Bruddah IZ
DA
You did. I took it as a compliment to those that I cited or quoted which I was fine with and still am.
Essential Economics for Politicians
- Thread starter Bruddah IZ
- Start date
-
- Tags
- finance too
Did you intend that sentence to make sense?
Bruddah IZ
DA
I did. Help me help you.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Peace Out, iPod, I'm Rocking Spotify
Generating Losers
Clearly, this process of creative destruction generates economic losers. Industries become obsolete – businesses fail, workers lose jobs, and resources get reallocated to more highly valued uses. The competitive forces at work in the economy can be swift and brutal, but this process allows markets to direct resources toward activities that generate value for society and away from ones in which the costs of production outweigh the benefits.
This newly generated value may make society wealthier over time, but none of this is particularly comforting to the worker whose job ceases to exist because of some new product consumers prefer.
Does this mean that the government should pass policies making it more difficult to innovate, spend millions of dollars subsidizing industries that are not competitive in the global economy, or even restrict our participation in the global economy altogether in an attempt to save jobs?
Policy-makers are quick to pass laws slowing the rate of innovation in the name of preserving jobs. The many government actions taken against Uber are a prime example. Uber’s displacement of traditional taxi cabs has led to several cities to ban the ride-sharing service altogether while other cities have imposed licensing requirements and pricing restrictions that are prohibitively costly for many would-be Uber drivers.
All the while, Uber has been hard at work innovating further by developing driverless car technology, which has been met with a similar policy response.
https://fee.org/articles/peace-out-ipod-im-rocking-spotify/?utm_source=ribbon
Generating Losers
Clearly, this process of creative destruction generates economic losers. Industries become obsolete – businesses fail, workers lose jobs, and resources get reallocated to more highly valued uses. The competitive forces at work in the economy can be swift and brutal, but this process allows markets to direct resources toward activities that generate value for society and away from ones in which the costs of production outweigh the benefits.
This newly generated value may make society wealthier over time, but none of this is particularly comforting to the worker whose job ceases to exist because of some new product consumers prefer.
Does this mean that the government should pass policies making it more difficult to innovate, spend millions of dollars subsidizing industries that are not competitive in the global economy, or even restrict our participation in the global economy altogether in an attempt to save jobs?
Policy-makers are quick to pass laws slowing the rate of innovation in the name of preserving jobs. The many government actions taken against Uber are a prime example. Uber’s displacement of traditional taxi cabs has led to several cities to ban the ride-sharing service altogether while other cities have imposed licensing requirements and pricing restrictions that are prohibitively costly for many would-be Uber drivers.
All the while, Uber has been hard at work innovating further by developing driverless car technology, which has been met with a similar policy response.
https://fee.org/articles/peace-out-ipod-im-rocking-spotify/?utm_source=ribbon
Bruddah IZ
DA
Scholars have warned that excessive zoning and occupational licensing make it more difficult for the disadvantaged to access areas of greater opportunity
Bruddah IZ
DA
Last but not least, an article in Reason explains how greedy politicians are undermining the otherwise successful pot legalization in Colorado.
Colorado…voters legalized recreational marijuana in 2012, transforming the popular stuff from a prohibited vice to a substance that could be produced, bought and sold without the hassle of hiding dealings from the authorities and the fear of arrest for voluntary transactions. Yet the marijuana black market is still going strong over four years later, with many sellers and customers willing to take a chance on legal consequences rather than make a risk-free deal. …the driving force behind the black market…is taxes so sky high and regulations so burdensome that they make legal pot uncompetitive. “An ounce of pot on the black market can cost as little as 180 dollars,” according to PBS correspondent Rick Karr. “At the store Andy Williams owns, you have to pay around 240 dollars for an ounce. That’s partly because the price includes a 15 percent excise tax, a 10 percent marijuana tax, the state sales tax, and Denver’s marijuana sales tax.” Colorado also piles on expensive regulatory requirements to get a license.
