Inflation vs. Unemployment
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 12:44:17 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Inflation vs. Unemployment
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment.
#1
Strongly disagree
 
#2
Disagree
 
#3
Agree
 
#4
Strongly agree
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 41

Author Topic: Inflation vs. Unemployment  (Read 21487 times)
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 21, 2004, 03:22:19 AM »

Agree is conservative, disagree is liberal.
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2004, 05:37:31 PM »

Agree, though I don't think that controlling one is exclusive to controlling the other.  We've seen the ravages inflation can wreck on wages.
Logged
Aegir
Guest
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2004, 07:07:03 PM »

Agree slightly
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2004, 07:51:38 PM »

Agree. There is a simple rule I learned in economics class: The higher inflation is the lower unemployement will be, the lower inflation is the higher unemployment will be. We don't want too much of either, but given the choice I would prefer to control inflation, as high inflation ultimately does far more damage to the economy in the long term.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2004, 08:21:11 PM »

Disagree. Both are pretty much equally important.
Logged
Nation
of_thisnation
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,555
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2004, 10:55:10 PM »

Control inflation for the most part, so we don't have to deal with controlling unemployment.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2004, 11:45:48 PM »

Agree.  If inflation snowballs out of control, the entire economy is wrecked.  Example: post WWI Germany.  That is the most extreme case, but the 1970's in America is another less extreme example.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,590
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2004, 12:55:29 PM »

Strongly Disagree

I remember the '80's
Logged
Redefeatbush04
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,504


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2004, 07:38:06 PM »

Agree
Logged
nclib
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,300
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2004, 08:59:28 PM »

Strongly disagree.

Unemployment has a more direct impact on individuals and therefore should be controlled.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,778


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2004, 09:42:38 PM »

Agree. There is a simple rule I learned in economics class: The higher inflation is the lower unemployement will be, the lower inflation is the higher unemployment will be. We don't want too much of either, but given the choice I would prefer to control inflation, as high inflation ultimately does far more damage to the economy in the long term.
Unfortunately, the rule you leaned is clasical Keynesian economics. It has been shown to have exceptions in modern economies, particularly in the 1970's. See for example stagflation.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2004, 09:53:52 PM »

Agree. There is a simple rule I learned in economics class: The higher inflation is the lower unemployement will be, the lower inflation is the higher unemployment will be. We don't want too much of either, but given the choice I would prefer to control inflation, as high inflation ultimately does far more damage to the economy in the long term.
Unfortunately, the rule you leaned is clasical Keynesian economics. It has been shown to have exceptions in modern economies, particularly in the 1970's. See for example stagflation.

Well, I did forget to mention that the rule only applies in the short term. No economic rule is perfect anyways, they are very general, and can't account for all factors.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2004, 10:02:05 PM »

Disagree. Both are pretty much equally important.

Same here
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2004, 11:11:44 PM »

Agree. There is a simple rule I learned in economics class: The higher inflation is the lower unemployement will be, the lower inflation is the higher unemployment will be. We don't want too much of either, but given the choice I would prefer to control inflation, as high inflation ultimately does far more damage to the economy in the long term.
Unfortunately, the rule you leaned is clasical Keynesian economics. It has been shown to have exceptions in modern economies, particularly in the 1970's. See for example stagflation.

Well, I did forget to mention that the rule only applies in the short term. No economic rule is perfect anyways, they are very general, and can't account for all factors.

Or, conversely, the 1990's, in which inflation and unemployment were both low.

The key is keeping the economy running at maximum productivity. Unemployment is thus bad, because it represents inefficiency in the economy; every person who doesn't have a job is someone who is not contributing, but yet they still must consume resources in order to survive. Consumption has to be met by productivity.

Clearly run away inflation is a bad thing, but as long as everyone is working in a job in which they are producing either a valuable good or providing a valuable service, and are being compensated fairly for it, it will be kept in check. The key is to ensure that consumption and production of goods is kept in balance.
Logged
Prospero
Rookie
**
Posts: 53


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 27, 2004, 10:05:45 PM »

Unemployment is not something that ought to be "controlled" as it will take care of itself naturally through an unfettered free market.  Inflation can be avoided through a return to a gold standard.
Logged
Mikem
Rookie
**
Posts: 84


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 28, 2004, 09:22:02 AM »

Strongly Agree.  Unemployment is not for us to control as mentioned above.  The market will take care of that.  If we start placing people in jobs (or dictating wages through minimum) which are not ready to be born by the market then we will be loosing productivity and raising the costs of goods, hence inflation.  This comes from a strong belief in market economics, free trade, and the idea that it is not the governments job or business to give anyone anything, only to protect them and take care of macro issues such as monetary policy.

