France's social market vs. the U.S.'s libertarian/less social market - Page 8

Propertarian · #71 08-16-2006, 06:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
We have more toys.

[/ QUOTE ] People below the median income here most certainly do not have more toys than people below that in France.

[ QUOTE ]

How exactly do you measure that?

[/ QUOTE ] It's in every economics text.

TomCollins · #72 08-16-2006, 06:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Moorobot statistics shopping?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow...two more conspiracy theories in three words.

[/ QUOTE ]

What conspiracy theory?

tolbiny · #73 08-17-2006, 02:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
We are talking about economic policy here; hence "market". The crime rates I'm thinking of are "other regarding crimes";

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean by "other regarding crimes"?

[ QUOTE ]
France has less violent crime by far, for example, than the U.S. does.

[/ QUOTE ]

You were the one who choose to put "libertarian" in the title, many believe that the majority of crime, and the majority of violent crime, in the US is due mostly to the effect of the drug policy. This is not a libertarian ideal. A discussion can be had on what policys are affecting crime rates more but to simply claim (or imply) that its solely economic policy is pretty dishonest.

[ QUOTE ]

B) As Wilkinson and other medical researchers have shown, among the developed countries it is not the richest societies which have the best health, but those which have the smallest income differences between rich and poor Here is some reading for you

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously i can't address this as i haven't read the book, but it will go on the list.

[ QUOTE ]

From my original source I have a 54.6% growth in per capita GDP in the US and a 50.5% growth in France from 1990 to 2002.

[/ QUOTE ]

The gdp of the US is currently and has historically been much higher than France. In 1999 (this isn't stats shopping its the easiest link i have availible [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]) the US had a gdp per capita of 31,500 to france's 22,600 link_1 . The GDP per capita in 1990: US 21,082 France, 14,600 link 2 While France increased its GDP by 55%, and the US by "only" 50% the US widened the gap in actual dollars earned by 37%. So even when france "outperformes" the US in GDP per capita growth they are still losing ground in dollars earned.

[ QUOTE ]
Far more economic and job security.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

really? Job security?
----------------------------------------
Do you know what job security means? It means not being fired from your job. This study is not about job security.

[/ QUOTE ]

No job security is also about being able to get a job, and includes being able to find a new job if you do lose your job (also included should be how easy it is to voluntarily switch jobs IMO). Unemployment in the US in 1999 was 4.5%, France 11.5%. As that study i linked showed it is about 4x more likely for an unemplyed person in the US to get a new job than it is for a person in France. Considering that there is 2.5 times the unemployment in France you end up with 10x the number of people who are long term unemployed, or around 3.6% in France and 0.36% in the US. Losing a job is much less painfull to a person who can more easily find a replacement. Are you saying this isn't an important aspect of job security?

Propertarian · #74 08-17-2006, 03:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying this isn't an important aspect of job security?

[/ QUOTE ] Job security, by definition, is how likely one is to be dismissed from one's current job. It doesn't have anything to do future jobs.

You are changing the definition of a term in order to make my claim look faulty.

Undoubtedly unemployment in France is a problem; but it's not an issue that has to do with job security, as its normally defined.

[ QUOTE ]
The gdp of the US is currently and has historically been much higher than France. In 1999 (this isn't stats shopping its the easiest link i have availible ) the US had a gdp per capita of 31,500 to france's 22,600 link_1 . The GDP per capita in 1990: US 21,082 France, 14,600 link 2 While France increased its GDP by 55%, and the US by "only" 50% the US widened the gap in actual dollars earned by 37%. So even when france "outperformes" the US in GDP per capita growth they are still losing ground in dollars earned.

[/ QUOTE ] All the gains in the U.S. are going to the wealthy, however. short article.

In the U.S. "• The median income for men under age 44 was significantly lower in 1997 than in 1970, after adjusting for inflation, according to a long-term analysis by the Census Bureau in the late 1990s. For those over 45, incomes barely held their own during that period."

That said, since 1995, real income has been increasing in the U.S. But the gains have gone almost entirely to people 45-64, who generally have higher incomes than younger people anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
The gdp of the US is currently and has historically been much higher than France.

[/ QUOTE ] I know...but since France started its social democracy it has been gaining ground on the U.S.

[ QUOTE ]
A discussion can be had on what policys are affecting crime rates more but to simply claim (or imply) that its solely economic policy is pretty dishonest.

[/ QUOTE ] Agreed, but I did not imply that. This thread is about the economic policy in both countries. And I don't think any sociologists doubts that poverty is a cause of crime, and inequality clearly tends to increase crime rates as well.

[ QUOTE ]
What do you mean by "other regarding crimes"?

[/ QUOTE ] An "other regarding crime" is a crime that primarily effects someone other than the "criminal", while a "self-regarding crime" is a "crime" against oneself e.g. seat belt laws or laws against marijuana.

tolbiny · #75 08-17-2006, 03:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Job security, by definition, is how likely one is to be dismissed from one's current job. It doesn't have anything to do future jobs.

You are changing the definition of a term in order to make my claim look faulty.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the claim was faulty on its own. Any mention of having "higher job security" as a bonus while ignoring factors that make it more valuable to one group than to another means it is a faulty claim, or at the very least incomplete.

[ QUOTE ]
I know...but since France started its social democracy it has been gaining ground on the U.S.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it catching up in % or by actual $? If i make 25,000 to your 50,000 one year, and 51,000 to your 100,000 the next, have i really "caught up"?

I have to go, i'll address more later.

hmkpoker · #76 08-22-2006, 05:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Job security, by definition, is how likely one is to be dismissed from one's current job. It doesn't have anything to do future jobs.

You are changing the definition of a term in order to make my claim look faulty.

Undoubtedly unemployment in France is a problem; but it's not an issue that has to do with job security, as its normally defined.

[/ QUOTE ]

That seems like a poor definition then, if we're looking for economic merits.

I don't disagree that an employee is more likely to get fired in a free market. However, it's also easier to get hired in a free market. Speaking from personal experience, getting a job is far more stressful than having a job, so while employee protection is good for the employed, it seems to hurt those trying to get into the workforce.

Surely you can agree that the ease of getting hired is an important factor in whatever it is we are trying to describe by with the term "job security."

tolbiny · #77 08-22-2006, 06:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
and inequality clearly tends to increase crime rates as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have several clarifying questions. What kinds of inequality are you talking about? If i get paid 25,000 a year to work 40 hours a week, and you get 25,000 as an umemployed person we are not equal are we? What about intergenerational inequality? Public debt is inherited by the next generation, and government that borrows to pay for this generation is placing the burden on the next one.

hmkpoker · #78 08-22-2006, 06:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
An "other regarding crime" is a crime that primarily effects someone other than the "criminal", while a "self-regarding crime" is a "crime" against oneself e.g. seat belt laws or laws against marijuana.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a tangent, how do you feel about "self-regarding crime"? Are there any that you support?

chezlaw · #79 08-22-2006, 10:21 AM

If two economies are linked and the much larger economy grows then would you expect the smaller economy to grow at a faster rate?

chez

Nielsio · #80 08-22-2006, 10:30 AM

How much money do both governments spend in relation to the amount of 'citizens'?