Basic economics for Democrats/Socialists

[psikeyhackr]

If I bought one car on my sixteenth birthday, and kept it all my life, manufacturers would not have a market for their newest designs.

New designs! LOL

The 2010 Jeep Grand Cherokee versus 2011. The fuel gauge was moved from the left of the steering wheel to the right. What good was that. Of course it meant the panel of the instrument cluster was an entirely different part. The tail lights were shaped entirely different also.

I repaired hi-fi equipment before I switched to computers. 90% useless variations in that year after year too. Rearrange the knobs, change the color, add some new equalization controls and take them off two years later. Yeah some technological improvements did occur that got ballyhooed to the heavens. Maybe 10% of customers even understood them.

I have never owned a new car. Let someone else suck up the depreciation. The laws of physics do not change year after year. What were all of the changes for in the 50s and 60s before mileage and pollution became huge issues?

 

[psikeyhackr]

It was a conspiracy? Can you calculate the number? Will you be in danger if you publish it?
What deep dark secret will be revealed if you post the number here?

Reality happens whether people keep track of it and report it or not.

How often is GDP mentioned versus NDP?

But NDP is the result of the Depreciation of Capital Goods being deducted from GDP.

Check whatever economics book you want. Where is it pointed out that the depreciation of durable consumer goods is not subtracted and why? I had to find that myself. I pointed it out to PhD economist from the University of Chicago.
He said NOTHING!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Reality happens whether people keep track of it and report it or not.

How often is GDP mentioned versus NDP?

But NDP is the result of the Depreciation of Capital Goods being deducted from GDP.

Check whatever economics book you want. Where is it pointed out that the depreciation of durable consumer goods is not subtracted and why? I had to find that myself. I pointed it out to PhD economist from the University of Chicago.
He said NOTHING!

I agree, consumer goods depreciation happens.

How often is GDP mentioned versus NDP?

A lot more.

But NDP is the result of the Depreciation of Capital Goods being deducted from GDP.

Ok.

Where is it pointed out that the depreciation of durable consumer goods is not subtracted and why?

So subtract it. Post the numbers side-by-side.
Then we can discuss the value of your number versus the other number.

 

[psikeyhackr]

So subtract it. Post the numbers side-by-side.
Then we can discuss the value of your number versus the other number.

Dude, there is no data. It is something that is ignored. That is my point. If I estimated that it was $1,500 per car in 1994 when there were 200,000,000 that would be $300,000,000,000 for jus that year. Is that estimate high or low?

I don't know!

But isn't that the job of economists? But experts aren't going to talk about things that are not good for their careers. So economics is bullshit. Nobody suggesting mandatory accounting/finance in the schools.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Dude, there is no data. It is something that is ignored. That is my point. If I estimated that it was $1,500 per car in 1994 when there were 200,000,000 that would be $300,000,000,000 for jus that year. Is that estimate high or low?

I don't know!

But isn't that the job of economists? But experts aren't going to talk about things that are not good for their careers. So economics is bullshit. Nobody suggesting mandatory accounting/finance in the schools.

If I estimated that it was $1,500 per car in 1994 when there were 200,000,000 that would be $300,000,000,000 for jus that year.

Ok. So what?

But isn't that the job of economists?

Why should that number be a part of their job?

But experts aren't going to talk about things that are not good for their careers.

Why is it bad for their careers?

What value is added by including that additional data?
Why should anyone else care?

 

[Curried Goats]

The foundation is there. But this thread is about economics, not "rights" as a concept. If it were, we would talk past each other. You believe that "rights" only exist when granted by government. I believe that government cannot grant rights, but only protect rights, and grant privileges, powers, license, subsidy, etc.



That is the beginning and end of our debate on rights as far as basic economics goes. You brought up rights, not I.



If you start a thread titled, "Rights only come from Government," maybe in the ethics section, I will join in the fray. It sounds fun.



Yes, and I know that there were zero houses on the Island, and now there is one. There is also effectively unlimited opportunity for the people to build their own.



