Author Topic: Real World Economics  (Read 8473 times)

Vellos

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 3736
  • Stodgy Old Man in Training
    • View Profile
Real World Economics
« Topic Start: September 13, 2011, 09:32:25 PM »
Don't feel bad, it's the same mistake economic theorists make all the time, which is one of the reasons most 1st world economic politics are !@#$ed up, but that's a different topic.

Watch yourself; one of them might be listening.
"A neutral humanism is either a pedantic artifice or a prologue to the inhuman." - George Steiner

egamma

  • Guest
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #1: September 13, 2011, 11:02:04 PM »
Watch yourself; one of them might be listening.

My college ECON professor was very fond of the Monty Python quote, "It's only a model". The problem is thinking that the model reflects reality.

Nosferatus

  • Testers
  • Mighty Duke
  • *
  • Posts: 1093
  • Too weird to live, too rare to die
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #2: September 14, 2011, 09:35:50 AM »
My college ECON professor was very fond of the Monty Python quote, "It's only a model". The problem is thinking that the model reflects reality.

if you ask me, modern day economists are all a bunch of shizofrenic, psychotic delusional narcissists who live in there little computer model bubble of the economic world and forget that indeed, it's only a model and not reality.
It's nice to have some model to predict things, but it gets !@#$ed up when you perceive it more as reality then... reality, just because it is more understandable and logic than reality, which is rather chaotic and unpredictable.
Ow what do i hate those people...

But reality for us is that we depend on them right now, so we better play nice for now. :P
(please save my little euro's !  ::))
« Last Edit: September 14, 2011, 09:37:40 AM by Nosferatus »
Formerly playing the Nosferatus and Bhrantan Family.
Currently playing the Polytus Family in: Gotland, Madina, Astrum, Outer Tilog

egamma

  • Guest
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #3: September 14, 2011, 04:15:45 PM »
if you ask me, modern day economists are all a bunch of shizofrenic, psychotic delusional narcissists who live in there little computer model bubble of the economic world and forget that indeed, it's only a model and not reality.
It's nice to have some model to predict things, but it gets !@#$ed up when you perceive it more as reality then... reality, just because it is more understandable and logic than reality, which is rather chaotic and unpredictable.
Ow what do i hate those people...

But reality for us is that we depend on them right now, so we better play nice for now. :P
(please save my little euro's !  ::))

I think the main problem is the difference between MACRO economics and MICRO economics. For example, to help the macro economy, I should spend my money and rack up huge amounts of credit card debt. To help the micro economy of my family, I should instead pay off my debts.

Perth

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 2037
  • Current Character: Kemen
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #4: September 14, 2011, 04:46:05 PM »
if you ask me, modern day economists are all a bunch of shizofrenic, psychotic delusional narcissists who live in there little computer model bubble of the economic world and forget that indeed, it's only a model and not reality.
It's nice to have some model to predict things, but it gets !@#$ed up when you perceive it more as reality then... reality, just because it is more understandable and logic than reality, which is rather chaotic and unpredictable.
Ow what do i hate those people...

LOL.

Sound like Vellos...?  ;D
"A tale is but half told when only one person tells it." - The Saga of Grettir the Strong
- Current: Kemen (D'hara) - Past: Kerwin (Eston), Kale (Phantaria, Terran, Melodia)

Lefanis

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1114
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #5: September 14, 2011, 05:36:22 PM »
I think the main problem is the difference between MACRO economics and MICRO economics. For example, to help the macro economy, I should spend my money and rack up huge amounts of credit card debt. To help the micro economy of my family, I should instead pay off my debts.

Therein lies the paradox. Individual savings is a virtue, but if the everyone saves (instead of spending on goods), your economy will slow down, reducing wages and driving down the amount of money you can save.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2011, 06:20:30 PM by Lefanis »
What is Freedom? - ye can tell; That which slavery is, too well; For its very name has grown; To an echo of your own

T'is to work and have such pay; As just keeps life from day to day; In your limbs, as in a cell; For the tyrants' use to dwell

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #6: September 14, 2011, 06:20:35 PM »
Therein lies the paradox. Individual savings is a virtue, but if the everyone saves, your economy will slow down, reducing wages and driving down the amount of money you can save.

Yet savings are a requirement for investing, which is necessary to promote economical growth.

