EconomicPolicy101

Most people want to (force the rich to) help the poor. Others want to abolish billionaires. Still others, think that poverty can be alleviated by raising the minimum wage by legislation. Since we are so concerned about poverty, let us discuss how poverty is created in the first place. Broadly speaking, creating poverty in a society is a two step exercise. Step one is to destroy the wealth of the society that may exist when you start this exercise. Let us see how this may be done, in more detail: I) Destruction of the wealth of a Society Declaring a war on a society and bombing the assets there is an obvious means by which it's wealth can be destroyed. A slightly less obvious method is for the society to itself engage in an unnecessary foreign war and send its assets to burn and crash in the foreign land. But the insidious termites that really annihilate the wealth of a society are government operated enterprises.  These enterprises utilize more and more man-power and asse...

'Fruit of the poisonous tree' is a legal metaphor in the United States used to describe certain evidence that is inadmissible in court because it was discovered during an illegal government operation. The logic of the terminology is that if the source (the "tree") of the evidence is tainted, then any evidence gained (the "fruit") from it is tainted as well. This terminology would also be apt to describe our health care system. There have been mistakes made in the past , such as exclusion of health insurance premiums from the income of the beneficiary, that are clearly arbitrary and unjustifiable. Accordingly, our health system today is a poisonous tree because it incorporated this sin early on.  While this original sin persists, no matter how we tend to our healthcare system, the fruits that it bears will lead to heart ache for consumers and the general population. It is for this reason that attempts to legislate 'Price controls', ...

Real economics is in decline the world over - it's rightful position being increasingly taken over by what we will call 'VooDoo' economics. This will have catastrophic consequences. Let me first contrast the two - Economics is the study of production, distribution & consumption of goods and services. Voodoo however, concerns itself with the study of money. Let us see how this leads people to act differently in some real life situations: If an entrepreneur produces some goods with minimal consumption of resources and sells it to fellow people, economists will celebrate the entrepreneur for making available these goods (or services) to people economically. Voodoo economists however, rue the 'hoarding' of profits by the entrepreneur.   Voodoo economists are happy to tax the rich to fund government waste because the rich have so much money that taxing the rich a little bit more doesn't affect their lifestyles much. The real economists are at pains ...

No other concept is misunderstood more widely (or as badly) as the concept of profits. So let us dive right into it: Profits is a term related to the study of money (rather than economics , which is a more relevant field for all of us). Profit basically implies that a person with a said sum of money is able to trade goods or hire people to perform services (and sell those services) in such a manner as to end up with more money than he started out with. Let us try to gain an understanding of profits from an economic perspective. Where do profits come from? One of the most pervasive myths in the popular psyche is as follows: Since there is a finite amount of money to go around, a profit for one person is an obligatory loss/deprivation for another person. Let us see if this concept holds true for the following example: Imagine an Entrepreneur with a million dollars uses it to lease a piece of land and a tractor, buy seeds and hire a farmer to operate all of the equip...

The initial usage of the term "capitalism" in its modern sense has been attributed to Louis Blanc in 1850 (" What I call 'capitalism' that is to say the appropriation of capital by some to the exclusion of others") and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1861 ("Economic and social regime in which capital, the source of income, does not generally belong to those who make it work through their labour"). This was however a miscarriage of language that needs to be called out. Capitalism - Most people have capitalistic traits. We want to get rich with our labor, earn a profit on trade or be compensated for advice. Others are willing to rob banks, bribe the bureaucracy, accept bribes in the bureaucracy or become lavish dictators of the poorest countries.  The harm from unbridled capitalism is well alluded to in the literature. But what is the best means to tame and bridle this selfish tendency? I would propose that the Free Enterprise system ...

Our licensing laws are directly responsible for the wastage of precious human and capital resources in the preparation of various professionals. This manifests itself in the high cost and scarcity of professional care. Instead of merely testing for competence, our laws mandate a tortuous and expensive path to becoming a clinician/accountant/hair dresser - you name it. Allow me to first offer you  critiques of the current professionallicensing system and then suggest that disposing of it is better than the amending of it. 1) We are missing the point ! - If the point of licensing is to make available competent professional/practitioner, it is helpful to compare our current occupational licensing laws with those of motor vehicle operation licensing. If you need a motor vehicle driver's license, you demonstrate your competence to drive and you get a license to drive. But where do you go to demonstrate your competence to mend sewage pipes, cut hair or do brain surgery? ...

With Amazon reversing it's plans to open a second headquarter in NY under intense opposition by local politicians and unions, there is a great debate raging. The debate focuses on whether Amazon coming to NY would  have brought prosperity for its residents. The bigger lesson to be learned here is how the general public is largely blind to cronyism (and happy to attribute its ill effects to 'capitalism' - whatever that means).  You may think that the amazon deal would have benefited NY, or harm it. But it sure as hell stinks of cronyism. Why is one big corporation able to get the mayor and governor to negotiate in secret and get a tax break for investment and job creation? all this while hundreds of other businesses are drowning in taxes? Are they not investing money in NY and creating jobs? If the people were fair in their thinking, the concern voiced above (regarding the cronyism of the whole thing) would be the first thing to notice. Unless we make...

Do you think it is possible to tax the rich to provide free services to the poor? Watch this video to find out!