TPS Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 In what school of economics does supply create demand? Say's Law (after the French economist of the 19th century). David Ricardo supported it, and it dominated classical economics until Keynes' refutation in 1936. One could argue it's the foundation for modern Supply-side economics.
DC Tom Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Say's Law (after the French economist of the 19th century). David Ricardo supported it, and it dominated classical economics until Keynes' refutation in 1936. One could argue it's the foundation for modern Supply-side economics. Really? There's an economic school that says, among other things, that the supply of labor creates demand for that labor? That is pretty seriously stupid.
Tiberius Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 In what school of economics does supply create demand? Supply of people means there are more wants and needs. Without people there is no economy. Are you really this stupid? Really? There's an economic school that says, among other things, that the supply of labor creates demand for that labor? That is pretty seriously stupid. Its pretty basic stuff. More people creates more demand. You have been hanging with greggy too much
GG Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Supply of people means there are more wants and needs. Without people there is no economy. Are you really this stupid? Its pretty basic stuff. More people creates more demand. You have been hanging with greggy too much Yes, Virginia, there real idiots.
unbillievable Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Really? There's an economic school that says, among other things, that the supply of labor creates demand for that labor? That is pretty seriously stupid. Economics is so complex that something that sounds really stupid can be true. Excessive supply of unskilled labor in 3rd world countries creates industries dependent on it. The idea is that there is always an equilibrium where a cheap supply of any good draws industries that can exploit it. Like a farmer using a tractor in Kansas, but illegal aliens in California.
keepthefaith Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 In part, yes. The more people the more jobs, more jobs means bigger tax base. It also makes us younger demographically. Heck, even this Republican gets it. Liberal immigration polices help the economy. Conservative immigration policies hurt it. http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20140807/PC1603/140809513/1005/ All the immigrant groups have moved up into the middle class eventually. Everyone hated the Italians, Irish and Germans for a time, but they became part of the back bone of the nations culture. This group of immigrants will do the same If adding a person to our population increased jobs by 1 or more than 1 job, then your argument might have some merit. However, the working population in this country is about 60% so if you add more people you don't get 1 job for 1 added person, you get about .6. That leaves 4/10's of a person to be supported by someone employed or through government benefits. That and if you add population too quickly, you will drive down the employment to population ratio which by the way is at the lowest rate in about 30 years. So, the radical right wing racist republican oh my god WTF if Trump gets elected stance has real merit. Reducing immigration (legal and illegal) should boost the employment rate among Americans which in turn should increase wages and reduce the cost of entitlements. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000
Chef Jim Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Supply of people means there are more wants and needs. Without people there is no economy. So you don't think there is a point when a society, not an economy but a society, can no longer support the massive influx of people? Where is all the clean water, food and livable land to support all these people going to come from? Also the influx has been and will likely continue to be poor unskilled labor. Where is all the skilled labor (doctors, police, high end service) to support these people going to come from? Your approach this in such a simple manner is astounding. Even for you.
DC Tom Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 Economics is so complex that something that sounds really stupid can be true. Excessive supply of unskilled labor in 3rd world countries creates industries dependent on it. The idea is that there is always an equilibrium where a cheap supply of any good draws industries that can exploit it. Like a farmer using a tractor in Kansas, but illegal aliens in California. That's not supply of labor creating jobs. That's demand for labor creating jobs.
Doc Posted January 31, 2016 Posted January 31, 2016 In what school of economics does supply create demand? Voodoo?
Tiberius Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 Really? There's an economic school that says, among other things, that the supply of labor creates demand for that labor? That is pretty seriously stupid. IMMIGRATION is the quintessential supply-side policy. It expands the labour force, encourages investment and provides taxpayers to support America’s growing ranks of the grey-haired. http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21635008-and-how-obamas-order-doesnt-how-migrants-help
DC Tom Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 IMMIGRATION is the quintessential supply-side policy. It expands the labour force, encourages investment and provides taxpayers to support America’s growing ranks of the grey-haired. http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21635008-and-how-obamas-order-doesnt-how-migrants-help Where does it say "it creates jobs?"
3rdnlng Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 IMMIGRATION is the quintessential supply-side policy. It expands the labour force, encourages investment and provides taxpayers to support America’s growing ranks of the grey-haired. http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21635008-and-how-obamas-order-doesnt-how-migrants-help So, you're a supply side believer?
DC Tom Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 So, you're a supply side believer? Nah, he's just an asshat.
Chef Jim Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 IMMIGRATION is the quintessential supply-side policy. It expands the labour force, encourages investment and provides taxpayers to support Americas growing ranks of the grey-haired. http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21635008-and-how-obamas-order-doesnt-how-migrants-help So what you're saying is there is an endless supply of jobs?
unbillievable Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 That's notsupply of labor creating jobs. That's demand for labor creating jobs. sortof... It's excessive supply drawing industries from outside the market into it, which doesn't really increase demand, merely shifting it, but within the closed system it does. IE; moving manufacturing back into the country by flooding the US with cheap illegal immigrants, which would return an unskilled labor demand that was moved to a foreign country. As a whole, it's not an ideal economic model, but the strategy does create jobs in China/India.
unbillievable Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 So what you're saying is there is an endless supply of jobs? Actually (like money), yes, there is an endless supply of jobs. Despite Gator's misunderstanding of the concept, raising the population does increase demand (which increases jobs), but as stated before, you run into problems. 1) You can satisfy the incresaed Demand without employing the entire increased population. 2)The skills of the immigrants may not match the jobs required. But most of all, it's easier to reap the benefits of the larger market simply by opening up trade rather than dealing with the hassle of immigration. With the consequence that they won't be able to vote Democrat -which is probably the real goal.
TPS Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 Really? There's an economic school that says, among other things, that the supply of labor creates demand for that labor? That is pretty seriously stupid. The theory focused on supply of output, which is a direct function of labor. As I said, Keynes debunked that stupid theory, for the most part. Most now accept that demand drives the economy over any meaningful period of time; however, long run growth theory is supply-focused. The ability to produce is a function of labor supply growth and productivity, related to capital stock and technology. Adherents of Say's Law argued if there was insufficient demand in the short run, it would be corrected in the long run. Their fixation on the long run solution is what underlies a famous quip by Keynes: "In the long run we're all dead."
TH3 Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 (edited) Supply of people means there are more wants and needs. Without people there is no economy. Are you really this stupid? Its pretty basic stuff. More people creates more demand. You have been hanging with greggy too much People with money creates demand.... Right now in the industrialized nations we have a lot of rich people with money who have bought all they can and a huge middle class who have not seen their pay go up in 30 years - and as well - globally - half the population of the earth with less wealth that - what - the top 80 people.....pretty sure if that wealth was more evenly distributed the worlds economy would take off.... Edited February 1, 2016 by baskin
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 People with money creates demand.... Right now in the industrialized nations we have a lot of rich people with money who have bought all they can and a huge middle class who have not seen their pay go up in 30 years - and as well - globally - half the population of the earth with less wealth that - what - the top 80 people.....pretty sure if that wealth was more evenly distributed the worlds economy would take off.... Can you please explain how you believe capital formation works?
GG Posted February 1, 2016 Posted February 1, 2016 People with money creates demand.... Right now in the industrialized nations we have a lot of rich people with money who have bought all they can and a huge middle class who have not seen their pay go up in 30 years - and as well - globally - half the population of the earth with less wealth that - what - the top 80 people.....pretty sure if that wealth was more evenly distributed the worlds economy would take off.... And if you were to compare the incomes and wealth of all these groups over the last forty years, what do you think the data would show?
Recommended Posts