|
On June 12 2013 06:10 Gorsameth wrote:
Our economy is bad. lets put another 2500 people on the street so they cant pay there mortgage and get things even worse.
The money these people get paid, has to be earned somewhere. Or rather, since Draghi is in money-printing mode, the value these people consume has to be created somewhere. If letting people continue to work and earn in jobs that don't add value to a society or a community would function longterm, we could all live in a selfulfilling socialist utopia.
|
On June 13 2013 15:51 Aiobhill wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 06:10 Gorsameth wrote:
Our economy is bad. lets put another 2500 people on the street so they cant pay there mortgage and get things even worse. The money these people get paid, has to be earned somewhere. Or rather, since Draghi is in money-printing mode, the value these people consume has to be created somewhere. If letting people continue to work and earn in jobs that don't add value to a society or a community would function longterm, we could all live in a selfulfilling socialist utopia.
Could you define value and explain who or what type of activity, according to you, create or don't create value please.
|
According to Jean-Paul Philippot, president of the EBU (European Broadcasting Union which is based in Geneva, Switzerland, and has 75 active members in 56 countries) the ERT was only receiving 10 millions euros from the greek state on a 330 millions budget. The rest of the money was coming directly from the subscription / tax (call it what you want) for TV.
As the president of the state sponsored french belgian TV (RTBF) he probably also has his own bia on the matter. So, as usual, keep that in mind while making your own opinion.
For the sake of comparison, Belgian public TV has a 800 millions budget when you add both dutch and french speaking TV and the local stations. Population is roughly the same as Greece.
|
So, wait. The Greek station was small, and already had a tiny budget to begin with, and got very little funding. Now they're cutting the station?
|
On June 13 2013 17:49 aksfjh wrote:
So, wait. The Greek station was small, and already had a tiny budget to begin with, and got very little funding. Now they're cutting the station?
If you look at the bottom of previous page, I also reported the opinion of one member of the greek ruling party which was basically saying that ERT was expensive as hell.
And now, I reported the opinion of the other side of the argument (the president of EBU) which says the contrary.
So, you have argument from both sides. Make your own opinion 
|
On June 13 2013 17:49 aksfjh wrote:
So, wait. The Greek station was small, and already had a tiny budget to begin with, and got very little funding. Now they're cutting the station?
You expect them to cut the jobs of their highly paid family members?
|
On June 13 2013 17:06 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 15:51 Aiobhill wrote:On June 12 2013 06:10 Gorsameth wrote:
Our economy is bad. lets put another 2500 people on the street so they cant pay there mortgage and get things even worse. The money these people get paid, has to be earned somewhere. Or rather, since Draghi is in money-printing mode, the value these people consume has to be created somewhere. If letting people continue to work and earn in jobs that don't add value to a society or a community would function longterm, we could all live in a selfulfilling socialist utopia. Could you define value and explain who or what type of activity, according to you, create or don't create value please.
Gladly. They create a product, in this case most likely information and/or entertainment. If there is no private demand at current cost for this product or a consensus to introduce or raise taxes or fees to finance continued production, it seems the value created does not match the cost. It's not my definition or my decision, it's up to the people for whom the product is made or their representatives.
|
if they fire people without reducing or nullifying the TV tax (( we have that here too: a television licence tax (for the national television only), mandatory for all holders of TV sets)) then it's about controlling the said TV station.
|
This is clearly a political move to eliminate (at least in part) objective journalism.
First, saving measly millions when your budget problem is counted in billions is not going to help you. Especially when you know that this step will enrage the public, which will make other more important measures that more difficult to implement.
