administrator Site Admin
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 Posts: 11987
|
Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2015 11:58 pm Post subject: 1111 |
|
|
PeakTrader:
I wonder what causes these “jobless recoveries” with U or L shaped economic recoveries?
In the late 1970s, interest rates and inflation were high. So, there was more saving and less spending.
And, Carter was a fiscal conservative.
When Reagan came in, there was a “wall-of-money” to flow into the economy.
Moreover, with the shift in demographics (i.e. the Baby-Boomers starting to enter “prime-age”), there was a V-shaped economic recovery.
There’s a wall-of-money today (e.g. $4 trillion of cash held by non-financial corporations and excess reserves in the banking system) that hasn’t flowed into the economy.
I think, one problem is when government pays people not to work, or pays people too much not to work, they won’t work.
For example, many laid-off workers, who had a $15 an hour job, may discover the only jobs available pay only $10 or $12 an hour. So, they stay on (extended and overextended) unemployment benefits.
Also, many students, who expected a much higher paying job after they graduated, became disappointed, and wouldn’t accept a low-paying job.
Perhaps, generally, when people receive more government benefits, because they earn less income, a $10 or $12 an hour full-time job may not be worth the opportunity cost.
---
dilbert Dogbert:
“I think, one problem is when government pays people not to work, or pays people too much not to work, they won’t work.”
It is good to hear from someone who has boots on the ground so to speak and has lived comfortably on unemployment/welfare.
---
PeakTrader:
Would you rather work full time for $3,000 a month or receive $2,000 a month for not working?
You’ll have plenty of time to work under-the-table without the need to pay taxes when receiving “free” government benefits.
I live somewhat uncomfortably, because I work so much and pay so much in taxes.
I lived very comfortably in college for a while when I wasn’t working full-time and attending school full-time, i.e. when I decided to live on student loans, grants, and scholarships, along with working part-time whenever I felt like it (e.g. buying goods at a merchandise mart in Denver, sometimes by the dozen, selling at the flea market in Boulder, where people have money, and making $100 profit, after all expenses, in less than four hours).
---
Education study
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/7154/wps4122.txt?sequence=2
---
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/lehman-brothers-collapse.asp
---
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/20/business/worldbusiness/20iht-prexy.4.16321064.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
---
http://www.expertecautomotive.com/index.php/coupons/transmission-service-special
---
http://www.valpak.com/coupons/printable/Expertec-Automotive/29802?addressId=1453903&offerId=1187996
---
Housing article:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/there-s-no-better-time-to-buy-a-house-than-today--fannie-mae-120236472.html
---
Some countries by median age - 2010
U.S.: 36.9
Japan: 44.6
Germany: 43.7
France: 39.7
Italy: 44.3
Spain: 41.5
Canada: 40.7
U. K.: 40.5
Russia: 38.5
Sweden: 41.7
Greece: 42.2
Switzerland: 41.3
China: 35.2
Brazil: 30.5
Mexico: 26.7
India: 25.9
Saudi Arabia: 21.6
Iraq: 20.6
Nigeria: 19.1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_median_age
---
Perhaps, since 1967, there has been a shrinking proportion of the population working more, while a growing proportion has been working less or not working, which would add to income inequality.
And, immigration likely caused more wealth & income inequality, because the vast majority of immigrants came from dirt poor countries and were less skilled than the domestic population.
--- |
|