I don't buy that it's such a paradox. Saving will slow down the consumer's market, but the investments will profit other kinds of industries, especially exports, which will then rack in profits for their investors. In the end, if we save more, we'll just see a shift in our main economic industries. Since the global economy is more and more open, we will just end up compensating for our smaller internal demand by seeking foreign markets as outlets for our products and services.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Lefanis

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1114
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #7: September 14, 2011, 07:25:08 PM »
Yet savings are a requirement for investing, which is necessary to promote economical growth.
Whether or not a person has savings, he will always have to invest some part of the money he earns for his subsistence, so there can be this investment even without savings.

By investment, I refer to every transaction a person undertakes- By buying groceries, you are investing your money into the grocers, allowing him to continue his trade and make a profit on the side, in turn allowing the grocer to make further transaction, and so on.
If all of us decide that instead of buying that huge LCD display, to save our money, we would drive the LCD vendor out of business,  whos bankruptcy would create ripple effects that would affect the entire economy.
What is Freedom? - ye can tell; That which slavery is, too well; For its very name has grown; To an echo of your own

T'is to work and have such pay; As just keeps life from day to day; In your limbs, as in a cell; For the tyrants' use to dwell

Vellos

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 3736
  • Stodgy Old Man in Training
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #8: September 14, 2011, 07:36:56 PM »
Therein lies the paradox. Individual savings is a virtue, but if the everyone saves (instead of spending on goods), your economy will slow down, reducing wages and driving down the amount of money you can save.

Thats why high savings countries like China have such low growth rates, and high-consumption economies like the US have such high growth rates.... err... what?

The idea that either consumption or investment is a necessary or logical lever for growth is silly. Infinite investment in an idea that is basically worthless will not make it functional. Infinite consumption in an economy that is basically unproductive will not make it prosperous.

In a high-savings economy, declining wages could be compensated for in the medium term by rising return on investment in companies that enjoy lower wages. Long term returns on k and l operate differently, and short term lower wages will definitely be the predominant effect.
"A neutral humanism is either a pedantic artifice or a prologue to the inhuman." - George Steiner

Tom

  • BM Dev Team
  • Exalted Emperor
  • *
  • Posts: 8228
    • View Profile
    • BattleMaster
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #9: September 14, 2011, 08:49:36 PM »
can we split this off into a topic somewhere in general chat? it's left the actual topic, and I accept it as my fault. :-)


Lefanis

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1114
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #10: September 14, 2011, 09:15:46 PM »
Thats why high savings countries like China have such low growth rates, and high-consumption economies like the US have such high growth rates.... err... what?

The idea that either consumption or investment is a necessary or logical lever for growth is silly. Infinite investment in an idea that is basically worthless will not make it functional. Infinite consumption in an economy that is basically unproductive will not make it prosperous.

In a high-savings economy, declining wages could be compensated for in the medium term by rising return on investment in companies that enjoy lower wages. Long term returns on k and l operate differently, and short term lower wages will definitely be the predominant effect.

In a country like the U.S, consumption is debt driven- people don't have enough money and are spending over and beyond what they have. Of course, this is unsustainable.

China keeps it's inflation artificially low. So the GDP appears larger than it really is. China has recessions even when it's GDP is chugging along at around 5 or 6%, so that gives you an idea of what it's actual GDP should be. In India, inflation is in the double digits. The average person in the developing country thus spends a much larger portion of his income on food or fuel. The average person also has to worry about his future (no social security, pension or universal healthcare), and is obliged to maintain a level of savings.

When a company wants to make an investment, where does it get this money from? For a vast majority of companies, it is not from savings, but from the expenditures of consumers, the government and or other firms.

Only a fraction of savings goes to companies for their investment purposes. The rest ultimately ends up going to consumption, as banks are quite happy to lend money to people who will use the money to consume goods. Thus by consuming the good, you are providing the company with the funds they need to invest.
What is Freedom? - ye can tell; That which slavery is, too well; For its very name has grown; To an echo of your own

T'is to work and have such pay; As just keeps life from day to day; In your limbs, as in a cell; For the tyrants' use to dwell

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #11: September 15, 2011, 01:44:42 AM »
Whether or not a person has savings, he will always have to invest some part of the money he earns for his subsistence, so there can be this investment even without savings.

