Re: Tzeentch's Thread of Everchanging Topics

[Drustai]

http://www.tsroadmap.com/index.html

Discovered this just now ... figured since it applies to a lot of people, that I'd share it here. Definitely worth having a look at

Yep. That's the single biggest resource I've used for the last 5-6 years or so.

[Feydor]

the fuck

"About Me:

I AM THE FORREST GUMP OF THE 21ST CENTURY
I HAVE BEEN TO WAR AND BACK SO NOTHING PHASES ME. ENJOY THE RIDE AND LAUGH WITH ME FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS
Influences:
ROCKY, DOG THE BOUNTY HUNTER AND QUEEN LATIFAH"

What better influences for a man can there be?


im supposed to be revising for an exam tomorrow but fuck it this guy is nuts

[Nithel]

SUPPORT ME PEOPLE. STOP THE POWERPOINT ABUSE WE HAVE BEEN SUBDUED BY.

No but seriously, I found it rather amusing!

[Antistia]

It's been happening for a while yeah.

Ironically China is looking to outscource some of their employment to neighbouring countries.
(Wages for intellectuals is also rising massively. The gap with Europe is closing.)

Yeah, I knew the wage increases in China were absurd (I think the average was 16% in 2010, could also be 10%, but still), but this is a factor I hadn't yet considered.

From what I tend to read I get the feeling that people look at China as if it is some economic miracle without any problems while it has some very terrible problems. Terrible problems that could absolutely wreck their economy (I'm looking at you, Chinese real estate market).

Not to mention their need for 8% growth to keep their populace happy. Those problems combined with a not-so-happy Chinese populace could bring quite a few problems.

I don't know whether to be happy or sad that China is not all that it seems (not that this is all new to me, only the wage-productivity thing was).

[Nithel]

It's the advantage of state capitalism. It's a very effective system to help an economy catch up. With the rate of growth that country has, China's output will double in just 7 years.

The current discussions in the WEF have confirmed the thoughts of many, aswell as my own opinion that our current system will most likely shift. Capitalism will see a change unless problems miraciously get fixed withing the current system.

If you want a noble prize in economy, thinking up an adapated model of new-capitalism that works will definitely get you that; So get to it people!

[Antistia]

It's the advantage of state capitalism. It's a very effective system to help an economy catch up. With the rate of growth that country has, China's output will double in just 7 years.

Wasn't Japan's boom fueled by a state capitalist model too? Look where they ended up. They've been stagnant for so long. I can imagine China encountering the same problems, after all, they seem to be following the example set by Japan. Only time will tell if they learned from Japan's mistakes. I think Japan had a stock and property bubble. Now I can't speak for Chinese stocks, but they truly have a real estate bubble. Which, of course, is a terrible, terrible, thing for their economy.

The current discussions in the WEF have confirmed the thoughts of many, aswell as my own opinion that our current system will most likely shift. Capitalism will see a change unless problems miraciously get fixed withing the current system.

If you want a noble prize in economy, thinking up an adapated model of new-capitalism that works will definitely get you that; So get to it people!

Any idea on what the people at the WEF are thinking with regards to how it might be changed?

[Amaryl]

It's been happening for a while yeah.

Ironically China is looking to outscource some of their employment to neighbouring countries.
(Wages for intellectuals is also rising massively. The gap with Europe is closing.)

Yeah, I knew the wage increases in China were absurd (I think the average was 16% in 2010, could also be 10%, but still), but this is a factor I hadn't yet considered.

From what I tend to read I get the feeling that people look at China as if it is some economic miracle without any problems while it has some very terrible problems. Terrible problems that could absolutely wreck their economy (I'm looking at you, Chinese real estate market).

Not to mention their need for 8% growth to keep their populace happy. Those problems combined with a not-so-happy Chinese populace could bring quite a few problems.

I don't know whether to be happy or sad that China is not all that it seems (not that this is all new to me, only the wage-productivity thing was).

well you could call it absurd...

but when you're making 40cents an hour... i'm sure its nice, considering the prices of the iphones those people are making..

[Nithel]

State capitalism is fantastic for an economy to catch up. Once it has caught up, economists seem to doubt it's further benefits.

