer workers (lower unemployment), it may allow workers to find the jobs that better fit their tastes, talents, and needs.
As in the Marxian theory of unemployment, special interests may also benefit: some employers may expect that employees with no fear of losing their jobs will not work as hard, or will demand increased wages and benefit. According to this theory, unemployment may promote general labor productivity and profitability by increasing employers' monopsony-like power (and profits).
Optimal unemployment has also been defended as an environmental tool to brake the constantly accelerated growth of the GDP to maintain levels sustainable in the context of resource constraints and environmental impacts. However the tool of denying jobs to willing workers seems a blunt instrument for conserving resources and the environment -- it reduces the consumption of the unemployed across the board, and only in the short-term. Full employment of the unemployed workforce, all focused toward the goal of developing more environmentally efficient methods for production and consumption might provide a more significant and lasting cumulative environmental benefit and reduced resource consumption. If so, the future economy and workforce would benefit from the resultant structural increases in the sustainable level of GDP growth.
I've read up some on the fair tax, and I don't see how that would make it any better for manufacturing jobs here. Labor here would still be much more expensive for a company, and especially with the companies who are based offshore and pay next to nothing in taxes, would the money they'd save on payroll tax alone be enough to justify paying the higher wages?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Economics is very complex and there are a ton of contributing factors that can slow down an economy, a recession. You want to have more jobs which equals to less unemployment. Also not all jobs are related to polluting the environment and to even think that is just fucking horse shit. As much as you may hate the idea we need money to survive. To put a roof over our head, heat our homes, buy clothing, medicine, food. Without jobs we loose the ability to purchase these necessities.
I don't really consider fishing a job, but I guess it is to some. Fishing puts food on the table.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
not everyone can fish. some dont know how, or live near a source of fish. thats why we pay people to do it for us. otherwise know as jobs.
As a corollary to what you said, Ocean:
http://www.counterpunch.org/engdahl08132007.html
A result of the bio-fuel revolution in agriculture is that world carryover or reserve stocks of grains have been plunging for six of the past seven years. Carryover reserve stocks of all grains fell at the end of 2006 to 57 days of consumption, the lowest level since 1972. Little wonder that world grain prices rose 100 per cent over the past 12 months. This is just the start.
That decline in grain reserves, the measure of food security in event of drought or harvest failure -- an increasingly common event in recent years -- is pre-programmed to continue going as far ahead as the eye can see. Assuming modest world population increase annually of some 70 million people over the coming decade, especially in the Indian subcontinent and Africa, the stagnation or even decline in the tonnages of feed corn or other feed grains including rice that is harvested annually as growing amounts of bio-ethanol and other bio-fuels displaces food grain, in fact means we are just getting started on the greatest transformation of global agriculture since the introduction of the agribusiness revolution with fertilizers and mechanized farming after World War II. The difference is that this revolution is at the expense of food production. That preprograms exploding global grain prices, increased poverty and malnutrition. And the effect on gasoline import demand will be minimal.
Prof. M.A. Altieri of Berkeley University estimates that dedicating all USA corn and soybean production acreage to bio-fuels would only meet 12 per cent of gasoline and 6 per cent of diesel needs. He notes that though one-fifth of last year's corn harvest went to bio-ethanol, it met a mere 3 per cent of energy needs. But the farmland is converting at a record pace. In 2006 more than 50 per cent of Iowa and South Dakota corn went to ethanol refineries. Farmers across the Midwest, desperate for more income after years of depressed corn prices, are abandoning traditional crop rotation to grow exclusively soybeans or corn with dramatic added impact on soil erosion and needs for added chemical pesticides. In the US some 41 per cent of all herbicides used are already applied to corn. Monsanto and other makers of glyphosate herbicides like Roundup are smiling on the way to the bank.