As far as whether it is better to have a home than not have a home, I do know that the overwhelming majority of them would prefer to have a home. There may be some that prefer the natural existence or are not interested in doing the work to create a home. In that case, for them there is no scarcity, certainly not a scarcity of shade caused by curring down a few of thousands of trees.



That people tend to act in their own interests by acquiring material possessions is a key principle of economics. Particularly in Marxist economics which are entirely materialistic. Historically it has only been when Marxism failed that the people who established it have announced that "materialism" is a bad thing and that we should all pursue more spiritual. The promise of Marxist revolutionaries is never that production will be minimized and we will "return" to a spiritual relationship to nature. The promise is that production will continue as before, or even improve under the wise guidance of worker committees and that the workers will receive the wealth created instead of the parasitical capitialists.



I proved their gain above with math, also: 1 House > 0 Houses.



They did not have one hundred acres of land. If they can be said to have "had" the land, then prior to the first European/English settlement, they had 1.9 Billion acres of land in the area that became the current United States. By the time they were fully confined to reservations, or living as racial minorities in the White United States, there was plenty of unused land left, expecially given how much smaller their numbers were by then.



Their near-genocide was not at all caused by famers taking up too much of their land, it was caused - as nearly all human misery is caused - by government incompetence or malevelance.





Yes, I do see the problem. I'll discuss that shortly.



Yes, I have made that argument about boxing people in also. Government would grant the use of property, but would also enforce an easement for people to walk through it if that were the only way to leave a given area.



I would argue that it isn't a "right" that government grants to land, but rather an agreement that a person can treat land as if it were his private property, the same as if he had created it. That is a privilege, a license called a deed, not a right. The "right" to own land is a legal fiction, but one which is often very beneficial to many people.



On my hypothetical island, the house builder probably doesn't think of the land as his, even if he correctly believes that the house is his. If the rainy season comes, and his house floods, because he didn't think of that possibility, he will just move it to another spot, not lament that "his" land isn't suitable for building.



Interesting. I had always thought that the government of Nazi Germany, for example, took away rights from Jews in Europe. The Jews actually had no rights except those they negotiated with government?

 

[Seymour Flops]

There were 200,000,000 cars in the US in 1994.

Where did their depreciation go?

What has happened to the depreciation of automobiles and other durable consumer goods in the US since WWII? Experts leaving out such information for 70 years cannot be an accident.

Treating air conditioners like bananas!

I'm not sure what you mean by "where did it go?"

Durable goods depreciate. Where should that be accounted for by economists?

Does depreciation of durable goods not happen in non-capitalist countries?

 

[Seymour Flops]

New designs! LOL

The 2010 Jeep Grand Cherokee versus 2011. The fuel gauge was moved from the left of the steering wheel to the right. What good was that. Of course it meant the panel of the instrument cluster was an entirely different part. The tail lights were shaped entirely different also.

Like I said, most of the new designs for automobiles are new ways to reduce carbon that do not benefit the consumer, and in fact make cars either less safe, less fuel effecient or both.

Most people do not buy a new car every year, but more like every five or six years, so there is innovation - however non-beneficial - in that time. The small changes you mention are for the wealthy suckers that buy new every year.

I repaired hi-fi equipment before I switched to computers. 90% useless variations in that year after year too. Rearrange the knobs, change the color, add some new equalization controls and take them off two years later. Yeah some technological improvements did occur that got ballyhooed to the heavens. Maybe 10% of customers even understood them.

How often did your customers by a new hi-fi?

I have never owned a new car. Let someone else suck up the depreciation.

You're smart to not buy a new car. I never have either. Closest I have come is buying cars with ten to twenty thousand miles, which are still under warranty. They are a bargain compared to new, even if you don't have a week of "new car smell."

