My jewish economics professor said that taxation is always inefficient because it reduces the consumer surplus and producer surplus and creates a deadweight loss. Also, he said that the consumer almost always pays for the tax. Also, tax ceilings and minimum wages are unfair and the market should decide all prices. If the equilibrium price of housing is too expensive for you (the consumer) you will just adjust your consumption levels by reducing your quantity demanded and not renting your apartment. By creating a tax ceiling, the government is causing suppliers of housing to decrease supply and thereby create a shortage in the market.
According to him, full employment doesn't mean that the whole workforce is employed. Apparently, full employment means only no frictional unemployment, but when people lose jobs to automation, that called structural unemployment and it's a good thing because now the economy can grow due to increased efficiency. The displaced workers can learn a new skill such as programming.
The efficient economy thing is in some ways a good idea, and should theoretically (but doesn't) reduce any argument of need for third world low skilled migrants. Also individual skill sets aren't as alterable as he pretends to be. This idea you can go from a truck driver or a coal minor, to a rocket scientist or a surgeon is a ridiculous idea. Class structures and hierarchies will always exist because different people have different abilities, skill sets and traits that predispose them for different positions along this hierarchy.
Christopher Ortiz
>displaced workers can learn a new skill such as programming kek
Jaxon Adams
As a brainlet sub 100 iq mensa let me tell you. Taxes take from those with means and gives to the state aka super welfare queens. Where the state is the queen and the recipients are the peasants.
The only thing feeding the state is the revenue it generates. So, by licensing, regulating, permitting, and taxing is how the government gains its income.
To be fair. A person making 80k a year has what is called expendable income. A person making 45k a year has some as well, but only about 15% of those that make 80k.
Is it wrong to steal from those well to do? Sure. But, if you look at the population as a spectrum then you will see that, virtuously taking from both groups allow retards to live semicomfy lives. And for them to not be homeless is a good thing. It maybe considered extortion by the 45k a year and larceny by the 85k a year, but both benifit in the long run. The 45k a year and 85k a year are both subjected to housing vouchers. So, undesirables move into your once prohibited areas. But, ideally speaking, you raise the intelligence of a could be criminal.
Now, this gib/handout would be better suited if we didn't import slaves.
Housing for lower income earners (real wealth compared to renters) is the way to bringing up the underclass.
There is no reason why a house that was once 50k is worth 100k in 20 years. If that relationship worked with cars we would all be driving 90s honda civics.
Tldr? Get rid of multifamily immigrants. They fuck the poor the most.
Jayden King
Your professor is correct for the most part. The only minor details to clarify are the ones regarding what is called "Creative Destruction". This is what happens when due to some new inventions, technologies, foreign competition, etc. emerge which makes some sector of the economy decline or obsolete and workers lose their jobs. A famous example is the invention of the automobile made buggy whip manufacturers go out of business due to reduced demand from more people switching from horse and buggy to automobile for transportation. The economy as a whole improves and the standard of living for people as a whole improves. However, those most directly affected do not "just find jobs" in some other sector of the economy. The buggy whip makers did not just go right to work in the Ford Model T plant. Those people are fucked. For the short term at least. Some will find better jobs and many will not. It is a good thing for the entirety of humanity when a new technology or new, more efficient method of doing something is created. However, the people who lose their jobs are fucked and end up working at Starbucks for a couple years and then after that they get a job 5 years later making what they made before they lost their original job.
Connor Miller
I am curious what college you go to because your Economics professor has a good handle on free market principles. Most are Keynesians or socialists and complete liberal retards.
Caleb Murphy
So we should go full-blown communist, brainlet?
Jeremiah Young
Yes. A jew telling the truth and not trying to subvert, how rare.
Nolan Smith
I'm not at liberty to disclose the name of my university but I'll give you a hint: they say if you can hold a fork, you can go there.