Also, the organization might be very inefficiently run, but that can be changed without closing it completely. It seems to be a clear case of throwing out the baby with the bath water.
|
On June 13 2013 18:54 Aiobhill wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 17:06 WhiteDog wrote:On June 13 2013 15:51 Aiobhill wrote:On June 12 2013 06:10 Gorsameth wrote:
Our economy is bad. lets put another 2500 people on the street so they cant pay there mortgage and get things even worse. The money these people get paid, has to be earned somewhere. Or rather, since Draghi is in money-printing mode, the value these people consume has to be created somewhere. If letting people continue to work and earn in jobs that don't add value to a society or a community would function longterm, we could all live in a selfulfilling socialist utopia. Could you define value and explain who or what type of activity, according to you, create or don't create value please. Gladly. They create a product, in this case most likely information and/or entertainment. If there is no private demand at current cost for this product or a consensus to introduce or raise taxes or fees to finance continued production, it seems the value created does not match the cost. It's not my definition or my decision, it's up to the people for whom the product is made or their representatives.
you didn't understand the meaning of public TV stations in a democracy.
they don't go after demand. they have the aim of educating and informing the population.
you say: "the value doesn't match the cost"
do you think it's different in german public TV? does the "value" (there is nearly none, mostly it's stupid entertainment) match the cost of 9 billion euro?
|
On June 13 2013 19:41 lord_nibbler wrote:
This is clearly a political move to eliminate (at least in part) objective journalism.
First, saving measly millions when your budget problem is counted in billions is not going to help you. Especially when you know that this step will enrage the public, which will make other more important measures that more difficult to implement.
Also, the organization might be very inefficiently run, but that can be changed without closing it completely. It seems to be a clear case of throwing out the baby with the bath water.
It will be reopened the closing is to reorganise.
Edit:and even if it is a small amount of money I don't see why you shouldn't make it more efficient. Its inexcusable when you're implementing austerity measures everywhere but skip the public TV because 'it's only a couple of million'.
|
On June 13 2013 19:45 fleeze wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 18:54 Aiobhill wrote:On June 13 2013 17:06 WhiteDog wrote:On June 13 2013 15:51 Aiobhill wrote:On June 12 2013 06:10 Gorsameth wrote:
Our economy is bad. lets put another 2500 people on the street so they cant pay there mortgage and get things even worse. The money these people get paid, has to be earned somewhere. Or rather, since Draghi is in money-printing mode, the value these people consume has to be created somewhere. If letting people continue to work and earn in jobs that don't add value to a society or a community would function longterm, we could all live in a selfulfilling socialist utopia. Could you define value and explain who or what type of activity, according to you, create or don't create value please. Gladly. They create a product, in this case most likely information and/or entertainment. If there is no private demand at current cost for this product or a consensus to introduce or raise taxes or fees to finance continued production, it seems the value created does not match the cost. It's not my definition or my decision, it's up to the people for whom the product is made or their representatives. you didn't understand the meaning of public TV stations in a democracy. they don't go after demand. they have the aim of educating and informing the population. you say: "the value doesn't match the cost" do you think it's different in german public TV? does the "value" (there is nearly none, mostly it's stupid entertainment) match the cost of 9 billion euro?
No it doesnt. Its a corrupt system that serves to employ ex-politicians in highly paid positions. I would be the first to applaud if ARD and ZDF get shut down.
|
Some people miss the fact that besides funding from budget, this TV station was also founded by a special tax going directly to it (its the same way in Poland). I am wondering what will happen to this tax now that station is gone. Stright into budget to fix finances a little? I cant imagine it will be gone (i mean tax), that would only ease population, not helping the budget in any way.
