Homelessness was on the rise even before the pandemic

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by kazenatsu, Feb 26, 2021.

  1. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So all you can respond with is emoting? Did I get you where it hurts with those uncomfortable truths on the disregard of those who simply posture and throw money?

    Why don't you try to defend your position. Show us exactly how enabling helps, long term.
     
  2. Mircea

    Mircea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,075
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's false.

    China's growth was based on its transition from 1st Level Economy to a 2nd Level Economy.

    Every economy in history that made that transition grew at GDP rates of 8%-15% annually.

    When China begins the transition from a 2nd Level Economy to a 3rd Level Economy, it's GDP growth rate will decline for the exact same reasons that it historically declined in every country, including every country in the so-called Free World.

    China's growth has nothing to do with the type of economic system it used. Note that the Soviet Union under Marxism also experienced rapid growth when it transition from a 1st Level Economy to a 2nd Level Economy.

    The reason this growth occurs is the demand for ancillary services.

    When you transition into the 2nd Level you're making heavy machinery, heavy equipment and durable goods. You need services for those: management, administration, engineering, research, development, testing, architectural, banking, finance, accounting, insurance, legal, marketing, advertising, warehousing and trucking/shipping just to name a few.

    Note that you also need labor with higher levels of education. 8th Grade won't do. You need high school graduates, plus college grads with advanced degrees.

    That has the effect of delaying marriage, which also delays child-birth, and so birth-rates naturally decline. There is no country on Earth that has advanced through the 2nd Level Economy into the 3rd Level that has not seen birth-rates decline.

    Given the population of China is 1.5 Billion, 30 years is hardly phenomenal. It isn't like you wave a magic wand and the entire country suddenly morphs into the 2nd Level (or 3rd or 4th Levels).
     
  3. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hating the homeless, judging the homeless, won't solve anything...
     
  4. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Being angry at me reveals that you know you've made an error. Instead of lashing out with meaningless spits, why not redirect your energy to consideration of why you're adopting ideological narratives without once challenging the dogma. You need to own that this narrative on the homeless doesn't stand up to even minimal scrutiny. It's all posturing and BS, serving only those who spout it. Far from helping, it actually adds to the burden of the homeless, and adds to the number of homeless.
     
  5. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not wanting help is part of the damage caused child hood generational-poverty. That's why the state is required to fix the problem. It's not making sense to you because your horrible "sovereignty of the individual" ideology prevents you from seeing the reality of systemic poverty which itself is the product of a dysfunctional neoliberal freemarket economy...based on delusional 'sovereignty of the individual' classical liberal ideology.

    Yes, many people DO want above-poverty employment and can't find it, in the current dysfunctional neoliberal freemarket economy.
    As for time (work hours) and resources; there are more than sufficient of these available in 1st world economies, to guarantee above poverty employment for everyone, AND care for those who have been damaged by our cruel/indifferent orthodox economic orthodoxy.

    You sound like Gigi Foster last night on Q&A, pushing the orthodox line that "we all have to die sometime, and the government should not have accumulated - in an attempt to saves lives during the pandemic - the massive debt that will be a burden for years to come". Breathtaking, blind, cruel ideology.

    [It ought to be obvious to her and you and everyone, that the sovereign currency issuing government could issue debt-free money in a pandemic- enforced lock-down, to enable non-essential workers to buy food, and pay for housing and utilities while only the essential parts of the economy - food production and delivery, and utilities - are kept operating.]

    OK. Australia doesn't have an alcohol problem...I stand corrected. Britney - in that Canberra bar - was ENTIRELY responsible for her own irresponsible behavior; cultural norms/expectations didn't have anything at all to do with her drinking to excess on that fateful night...
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2021
  6. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1) If people DON'T WANT HELP, then no one will be able to force them to accept it. Not even the State. Besides, there is nothing the State can offer which isn't the same as family/friends etc offers (a solid base from which to heal themselves). In fact the State cannot possibly provide the extent of support that a family can, for obvious reasons. It's a very poor substitute, which is why it rarely makes a difference. You're championing the equivalent of those 20thC parents who put their blind or deaf kids in institutions, because they didn't want to have to extend the care needed.

    2) SOME Australians may have alcohol problems. It's not universal, and it's bizarre that you think it is. Once again, you need to get out more.
     
  7. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Government can always find vacant housing/land in ANY area, to provide low cost (subsidized, not low standard) housing. There is no scarcity.

    Note my underlined: provision of public housing is outside of the free market, by definition.

    You still haven't acknowledged the possibility of the public sector 'command' economy operating side by side with private sector free markets.
     
  8. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wrong. The state recognizes it MUST act as child carer when the parents are not capable.

    So you are claiming Britney has an alcoholic problem?
     
  9. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly what Noah Smith said (in the linked article).

    Wrong. In fact the BIS/IMF could have funded a global lock-down for as long as required, to minimize loss of life during the pandemic... if they were free of the terrible mainstream economic orthodoxy wreaking havoc in the world.

    Hint: private banks create money 'ex nihilo' in normal times, so there is no reason why governments cannot do the same in a pandemic.

    And as for those bonds:

    http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=47114

    RBA shows who is in charge as the speculators are outwitted

    "3. The Australian government is increasingly buying up its own debt – not a taxpayer in sight (May 26, 2020)"

     
  10. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1) In the case of orphans or minors impacted by recalcitrant parenting (homeless youth etc), of course - when has the State ever failed to do that? 1920?. But we're not talking about outliers, are we - we're talking about bog standard families who fob off their responsibility to each other, to the State. It happens ALL THE TIME, in every demographic. In fact the middle classes are the worst.

    2) I have no idea who Britney is, or what you're talking about. Sorry.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2021
  11. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Er....nice try with your "transition from 1st Level Economy to a 2nd Level Economy." theory, but no cigar.

    1980. Two countries - China and India - roughly the same population, same resources, same GDP <$1 trillion, same subsistence agricultural economies of c.700 million people.

    2021. China GDP: $15 trillion; India GDP: < $3 trillion, populations roughly doubled in both countries.

    The former employed a combination of free market private enterprise and massive government intervention ("socialism with Chinese characteristics") backed by massive spending by the PBofC, while India maintained a more Western-oriented private sector model.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2021
  12. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Didn't you know, kids are living with their parents (in "bog standard families") for longer than ever before....

    Oh gosh; Brittany Higgins ..my mistake with the first name (please don't say you haven't heard of her...)
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2021
  13. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What? And families are supporting each other through life LESS than ever before.

    And no, never heard of her. Sorry.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2021
  14. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hating the homeless, judging the homeless, won't solve anything...
     
  15. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Defaulting on loans/bonds will not be a good thing...
     
  16. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The sovereign currency-issuing government need never default on its loans; the issue is maximizing the productive capacity of the nation.

    If you want to learn (including about bond issuance), and catch up on what is really happening in the world of macroeconomics eg the debate between mainstream orthodoxy (represented by eg Summers, Krugman who are questioning the size of the stimuls package) and a more reality based economics based on the capacity of the sovereign currency issuer to spend money into existence, here is a fascinating interview:

    https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1LyxBdrYDoYGN


    The debate is heating up:
    (link)
    Hern, Braun introduce resolution condemning Modern Monetary Theory | U.S. Representative Kevin Hern (house.gov)

    Needless to say, Hern and Braun are talking 'flat-earth'** economic nonsense, **because that's how it seems when you look at it - the earth is flat, obviously.

    Only thing is, the earth is NOT flat.....
     
  17. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Defaulting on loans/bonds will not be a good thing...period...
     
  18. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You already said that.... and I offered you the chance to learn. Refusal noted.
     
  19. Mircea

    Mircea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,075
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You completely ignored the fact that India is now the world's 3rd largest economy, a feat it accomplished only by abandoning Socialism.

    You also ignore the sociological effects on the Chinese people. What's the point of having a successful economy if you have only the freedom to shut up?

    What the Chinese government is doing isn't for the Chinese people. It's for the Chinese government. They have a chip on their shoulder and an axe to grind.
     
  20. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,396
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's better than starving. And the Chinese have a cultural tradition of shutting up. Freedom of speech is not a priority for them the way it is for the West.
     
  21. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And if they don't, well, we can see what happens in the case of Hong Kong.
     
  22. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    By GDP by PPP, yes, but that refers to purchasing power of citizens within their own country.