Ryder King
Your professor sounds like he understands free market economics and he might be Austrian school or Chicago School. Where Libertarians and Austrians go wrong is that they frame the entire world in economics and the free market without taking into consideration racial and cultural differences. I had a prominent Austrian economist tell me once that labor flows to where it is most needed and valued. What he was saying is that millions of Mexicans can come to America to find better, more productive jobs. We will all be better off economically from millions of Mexicans coming here and having access to our technology and capital equipment which will make them produce more goods and services for cheaper and improve everyone's financial life. However, there are Externalities. The Mexicans bring with them their culture, values, intellect, birth rates. So in exchange for importing millions of Mexican workers and giving them access to capital which makes their work more productive we have to accept more crime, changes in culture, poor quality schools, lower national average IQ. This is where it becomes a problem and where the Anarcho Capitalists go too far. It is definitely good to take 10 70 IQ Africans building a road with pickaxes and shovels and give them bulldozers, graders, and forklifts. But they cannot live in the same geographical location or they will cause problems for the rest of the society.
Colton Perez
>Taxation is always inefficient No -- taxation through tariff is some of the most efficient taxation possible because it creates a dissuasive effect for international producers and allows native producers the best share of native markets. >because it reduces consumer and produce surplus and creates deadweight loss Yes >Tax usually passed to consumers Yes >Ceilings and minimum wages are unfair, markets should decide all prices Yes in Perfect Competition, no in practical reality (this is the difference between pure market capitalism and oligopoly, which is what we have today. Markets setting the price today would resemble the monopoly model, with CS minimized and PS maximized). >You will reduce QD for housing and other basic essentials if dictated by scarcity Yes. You'll rent an apartment with a (((roommate))) or stay home with your parents instead of renting an apartment. Minimum wage laws are inefficient because your Jewish professor will also push for immigration. Immigration = cheaper labor than natural labor down to the minimum wage (for you, less for the illegals who are paid illegally). >Full employment doesn't mean that the whole workforce is employed Economic pilpul. >Structural unemployment is a good thing This is his self-interest speaking. He works in education. People who need to be retrained make him his shekels. Ask him his opinion on central banking. If he can explain to you what a central bank is, what it does, and how it works such that you can understand, that is a much better metric by which to gauge his level of Jewry. >t. idiot who bought the economics meme and got a degree in it
Carson Foster
Beautiful protruding nipples
Daniel Gutierrez
University of Economics in South Tatarstan ?
James Edwards
>Your professor is correct for the most part. This is the problem with jewish pilpul.
John Price
So is real theft. Taxation for national security is the efficient way to live among humans with unequal access to information and unequal skills.
Aaron Hughes
Taxation pales in comparison to usury.
Andrew Gonzalez
You wouldnt reply to me the last time you made this thread because I'm right, tell professor Cohen to fuck off
Adam Morales
I like how you recognize that most of what is called state is rent seeking. I don't quite follow how your finality is only multi-family immigrants, since literally the people who fuck you the most are DC themselves.
Grayson Young
>The displaced workers can learn a new skill such as programming.
It merely prevents those skills from equally being acquired.
Brandon Ramirez
You use that word alot, I don't think it means what you think it means.
Christopher Edwards
Problem with all these economic theories is they start with a blank slate. That is never the case. Second they are about efficiency and not about making a good life for everyone
Ethan Johnson
Your 75 year old grandmother will never run a 100dash as fast as the average male in his early 20's. Your pregnant wife will never box like Mike Tyson.
Eli Flores
>efficiency and not about making a good life Because good life is spending 4 hours on a task that could be done in 20 minutes?
Chase Scott
>You use that word alot, I don't think it means what you think it means. You use that word a lot, I don't think it means what you think it means.
More like the wealthy connections compared to the poor connections.
In any scenario you presented would never be equal. We're talking about monetary.
Colton Young
you know i need sauce on pic related
Nolan Carter
Would
Brandon Jenkins
Economists don't use the same definition of efficient as laymen. For example it is currently considered "efficient" to ship materials and products back and forth across the globe multiple times, doing this does not take less time nor less resources though.
Jose Stewart
Pleasant grove Dallas Tx pre1990s was under 20%black 0% illegal. Today it is 90% illegal 9%black 1% white. The houses went for 50k when my grandmother bought it in 1987. They go 100k now. Every house has at least 2 families per roof. That area had shopping, police, fire,medical, all within 2 minutes response time.
I swear to you. If you repossess the illegal housing you would open a wealth for the underclass. And the6 wouldn't have to live in an apartment. They would be surrounded by 65% white 15% black 10% Hispanic (legal Hispanic) 10% other. The crime rate would be around 10/1000.
