Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (462459)	3/9/2009 9:17:10 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578270

After you painted yourself into a corner with the unemployment during the Great Depression, you made this statement. What do you mean by that? I didn't paint myself into a corner. "The incentive in that instance is to stay ON unemployment, not to better oneself by finding a better job." Which should be intuitively obvious even to an idiot. If you are paying people to NOT work more, as much, or ALMOST as much to stay home and watch Oprah as they can make (which is definitely the case for MANY, if not MOST people on unemployment), then the incentive is definitely to stay on unemployment as long as possible. Note also that you have gone from a 'better' job, to any job at all. The point is about incentive. That's been the entire argument. Is the incentive to get off the public dole, or is it to stay at home and take the freebie. You have constructed whole new schools of economics and created brand new principles to go along with them. Hardly original thought on my part. We've known it for years. The point I've made, correctly, and which remains unrefuted, is that a person can make enough money watching Oprah to incentivize him to do so until the benefits run out, rather than seeking employment. We know that. It isn't subject to debate -- anywhere but here. This has been proven econometrically, for years, and specifically has been shown by Jim Powell in his excellent treatise "FDR's Folly". This, from the editorial review of his book: Truth to tell–as Powell demonstrates without a shadow of a doubt–the New Deal hampered recovery from the contraction, prolonged and added to unemployment, and set the stage for ever more intrusive and costly government. Powell’s analysis is thoroughly documented, relying on an impressive variety of popular and academic literature both contemporary and historical.” –Milton Friedman, Nobel Laureate, Hoover Institution The result is a devastating indictment, compellingly told. Those who think that government intervention helped get the U.S. economy out of the depression should read this book." David R. Henderson, editor of The Fortune Encyclopedia of Economics and author of The Joy of Freedom You should STFU and read the book, which is, if nothing else, an excellent instructional piece on how NOT to end a Depression.