Colorado…voters legalized recreational marijuana in 2012, transforming the popular stuff from a prohibited vice to a substance that could be produced, bought and sold without the hassle of hiding dealings from the authorities and the fear of arrest for voluntary transactions. Yet the marijuana black market is still going strong over four years later, with many sellers and customers willing to take a chance on legal consequences rather than make a risk-free deal. …the driving force behind the black market…is taxes so sky high and regulations so burdensome that they make legal pot uncompetitive. “An ounce of pot on the black market can cost as little as 180 dollars,” according to PBS correspondent Rick Karr. “At the store Andy Williams owns, you have to pay around 240 dollars for an ounce. That’s partly because the price includes a 15 percent excise tax, a 10 percent marijuana tax, the state sales tax, and Denver’s marijuana sales tax.” Colorado also piles on expensive regulatory requirements to get a license.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Biz doesn't need to tell people he's brilliant.
Only jackasses do that.
Ive been thinking of getting a piece of land in the Philippines, up near Algeria, Israel, and Ukraine.
Sheriff Joe
DA
He's a smart fucker, he doesn't need to convince people like you people. Try to keep up.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Talaga?
Bruddah IZ
DA
I'm not smart. Now, the guys and gals I cite are smart. They make "those people" look....... Shale Gas comes to mind. (cast)
Apache.
Bruddah IZ
DA
The Transitional Gains Trap
http://www.libertylawsite.org/2013/09/26/the-transitional-gains-trap/
In the piece, Tullock talks about a tragedy that often results from government regulation or spending. The government takes an action that initially benefits a particular group, although at the expense of imposing an inefficient policy on the public. But over time, even that special interest group will not benefit from the government program. Yet that group will fight hard to prevent the program from being eliminated, since eliminating it will make that group worse off.
For example, a city government may establish a taxi medallion system that, by restricting entry into the taxi business, will provide large benefits to the initial generation of taxi cabs. This medallion, of course, will harm the public, since it restricts competition. But over time, those who purchase the medallions will pay the market rate for them and therefore will not receive any special rents. Yet, they will fight to prevent the medallion system from being eliminated, since these owners will be harmed by such elimination. Thus, the city will be stuck with an inefficient medallion system that will be difficult to eliminate. Eliminating the medallion program will harm existing taxis, many of whom did not lobby for the system in the first place and do not receive supercompetitive profits.
Tullock’s basic recommendation is not to get into these traps, because they are very hard to get out of.
http://www.libertylawsite.org/2013/09/26/the-transitional-gains-trap/
In the piece, Tullock talks about a tragedy that often results from government regulation or spending. The government takes an action that initially benefits a particular group, although at the expense of imposing an inefficient policy on the public. But over time, even that special interest group will not benefit from the government program. Yet that group will fight hard to prevent the program from being eliminated, since eliminating it will make that group worse off.
For example, a city government may establish a taxi medallion system that, by restricting entry into the taxi business, will provide large benefits to the initial generation of taxi cabs. This medallion, of course, will harm the public, since it restricts competition. But over time, those who purchase the medallions will pay the market rate for them and therefore will not receive any special rents. Yet, they will fight to prevent the medallion system from being eliminated, since these owners will be harmed by such elimination. Thus, the city will be stuck with an inefficient medallion system that will be difficult to eliminate. Eliminating the medallion program will harm existing taxis, many of whom did not lobby for the system in the first place and do not receive supercompetitive profits.
Tullock’s basic recommendation is not to get into these traps, because they are very hard to get out of.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Are you saying all those pearls of wisdom aren't your own? I'm going to need a minute.
Bruddah IZ
DA
I'm afraid so.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Oh, man.
Bruddah IZ
DA
I enjoy reading the responses to the sources that I link. Still a lot to be mined from those links if you know the big picture.
All this time, I thought you were Milton Friedman.