As far as the 90's go, I believe the late boom part of the decade was nothing more than an economic anomoly.  The gains made there were not sustainable, and were mainly caused by superoptimism and speculation.  The market realized this in the last days of the millenium and corrected itself, hence the recession that ensued.

Also, I do not believe that everyone SHOULD be employed for that matter.  I'm sorry to say that some people are just too unskilled, unproductive, or just plain lazy to make give utility to an employer.  We cant just go around giving everyone a shovel and telling them to dig and they'll get paid as well as anyone else, thats command economics not capitalism.  Next thing we would be standing in line for toilet paper Smiley
Logged
Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.
HoffmanJohn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,951
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 17, 2010, 10:37:54 PM »

Agree. There is a simple rule I learned in economics class: The higher inflation is the lower unemployement will be, the lower inflation is the higher unemployment will be. We don't want too much of either, but given the choice I would prefer to control inflation, as high inflation ultimately does far more damage to the economy in the long term.
Unfortunately, the rule you leaned is clasical Keynesian economics. It has been shown to have exceptions in modern economies, particularly in the 1970's. See for example stagflation.

Well, I did forget to mention that the rule only applies in the short term. No economic rule is perfect anyways, they are very general, and can't account for all factors.

Or, conversely, the 1990's, in which inflation and unemployment were both low.

The key is keeping the economy running at maximum productivity. Unemployment is thus bad, because it represents inefficiency in the economy; every person who doesn't have a job is someone who is not contributing, but yet they still must consume resources in order to survive. Consumption has to be met by productivity.

Clearly run away inflation is a bad thing, but as long as everyone is working in a job in which they are producing either a valuable good or providing a valuable service, and are being compensated fairly for it, it will be kept in check. The key is to ensure that consumption and production of goods is kept in balance.

The fundamentals of macroeconomics teach us that inflation is not a problem unless it is unexpected, and secondly how can a thread discussing inflation not start out by discussing cost-push inflation model?
Logged
k-onmmunist
Winston Disraeli
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,753
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2010, 02:53:46 AM »

Strongly disagree. Unemployment is a massive social problem and fixing it should be a top priority.
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2010, 02:58:15 AM »

The question posed here presents a false dichotomy.
Logged
Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.
HoffmanJohn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,951
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2010, 08:19:48 AM »

The question posed here presents a false dichotomy.

obviously but it is something the Federal Reserve seriously considers. Probably because they have no clue what cost push inflation is!
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: June 19, 2010, 03:36:55 PM »
« Edited: June 21, 2010, 01:50:40 PM by The Prince »

Strongly agree. If you handle inflation first, then unemployment can be handled afterwards without raising ifnlation too much. However, if you tackle unemployment first, then inflation will still be high and then once you tackle inflation, unemployment will go up and you will need to tackle unemployment a second time. Thus, tackling inflation first is much easier and much more beneficial. Just look at the example of Paul Volcker in 1979-1983.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 21, 2010, 06:27:56 AM »

What an old poll - wish I could change my vote on this one!
Logged
Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.
HoffmanJohn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,951
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: June 21, 2010, 10:52:20 AM »

What an old poll - wish I could change my vote on this one!

how did you vote and why?

This thread does not consider cost push inflation, and i am assuming it is only talking about price inflation, but not any other kind of inflation.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 21, 2010, 11:03:07 AM »

What an old poll - wish I could change my vote on this one!

how did you vote and why?

This thread does not consider cost push inflation, and i am assuming it is only talking about price inflation, but not any other kind of inflation.

I voted in favor of prioritizing inflation as compared to unemployment, as at the time I was a right-winger.

But yes, few people understand that the inflation of the 70 through early 80s was not in fact any kind of indictment of Keynesian-ism, nor an effective argument for neo-liberalism, but rather just a supply shock.
Logged
Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.
HoffmanJohn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,951
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: June 21, 2010, 11:07:31 AM »

What an old poll - wish I could change my vote on this one!

how did you vote and why?

This thread does not consider cost push inflation, and i am assuming it is only talking about price inflation, but not any other kind of inflation.

I voted in favor of prioritizing inflation as compared to unemployment, as at the time I was a right-winger.

But yes, few people understand that the inflation of the 70 through early 80s was not in fact any kind of indictment of Keynesian-ism, nor an effective argument for neo-liberalism, but rather just a supply shock.

maybe you should post more in this forum about inflation. Their are a lot of misconceptions about it. For example my father comes from the generation that had to deal with supply shocks, and thus until this economic crisis he had an inherent disagreement with inflation.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.059 seconds with 14 queries.