"Permanent job loss" fallacy. There is no permanent job loss!

Discussion in 'Economics' started by trade4succes, May 24, 2009.

  1. This is a fantastic post.

    From a content family in the post WWII era where just dad needed to work to have a stable, financial situation, and a safe, clean home, college is desired, etc., and real savings, to the two-family income beginning in the 80s, when Americans became voracious consumers and started running up huge debts on their credit cards and with HELOCs (especially in the 90s and 2000s), and now the government outspending even its debt-laden citizens.

     
    #61     May 27, 2009
  2. Where's that union chick holding the 'stop'/'slow' sign, flipping it over every 5 minutes, making $22.17 per hour?
     
    #62     May 27, 2009
  3. jprad

    jprad

    Precisely...
     
    #63     May 27, 2009
  4. Thanks pal, I hope you are not one of those persons who believe that closing up the economy from import and giving people 4 day workweeks will solve unemployment and/or low wages.
     
    #64     May 27, 2009
  5. I guess you and me are the difference between factual and literal thinking, in contrast to logical, conceptual thought. There is more beyond those figures you copy pasted above. Like higher healthcare spending is a good thing ??? Yes, very productive all these doctors patching up burnt out bodies. If you are talking long term/permanent of course, not short term.
     
    #65     May 27, 2009
  6. And since many of you guys love to make arguments based on empirical evidence (edit, before my words get used against me, i meant statistics/figures, not "empirical evidence"): Make a correlation chart of the economies that are more open to imports, and those that are against it. Remember North Korea, hermit state?
     
    #66     May 27, 2009
  7. In a strict factual literal sense, yes, the doctors are productive, they produce healing services. what i want to say is that, wouldn´t it be nicer if those doctors would be able to do something else? if the people who are now paying for the healing services, would be healthier to begin with, and would be paying for other services to these doctors? maybe different kinds, more pleasant kinds of healing (to stay in the industry)?

    This is what I mean by the difference between literal thinking, not making any connections, and thinking and making some steps ahead in your thoughts. But well, according to you the people won´t have money to pay for more pleasant kind of services from those people who are now diabetics/cancer doctors. I rest my case.
     
    #67     May 27, 2009
  8. jprad

    jprad

    It took you a day and this is the best you can come back with; a non-sequitur?

    Conceptualize this -- you're a moronic twit...
     
    #68     May 27, 2009
  9. Only thing I can say is: You are not being very nice here. Get out of my way.
     
    #69     May 27, 2009
  10. The simple fact is, that imports and exports are entirely unrelated in an open society.

    People and places like Wal-Mart are going to import from the places with the best price-supplier combination. No amount of legislation can do much in an open society.

    About the only thing the govt can do, is tariffs and similar legislation.

    Practical exporting depends on being seen as a quality, low-cost, reliable source.
     
    #70     May 28, 2009