ImageImageImageImageImage

Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V

Moderators: nate33, montestewart, LyricalRico

User avatar
Induveca
Head Coach
Posts: 7,379
And1: 724
Joined: Dec 02, 2004
   

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1481 » by Induveca » Fri May 3, 2013 7:05 pm

By survival of the fittest, I was referring to societies weeding out the financial dregs...hence the mention of thinning the herd. The biggest predator humans have is in fact society, and we should indeed be prey in far more instances, unfortunately for overall finance many governments feel the need to "protect" us. So for every 1 going hungry for legitimate reasons, you have 10 well fed citizens claiming the same benefits due to lack of appropriate checks. Same with housing, welfare, unemployment etc etc....

These issues, and how to eliminate them, have become a driving force behind Chinese and Russian policies since the early 90s. May sound evil to Rocky IV 1985 sensibilities, as there is certainly a better middle ground between "kill them" and "support them completely on the backs of the wealthy".
Zonkerbl
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 8,177
And1: 4,149
Joined: Mar 24, 2010
       

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1482 » by Zonkerbl » Fri May 3, 2013 7:06 pm

So my third answer is, if the current government is doing a lousy job addressing market failures properly, is it better to just eliminate the government altogether, recognizing that they will never figure it out? Or should we take the current government and try to push them towards doing a better job addressing market failure?

As a practical matter, I don't think it's possible to just tear the government down and then rebuild it with a better mission. If you are going to try to address market failure at all, you're stuck with what we have now.

And finally, a lot of government activity is related to establishing and enforcing property rights. The system we have now is the best in the world, bar none. That part of the government does an excellent job incorporating economic analysis into decisions where relevant. It's just that court decisions are usually for extreme cases. It's the everyday, noncontroversial decisions that are actually about 90% of the effect of the government on our lives that has no economic rationale.
I've been taught all my life to value service to the weak and powerless.
User avatar
sfam
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,462
And1: 548
Joined: Aug 03, 2007
         

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1483 » by sfam » Fri May 3, 2013 7:11 pm

Induveca wrote:By survival of the fittest, I was referring to societies weeding out the financial dregs...hence the mention of thinning the herd. The biggest predator humans have is in fact society, and we should indeed be prey in far more instances, unfortunately for overall finance many governments feel the need to "protect" us. So for every 1 going hungry for legitimate reasons, you have 10 well fed citizens claiming the same benefits due to lack of appropriate checks. Same with housing, welfare, unemployment etc etc....

These issues, and how to eliminate them, have become a driving force behind Chinese and Russian policies since the early 90s. May sound evil to Rocky IV 1985 sensibilities, as there is certainly a better middle ground between "kill them" and "support them completely on the backs of the wealthy".

This is completely silly reasoning.

Just taking health care, the idea of withholding any care from those who can't afford it until they end up in the emergency room increases the costs ten-fold. Ayn Rand even sucked as a book we were all forced to read in college (most of us just went for the cliffnotes version as the prose sucked so bad), it certainly isn't a philosophy worthy of building a society on. The goal for sustaining a stable to society is to continually grow the middle class. It is not to make fabulously wealthy people and then to protect them from the unwashed masses of plebes. That approach leads to far less stable societies.
User avatar
sfam
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,462
And1: 548
Joined: Aug 03, 2007
         

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1484 » by sfam » Fri May 3, 2013 7:18 pm

Zonkerbl wrote:So my third answer is, if the current government is doing a lousy job addressing market failures properly, is it better to just eliminate the government altogether, recognizing that they will never figure it out? Or should we take the current government and try to push them towards doing a better job addressing market failure?

As a practical matter, I don't think it's possible to just tear the government down and then rebuild it with a better mission. If you are going to try to address market failure at all, you're stuck with what we have now.

And finally, a lot of government activity is related to establishing and enforcing property rights. The system we have now is the best in the world, bar none. That part of the government does an excellent job incorporating economic analysis into decisions where relevant. It's just that court decisions are usually for extreme cases. It's the everyday, noncontroversial decisions that are actually about 90% of the effect of the government on our lives that has no economic rationale.

Actually, the US Patent office is falling woefully behind, especially in the technology world. One needs only look at the fact that every main company is continually creating lawsuits against everyone else for almost every successful product. The fact that the Patent office approves Apple's patent application for natural finger gestures shows how screwed up the system is. Everyone in tech agrees this is costing us billions in cost, and significantly impacting innovation. Lots of small companies completely stay out of contested markets because they don't have the financial resources to respond to the lawsuits that will inevitably come.
dobrojim
RealGM
Posts: 15,557
And1: 3,290
Joined: Sep 16, 2004

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1485 » by dobrojim » Fri May 3, 2013 7:20 pm

sfam wrote:
Induveca wrote:By survival of the fittest, I was referring to societies weeding out the financial dregs...hence the mention of thinning the herd. The biggest predator humans have is in fact society, and we should indeed be prey in far more instances, unfortunately for overall finance many governments feel the need to "protect" us. So for every 1 going hungry for legitimate reasons, you have 10 well fed citizens claiming the same benefits due to lack of appropriate checks. Same with housing, welfare, unemployment etc etc....

These issues, and how to eliminate them, have become a driving force behind Chinese and Russian policies since the early 90s. May sound evil to Rocky IV 1985 sensibilities, as there is certainly a better middle ground between "kill them" and "support them completely on the backs of the wealthy".

This is completely silly reasoning.

Just taking health care, the idea of withholding any care from those who can't afford it until they end up in the emergency room increases the costs ten-fold. Ayn Rand even sucked as a book we were all forced to read in college (most of us just went for the cliffnotes version as the prose sucked so bad), it certainly isn't a philosophy worthy of building a society on. The goal for sustaining a stable to society is to continually grow the middle class. It is not to make fabulously wealthy people and then to protect them from the unwashed masses of plebes. That approach leads to far less stable societies.



This is a huge and widely held fallacy analogous to exaggerated claims about how
much is spent on foreign aid.
A lot of what we call 'thought' is just mental activity

When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression

Those who are convinced of absurdities, can be convinced to commit atrocities
User avatar
sfam
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,462
And1: 548
Joined: Aug 03, 2007
         

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1486 » by sfam » Fri May 3, 2013 7:25 pm

Zonkerbl wrote:Your last paragraph diverges into a question about macro policy. I firmly believe that the U.S. government cannot create jobs with discretionary stimulus programs. The U.S. government can invest in public infrastructure, and create a stable macroeconomic environment that lowers the costs of risk for the private sector. That's it. That's where I diverge significantly from Krugman. I think there is a danger in having too much faith in your own massive intellect. Sometimes the smart thing is to know your limits, and the utility of stimulus policies is very limited. Add in the fact that 70% of what actually goes into a stimulus package is pork and other politics driven earmarks that will have no stimulus effect whatsoever, and you have a very strong argument for keeping your efforts to steer the economy with macro policy to a minimum.

Why do you say Pork doesn't have a stimulus effect? That's in fact its basic purpose - to create new jobs in a political district. As for Government not creating jobs, does this mean you are in favor of stopping funding to Lockheed Martin, Ratheon, Northrump Grummand, Boeing, General Dynamics and the rest? This is where the vast bulk of the $600 Billion+ in the Defense budget is going, which of course translates to millions of jobs.

But cutting teachers or police officers from State budgets, which are happening now, or cutting defense contractors, or K-Mart closing down all leads to the same thing - more people on unemployment, which leads to less tax revenue in the Federal coffers, and subsequently a greater debt to GDP.
Zonkerbl
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 8,177
And1: 4,149
Joined: Mar 24, 2010
       

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1487 » by Zonkerbl » Fri May 3, 2013 7:35 pm

sfam wrote:
Zonkerbl wrote:So my third answer is, if the current government is doing a lousy job addressing market failures properly, is it better to just eliminate the government altogether, recognizing that they will never figure it out? Or should we take the current government and try to push them towards doing a better job addressing market failure?

As a practical matter, I don't think it's possible to just tear the government down and then rebuild it with a better mission. If you are going to try to address market failure at all, you're stuck with what we have now.

And finally, a lot of government activity is related to establishing and enforcing property rights. The system we have now is the best in the world, bar none. That part of the government does an excellent job incorporating economic analysis into decisions where relevant. It's just that court decisions are usually for extreme cases. It's the everyday, noncontroversial decisions that are actually about 90% of the effect of the government on our lives that has no economic rationale.

Actually, the US Patent office is falling woefully behind, especially in the technology world. One needs only look at the fact that every main company is continually creating lawsuits against everyone else for almost every successful product. The fact that the Patent office approves Apple's patent application for natural finger gestures shows how screwed up the system is. Everyone in tech agrees this is costing us billions in cost, and significantly impacting innovation. Lots of small companies completely stay out of contested markets because they don't have the financial resources to respond to the lawsuits that will inevitably come.


Hm, yeah. That's a problem, and my brother works in a company where patent trolls are a real problem.

USPTO is kind of a victim of its own success. These problems arise precisely because we have the best patent system in the world. All the other ones are even worse.

USPTO, by the way, is one of the best run agencies in the U.S. government.
I've been taught all my life to value service to the weak and powerless.
User avatar
sfam
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,462
And1: 548
Joined: Aug 03, 2007
         

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1488 » by sfam » Fri May 3, 2013 7:39 pm

Zonkerbl wrote:
sfam wrote:
Zonkerbl wrote:So my third answer is, if the current government is doing a lousy job addressing market failures properly, is it better to just eliminate the government altogether, recognizing that they will never figure it out? Or should we take the current government and try to push them towards doing a better job addressing market failure?

As a practical matter, I don't think it's possible to just tear the government down and then rebuild it with a better mission. If you are going to try to address market failure at all, you're stuck with what we have now.

And finally, a lot of government activity is related to establishing and enforcing property rights. The system we have now is the best in the world, bar none. That part of the government does an excellent job incorporating economic analysis into decisions where relevant. It's just that court decisions are usually for extreme cases. It's the everyday, noncontroversial decisions that are actually about 90% of the effect of the government on our lives that has no economic rationale.

Actually, the US Patent office is falling woefully behind, especially in the technology world. One needs only look at the fact that every main company is continually creating lawsuits against everyone else for almost every successful product. The fact that the Patent office approves Apple's patent application for natural finger gestures shows how screwed up the system is. Everyone in tech agrees this is costing us billions in cost, and significantly impacting innovation. Lots of small companies completely stay out of contested markets because they don't have the financial resources to respond to the lawsuits that will inevitably come.


Hm, yeah. That's a problem, and my brother works in a company where patent trolls are a real problem.

USPTO is kind of a victim of its own success. These problems arise precisely because we have the best patent system in the world. All the other ones are even worse.

USPTO, by the way, is one of the best run agencies in the U.S. government.

Talk about an agency that needs to get LOTS LOTS bigger! Nope, keep it the same size as the 1930s - surely the pace of innovation hasn't changed since then. Work smarter, not harder!!!
DCZards
General Manager
Posts: 9,929
And1: 3,903
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Location: The Streets of DC
     

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1489 » by DCZards » Fri May 3, 2013 7:48 pm

Induveca wrote:By survival of the fittest, I was referring to societies weeding out the financial dregs...hence the mention of thinning the herd. The biggest predator humans have is in fact society, and we should indeed be prey in far more instances, unfortunately for overall finance many governments feel the need to "protect" us. So for every 1 going hungry for legitimate reasons, you have 10 well fed citizens claiming the same benefits due to lack of appropriate checks. Same with housing, welfare, unemployment etc etc....


Who, pray tell, are the financial dregs? Is it the Robber Barons on Wall Street and in the suites of many American corporations? Or is it just those “weak-minded” poor folks who haven’t figured out how to game the system the way that the robber barons have?

And why do you only single out those individuals receiving govt. subsidies in the form of help with housing, food, etc.? What about those receiving govt. subsidies by taking advantage of tax loopholes, off-shore banking accounts and all sorts of corporate welfare? Do they get a pass?

And where do you get this stuff about there being 10 well-fed people getting govt. benefits for every one person that is actually hungry? I’m not saying that there’s not abuse, but that sounds to me like something you believe and not anything you can back up with data.

Sorry guys if I’m overreacting a little, but nothing galls me more than the kind of elitism and outright disdain for the poor and dependent that induveca often exhibits.
Zonkerbl
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 8,177
And1: 4,149
Joined: Mar 24, 2010
       

Re: Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V 

Post#1490 » by Zonkerbl » Fri May 3, 2013 8:11 pm

sfam wrote:
Zonkerbl wrote:Your last paragraph diverges into a question about macro policy. I firmly believe that the U.S. government cannot create jobs with discretionary stimulus programs. The U.S. government can invest in public infrastructure, and create a stable macroeconomic environment that lowers the costs of risk for the private sector. That's it. That's where I diverge significantly from Krugman. I think there is a danger in having too much faith in your own massive intellect. Sometimes the smart thing is to know your limits, and the utility of stimulus policies is very limited. Add in the fact that 70% of what actually goes into a stimulus package is pork and other politics driven earmarks that will have no stimulus effect whatsoever, and you have a very strong argument for keeping your efforts to steer the economy with macro policy to a minimum.

Why do you say Pork doesn't have a stimulus effect? That's in fact its basic purpose - to create new jobs in a political district. As for Government not creating jobs, does this mean you are in favor of stopping funding to Lockheed Martin, Ratheon, Northrump Grummand, Boeing, General Dynamics and the rest? This is where the vast bulk of the $600 Billion+ in the Defense budget is going, which of course translates to millions of jobs.

But cutting teachers or police officers from State budgets, which are happening now, or cutting defense contractors, or K-Mart closing down all leads to the same thing - more people on unemployment, which leads to less tax revenue in the Federal coffers, and subsequently a greater debt to GDP.


I mean that, to the extent that pork is equivalent to digging ditches and filling them up, they're not really "creating" jobs. They might successfully transfer jobs from one political district to another, but that's it. I would argue similarly for the defense budget. What is the value added of building something that will eventually just be blown up? What's the difference between that and digging a ditch and filling it up?
I've been taught all my life to value service to the weak and powerless.

Return to Washington Wizards