I don't think WEF will have any conclusive answer on how the new capitalism should look like. (it never really delivers on that. It only starts debates.)

Beyond the spoiler lies my more in debt view of the situation. Read at your own risk!

Spoiler:

Truth be told, I think we ought to make a general debate threat. Stuff like this doesn't fit in Tzeetch thread but it feels silly to make a different topic everytime something po(o)ps up!

Probably would only be Anti and me posting in it though <3

[Shaelyssa]

Huh what am I missing here? Why is it bad that their wages are increasing? Doesn't the common worker make less than a dollar a day or something? I'd have thought that that's a good thing. ?

[Antistia]

well you could call it absurd...

but when you're making 40cents an hour... i'm sure its nice, considering the prices of the iphones those people are making..

True, I'm not saying it's bad for those people. However it's hard to keep up productivity wise, which doesn't seem to be good to me.


And Nithel, to be honest, having read that I think I'd agree more with the stance of the companies than the stance of the socialist (gee, that's a surprise..). However personally I think we're far too focused on short term profits. They're the end-all be-all of goals corporations these days seem to have. Indeed, to me it seems that few corporations focus on long term profits, which they should. Yet when they have losses because they focus on this the market does not take kindly to it, not at all. Which is understandable, of course, but one should focus on the long term.
The CDO's (as they were in the 2008 crisis) seem to me to be a prime example of what can go wrong with this attitude. Not to mention politicians. Taking the United States as an example, the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act of 1933 made the whole thing worse in my mind. This due to the fact that the act had kept investment banks and deposit banks separate.

Oh, and the love for home ownership should not be forgotten either. I recall the US government making it much simpler to get mortgages in the past, thanks also due to Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Home ownership is a decent goal, but people were able to get mortgages that they couldn't afford.

Huh what am I missing here? Why is it bad that their wages are increasing? Doesn't the common worker make less than a dollar a day or something? I'd have thought that that's a good thing. ?

Shae, imagine it like this. It's probably highly simplified compared to how it really is:

You're working in a factory. There you make product X. You get paid 10 dollars an hour and you can make product X one time in one hour. The company sells product X for 50 dollars. This means, for simplicity's sake, that the company gets to keep 40 dollars. That's 40 dollars it can invest in business and use to employ other people. Now imagine your wage tripling yet your ability to make that product does not triple. No, you're now so productive that you can make product X 2 times in one hour.

So now you get paid 30 dollars in one hour, while you make product X two times in one hour. The company sells these two things for 100 dollar in total, but can only invest 70 dollars because it has to pay you 30 dollars. The company's profit ratio declines. Relatively speaking it has less money to invest and expand. Which means it can employ less people than if productivity and wages were growing at the same rate (Which would give them 80 dollars to invest).

Nithel's better with economics than I am so can probably give a quality explanation but this is how I view it.

(To add to the simplification: In reality the company would also have to pay taxes, buy resources to make product X etc which further diminishes the amount of money they make and can invest)


Edit 2:
And Nithel, we should probably create a general debate topic.

[Nithel]

I stand more at side of the corporate world aswell.

The factors that determine output on a long term scale (Multiple decades) are things the corporate world can barely control in the current system. (Matters such as eductation system, the saving rate and the role of the government.)
I believe you mean medium run. (A decade) Factors like capital stock, level of technology and innovation are dictated for a large part by companies.

My opinion is that the government needs to invest big time in education and make investment-friendly regulations that rewards faster and more adaptable innovation and technology shifts. Also the government should loosen and adapt the regulations on jobs, allowing companies to increase the size of the labor force.
There direly should be more efficient systems that allow universities (education) to work alongside with companies. Why is this not done yet?


Ps: CDOs were more a problem of a system that was thought to be indestructible. CDOs enjoyed a very larg trust. They were -the- investment short term and mid term because it was thought impossible the mortgages would forfeit in such a scale. Much alike: one of the problems now is that many of the 'Titanics' of our age were thought to be invincible.