By investment, I refer to every transaction a person undertakes- By buying groceries, you are investing your money into the grocers, allowing him to continue his trade and make a profit on the side, in turn allowing the grocer to make further transaction, and so on.

I think you completely misunderstand what an investment is. Buying groceries can be considered an investment if you will, under certain conditions... but in yourself, not in the grocerer. For example, I could decide to buy more fruits in order to be more healthy. This is investing in one's health.

Consumption is *not* investment, they are opposites. Check wikipedia or your dictionary or any financial definition if you want. You can invest in the grocery, but buying food is not that, buying food is comsumption.

If all of us decide that instead of buying that huge LCD display, to save our money, we would drive the LCD vendor out of business,  whos bankruptcy would create ripple effects that would affect the entire economy.

Uh... Who the hell sells nothing but LCD displays? You speak as if the bank is a void... The more money you put in the bank, the more money the bank will be able to lend out, the lower their interest rates will be, which will help both businesses and consumers, and therefore consumption will be increased.

When a company wants to make an investment, where does it get this money from? For a vast majority of companies, it is not from savings, but from the expenditures of consumers, the government and or other firms.

How do companies invest? Typically, by credit (because if you were saving up yourself and your project is truly profitable, then surely you would have made more money by starting it earlier and paying the interest on the loan than by waiting out and sitting on your cash). Where do they get their credit? Directly or indirectly, from the banks (even with government aid, because the government doesn't do surpluses either because it follows the same logic, it runs on credit). What determines how much money and at which rate can the banks offer loans for said investments? Quite simply: savings.

Only a fraction of savings goes to companies for their investment purposes. The rest ultimately ends up going to consumption, as banks are quite happy to lend money to people who will use the money to consume goods. Thus by consuming the good, you are providing the company with the funds they need to invest.

That's some !@#$ed up logic. You are saying that consumers buy products with the objective in mind that this will allow companies to invest. What the hell kind of goal is investing for the sake of investing? And why would the consumers care if the companies invest or not?

Companies invest so that they may better sell their products to consumers. Companies invest with loaned money, because their profit rate will be higher than their interest rates (unless they fail at business). Banks will be happy to lend them the money because the interest rates will be higher than the inflation rates. Therefore, everyone is happy: banks get more money off of their money, company gets more sales and therefore profits, and consumer gets a greater product availability, and likely at a cheaper price too.

Therefore, by saving, we are helping the economy just the same as we are by consuming, as we help promote investment. The problem with saving is that governments only have issues with it when the economy slows down and consumption drops, as the consumption-based market fails. The problems that arise from this are not because consumption-based markets are better in every way, but rather because the transition between a consumption-based market and a savings-based market requires radical mutations, and a lot of people are going to hurt during the transition phase. It's the same with any major economical mutation, just think of how bad the ex-USSR had it when transitioning to a market-based economy. Some countries are still not over with the problems.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

egamma

  • Guest
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #12: September 15, 2011, 03:22:57 AM »
Therefore, by saving, we are helping the economy just the same as we are by consuming, as we help promote investment. The problem with saving is that governments only have issues with it when the economy slows down and consumption drops, as the consumption-based market fails. The problems that arise from this are not because consumption-based markets are better in every way, but rather because the transition between a consumption-based market and a savings-based market requires radical mutations, and a lot of people are going to hurt during the transition phase. It's the same with any major economical mutation, just think of how bad the ex-USSR had it when transitioning to a market-based economy. Some countries are still not over with the problems.

Saving does nothing to increase GDP. It decreases the cost of capital, nothing more.

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #13: September 15, 2011, 03:27:02 AM »
Saving does nothing to increase GDP. It decreases the cost of capital, nothing more.

Saves the cost of capital, which allows to improve means of production, allowing businesses to lower costs and therefore increase sales and profits!  ;D
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Real World Economics
« Reply #14: September 15, 2011, 03:30:27 AM »
Saves the cost of capital, which allows to improve means of production, allowing businesses to lower costs and therefore increase sales and profits!  ;D

Though really, what I meant was: "Who cares for the GDP"? Pay a thousand people to dig holes for 10 hours a day, and then to fill them back up on the next, and you'll see a good increase in GDP. Is society better off for it?

GDP's an indicator. No indicators are perfect.

If GDP remained the same for people and businesses (who are naturally adapted or have adapted to a higher savings market) being more financially secure, then that's a good thing.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron