21 Jul 19
2 edits
@no1marauder saidYour silly analogy aside, I suppose you're clinging to this because you failed to understand the historical context, and even if we accept that unemployment is part of it (which in itself is up for debate as my macroeconomics textbook excludes it, as did my professors - it's in the name), you're still wrong. Inflation was rising from '65 onwards, growth was slowing and unemployment was rising (if you insist on this) during the period in question. That's classic stagflation - it presents a problem for policymakers as measures to stop one of the bad things exacerbates the others.
Yes, I'm using the standard economic definition of "stagflation" and you are using one you have concocted on your own. Thus, it is reminiscent of Alice's exchange with Humpty Dumpty:
'And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'
'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't ...[text shortened]... aster — that's all.'
https://sabian.org/looking_glass6.php
Try not to fall off any walls, Ash.
Try not to fall off any walls, Ash.
I tend not to sit on them.
@kazetnagorra saidSo at least you are conceding that they are not socialist
The workers have relatively high influence compared to elsewhere.
How much influence compared to elswhwere?
21 Jul 19
@mghrn55 saidIn fact, the situation in Norway is very similar to Sweden, Denmark and Finland, which do not have such large reserves of natural resources. The main strength of the Norwegian economy is in its economic model, which it broadly shares with its Nordic neighbours. Indeed, if it was just oil you'd expect the average Venezuelan or Saudi to also be very well off, which is obviously not the case.
Speaking of Norway, their economic success is situational.
They are sitting on a wealth of oil reserves.
But then again, so is Venezuela.
So the debates continue.
Additionally, the distinction between Socialism and Communism should be made.
People should Google it.
Socialism as a term has been misused in the past.
Soviet Union called themselves a Socialist country.
They were in fact Communist.
Heck, East Germany called themselves a Democratic Republic.
21 Jul 19
@ashiitaka saidIt is a remarkable ability of many internet posters to never admit they are wrong despite being shown indisputable proof of their error.
Your silly analogy aside, I suppose you're clinging to this because you failed to understand the historical context, and even if we accept that unemployment is part of it (which in itself is up for debate as my macroeconomics textbook excludes it, as did my professors - it's in the name), you're still wrong. Inflation was rising from '65 onwards, growth was slowing [i]and[/ ...[text shortened]... exacerbates the others.
Try not to fall off any walls, Ash.
I tend not to sit on them.
That you stubbornly refuse to accept the standard definition of stagflation in order to save your incorrect claim is rather pathetic. Friedman made a specific claim using the standard definition, not your peculiar, malleable one and no experience supports it.
@no1marauder saidYour arguments have descended into laughable territory - I made no mistake. When googling "stagflation", the first link that I see is this one:
It is a remarkable ability of many internet posters to never admit they are wrong despite being shown indisputable proof of their error.
That you stubbornly refuse to accept the standard definition of stagflation in order to save your incorrect claim is rather pathetic. Friedman made a specific claim using the standard definition, not your peculiar, malleable one and no experience supports it.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stagflation.asp
From there:
Stagflation is a condition of slow economic growth and relatively high unemployment, OR economic stagnation, accompanied by rising prices, or inflation. It can also be defined as inflation and a decline in gross domestic product (GDP).
I can also cite my current textbook (I sold my ones from previous years but they said the same thing):
Macroeconomics: Global and Southern African Perspectives
by Blanchard/Johnson
It's adapted from an American textbook and adjusts for the different currency used in SA, etc.
The definition of stagflation from page 613 is "The combination of stagnation and inflation".
I didn't "make a mistake"; I was taught that by several professors of economics. That your Merriam-Webster definition (which apparently is an American dictionary company; I am unaware of it as I tend to use British dictionaries) is slightly different does NOT mean that I made a mistake. Stop pretending as if the definition that you googled right before your post is the "standard" one - what makes you think you are educated enough on this topic to say such a thing?
Anyways, even if you want to include unemployment, you are still wrong. Unemployment was increasing from the mid-60s. You have no point and now you are desperately clinging to this in the hopes of covering up your other abysmal errors. It's pretty clear that you have no idea how inflation works, what healthy levels are or basically any of the economic history of the Keynesian period outside of America, so stop pretending that you do - you cannot fool me.
As for your fantasies about me "falling off a wall" - dream on.
- Joined
- 03 Mar 19
- Moves
- 238
@ashiitaka saidI read every word, even my grandchildren were mesmerized by the tenets of Shavism. I read to them by 🕯 candlelight, to give the full effect of the joy of Shav’s dreamworld.
Das Kapital is an extremely dense, plodding work. I couldn't get through it. I agree that the Communist Manifesto is much more manageable.
I saved the Best till last, when I asked them a question, What if some people in that society work harder than other people? They looked at me with sad empty eyes, not unlike the eyes you will see in the world of Shav. Hey, how much money did Kazet say that we should all be able to ‘get along’ on . LOL. I plan to have a lot more than that !
- Joined
- 03 Mar 19
- Moves
- 238
21 Jul 19
@no1marauder saidI’ll get this one. Stagflation Is basically when people stop working and putting out.
It is a remarkable ability of many internet posters to never admit they are wrong despite being shown indisputable proof of their error.
That you stubbornly refuse to accept the standard definition of stagflation in order to save your incorrect claim is rather pathetic. Friedman made a specific claim using the standard definition, not your peculiar, malleable one and no experience supports it.
I think that covers it. If you want to prosper, go somewhere full of those dependent parasite losers and work your butt off. Maybe start with a lemonade stand, it wouldn’t make any difference! You will prosper.
@ashiitaka saidStamping your feet and insisting you are right when every standard definition says you are wrong isn't as impressive as a bluff as you pretend it to be.
Your arguments have descended into laughable territory - I made no mistake. When googling "stagflation", the first link that I see is this one:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stagflation.asp
From there:
[b]Stagflation is a condition of slow economic growth and relatively high unemployment, [i]OR economic stagnation, accompanied by rising prices, or inflation. ...[text shortened]... hat you do - you cannot fool me.
As for your fantasies about me "falling off a wall" - dream on.
Admit your error and move on like a grownup.
EDIT: Your own in bold definition:
Stagflation is a condition of slow economic growth and relatively high unemployment, OR economic stagnation, accompanied by rising prices, or inflation. It can also be defined as inflation and a decline in gross domestic product (GDP).
None of these conditions are applicable to the UK in the late 1960s.
I ignore personal attacks and will continue to do so. I am "qualified" enough to see through your propaganda.
22 Jul 19
@livineasy4 saidObviously you never made it past the level of education where "stagflation" was defined.
I’ll get this one. Stagflation Is basically when people stop working and putting out.
I think that covers it. If you want to prosper, go somewhere full of those dependent parasite losers and work your butt off. Maybe start with a lemonade stand, it wouldn’t make any difference! You will prosper.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
22 Jul 19
@eladar saidA. Is that mean, mode or median? Do you even know the difference?
@KazetNagorra
Check out Switzerland. The article I saw said they bring home on average 84k.
For the US
Practical tax rate: 18%
Average pre-tax salary: $64,154
Average post-tax salary: $52,344
Netherlands
Practical tax rate: 41%
Average pre-tax salary: $51,669
Average post-tax salary: $30,562
B. What's the distribution - pyramidal, bimodal, anything?
C. How high is the cost of living? Mere survival? Living healthily? Education? Misfortune?