Save the Economy

[msmith537]

*Originally posted by jshore *
Yeah…Who needs people to buy stuff! We just need people to make stuff! What, they can’t sell it? Oh well, certainly they’ll make it anyway just for the fun of it!

I’m all for paying lower taxes but how much stuff do you think poor people will buy? What products do you think they will buy? What industries will benefit? How does increasing consumer spending help the aircraft, steel, technology, or heavy manufacturing industries?

I am not talking about trickle down economics or giving tax breaks to the rich. I am talking about doing things to make American industries more competitive and getting people jobs.

[Azael]

**
(The beef industry, for example, is heavily subsidzed. Beef prices, for example, would skyrocket if water subsidies and the like were taken away.)

**

Cite?

**
When I spoke about the conditions that companies take advatage of in third-world nations, I merely noted that poor countries are grateful for any jobs which come their way, and corporations take advantage of this fact, as well as their lax environmental standards. In no way do I approve of these conditions, but I realize that I can’t change them.

**

Your concerns are noted and they are certainly not without merit. While you do not know how to change them, I would say that that investment, development and technology transfer are the tools those corporations use to raise the standard of living in a country. Using those concerns in order to erect barriers to trade only creates disincentives for investment and hurts people living on both sides of the border.

**
In a perfect world, yes, I’d like to see all working people have a wage which would allow them to support themselves and their families.

**

So would I, but do not be misled by figures which do not take Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) into consideration. Such analyses are often used to overstate the plight of workers in developing nations. Many times these corporations are offering a wage that might be out of reach otherwise.

**
My hope was that the tax money could be used for programs which would benefit the poor, such as job training programs, extended unemployment benefits, other educational programs for young adults, and perhaps even a public works program which would employ some of those who have lost their jobs. When people have money in their pockets, they can buy more “stuff” which, of course, benefits the economy.

**

Believe me, programs which provide job training and other education to the poor will always get my vote (provided they have some hope of being effective). Unemployment benefits are a sticky area however, one must always be careful not to provide too many incentives not to work.

Decriminalization of Marijuana in and of itself would free up a great deal of resources which are currently a drain on our economy. And legalisation might prove to be a great source of government tax revenue. But do not get too carried away, the impact on the bigger picture is not clear. But that’s the subject of another thread.

[Azael]

Originally posted by Libertarian
**So, you and I agree if we may define a corrupt government as one that usurps rights and claims property.

**

We are in agreement, but I would extend that definition to include abuses of power that distort the functioning of the markets. Bribes and political cronyism that prevent market entry and encourage rent-seeking behavior for instance.

Originally posted by Apos
**I don’t think they are exactly different sides of the same coin.

**

Perhaps I was playing a little too fast and loose with my metaphors but I meant to say that the problems of corruption effect all types of government. That said, I agree with what you are saying about governments needing incentives to protect their people. And yes, democracy isn’t something that can just be expected to work wherever it is instituted. It is vitally important that ways be found to adapt the democratic process to the cultural enivirons in which we want it to grow.

[Lissa]

[quote]
The beef industry, for example, is heavily subsidzed. Beef prices, for example, would skyrocket if water subsidies and the like were taken away.)

---

** Azael: **

Cite?

[quote]

I read about beef subsidies in a book, an unfortunately there aren’t many “unbiased” sources on this on the 'Net.

I did find this (not about beef) on subsidies:

From this site on Iran’s elimination of subsidies

“The Iranian parliament has already passed legislation on elimination of such subsidies. The move is aimed at paying the subsidies directly to low-income families and making payment of subsidies more organized. Estimates show prices will shoot up when subsidies become a thing of the past. Prices of medications will register a 400% rise, bread prices will go by 700%, and fuel and energy prices will go up almost 500%.”

The only information on the price of beef sans subsidies that I found after (an admittedly quick) search was from vegetarian sites, not necessarily the most unbiased sources, I’m sure. The Beef industry’s web site debunked a lot of the “facts” that were cited from the book referenced in the first site, but did not debunk the subsidy statistics. Again, I can not vouch for the veracity of the figures, but I have seen similar estimates in books, and from other sources.

This site claims beef would cost $35 a pound, if not for subsidies.

This site says much the same thing, but with a few supporting figures.