• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 16:35
CEST 22:35
KST 05:35
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 20259Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202577RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18
Community News
EWC 2025 - Replay Pack0Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced25BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19
StarCraft 2
General
EWC 2025 - Replay Pack #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 2025 Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 I offer completely free coaching services
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $10,000 live event Esports World Cup 2025 $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced $5,000 WardiTV Summer Championship 2025 WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 484 Magnetic Pull Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune
Brood War
General
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign Dewalt's Show Matches in China BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers [G] Mineral Boosting Does 1 second matter in StarCraft?
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
UK Politics Mega-thread US Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 729 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 64

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 62 63 64 65 66 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
paralleluniverse
Profile Joined July 2010
4065 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-06 10:51:25
January 06 2013 10:45 GMT
#1261
[image loading]
Tufas
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Austria2259 Posts
January 06 2013 12:48 GMT
#1262
Let me start with "I know, I know..."
This article tries to find the "real" Dollar value of the department of defense's overseas spending, done by David Vine - a Tom Dispatch regular and assistant professor of anthropology at American University, in Washington, DC. (also, very long article)
http://mondediplo.com/openpage/picking-up-a-170-billion-tab

As many of you would say he is very left, so if you read the article .. ignore his needling and his agenda, take the article for what it is ..

I am not going to write a tl:dr
Where is my ACE flair
Tufas
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Austria2259 Posts
January 06 2013 13:25 GMT
#1263
Another thing .. I know this is old news but hey. I have to write it somewhere.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1

Just two quotes from the article.

"Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital “pocket litter.” "

"But “this is more than just a data center,” says one senior intelligence official who until recently was involved with the program. The mammoth Bluffdale center will have another important and far more secret role that until now has gone unrevealed. It is also critical, he says, for breaking codes. And code-breaking is crucial, because much of the data that the center will handle—financial information, stock transactions, business deals, foreign military and diplomatic secrets, legal documents, confidential personal communications—will be heavily encrypted. According to another top official also involved with the program, the NSA made an enormous breakthrough several years ago in its ability to cryptanalyze, or break, unfathomably complex encryption systems employed by not only governments around the world but also many average computer users in the US. The upshot, according to this official: “Everybody’s a target; everybody with communication is a target.” "

In case you really did not know, this is not a conspiracy ... this is reality.
I know that to some U.S. citizens every citizen of another country is worth nothing but hey .. uhm .. I dont really like that.
Now. I have no doubt that my government is doing the same or something similar (well maybe not Austria, too lazy for that) but some interagency in the EU surely does. Its just that .. this makes me so sad beyond believe. Its like all the Stasi employees emigrated to every powerfull country after 1989 and try to achieve what they never could

It just makes me sad ... because there is absolutely zero I can do against it.
I know this is not really a discussion, just my frustration
Sorry.
Where is my ACE flair
Tufas
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Austria2259 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-06 13:29:21
January 06 2013 13:28 GMT
#1264
I mean lol its not like it is better for any of you U.S. citizens, just quoting the Wall Street Journal ...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324478304578171623040640006.html

"The rules now allow the little-known National Counterterrorism Center to examine the government files of U.S. citizens for possible criminal behavior, even if there is no reason to suspect them. That is a departure from past practice, which barred the agency from storing information about ordinary Americans unless a person was a terror suspect or related to an investigation.

Now, NCTC can copy entire government databases—flight records, casino-employee lists, the names of Americans hosting foreign-exchange students and many others. The agency has new authority to keep data about innocent U.S. citizens for up to five years, and to analyze it for suspicious patterns of behavior. Previously, both were prohibited. Data about Americans "reasonably believed to constitute terrorism information" may be permanently retained.

The changes also allow databases of U.S. civilian information to be given to foreign governments for analysis of their own. In effect, U.S. and foreign governments would be using the information to look for clues that people might commit future crimes."

We are all fucked, dont worry.

