There was talk about renaming the Krugman thread for this purpose, but that seems to be going nowhere. Besides which, I feel the Krugman thread should be left to discuss Krugman while this thread can be used for more general economic discussion.
Discuss:
- The merits of competing theories.
- The role of the government in managing the economy.
- The causes of and solutions to our current economic woes.
- Comparisons between the economic systems of different countries.
- Theoretical and existing alternatives to our current market system.
edited 17th Dec '12 10:58:52 AM by Topazan
Lost in Space
At 12 percent, that's already pretty damn hard. It's what some of the most heavily indebted Eurozone nations were facing back in 2009-2010.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers
"Harder to borrow money" is reflected in the interest rate, so yeah, they already have.
The question is why they don't dump debt they hold, but i suppose there's a good reason for that.
Lost in Space
I'm waiting until the Fox News and CNBC idiots start warning that unless we cut our expenditures, we're going to turn into Russia.
edited 8th Dec '14 3:21:27 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
HGW XX/7
V
Uber India 'rape' fallout: Delhi bans internet taxi services
The ban means taxis from selected services will now attract a fine or even be impounded, officials say. Delhi banned Uber on Monday for failing to do adequate checks on its drivers. The service is still accepting bookings on its app and it is not yet clear how the ban will be enforced since Uber taxis do not carry any visible branding.
In an order issued late on Monday, the Delhi government said only six registered radio taxi companies were allowed to operate in the capital.
"All other transport/ taxi service providers through web-based technology, who are not recognised, are prohibited from providing such services...till they get licence/permission from the transport department," S Roy Biswas, Delhi's deputy commissioner of transport, said.
Media reports said the ban could hit several such taxi services in the city, and thousands of drivers would be out of work. The federal government in Delhi has also issued an advisory to all states to ban these cab-booking services. The 26-year-old woman had used the Uber smartphone app to book a taxi home on Friday night but said she was taken to a secluded area and raped. Uber has not yet commented on the ban.
Seems like an over-reaction to me.
I think there’s a global conspiracy to see who can get the most clicks on the worst lies
Lost in Space
Isn't that governments' job? 
Yeah. Plus, I don't think India's taxi system is as horribly corrupt as America's is.
For some definition of system....
Somehow I doubt that banning web-based services is the most effective approach they can take to protecting women from the possibility of rape. If that's their solution, better buy some tear gas.
I think there’s a global conspiracy to see who can get the most clicks on the worst lies
Lost in Space
Oh, it's most definitely an overreaction, but I should point out that it is only a General Economics topic by the broadest possible stretch of the imagination.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
V
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I know that Uber has been a topic of conversation here, and it's a development...
I'm sure it's about fifty times more bureaucratic, thoughnote .
Keep Rolling On
I see the Uber situation as something like overregulation (the crappy taxi industry) versus lack of regulation (Uber's crappy behavior). Which is worse? You either get inefficiency and corruption, or shitty behavior.
I haven't heard people saying bad things about Lyft, Uber's competitor. I find that very interesting... ![[lol]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/lol2v12_4863.png "[lol]"){kind=small}
Maybe Lyft figured out how to do it right?
Lost in Space
It's clearly possible to run a business honestly and profitably in a regulated environment: we have thousands or even millions of examples. When you reject all regulation in favor of a purely laissez faire system, the damages rack up quickly, to the point where you force people to band together and restrict you for their own safety.
I'm not familiar with Lyft mainly because they haven't made the news for shitty business practices or their drivers raping passengers, and in the world of business, not being talked about in the daily headlines is generally a good signal.
edited 10th Dec '14 6:34:02 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
V
I'm sure the taxi industry isn't as tightly regulated as the road haulage (trucking) or the public transport (mass transit) industries are.
Actually, the taxi industry is "regulated" by limiting the number of taxis in each city, and every medallion normally being bought up by one company, amounting to a legalized monopoly.
That's the problem that Uber and Lyft are fighting.
V
Taxis don't need a separate driving licence to drive or have Hours of Service regulations, do they? I'm quite sure there are operating, safety, and financial restrictions for operators as wellnote .
edited 10th Dec '14 6:53:19 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling On
If you want to fight a problem, don't become a problem yourself. On articles about Uber's behavior, I see anti-taxi comments as well as anti-Uber comments. People saying that while Uber may suck, the taxi industry is worse. Things like that.
And Uber is trying to throttle Lyft by calling their drivers and cancelling appointments, all to waste their time? Sounds like for a company that brags about bringing competition to a corrupt industry, they sure don't like competition themselves.
Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago
Before I even read the article, I'm going to say this:
Companies want money. A gender neutral toy could be purchased by a parent with both a son and daughter, and both kids will play with it. However, if the toy is divided by gender, both sexes will likely want "their" version of it, and the parent who would have bought one toy will now buy two.
It's simple money. Not ideology, money. The only way to change that is to change consumer behavior.
Lost in Space
You are correct, of course, but you're omitting that consumer behavior is driven by marketing, creating an incestuous feedback loop. Interrupting the loop requires external intervention.
edited 10th Dec '14 7:56:46 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
And now that I've read the article, it omits the whole "companies want to divide toys by gender" idea. Which is really a hypothesis I came up with, not something I read somewhere, but I wouldn't be in the least surprised if it were true.
A hand chart type chart of the above.
edited 10th Dec '14 9:02:10 AM by PotatoesRock
"Companies want money. A gender neutral toy could be purchased by a parent with both a son and daughter, and both kids will play with it. However, if the toy is divided by gender, both sexes will likely want "their" version of it, and the parent who would have bought one toy will now buy two."
The problem is that companies wanted money 50 years ago, too, yet didnt divide by gender at the rate they do today, so something else must be driving the change in marketing in the last 20 years.
I think there’s a global conspiracy to see who can get the most clicks on the worst lies
Lost in Space
As I said, it's a feedback loop between sales and marketing. It's not at all mysterious if you understand how toy manufacturing, toy sales, and toy marketing form a closed circle.
"The question one might ask is, why is Russia so vulnerable? It has, after all, run large current surpluses over time; overall, it’s a creditor, not a debtor nation. But there are a lot of external debts all the same, reflecting private sector borrowing — and foreign currency reserves are dropping fast in part thanks to private capital flight."
Not to mention that a lot of those private sector business are minority owned by the government. When they lose value, the government's capital stock does as well. That in turn affects their standing as a credit risk. Moscow is going to find it harder to borrow money shortly, if they havnt already.
I think there’s a global conspiracy to see who can get the most clicks on the worst lies