But what lesson can we learn from that other than "let someone else suck up the depreciation" which is very good advice. My mom told me when I was young that "when you buy a new car, you buy someone else's trouble." Which is true for a non-college loan college student living on a shoestring in the eighties and buying a beater to make it to my part time job. The trick now is to find a car that was someone else's trouble for a reason that doesn't really affect me. I bought a very nice 2008 Dodge Ram in 2008, with less than 5K miles. It has resin spilled in the bed and it was a standard cab which are not very popular.

The laws of physics do not change year after year. What were all of the changes for in the 50s and 60s before mileage and pollution became huge issues?

Mainly it was making the cars smaller, but with similar room inside, more comfort, such as air conditioning, automatic transmissions, or floor transmissions for those who preferred them. But mainly it was again making changes year by year to keep people wanting the latest model?

Would you prefer that one design for all cars be chosen and the standard design remain unchanged for decades with only engineering changes to please the Al Gores of the world? The Al Gores are sure to have the latest limos and private jets, the standard car would only be for "standard" people.

What is your solution this depreciation problem and how should records of it be kept by economists?

 

[psikeyhackr]

Why should that number be a part of their job?

That question tends to indicate that it is pointless to talk to you.

Adam Smith is called the father of economics by some and the godfather of economics by others. He did not use the word depreciation in Wealth of Nations though he did say something about paper money depreciating.

Karl Marx used 'depreciation' 35 times in Das Kapital, talking about machinery and money. But Smith and Marx did not live in societies where consumers purchased complex technological products that would be challenges to engineers to evaluate. Making these products use up the planet's resources and usually have polluting side effects. They weren't on the planet with 8 billion other people either.

So if you don't consider having accurate data on a system affecting the lives billions of people to properly manage the system, who am I to try to explain it to you.

 

[psikeyhackr]

What is your solution this depreciation problem and how should records of it be kept by economists?

First economists need to talk about NDP, which they don't. That information is somewhere. However it is kept the same should be readily estimated for consumer products.

But manufacturers should be required to provide bathtub curve reliability data on products. Our schools need to make kids more technologically astute.

Of course that will be a challenge since I sat in a high school class a few years ago where the teacher didn't know a kilometer from a meter. Can you imagine a wall 9 kilometers tall. LOL

 

[Seymour Flops]

First economists need to talk about NDP, which they don't. That information is somewhere. However it is kept the same should be readily estimated for consumer products.

But manufacturers should be required to provide bathtub curve reliability data on products. Our schools need to make kids more technologically astute.

Of course that will be a challenge since I sat in a high school class a few years ago where the teacher didn't know a kilometer from a meter. Can you imagine a wall 9 kilometers tall. LOL

Companies have to keep track of depreciation, so they understand that the vehicles, and other machines the company owns are not permanent assets at value of their purchase price as would be say gold bars or artwords by noted artists who are dead. They have a strong tax incentive to do so.

How would publicizing the NDP more affect policy decisions in a positive way.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That question tends to indicate that it is pointless to talk to you.

Adam Smith is called the father of economics by some and the godfather of economics by others. He did not use the word depreciation in Wealth of Nations though he did say something about paper money depreciating.

Karl Marx used 'depreciation' 35 times in Das Kapital, talking about machinery and money. But Smith and Marx did not live in societies where consumers purchased complex technological products that would be challenges to engineers to evaluate. Making these products use up the planet's resources and usually have polluting side effects. They weren't on the planet with 8 billion other people either.

So if you don't consider having accurate data on a system affecting the lives billions of people to properly manage the system, who am I to try to explain it to you.

That question tends to indicate that it is pointless to talk to you.

Especially because you won't answer.

So if you don't consider having accurate data on a system affecting the lives billions of people to properly manage the system, who am I to try to explain it to you.

If you think the answer would be a huge benefit to society, do the research.
Post the data. You'll be famous.

 

[KissMy]

Trump Government Spending was $11 Trillion

In what year?

real GDP was only $18.7 Trillion

In what year?

