RGacky3
16th September 2011, 09:30
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/15/chris-matthews-bernie-sanders-poverty-hardball_n_964237.html
(watch the bottom video)
The British lady from the Cato institute makes some very stupid points, unfortunately it was not a mono on mono debate so Bernie did'nt really get to respond.
A. There is demand for cheaper goods: Of coarse there is, but the cost of cheaper goods means less buying power, infact much less buying power because your not dropping American wages your actually getting rid of American jobs, and as individuals people will always buy the lowest prcie even though they all prefer to have them made in America (game theory), so for that you need democratic intervention, when you ship jobs to china you actually end up with less demand so the cost saved is less than the sales lost.
B. We can pass a bunch of laws saying you can't use certain things: Not at all the same thing, no one is restricting consumptoin, no one is banning individuals from doing certain things, what they are restricting is capital and production, because if the economy, the supply side of it, is for the public it should be in their interest, thats not restricting hte demand side at all.
C. People wil buy less: Bullshit they'll buy more beceause they have more money because they have jobs. Again the cost saved moving a job to china is less than the sales lost due to unemployment (overall), obviously companies will continue to move jobs overseas because loss of overall demand is an externality, so you need industrial policy to fix that.
D. American buisinesses make the best decisions and create new industries: Yeah, like the derivatives industry :rolleyes:, like the credit card industry, the outsourcing industry, American buisinesses are creating new industries .... in China, and most of the industries they create don't benefit society that much at all. A public works industry, affordable housing or healthcare industry would benefit people MUUUCHHH more than a new type of derivative or a new iphone.
E. We don't produce trinkets because we are producing airplanes and other great stuff: Manufacturing is down overall in America, all over the economy, and we have ove 9% unemployment and probably 18% real unemployment, so its not like the trinket manufacturing jobs just became airplane manufacturing jobs, both of them moved.
(watch the bottom video)
The British lady from the Cato institute makes some very stupid points, unfortunately it was not a mono on mono debate so Bernie did'nt really get to respond.
A. There is demand for cheaper goods: Of coarse there is, but the cost of cheaper goods means less buying power, infact much less buying power because your not dropping American wages your actually getting rid of American jobs, and as individuals people will always buy the lowest prcie even though they all prefer to have them made in America (game theory), so for that you need democratic intervention, when you ship jobs to china you actually end up with less demand so the cost saved is less than the sales lost.
B. We can pass a bunch of laws saying you can't use certain things: Not at all the same thing, no one is restricting consumptoin, no one is banning individuals from doing certain things, what they are restricting is capital and production, because if the economy, the supply side of it, is for the public it should be in their interest, thats not restricting hte demand side at all.
C. People wil buy less: Bullshit they'll buy more beceause they have more money because they have jobs. Again the cost saved moving a job to china is less than the sales lost due to unemployment (overall), obviously companies will continue to move jobs overseas because loss of overall demand is an externality, so you need industrial policy to fix that.
D. American buisinesses make the best decisions and create new industries: Yeah, like the derivatives industry :rolleyes:, like the credit card industry, the outsourcing industry, American buisinesses are creating new industries .... in China, and most of the industries they create don't benefit society that much at all. A public works industry, affordable housing or healthcare industry would benefit people MUUUCHHH more than a new type of derivative or a new iphone.
E. We don't produce trinkets because we are producing airplanes and other great stuff: Manufacturing is down overall in America, all over the economy, and we have ove 9% unemployment and probably 18% real unemployment, so its not like the trinket manufacturing jobs just became airplane manufacturing jobs, both of them moved.