Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-13-2016, 10:06 PM
 
Location: North of Canada, but not the Arctic
21,097 posts, read 19,692,053 times
Reputation: 25612

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
The only economic policy that has been thoroughly debunked is supply-side economics. It has been a complete and utter failure.
A healthy economy takes into consideration both supply-side and demand-side economics. If you tax the suppliers (corporations and investors) too much, supply decreases and costs go up. Vice-versa if you lower their taxes. If you tax demanders (consumers) too much, they can't afford to buy as many goods. Vice-versa if you lower their taxes. It's not an either/or question; it is a matter of balance and optimization.

Quote:
Laissez faire economics (what you're obviously peddling here) are another massive failure. How many economic meltdowns do we need before Americans realize that conservative/libertarian economic principles are a dud?
Economic meltdowns can also be precipitated by government control though. The housing crisis of 2008-9 was a perfect example. Government insurance of mortgage securities encourage over-speculation in them. Government stimulation of home ownership encouraged unscrupulous motrgage loans.

But most booms and busts are a natural part of the economic cycle. As new products come to market, cosumption increases at ever increasing rates until the market is saturated and the demand collapses. For the government to prevent that, they would have to reduce consumption of those products to a low level so that adoption by the consumers could be spread out over a long period of time. That would require telling people thay could not buy things that they want. This is how communism (tried to) work, and it is easy to see why it fails.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-13-2016, 10:07 PM
 
Location: Taos NM
5,349 posts, read 5,122,453 times
Reputation: 6766
Lol, as an econ graduate, all I can say is that learning economics demonstrates how the pros and cons of your listed items aren't nearly as clear cut as you make them out to be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:55 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top