    For a more direct comparison of the size of a nation's economy relative to other nations, nominal GDP is the more relevant figure. India is still only in 6th place, behind the UK.

    List of countries by GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia

    US $20 trillion, China $15 trillion, India $3 trillion.

    India was never socialist, it was protectionist (though one or two states adopted communism). And it's still a disgrace to humanity, whereas China has now officially eradicated absolute poverty, reflected in its PPP GDP figure which is indeed larger than the US by the same metric.

    Beware of "free market" propaganda.

    The Chinese government is acting on behalf of all citizens, unlike free market democracies which place free-market outcomes above social outcomes. That's why mainland Chinese are increasingly satisfied with their government (according to Harvard Research: google it).

    And why China has grown its economy by 15 (with its unique private sector free market and public sector socialism combo) , cf with India which has only grown by 3 times in the same period, with it's crappy protectionist/free market failure.

    Meanwhile democracies around the world are wracked by hyper-partisanship, as to be expected by electorates composed of self-interested individuals all wishing to maximize their own claims on the nation's output.
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2021
  23. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well that and all the propaganda and state stranglehold over the media. (don't forget extensive internet censorship)
    Hard to hold bad opinions when everything you hear is only good.

    A lot of that money came from the US.
    That's what long-term chronic trade deficits get you: wealth transfer from one nation to another.

    China used all that money from selling consumer goods to buy capital. When you borrow money to get a mortgage on a house, for example, some of that money may be coming from China (indirectly), and so too the interest payments.


    The Left has been saying how manufacturing is not needed and so outdated, but guess how China built all that wealth so fast?
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2021
  24. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,396
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No nominally "communist" Indian state ever nationalized land, so there was never communism or socialism. Landowner privilege and parasitism are effectively part of the Hindu religion, as the highest (Brahmin) caste is also the landowning caste. The systematic, institutionalized, religiously sanctioned sacrifice of everyone else on the altar of landowner greed has been the major factor keeping India poor for thousands of years. It is worth nothing that its period of greatest prosperity was during the Muslim Mughal Empire, when Akbar the Great levied the highest taxes on land and made them more proportional to land value.
    By maintaining land in public ownership while making products of labor private property. Not socialist, not capitalist, but geoist.
    There can be no free market while people's rights to liberty are the property of the privileged.
    A market in which people's rights to liberty are owned, bought, and sold by other people is not a free market. It is a slave market.
    Land held in public ownership vs privately owned. The Hong Kong model vs the capitalist model.
     
  25. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The thing is: given its task in 1990, the CPC had no choice BUT to maintain strict control of the media, because as we know, "freedom loving" individuals (which we all are) bicker endlessly as they attempt to maximize their own share of the nation's output, in "free", "democratic" elections. Free-market, "democracy" ideologues think this is the best form of government, but I despise the systemic, entrenched poverty which exists in all current democracies, content with their 'flat-earth' monetarist systems. China has created the world's biggest support system for 1.4 billion people, via public subsidization of low-wage workers and state-controlled industry, alongside private sector free-markets which create billionaires just as they do in the West.


    In our current dysfunctional neoliberal monetarist system, yes, with global free trade in which corporations self-interestedly chase the lowest labour costs and lowest tax regimes, to create lowest prices for their products, creating both winners and losers in deficit nations like the US, whereas China raises living standards for all. You still a proponent of free trade, rather than fair trade?

    Interesting exercise for economists: how could the US have prevented the pauperization of Detroit and Baltimore, in the face of competition from low wage Asia?

    Whether that is correct or not, the US doesn't NEED money made in China, while it is the leading creator of cutting edge technology. MMT will explain that to you.

    Addressed above. The solution is fair trade, with nations' most efficient productivity employing their own particular resources, and exchange rates adjusted via an international trade body, to allow prosperous development in all nations.

    Keynes actually presented an analogous concept in 1944 at the Bretton Woods conference, but his proposals were rejected by the Americans when they emerged victorious after WW2, as the world's largest creditor economy.

    The US should persist with its leading role in cutting edge technology, rather than resuming manufacturing of white goods. Of course China is also targeting AI and IT, so that competition is heating up.
     

Share This Page