I typed a different message but my phone fucked up when I started talking about opportunities being close to down town dallas. (Sub 10 minutes away via highway)
James Perry
Structural Unemployment is a good thing in general. However, it is not a good thing for those who are specifically affected. If you work in the oilfield making 100k per year you are doing that job because it is your best option that you are aware of. If business reorganize, become more efficient, incorporate new technologies that allow them to accomplish the same amount of production with less labor then it is a good thing for the economy as a whole. The additional labor and capital that are now freed can be put to a productive use. However, the actual workers who are laid off from their 100k job will not all necessarily find some other 100k job. Studies have shown that displaced workers take years to get back to what they were earning before they were laid off. In economics, you have to be very specific with your language. While something can be good, it is not necessarily an absolute good. What is known in economics as Pareto optimal never exists in real life. But, economics is all about making trade offs.
Liam Morris
it's the basic school of economics. Imo it's too radical, because it treats people instrumentally. Are the people for economy or is economy for the people?
often people saying these same stuff also say that we need immigrants, because there's no one to work for elderly. They don't care about society state, but graphs
Jayden Richardson
Has he learned to code? Most professors should be the first to be replaced when we can just read textbooks.
Gavin Morales
I would like to see your professor explain how ROADS would work
Michael Price
>this is what Jow Forumstards actually believe you've never taken an actual economics class have you? they're all right-wing fucktards who fallate murray rothbard and the like
>they say if you can hold a fork, you can go there. Isn't that basically all of them today.
Thomas Scott
If you consider taxes just as a X amount payed to giberment just for breathing then yeah he is right. Taxes are for maintaining a barrier-less infrastructure/basis for all to use. If you regard them as investment then you will see what they are. You pay taxes to create utilities like roads that add value (reduce costs) in transportation. They are not-as efficient as free market, however they are constant and unmoving due to market shifts. Minimal wage is the same, yes it creates a barrier for enployment - reducing available jobs, thus creating unemployment, however it is also making sure that any and all employed shall have a minimal income that can be spent on goods and services.
Taxes are investment that create value indirectly. Minimal wage is creating a minimal consumption level.
Yes they are not 100% efficient but are less susceptible to market variability and pathologies.
>structural unemployment and it's a good thing The fuck ? Stuctural unemployment means that there is a portion of workforce that cannot be utilized as is they must re-qualify. All those costs of qualification are lost. Automation pushes people out of jobs out of income out of consumption. Exactly opposite what he said - if automation created frictional unemployment it would be good as all those that are replaced would easily (low-costly) switch to other jobs.
I fucking failed my degree [spoiler] haven't finished my thesis [/spoiler] and still know better. Fucking theoretics in academia.
>t. idiot who bought the economics meme and got a degree in it Undergraduate level economics is a meme. I majored in Comp Sci and took a few economics courses for the lulz and a minor. I would say 3/4 of the students arn't even well equipped enough mathematically to understand their economic model, which is full of bullshit and has very low reproducibility to begin with. It's basically indoctrination. Post-grad economics however is where you learn to produce such indoctrination for teaching and think tank positions.
Alexander Nguyen
That’s all standard economic theory that they teach you at university.
It all seems to be correct. It’s hard to know if it’s true, but it’s the best explanation that we have.
James Diaz
It's all true in theory. But it doesn't take into account the bigger picture.
Government is necessary because anarchy is inefficient. To sustain a government you need taxes.
The issue is when the government gets too big. The government should be as small as reasonably possible. The government should set a minimum amount of regulation to do the job. The government should enforce contracts and maintain public order.
Otherwise how much money would business groups spend trying to enforce contracts for example? Just these costs alone would bankrupt businesses.
Taxes allow these costs to be distributed among the whole population because everyone benefits either directly or indirectly.
David Lopez
>Taxation for national security
When was the last time the USA was invaded?
Our military spending isn't for "national security" any more, it's for dictating the world's behavior.
Nolan Butler
Meme flag
Alexander Stewart
Undergrad econ is an exercise in game theory and elementary statistics if you do it well. >LIAR FOR HIRE, ECON DEGREE
