apparently not paying attention, are you.

Post #352,170 by beepster 12/20/11 11:39:28 AM Reply	apparently not paying attention, are you. Photo caption on Jobs...not a job creator. The base assumption is that the economy starts at Demand=0. This is an absurd baseline assumption (I call it stupid). Ferchrissakes, the inventor of shamwow found a market...in a "down economy". Yes, there has to be someone to sell the product to...yes this is a demand economy...but to pretend that the starting point is Demand=0 is, yes Virginia, stupid. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #352,171 by drook 12/20/11 11:53:46 AM Reply	Jobs never created demand He created desire. That, combined with available funds, created demand. Take away the available funds -- like in the island example -- and there's no demand. Anything sold to people with no savings by definition can't count as an increase in demand. Unless we increase debt -- which hasn't worked out so well after all, so I'll say it doesn't count -- any money spent on an iPad by someone with no savings is money not spent on something else. It's shifting demand, not creating it. There are only two ways to increase demand: 1. Increase desire among people with savings. 2. Increase disposable income among people with unsatisfied desire. And just to be clear ... where exactly in that article does it state anything about demand=0? -- Drew
Post #352,173 by beepster 12/20/11 1:26:35 PM Reply	Re: Jobs never created demand "Take away the available funds -- like in the island example -- and there's no demand. " D'uh. That creates the assumption D=0. A stupid assumption. And shifting demand, depending on where that demand shifts from and to can create net positive jobs. And your limit of 2 options is woefully inadequate. There are..just to name a few... 3) grow the macro economy 4) increase the population 5) change the tastes and preferences of the population (the steve jobs example, btw) 6) reduce general price levels (especially for staples...the OPPOSITE of what is happening..and one of the places where Krugman is wrong (to leap threads). Jobs DID create demand. He changed peoples preferences..and did so with Veblen goods (higher demand in part due to higher price...think Gucci) I'm not disagreeing that a demand based economy needs demand to exist. I'm saying his "millionaire island" concept is stupid..and proves nothing. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #352,174 by drook 12/20/11 1:56:47 PM Reply	? Grow the macro economy? Isn't that the result of increasing demand? How can that be the cause of increasing demand? Increase the population. Okay, I missed that one. But with unemployment already ridiculously high, do you really think that's going to help anything? Change tastes ... so that you increase desire. That was my #1. Reduce prices of staples. How? Reduce margins? Increase efficiency? Outsource even more? Lay off more people? Not seeing how that helps. -- Drew
Post #352,180 by beepster 12/20/11 4:32:05 PM Reply	Re: ? Reduce price of staples... Let's see...stop using corn to make ethanol. One example. Stop paying farmers not to grow. Invest in agricultural land restoration. Drill, baby, drill. To name a few. Grow macro...invest in PRODUCTIVE resources (something our gov has failed to do) . Then you pay down the resulting debt with the increase in revenues over time. (see above re: restoration...drilling...cross country pipelines (new add)..all not on table or actively opposed..all net job additions=increased net income=economic growth.) Instead, they've added backdoor bailouts. And increasing desire or changing and defining taste was your number one with a caveat. Your number one added "with savings". And if you think Jobs never created demand...then how did he sell ipod 1? It never existed prior to his (company's) invention of it. It certainly was not "needed". If you assume his actions netted no demand, then no new invention would ever succeed. If I don't demand it now, then I should not demand it ever. Straight logical progression. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #352,183 by drook 12/20/11 4:58:52 PM Reply	How many times do you spend a dollar? Every iPod sold to people without savings was several hundred dollars not spent on something else. How is that a net increase in demand? You're mixing micro and macro. -- Drew

Welcome to IWETHEY!