|
On June 13 2013 19:56 Yuljan wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 19:45 fleeze wrote:On June 13 2013 18:54 Aiobhill wrote:On June 13 2013 17:06 WhiteDog wrote:On June 13 2013 15:51 Aiobhill wrote:On June 12 2013 06:10 Gorsameth wrote:
Our economy is bad. lets put another 2500 people on the street so they cant pay there mortgage and get things even worse. The money these people get paid, has to be earned somewhere. Or rather, since Draghi is in money-printing mode, the value these people consume has to be created somewhere. If letting people continue to work and earn in jobs that don't add value to a society or a community would function longterm, we could all live in a selfulfilling socialist utopia. Could you define value and explain who or what type of activity, according to you, create or don't create value please. Gladly. They create a product, in this case most likely information and/or entertainment. If there is no private demand at current cost for this product or a consensus to introduce or raise taxes or fees to finance continued production, it seems the value created does not match the cost. It's not my definition or my decision, it's up to the people for whom the product is made or their representatives. you didn't understand the meaning of public TV stations in a democracy. they don't go after demand. they have the aim of educating and informing the population. you say: "the value doesn't match the cost" do you think it's different in german public TV? does the "value" (there is nearly none, mostly it's stupid entertainment) match the cost of 9 billion euro? No it doesnt. Its a corrupt system that serves to employ ex-politicians in highly paid positions. I would be the first to applaud if ARD and ZDF get shut down.
Unfortunately this is true.
I do however think that there should be an efficiently run public boadcasting outlet with it's main goals information and eduction rather then profit. I rather like the British way of doing things (the BBC basicly) in that regard.
|
On June 13 2013 18:54 Aiobhill wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 17:06 WhiteDog wrote:On June 13 2013 15:51 Aiobhill wrote:On June 12 2013 06:10 Gorsameth wrote:
Our economy is bad. lets put another 2500 people on the street so they cant pay there mortgage and get things even worse. The money these people get paid, has to be earned somewhere. Or rather, since Draghi is in money-printing mode, the value these people consume has to be created somewhere. If letting people continue to work and earn in jobs that don't add value to a society or a community would function longterm, we could all live in a selfulfilling socialist utopia. Could you define value and explain who or what type of activity, according to you, create or don't create value please. Gladly. They create a product, in this case most likely information and/or entertainment. If there is no private demand at current cost for this product or a consensus to introduce or raise taxes or fees to finance continued production, it seems the value created does not match the cost. It's not my definition or my decision, it's up to the people for whom the product is made or their representatives.
Television, like school does not create a simple product. In economy, after the theorist who built the idea of the endogenous growth, we consider that such "product" are responsible for positive externalities - which means that the activity made by televisions is acting positively on the economic activity of others, but that "transaction" doesn't pass through the system of price (nobody paid for it). Television gives information to people (information are important for economy because it helps people makes efficient decisions) it also display knowledge, which develop human capital within the country. For a long time economists thought that public administrations and the likes had no real economic value, that there were just waste of money, but now they insist on the idea that investing in such administrations help firms to focus on production, and economist have actually empirically quantified the impact of an administration and public infrastructure on the economic growth.
The fact that public televisions are corrupted is another matter entirely.
Plus, you cannot product if there is no demand as you say. Cutting down job on a microeconomic level is just cutting working cost (which is a good thing in a competitive market, like today with the competition from china and those country with really low labor cost), but on a macroeconomic level it's cutting down the global demand. That is what is happening in Greece, you cannot cut thousands and thousands of job because they don't create "economic value" (as you defined it) without instantly destroying the demand and thus destroying your country (consumption is more than half the GPD of most developped country). The 2700 job they are cutting are not only cutting down "unproductive" jobs, it's also cutting down 2700 people consumption and thus cutting down the possible profit "productive" firms could make.
|
United States6277 Posts
Crime Gangs Look to Clean Up as Europe's Black Market Balloons
The financial crisis has fuelled a huge expansion of organized crime in Europe with 3,600 criminal syndicates now active across the continent, profiting even from such prosaic products as household detergents, the head of Europol has warned.
Rob Wainwright, director of the European Union's crime-fighting agency, said Europe's black market in counterfeit foodstuffs, pharmaceuticals and machine parts doubled to a value of about two billion euros in the early years of the recession. ...
When asked whether crimes such as these were hampering the EU's economic recovery, Mr. Wainwright said: "Yes, I think the short answer to that is yes . . . there is a deliberate exploitation of our global economic conditions to serve the illegal economy."
Other recessionary crime trends identified by Europol include an increasing willingness by companies to cut costs by using illegal labour, which has led to breaches of minimum wage guidelines and fuelled people-trafficking networks in more extreme cases.