-The Duke
No need to get angry. I'm not doubting the reality of money for you, but I'm one of those that can take it or leave it...for the most part, not completely.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Yes coupled with any import tarrifs that they pay to ship there goods here. It wouldn't be the case for everyone but for some companies it would definitely be cheaper to keep/move manufactoring to the US. It's not only the payroll tax that they would be saving on but the embedded taxes on materials that they purchase to run their business.
Do you also raise your own livestock for your milk and butter, grow your own vegetables, spin your wool into yarn, weave your yarns into fabrics, create clothes from your fabrics, fell your trees to provide shelter and heat, generate your own electricity to power the computer that you build out of semiconductors of your own design and manufacture so you can post here?
Somewhere along the line, even if you don't have a job, your'e probably relying on someone who is for some good or service.
I'm still having fun with this
I ignore it for a while and when I get back to it he is stuck somewhere, but I just fling him in another direction... If there was only one of these for Cheney
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Money is real for everyone unless you live off the grid and off the land. Money is not the most important thing in the world to me but providing for my children is; food, clothing, healthcare, shelter. In order for me to provide any of that to my children, and for myself, I need money. In order to obtain money, legally, I need a job. When the economy slows down people tend to spend less on luxury good. this causes companies to cut operations cost in order to meet profit projections. The quickest way to cut overhead is by unloading some jobs. I work in an industry that lives and dies by the market. When our economy is strong and the consumer is spending money my clients have money to afford my services on the other hand when the economy is down and consumers no longer have that disposable income my clients no longer have the money to employ me. So the strength and weakness of our economy should be important to everyone because it affects us all, unless you are a hermit or live in some nature commune.
What's that got to do with anything?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Seriously, there are only so many squirrels in my neighborhood to eat before I would starve.. and If I moved to places I could hunt, so would billions. Good luck with that... At this point, you have to pay for food. Thats why we have specialized farms for crops and live stock. Special technology requires little work to produce lots of food.
Sounds dramatic.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Sorry, you must have had one of those internal resets. Just to catch you up, you were wondering why it is bad if the market tanks, the economy craters and people don't have jobs.
Well, if this is the best that you can come with I'll have to hope somebody with a little more education on the matter makes a post.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
It's reality. You may not like it but that is the world we live in.
You still wouldn't understand it if they did.
Alright. So I guess the market is part of civilized society.
I need more, though. I think I already knew this part.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
You people really believe in this market, don't you?
Wow.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Go to barnes and Nobles and pick up any book that describes the principles of economics. We could sit here all day for the next year discussing economics and still not cover it all.
Do you work?
If you answered "yes", do you spend that money on food, shelter and luxury things like internet access?
If you answered "no", then who pays for your food, shelter and luxury things like internet access?
While the economy is incredibly complicated, at it's most basic level, if the economy goes in the tank, people loose jobs... when people loose jobs, they can't get shelter or food for themselves and their families...
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Why wouldn't we?
So you could careless if you lost your job tomorrow or if thousands of people started loosing their jobs because we are in a recession.
So, by your definition, the market is money.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
This may be where the disconnect is occuring. You're looking for something to believe in. We're talking about reality.
I would think that's a reason not to believe in it, but that's just me.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
No, I believe in myself. Always have, always will. That's not the issue.
I'm talking about reality, too.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Isn't it the big ones that should go under?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Like jeff said it's not something you believe in like Santa Claus or the Yeti. It is reality. You need money to obtain the necessities, food, shelter, clothing. To legally obtain money you need to have a job. When the economy is good there are more jobs which equals less unemployed people. When the economy is bad you have less jobs which equals more unemployed people. The more unemployed people you have the more people there are who are struggling to provide the basic necessities for themselves and/or their families. Prolonged high levels of unemployment puts a huge strain on the government and may lead to an increase in taxes in order to provide for these people. That in turn puts more of a strain on the rest of society who is now forced to burden the bill. Just look at what happened during the Great Depression when the market completely bottomed out and our economy came to a skreeching halt. How many people went hungry and died? That is why the economy is important.