Post Reply  Post Thread 
Pages (22): « First < Previous 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next > Last »

The Gazprom School of Economics - Miller Hall of Macroeconomics

Author Message
Alexei B.Miller
Co President of the Ros'Gaz Union State
*


Posts: 3,769
Words count: 630,277
Group: Basic
Joined: May2011
Status: Offline
Reputation: 75
Experience: 6916
Glory Points: 800
Medals: 31

Xian
Post: #11
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

Helsworth Wrote:

Alexei B.Miller Wrote:

Rising Phoenix Wrote:
I have also been a pretty good mixed-economy statist, where most of the major industries were nationalized but small-scale capitalism was allowed. Wink

The key are not it's laws, but what they intend to do, how, and the effectiveness of the laws themselves as well as the state's capacity to enforce them.


I think certain industries should be nationalized, but not at the expense of the state. If the state cannot run critical infrastructure at a profit or break-even or if the benefits do not totally outweigh the cost; they should be nationalized. Privatization frees up government assets that could be used for more useful ares such as infrastructure or tax decrease both which are proven ways to drive the economy. I have perfected the manner in which a state can be successful and profitable. I now have a booming surplus and am preparing to lower taxes across the board to increase employment and stimulate spending.

I am no longer worried about a balance of trade...why? Well the Libertarian thought is that free trade should always be encouraged. Any government intervention in the economy should be prohibited, as tariffs and such will hurt the consumer with increased prices. My government has taken the approach of pragmatism and prudence. Our role will be strictly in keeping the peace, providing essential services, and protection of rights.

In reality, if your economy is dependent too much on foreign investment a financial crisis will really hurt your economy. I like to give Japan as a nice example, where all its debt is mostly in the hands of domestic investors.


Truuue, but at the moment my economy is fueled currently by domestic consumption. I believe it's because I have a weak currency which I'm trying to raise. If the game had those crisis algorithms I wouldn't be as effected since I still maintain a very large trade surplus. I'm trying to increase foreign capital to decrease unemployment which as worked. Now I need to stem immigration or else I'll be in a constant struggle to grow! But Yes Helsworth haven't heard from you in weeks, hows your nation?


"Hitler wanted to destroy Russia, everyone needs to remember how that ended"

Vladimir Putin

18.11.2011 16:25
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #12
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

Just started a new today, I grew bored of my last one and have started with a russian template. I'll try an industrialization program, I don't want to rely just on the gas business Wink Going for anti-immigration policies really helps lower your unemployment rate.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache
18.11.2011 17:19
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rising Phoenix
Unregistered


Post: #13
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

I am against Free Trade. Why? Well, flat tariffs can be much more profitable while at the same time neither hurting exports nor being overly protectionist towards imports. Smile

18.11.2011 18:06
Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #14
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

Rising Phoenix Wrote:
I am against Free Trade. Why? Well, flat tariffs can be much more profitable while at the same time neither hurting exports nor being overly protectionist towards imports. Smile

Well said. What matters is to have the same tariff for a particular type of good or no tariff, while at the same time have different tariffs for different kinds of goods. If you're a manufacturing economy, there's no sense in levying tariffs on the semifinished goods you are importing to sell as finished goods. But it makes sense to put tariffs on finished goods in order protect your autochtonous producers. The main idea is to give everyone the same chance to trade a particular commodity.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache

This post was last modified: 18.11.2011 18:51 by Helsworth.

18.11.2011 18:51
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Alexei B.Miller
Co President of the Ros'Gaz Union State
*


Posts: 3,769
Words count: 630,277
Group: Basic
Joined: May2011
Status: Offline
Reputation: 75
Experience: 6916
Glory Points: 800
Medals: 31

Xian
Post: #15
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

Helsworth Wrote:

Rising Phoenix Wrote:
I am against Free Trade. Why? Well, flat tariffs can be much more profitable while at the same time neither hurting exports nor being overly protectionist towards imports. Smile

Well said. What matters is to have the same tariff for a particular type of good or no tariff, while at the same time have different tariffs for different kinds of goods. If you're a manufacturing economy, there's no sense in levying tariffs on the semifinished goods you are importing to sell as finished goods. But it makes sense to put tariffs on finished goods in order protect your autochtonous producers. The main idea is to give everyone the same chance to trade a particular commodity.


