Austerity measures have they ever saved an economy?

The logic seems to be that if we stop giving rich people's money to poor people, and teach poor people janitorial skills in elementary school, the indigent can aspire to someday own their own cleaning businesses.Because the drag on the economy is caused by retail establishments with dirty windows.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I understand why this bit of wisdom is appealing, but I'd welcome an explanation of how this policy is going to help get the economy out of the doldrums.In your view, what role does the deficit play in preventing job growth and eroding consumer confidence? Currently banks have access to money at extremely low interest rates yet that doesn't translate into wanting to loan money. What is it about reduced spending and increased taxes that will change that?On the other hand, it is easy to see how increased spending on infrastructure and pork might actually be helpful.

I don't believe such systems are sustainable. I'm willing to listen to arguments that they could be, but I'm quite skeptical.

Yes I do understand that higher efficiency would mean less man-hours of work to be done. But I believe the end result would be a population full of lazy layabouts. As a result, a system were it is okay, and in fact required that large segments of people not work is not a sustainable system.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Actually I think we're in the process of appreciating that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were keeping tens of thousands of men and women off of the dole.

Even waste must end up in someone's pocket.

No commentary needed.

Sounds exactly like lazing about to me. Lazing doesn't have to mean sitting on the couch or avoiding the expenditure of energy. First of all, life will never be that easy. Secondly, a society in which only button pushing is required will be technologically stagnant. Thirdly, someone must tend the machines. Finally, stop watching the Jetsons.

I think you are defining service jobs quite narrowly. No, you cannot get your hamburger cooked abroad, but legal services, programming, product support, sales, advertising, etc. can all be performed off shore. Yes, you can outsource teaching Yoga to China.

[qs=NoNukes]My answer is still the same. The society you describe is stagnant and fragile. I don't believe it is adabtable enough to external forces that will change. I don't see the motivation for technological advance or for people to educate themselves in anything hard. I can hardly be criticized for responding to what you actually posted, and I don't believe your illustrated point is correct. The point at which needs and wants are satisfied is not some static point, but is a point subject to change as population increases, resources are consumed, and external factors change. Yet the society itself appears to be stagnant. It sound like Jetson's style utopian nonsense. Read Huxley and skip the Hannah Barbera.

Maybe under a definition that nobody other than you employs. And it is only your definition that I am criticizing. I'm not suggesting that bagging groceries can be off shored.Do medical doctors provide a service? If so why is it considered a service to give someone an opinion on a disease prognosis, but manufacturing to provide an opinion on whether a law suit against you might succeed? I think you are confusing the legal papers that any scribe can generate given the actual legal service that lawyers are licensed to perform.If all of the records in a jurisdiction were on line, couldn't a title clearance search for a commercial property be performed online by anyone in the world with the knowledge to do so?Why is cooking a hamburger not considered to be manufacturing.In short have you seem to be defining service jobs to be those kinds of things that are either impossible or impractical to perform remotely. I don't think that's what people refer to as service sector jobs. Using a bunch of sensors, video camera, and transducers to detect body position and neural activity, and to administer tactile, visual, and/or audio feedback. Surely you could imagine more than one way to do this using off the shelf technology. My guess is that it would be far more feasible to provide remote Yoga lessons than to give someone a haircut from 1000 miles away.But besides all of that, Americans sometimes find it cheaper to go abroad to have medical procedures done. If foreign yoga lessons and transportation are cheap enough, maybe it would be feasable to go to China once a month for Yoga lessons.

In the US, while there may be people who are not productive, we don't encourage non-productivity, or require it as policy. A society of the type Jon suggests is a different animal entirely. It is not simply a more efficient version of US society.

True, of course. But Jon didn't provide any examples of productive things.But perhaps lazing about is an unfair characterization. I'm suggesting that some endeavors are hard and require years of preparation. Preparing for the unknown requires education, experience, and hard work. I don't think a push button society in which everybody has everything they want effortlessly provides an incentive to do the hard things.

That's complete rubbish. It is entirely possible and in fact likely that without efforts to counter the effect, Coca Cola would lose market share to other cola manufacturers.The goal of advertising is to increase profits, with increasing consumption of cola being one way to do that. Another way to increasoe profits is to increase the price while convincing people that they still must drink Coca Cola despite the increased price.There demand for Coca Cola is not a fixed number. The demand for coke is variable with price, marketplace substitutes, etc. One object of advertising for Coke is to convince people that there is no acceptable substitute thus increasing the demand. There is plenty of opportunity for Coca Cola to lose or gain marketshare.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

That may be what you just said, but your statement does not resemble what I said. Telling people about your product does not constitute an artificial means independent of the dictates of a free market.How old are you?