EDIT : Sorry for the three posts, I did not really have a concept and just wrote it as I went along ..
Where is my ACE flair
radiatoren
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
Denmark1907 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-06 14:22:00
January 06 2013 14:19 GMT
#1265
On January 06 2013 17:27 BluePanther wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:10 oneofthem wrote:
[quote]
well, there is this whole NAIRU idea that basically makes a policy imperative out of having unemployment. not very far from the idea of a reserve pool of labor that keeps wage down.

But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?


Well there are two ways to combat this.

Lower taxes or lower the minimum wage.

Incentivise lower education or incentivise the use of the higher educated (taxes, regulations, tax-breaks, subsidies etc.).
Lowering taxes in response to "underemployment" (the overqualified employment) is not the answer generally since it encourages increase in lower educated jobs mostly. If it is a question of underemployment in terms of fewer hours than wanted, it is neither a solution since unemployment is low. You risk emptying the flexibility by making unemployment too low.

I don't know enough about government protected minimum wages, but from what I hear, it is already low in USA. Is it possible to live on food stamps when you have a job in USA? If it isn't there is something to be said about the livelyhood. Especially for people in part time jobs, a lowering of minimum wage is problematic. Since a lot of the people in multiple minimum jobs are lesser resourced to begin with, it is a radical step towards more need of charity.
Repeat before me
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 06 2013 19:36 GMT
#1266
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:10 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:06 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
Inflationary, not inflation.

well, there is this whole NAIRU idea that basically makes a policy imperative out of having unemployment. not very far from the idea of a reserve pool of labor that keeps wage down.

But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

I think decisions get pretty complex at that point. Sometimes jobs leave for good and people just need to retrain. Other times there's a competitiveness issue and jobs can be brought back.
TotalBalanceSC2
Profile Joined February 2011
Canada475 Posts
January 06 2013 19:42 GMT
#1267
On January 07 2013 04:36 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:10 oneofthem wrote:
[quote]
well, there is this whole NAIRU idea that basically makes a policy imperative out of having unemployment. not very far from the idea of a reserve pool of labor that keeps wage down.

But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

I think decisions get pretty complex at that point. Sometimes jobs leave for good and people just need to retrain. Other times there's a competitiveness issue and jobs can be brought back.


I personally think the US needs to lower its corporate tax rates, they are a little high compared to other countries at the moment. Even Jamie Dimon says he would be willing to pay higher income taxes if America would lower the corporate rate.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/10/us-jpmorgan-dimon-taxes-idUSBRE8991DI20121010
HunterX11
Profile Joined March 2009
United States1048 Posts
January 06 2013 19:43 GMT
#1268
On January 07 2013 04:36 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:10 oneofthem wrote:
[quote]
well, there is this whole NAIRU idea that basically makes a policy imperative out of having unemployment. not very far from the idea of a reserve pool of labor that keeps wage down.

But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

I think decisions get pretty complex at that point. Sometimes jobs leave for good and people just need to retrain. Other times there's a competitiveness issue and jobs can be brought back.


What if it's the worst case scenario, and the U.S. really is such a rich and productive country that there isn't ever going to be enough work for everyone to find employment that provides them with a comfortable standard of living?
Try using both Irradiate and Defensive Matrix on an Overlord. It looks pretty neat.
Souma
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
January 06 2013 19:44 GMT
#1269
On January 07 2013 04:43 HunterX11 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 07 2013 04:36 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

I think decisions get pretty complex at that point. Sometimes jobs leave for good and people just need to retrain. Other times there's a competitiveness issue and jobs can be brought back.


What if it's the worst case scenario, and the U.S. really is such a rich and productive country that there isn't ever going to be enough work for everyone to find employment that provides them with a comfortable standard of living?


Is that really the "worst case scenario?" Seems like a normal scenario to me.
Writer
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 06 2013 19:48 GMT
#1270
On January 06 2013 23:19 radiatoren wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 06 2013 17:27 BluePanther wrote:
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?


Well there are two ways to combat this.

Lower taxes or lower the minimum wage.

Incentivise lower education or incentivise the use of the higher educated (taxes, regulations, tax-breaks, subsidies etc.).
Lowering taxes in response to "underemployment" (the overqualified employment) is not the answer generally since it encourages increase in lower educated jobs mostly. If it is a question of underemployment in terms of fewer hours than wanted, it is neither a solution since unemployment is low. You risk emptying the flexibility by making unemployment too low.

I don't know enough about government protected minimum wages, but from what I hear, it is already low in USA. Is it possible to live on food stamps when you have a job in USA? If it isn't there is something to be said about the livelyhood. Especially for people in part time jobs, a lowering of minimum wage is problematic. Since a lot of the people in multiple minimum jobs are lesser resourced to begin with, it is a radical step towards more need of charity.

The Federal minimum wage is low but many states and cities have higher minimums. Cost of living varies a lot ('tis a big country!) so having one all encompassing minimum is problematic. Minimum wage in the US mainly affects young people because they don't have skills yet. So yeah you can't raise a family on it but you aren't supposed to either.

And yes, there are a bunch of government support programs available to people on minimum wage and above.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
January 06 2013 19:55 GMT
#1271
On January 07 2013 04:36 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:10 oneofthem wrote:
[quote]
well, there is this whole NAIRU idea that basically makes a policy imperative out of having unemployment. not very far from the idea of a reserve pool of labor that keeps wage down.

But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

people just need to retrain.


To do what?
shikata ga nai
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 06 2013 19:56 GMT
#1272
On January 07 2013 04:43 HunterX11 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 07 2013 04:36 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

I think decisions get pretty complex at that point. Sometimes jobs leave for good and people just need to retrain. Other times there's a competitiveness issue and jobs can be brought back.


What if it's the worst case scenario, and the U.S. really is such a rich and productive country that there isn't ever going to be enough work for everyone to find employment that provides them with a comfortable standard of living?

Well that's getting into a borderline paradox - if we're so productive there should be plenty of jobs available at a high wage. From an employer's perspective jobs aren't cheap or expensive based on the wage it is cheap or expensive based on the wage relative to the production. So US workers can be very productive, earn a high wage and be cheap from the employer's point of view.

Ex. A Chinese worker produces 10 units per hour at $1 per hour.
A US worker produces 1,000 units per hour at $20 per hour.
The US worker is cheaper!
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
January 06 2013 20:00 GMT
#1273
On January 07 2013 04:55 sam!zdat wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 07 2013 04:36 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
But in that circumstance wages are irrelevant. If wages rise $1 and prices rise $1 real wages have risen $0. Keeping wage price inflation in check does not mean keeping real wages in check.

having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

people just need to retrain.


To do what?


Well realistically that would depend on the individual and their circumstance.
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
January 06 2013 20:00 GMT
#1274
there is no vast consciously designed capital class conspiracy at least when it comes to the labor market.
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-06 20:07:44
January 06 2013 20:06 GMT
#1275
are you talking to me, oneofthem?

On January 07 2013 05:00 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 07 2013 04:55 sam!zdat wrote:
On January 07 2013 04:36 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 07:59 oneofthem wrote:
[quote]
having unemployment does mean less bargaining power for labor and less share of production value for labor, so real wage can be kept down.

When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

people just need to retrain.


To do what?


Well realistically that would depend on the individual and their circumstance.


So you don't know either, ok. This is just a non-answer and market worship.
shikata ga nai
TotalBalanceSC2
Profile Joined February 2011
Canada475 Posts
January 06 2013 20:10 GMT
#1276
On January 07 2013 05:06 sam!zdat wrote:
are you talking to me, oneofthem?

Show nested quote +
On January 07 2013 05:00 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 07 2013 04:55 sam!zdat wrote:
On January 07 2013 04:36 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 15:04 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 14:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 11:02 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:13 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On January 06 2013 09:00 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
On January 06 2013 08:56 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
When unemployment is that high the policy is to bring unemployment down.

Some unemployment doesn't mean that real wages can be kept down. Too much unemployment does.


Out of curiosity then, what in your opinion constitutes Too much unemployment?

>5% is pretty standard. Around that and you are left with structural unemployment, more or less.

In other words you want enough jobs available for everyone that wants one and it just becomes a matter of matching the available worker to the available job.


As a follow up then, what is your opinion on the number of under-employed people? People that have useful degrees but have to resort to part-time/unskilled labor due to a lack of openings. I hear the problem of underemployment is becoming quite the issue, with some 14% of workers reporting being underemployed in the most recent jobs report if I remember correctly.

IMO it would be similar to unemployment if its due to a temporary drop in demand for those skills. Typically if that's the case then the underemployment goes away along with unemployment going away.


What would be your response if the level of unemployment went down only because the level of underemployment went up and their was clear data showing the reason was due to high quality jobs leaving the country?

people just need to retrain.


To do what?


Well realistically that would depend on the individual and their circumstance.


So you don't know either, ok. This is just a non-answer and market worship.


Would you have rather heard we create government funded positions for philosophical study?
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-06 20:13:43
January 06 2013 20:11 GMT
#1277
I just want to hear what people think people are going to spend their time doing in the future, nobody will tell me even though I keep asking

edit: it's not about me at all, I live modestly on philosophical principle and I'm going to inherit several million dollars so I could mostly care less
shikata ga nai
TotalBalanceSC2
Profile Joined February 2011
Canada475 Posts
January 06 2013 20:22 GMT
#1278
On January 07 2013 05:11 sam!zdat wrote:
I just want to hear what people think people are going to spend their time doing in the future, nobody will tell me even though I keep asking

edit: it's not about me at all, I live modestly on philosophical principle and I'm going to inherit several million dollars so I could mostly care less


well I can tell you what I think I hope to be doing. I am not an American so I am not sure how much it pertains to this thread though.

I hope to graduate high school and get a degree in either economics or financial mathematics. From there I hope to get a job working in finance, my dream would be to work at Berkshire Hathaway but that is unlikely to happen so I will settle for working for one of the larger more generic financial institutions. If I make enough I would like to start my own fund or maybe just retire early and enjoy my money. After that I suppose I grow old and die.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
January 06 2013 20:29 GMT
#1279
You don't want to hear my opinion about your becoming a financier.
shikata ga nai
TotalBalanceSC2
Profile Joined February 2011
Canada475 Posts
January 06 2013 20:30 GMT
#1280
On January 07 2013 05:29 sam!zdat wrote:
You don't want to hear my opinion about your becoming a financier.

In fact I would love to hear your opinion
Prev 1 62 63 64 65 66 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
18:00
RO8 Round Robin Group - Day 4
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
ZZZero.O240
LiquipediaDiscussion
FEL
09:00
Cracow 2025
Clem vs LamboLIVE!
Reynor vs TBD
RotterdaM2864
ComeBackTV 2538
IndyStarCraft 742
WardiTV468
3DClanTV 222
CranKy Ducklings180
EnkiAlexander 137
Rex67
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RotterdaM 2864
IndyStarCraft 742
Rex 67
StarCraft: Brood War
ZZZero.O 240
NaDa 8
Dota 2
capcasts294
LuMiX1
League of Legends
JimRising 294
febbydoto15
Counter-Strike
fl0m3371
Fnx 2264
Stewie2K597
flusha375
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox2174
Mew2King1541
AZ_Axe304
Westballz14
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu569
Khaldor409
Other Games
Grubby3173
B2W.Neo1006
KnowMe108
mouzStarbuck105
Sick32
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick3014
StarCraft 2
angryscii 22
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 19 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta29
• LUISG 19
• Adnapsc2 6
• intothetv
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• Migwel
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki36
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22079
• WagamamaTV936
League of Legends
• Doublelift4549
Other Games
• imaqtpie1680
• Shiphtur524
Upcoming Events
Wardi Open
14h 25m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 13h
WardiTV European League
1d 19h
Online Event
1d 20h
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
2 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL 20 Team Wars
FEL Cracov 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.