Ps2: We should make that debate thread! Get to it Antistia! I hate making threads

Ps3: Your reasoning is a bit flawed Anti. Output equals investments + consumption + government spending. High wages means that consumptions goes up a lot. Allowing for an even larger output change. Sudden change of wages which does not equal a rise of productivity could lead to dangerous inflation however. And that -is- a threat.

[Antistia]

The factors that determine output on a long term scale (Multiple decades) are things the corporate world can barely control in the current system. (Matters such as eductation system, the saving rate and the role of the government.)
I believe you mean medium run. (A decade) Factors like capital stock, level of technology and innovation are dictated for a large part by companies.

Yeah, I meant medium run by that. A decade is what I had in mind.

My opinion is that the government needs to invest big time in education and make investment-friendly regulations that rewards faster and more adaptable innovation and technology shifts. Also the government should loosen and adapt the regulations on jobs, allowing companies to increase the size of the labor force.
There direly should be more efficient systems that allow universities (education) to work alongside with companies. Why is this not done yet?

All things I agree with. Especially the latter. Universities and companies should work together, a lot. Universities, at the very least, should try to get feedback from companies with regards to what they deem important as part of the curriculum. Ideally the cooperation between universities and companies should even go further. Not to mention that I think companies would profit greatly by paying for some people's education (as part of a contract, of course). I know my family's company does that and it works quite well for us.

Ps: CDOs were more a problem of a system that was thought to be indestructible. CDOs enjoyed a very larg trust. They were -the- investment short term and mid term because it was thought impossible the mortgages would forfeit in such a scale. Much alike: one of the problems now is that many of the 'Titanics' of our age were thought to be invincible.

True, but I do recall that.. I think it was Goldman or Lehman. One of them (or both) sold a lot of these things to AIG and then insured itself against AIG failing because of the CDO's. Which, kind of, shows what they thought of that. However, I'll add that it's been very long since I saw this and I'm not quite sure if I remember it right.

Your reasoning is a bit flawed Anti. Output equals investments + consumption + government spending. High wages means that consumptions goes up a lot. Allowing for an even larger output change. Sudden change of wages which does not equal a rise of productivity could lead to dangerous inflation however. And that -is- a threat.

Thanks for pointing that out. However, there's a limit to what these companies can produce (and thus sell) is there not? I figure that a more even ratio in how wages and productivity rise would be more positive than what I used in my example

Ps2: We should make that debate thread! Get to it Antistia! I hate making threads

I'm not good with names. I'd probably just call it "The debate thread" :/

[Lavian]

This is an interesting watch if you're into these types of things.

[Guest]

Not sure if real, but if it is...

[Eowale]

I link this to the missus while on Skype with her.
My face when she goes: "AAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWH!" in a very high-pitched voice.

[Lini]

I link this to the missus while on Skype with her.
My face when she goes: "AAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWH!" in a very high-pitched voice.

Your face what? <.<

[Nithel]

That is by far the most adorable thing I've seen all month

[Kristeas Sunbinder]

Spoiler for those with Arachnophobia.

Spoiler:

[Rmuffn]

Not sure if real, but if it is...

wtf...

[Shaelyssa]

I link this to the missus while on Skype with her.
My face when she goes: "AAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWH!" in a very high-pitched voice.

omgomgomgogmogmogmogmgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomg

OH MY GOD

[Morinth]

I swear to God if I haven't dropped a dress size after all this dancing tonight, I'll break this stupid game

Then cry and buy a new one it's so awesome. *-*

[Lyniath]

Dancing?
Ceilidh got everyone in my year drunk last night.

[Lavian]

Well this is a first, a 65 year old man released without charges for defending himself against some around 15 year olds by shooting at them with his gun in self defense, killing one of them:

http://www.wfmz.com/news/news-regional-berks/DA-Robbery-victim-65-justified-in-shooting-of-teens-on-trail/-/121418/8505702/-/3s906uz/-/index.html

[Lexgrad]

Not sure if real, but if it is...

wtf...

This made me giggle.

[Amaryl]

the best thing about this ordeal is:

The guy Maus, had sex 72 times with someone he didn't like, and whom didn't like him, he found out that his own wife cheated on him at least twice, And now he's getting sued...

all that for $2,500

what can I say:

Ignorance is bliss.

[Sponsored content]