Criminals are even making gains from governments' attempts to recover from the crisis: the decision by some member states to raise VAT has spurred a growth in fraudulent VAT claims which used to be concentrated on electrical products to a much wider range of goods over a bigger range of EU countries.
In the UK, for instance, the VAT rate increased in early 2011 from 17.5 per cent to 20 per cent, making any fake claim on this tax instantly more profitable. VAT fraud is now estimated to be worth 100 billion euros a year across Europe. ...
Link
|
On June 13 2013 20:16 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 18:54 Aiobhill wrote:On June 13 2013 17:06 WhiteDog wrote:On June 13 2013 15:51 Aiobhill wrote:On June 12 2013 06:10 Gorsameth wrote:
Our economy is bad. lets put another 2500 people on the street so they cant pay there mortgage and get things even worse. The money these people get paid, has to be earned somewhere. Or rather, since Draghi is in money-printing mode, the value these people consume has to be created somewhere. If letting people continue to work and earn in jobs that don't add value to a society or a community would function longterm, we could all live in a selfulfilling socialist utopia. Could you define value and explain who or what type of activity, according to you, create or don't create value please. Gladly. They create a product, in this case most likely information and/or entertainment. If there is no private demand at current cost for this product or a consensus to introduce or raise taxes or fees to finance continued production, it seems the value created does not match the cost. It's not my definition or my decision, it's up to the people for whom the product is made or their representatives. Television, like school does not create a simple product. In economy, after the theorist who built the idea of the endogenous growth, we consider that such "product" are responsible for positive externalities - which means that the activity made by televisions is acting positively on the economic activity of others, but that "transaction" doesn't pass through the system of price (nobody paid for it). Television gives information to people (information are important for economy because it helps people makes efficient decisions) it also display knowledge, which develop human capital within the country. For a long time economists thought that public administrations and the likes had no real economic value, that there were just waste of money, but now they insist on the idea that investing in such administrations help firms to focus on production, and economist have actually empirically quantified the impact of an administration and public infrastructure on the economic growth. The fact that public televisions are corrupted is another matter entirely. Plus, you cannot product if there is no demand as you say. Cutting down job on a microeconomic level is just cutting working cost (which is a good thing in a competitive market, like today with the competition from china and those country with really low labor cost), but on a macroeconomic level it's cutting down the global demand. That is what is happening in Greece, you cannot cut thousands and thousands of job because they don't create "economic value" (as you defined it) without instantly destroying the demand and thus destroying your country (consumption is more than half the GPD of most developped country). The 2700 job they are cutting are not only cutting down "unproductive" jobs, it's also cutting down 2700 people consumption and thus cutting down the possible profit "productive" firms could make.
So if we follow this logic, the government of Greece should hire every single unemployed person tomorrow to cut grass with nail-clippers and generate consumption to grow the economy? Paying people government money to do unproductive jobs does not add to the economy. The consumption would have went elsewhere if they had not been 'given' away to the people doing these jobs.
|
On June 25 2013 08:38 Feartheguru wrote:
So if we follow this logic, the government of Greece should hire every single unemployed person tomorrow to cut grass with nail-clippers and generate consumption to grow the economy?
Of course, talking in pure black and white with senseless hyperbole is a great and productive way discuss the serious issues raised on this topic. Way to go, buddy.
|
|
|
On June 25 2013 08:53 lord_nibbler wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 08:38 Feartheguru wrote:
So if we follow this logic, the government of Greece should hire every single unemployed person tomorrow to cut grass with nail-clippers and generate consumption to grow the economy? Of course, talking in pure black and white with senseless hyperbole is a great and productive way discuss the serious issues raised on this topic. Way to go, buddy.
Since they both are completely forgetting standard concepts like diseconomies of scale and diminishing returns I doubt they can seriously add to any complex economical discussion.
I don't want to be so harsh against Whitedog though. At least he tries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