This is true in a sense, i don't fully oppose tariffs, nor do fully support them. If you propose a tariff there should be extensive simulations about it's implications. For instance we are currently seeing a "boom" of green jobs in the world. Germany leads the world in solar panel production. The U.S. however isn't why should the U.S. implement tariffs to protect an inefficient domestic industry? Protecting this domestic industry directly hurts the consumer and enviroment. One because the American consumer will receive a more expensive and less efficient (less cost-effective) this inefficiency does not help to drive down the cost of electricity and only gives us reasons to fossil fuels.


"Hitler wanted to destroy Russia, everyone needs to remember how that ended"

Vladimir Putin

18.11.2011 19:44
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #16
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

There is no efficiency to be had in subsidizing low fixed energy flux density sources of power. While households can work with them, a modern industrial economy cannot. If you increase monetary efficiency while reducing physical productivity, you are decreasing the relative population density that the current physical economic platform can support. I saw someone post in an other thread that nuclear energy isn't clean because it produces so called waste. 96% of the nuclear process byproducts can be recycled, into new fuel that can be spent and substances that have use in other types of industries. Currently the US legislation forbids the recycling of nuclear fuel, instead it's deposited when it should be reused. Go for breeder reactors. Wink


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache
18.11.2011 19:55
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Alexei B.Miller
Co President of the Ros'Gaz Union State
*


Posts: 3,769
Words count: 630,277
Group: Basic
Joined: May2011
Status: Offline
Reputation: 75
Experience: 6916
Glory Points: 800
Medals: 31

Xian
Post: #17
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

Helsworth Wrote:
There is no efficiency to be had in subsidizing low fixed energy flux density sources of power. While households can work with them, a modern industrial economy cannot. If you increase monetary efficiency while reducing physical productivity, you are decreasing the relative population density that the current physical economic platform can support. I saw someone post in an other thread that nuclear energy isn't clean because it produces so called waste. 96% of the nuclear process byproducts can be recycled, into new fuel that can be spent and substances that have use in other types of industries. Currently the US legislation forbids the recycling of nuclear fuel, instead it's deposited when it should be reused. Go for breeder reactors. Wink

I am a supporter of sustainable and clean energy. But currently I wish we could make hybrid vehicles cheaper. I want one for my own financial future. Natural gas will be cheap for at least one or two hundred more years. I want a car that's power by a combination of sources. The windows and roof could have solar film it. The wheels could have magnets that spin and generate electricity. An advanced flex fuel engine, and I stated earlier I supported sci.research because carbon-nanotube have apromising future in the energy sector. They have potential to hold a tremendous amount of power in a very small space. This is sustainable and enviromentally sound. I think we should save our fossil fuels for when we get to mars so we can terraform it Wink


"Hitler wanted to destroy Russia, everyone needs to remember how that ended"

Vladimir Putin

18.11.2011 20:05
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #18
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

Alexei B.Miller Wrote:

Helsworth Wrote:
There is no efficiency to be had in subsidizing low fixed energy flux density sources of power. While households can work with them, a modern industrial economy cannot. If you increase monetary efficiency while reducing physical productivity, you are decreasing the relative population density that the current physical economic platform can support. I saw someone post in an other thread that nuclear energy isn't clean because it produces so called waste. 96% of the nuclear process byproducts can be recycled, into new fuel that can be spent and substances that have use in other types of industries. Currently the US legislation forbids the recycling of nuclear fuel, instead it's deposited when it should be reused. Go for breeder reactors. Wink

