tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post8714430478526314840..comments2024-03-28T02:46:41.090-05:00Comments on Supply and Demand (in that order): Exceptions to Keynesian TheoryCasey B. Mulliganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03317454408275318282noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-72954382534463407722014-07-11T02:16:02.255-05:002014-07-11T02:16:02.255-05:00As for teat size, a good portion of that is geneti...As for teat size, a good portion of that is genetic. I have some maternal lines that are heavy milkers and last well into their teens without udder problems. These make up the majority of my replacement heifers. <a href="http://www.theblanchlawfirm.com/" rel="nofollow">criminal defense attorneys</a>JOJOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11658184493104109189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-14437341404073864322014-02-25T08:11:51.917-06:002014-02-25T08:11:51.917-06:00Insurance policy actually promotes career by incre...Insurance policy actually promotes career by increasing the number of individuals whom companies are willing to seek the solutions of. <a href="https://plus.google.com/112458942571457568265" rel="nofollow">bubblegum casting</a>Yasirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14924859519469885670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-7889083514633212602012-02-03T11:19:38.272-06:002012-02-03T11:19:38.272-06:00I would like to thank you for the efforts you'...I would like to thank you for the efforts you've put in writing this web site. I'm hoping the same high-grade site post from you in the future as well. Actually your creative writing abilities has inspired me to get my own website going now. Actually blogging is spreading its wings and growing rapidly. Your write up is a good example.<br /><a href="http://www.canadianmastercard.com/" rel="nofollow">Canadian Tire MasterCard</a>|<br /><a href="http://www.canadianmastercard.com/essential-reforms-of-canadian-credit-cards.html" rel="nofollow">Canadian credit cards</a>emark.limhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05313791754194142481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-68625927796204122422011-08-18T14:22:24.530-05:002011-08-18T14:22:24.530-05:00In general, however, it is true that many things, ...In general, however, it is true that many things, such as unemployment insurance, increase the incidence of unemployment in a population.<br /><br />However, society is not balanced solely on supply and demand and labour; the third component, "avoiding riots and the destruction of property and owned capital that form the basis for the distribution of resources", provides a floor to the optimum wage level and quality of life (including taxes) even if this is above the point where supply and demand would balance. It's a three-variable system, not a two-variable one.Misakihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12737066913010944899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-38672990158222713742011-08-18T14:12:13.144-05:002011-08-18T14:12:13.144-05:002nd comment: the explanation of "progressive&...2nd comment: the explanation of "progressive" motives.<br /><br />"The general argument that the President should try to do something effective has merit. However, just as important is understanding what, exactly, is likely to be effective given the existing goals of people and the resistance that will result from policies that contradict their goals. People do not want the government to spend money to create jobs, so while it is "brave and foolish" to continue advocating such, a more flexible approach both by the President and by other concerned parties is more likely to achieve a reduction of unemployment.<br /><br />The largest battleship ever constructed, the Japanese battleship Yamato, was given as much fuel as the local port commanders could provide instead of just enough for a one-way voyage as ordered, but this did not prevent it from being destroyed in combat or heavy criticism about better uses for that precious fuel under the blockade."<br /><br />Mr Jared Bernstein said,<br />"House Rs will likely block most of the above ... let’s make sure everyone in this country knows exactly who’s standing between the 20+ million un- and underemployed Americans, and their jobs, paychecks, and living standards."<br /><br />Think this through to the logical conclusion. On one hand you have an unemployed worker, who has lost their self-esteem. On the other hand you have an employed worker angry that the government is spending "their" tax money in ways that seem to benefit only Wall Street and fin. inst.<br /><br />Do you really expect the unemployed worker to want the government to spend more, so their neighbor who is employed has to pay higher taxes (or suffer inflation on their savings/fixed income)? How exactly does this cause people to feel any less like a "manipulative leech" as someone I know put it?<br /><br />The alternative, once again, is for the employed worker to be 'taxed' (where the taxes go to their employer, not the government) only if they refuse to reduce their working hours to allow the unemployed worker a job and an income. http://pastebin.com/Wy8B0hK9<br /><br />[following omitted due to space]<br /><br />There is already a strong undercurrent of opinion among the general public that people need to consume less, not more:<br />http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/08/the-consumption-economy-is-dying-let-it-die/243628/<br /><br />So "aggregate demand", and the economy are only likely to get worse if people do not agree to conserve work.Misakihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12737066913010944899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-77588511210155250652011-08-18T14:07:52.034-05:002011-08-18T14:07:52.034-05:00Might be useful
"The essence of macroeconomi...Might be useful<br /><br />"The essence of macroeconomics is understanding why such things are a fallacy, why what happens if one group does something is not at all what happens when everyone does it. And it’s a sad commentary on the state of economics when tenured professors at famous schools don’t get that distinction."<br /><br />Saying that the US should not be China is not the same as proving that the US would not increase employment by being China. It's a sad commentary when....<br /><br />Once again, US companies do not have to lower wages to increase employment or depend on the weakness of the USD; they would only have to decrease costs of their products in other currencies (and wage decreases would follow naturally).<br /><br />But I'm sure everyone upset about the recent report on the percentage of GDP as imports from China and other countries is fully convinced by you saying "fallacy of composition" as an explanation for why the government must spend more of "their" tax money.<br /><br />Both sides of a debate simplify. It is poor form to say that no simplification by the 'other' side is justified while simultaneously including similar simplifications in your own arguments.Misakihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12737066913010944899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-54935103859283658432011-08-18T07:35:26.655-05:002011-08-18T07:35:26.655-05:00Prof. Mulligan,
Your findings are consistent with...Prof. Mulligan,<br /><br />Your findings are consistent with Say's Law. That's good to know.<br /><br />I do not think businesses are quite as stubborn as Krugman seems to think they are. A business will not keep hiring people if the marginal benefit of the hire does not at least equal the marginal cost, no matter their previous plans. Businesses understand the principle of 'sunk cost.' <br /><br />To "RationalThought:" Perhaps you should read John Taylor's recent working paper on the topic: http://www.stanford.edu/~johntayl/JEL_taylor%20revised.pdfProf Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16539902592080231165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-35098698802448228942011-08-17T20:08:17.352-05:002011-08-17T20:08:17.352-05:00Prof. Mulligan, I hope you read the comments on th...Prof. Mulligan, I hope you read the comments on the Economix site. To state that unemployment insurance is the be-all-end-all of stimulus spending is ludicrous. And to insist that someone who gets a job is 'penalized' by losing their unemployment check is crazy. What about the benefit they receive from the paycheck they get? <br />As for Milton's argument that federal stimulus 'replaces' other spending for a zero multiplier effect...please! Maybe if the stimulus spending occurred at the same time as the decrease in private sector spending. Unfortunately that never happens in the real world. First, private sector spending declines (a negative multiplier effect). GDP falls. After Congress acts, then stimulus spending begins. Starting at a lower level of GDP and a lower 'total spending' figure, it will result in a POSITIVE multiplier effect. (Note: Please consider stimulus spending to include infrastructure spending in addition to unemployment insurance). <br />How does the UofC allow this type of economic instruction??RationalThoughthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07269710500900698927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7539577136486286096.post-17171121991635866802011-08-17T12:12:49.564-05:002011-08-17T12:12:49.564-05:00Interdependent of incentive concerns, there is oft...Interdependent of incentive concerns, there is often failure to look at the marginal effects of stimulus funding.<br /><br />When someone loses a job, there consumption does not drop to zero. The unemployed use their own savings, or rely on friends or relatives for some free meals, temporary living quarters or free services such as a washing machine, etc. Part of this consumption is supplied and purchased by others and increases their demand.<br /><br />Keynesian stimulus, including unemployment insurance, substitutes for other consumption spending funds.<br /><br />The same is true on state and municipal levels where part, probably most, of local projected spending will substitute federal stimulus funds for local funds.<br /><br />To the extent that federal stimulus funds acts as substitute funding, there is no demand increase and economic boost from it.<br /><br />The part of stimulus funds that replaces other spending has a zero multiplier effect on the economy.<br /><br />When the extra US government stimulus inefficiencies and delays, as compared to the private sector, are considered, parts of stimulus funding can even have a negative economic multiplier.<br /><br />The failure to look at marginal spending effects, the failure to consider government inefficiency and the negative incentives mentioned in the blog post are the reasons payments such as food stamps, unemployment insurance and other stimulus spending do not create jobs or provide strong economic stimulus. Stimulus spending, inefficiently and often with negative incentives, substitutes one funding source for another, but does not increase the spending above the baseline amount that would occur without stimulus funding.Milton Rechthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02488660316957122768noreply@blogger.com