Unsustainable government spending was over 55% of the economy under Trump. Government spending increased rapidly since Trump was elected. Same as Bush2. Republicans are fiscal disasters.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Unsustainable government spending was over 55% of the economy under Trump. Government spending increased rapidly since Trump was elected. Same as Bush2. Republicans are fiscal disasters.

Unsustainable government spending was over 55% of the economy under Trump.

So you said. In what year? Don't add non-federal spending, that would be dishonest. Or stupid.

 

[psikeyhackr]

That question tends to indicate that it is pointless to talk to you.

Especially because you won't answer.

So if you don't consider having accurate data on a system affecting the lives billions of people to properly manage the system, who am I to try to explain it to you.

If you think the answer would be a huge benefit to society, do the research.
Post the data. You'll be famous.

Raymond Goldsmith PhD was writing about the depreciation of durable consumer goods in the 1950s.He died in 1988. I didn't find out about him until 2005.

Consumerism and GDP depends on consumers being stupid. Accounting/finance could have been mandatory in the schools since Sputnik. It is not that difficult an idea.

Economic Wargames

The global economy is a giant multilevel, multiplayer chess game. It is however, being played in the dark. The powers that be, have the overhead lights switched off. To have any chance you need a flashlight, and that would still leave the problems of learning the rules and developing your...

blog.lostsoulscorp.com

Economic Wargames Opinion: (no title)

Economic Wargames

This has been an ongoing adventure.

 

[psikeyhackr]

How would publicizing the NDP more affect policy decisions in a positive way.

The policy is ignorant consumers. Mandatory accounting/finance in the schools is not a difficult idea.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Raymond Goldsmith PhD was writing about the depreciation of durable consumer goods in the 1950s.He died in 1988. I didn't find out about him until 2005.

Consumerism and GDP depends on consumers being stupid. Accounting/finance could have been mandatory in the schools since Sputnik. It is not that difficult an idea.

Economic Wargames

The global economy is a giant multilevel, multiplayer chess game. It is however, being played in the dark. The powers that be, have the overhead lights switched off. To have any chance you need a flashlight, and that would still leave the problems of learning the rules and developing your...

blog.lostsoulscorp.com

Economic Wargames Opinion: (no title)

Economic Wargames

This has been an ongoing adventure.

Raymond Goldsmith PhD was writing about the depreciation of durable consumer goods in the 1950s.He died in 1988.

He sounds awesome.

Consumerism and GDP depends on consumers being stupid.

You only make smart purchases? Or no purchases at all?

Accounting/finance could have been mandatory in the schools since Sputnik.

I agree. But math is hard, especially for liberals.

 

[psikeyhackr]

You only make smart purchases? Or no purchases at all?

Sometimes there are no smart purchases, only least bad of available options. IBM could have made the PC with a passive backplane and probably tens of millions, possibly hundreds of millions of computers could have been easy to upgrade. We can only wonder how many computers with perfectly good cases and power supplies have been trashed because their CPUs were obsolete and replacing the motherboard was too much of a hassle.

I dumpster dived for a computer back in the 90s. The case was really nice and the power supply worked fine. Technically the only thing wrong was the dead 100 meg hard drive. But the CPU was a 486. I upgraded the motherboard to a Pentium and used it for years. But just a little redesign could have kept lots of electronics off the junk heaps around the world.

 

[KissMy]

Raymond Goldsmith PhD was writing about the depreciation of durable consumer goods in the 1950s.He died in 1988.

He sounds awesome.

Consumerism and GDP depends on consumers being stupid.

You only make smart purchases? Or no purchases at all?

Accounting/finance could have been mandatory in the schools since Sputnik.

I agree. But math is hard, especially for liberals.

The rich conspire to prevent sale of quality or durable consumer goods forcing repeat purchases, manufacturing, installation, recycling & disposal to keep their profits flowing.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The rich conspire to prevent sale of quality or durable consumer goods forcing repeat purchases, manufacturing, installation, recycling & disposal to keep their profits flowing.

Sounds awful!