I am a supporter of sustainable and clean energy. But currently I wish we could make hybrid vehicles cheaper. I want one for my own financial future. Natural gas will be cheap for at least one or two hundred more years. I want a car that's power by a combination of sources. The windows and roof could have solar film it. The wheels could have magnets that spin and generate electricity. An advanced flex fuel engine, and I stated earlier I supported sci.research because carbon-nanotube have apromising future in the energy sector. They have potential to hold a tremendous amount of power in a very small space. This is sustainable and enviromentally sound. I think we should save our fossil fuels for when we get to mars so we can terraform it Wink

For Mars we're gonna require H2O, Silver iodide, high energy flux density power (Helium 3, Tritium, Thorium, mox fuel in general) and plants that don't require insects to grow/reproduce.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache
18.11.2011 20:56
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Alexei B.Miller
Co President of the Ros'Gaz Union State
*


Posts: 3,769
Words count: 630,277
Group: Basic
Joined: May2011
Status: Offline
Reputation: 75
Experience: 6916
Glory Points: 800
Medals: 31

Xian
Post: #19
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

They should settle some-where near the ice caps, they can use electrolysis from the ice to make oxygen, water, and hydrogen fuel. Plants won't be able to handle the UV and will die without adequate protection. I think before we send our bitches to mars we should have a non-stop convoy of automated settlement unit go there and setup some basic infrastructure. But my main point is screw looking for life on mars let's begin to spread our own there. And Terraform the mofo! Concentrate the life missions on the Jovian and Saturnian moons and leave Mars to human science engineering!


"Hitler wanted to destroy Russia, everyone needs to remember how that ended"

Vladimir Putin

19.11.2011 04:05
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lord Weasel
Great Heavenly Supreme Eater of Rabbits
*


Posts: 731
Words count: 66,104
Group: Basic
Joined: Oct2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 25
Experience: 103889
Glory Points: 30
Medals: 2

Post: #20
RE: Gazprom School of Economic - How to reduce budget deficit and lower living standards!

Exactly right, we do have to consider though that Mars has no electromagnetic field. This means that the Martin atmosphere is being bombarded by highly charged particles from the sun, known as the solar wind. This has resulted in the Martian atmosphere being slowly stripped away thinning it, therefore any gas we release from the caps will just be stripped in the same manner.

I would be interested to know if there was anyone on here who had any idea if we possessed any technology or theory as to how we could reignite the core. Possibly something like H.A.A.R.P? or other focused waves of some form.

04.12.2011 00:55
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pages (22): « First < Previous 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next > Last »
Post Reply  Post Thread 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Economics is not a real science (xpost r/badphilosophy) gamora77 4 1,590 07.04.2020 22:37
Last Post: dragonflare89
  An Argument against Capitalist Economics ClassyCommunist 10 3,345 14.02.2017 18:30
Last Post: Ajay Alcos
  What is your opinion of the economics academia? Ajay Alcos 2 1,722 13.02.2017 22:08
Last Post: Ajay Alcos
  Macroeconomics in Germany: The forgotten lesson of Hjalmar Schacht Helsworth 1 1,549 27.01.2017 08:47
Last Post: VineFynn
  J is for Junk economics. Michael Hudson. Free market = Freedom from rent seekers Helsworth 1 2,618 22.11.2016 17:35
Last Post: yangusbeef
  Methods for teaching simple economics Ajay Alcos 2 1,710 07.03.2016 17:47
Last Post: Ajay Alcos
  Ibn Khaldun, pure awesome 14th century economics Helsworth 1 1,687 13.01.2016 07:37
Last Post: Ajay Alcos
  From Kenneth Boulding's Economics of Peace 1945 Helsworth 0 1,618 10.05.2015 12:53
Last Post: Helsworth
  Caius Filimon Gabriel Economics CaiusFilimonG 23 6,314 21.12.2014 10:14
Last Post: Alexei B.Miller
  Steve Keen, The Dodgy Dynamics of Economics Helsworth 0 1,886 15.06.2014 15:43
Last Post: Helsworth

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites

Forum Jump: