progressive economics

[shireen]

I'm not an expert in economics. I go by my intuition, common sense, and values, which is why I'm a liberal who identifies with Bernie Sanders.

What I don't have is a knowledge of the logic and data analysis that makes the case for such things as progressive taxes and other major economic issues that generally divide Republicans and Democrats. If you know of any easy-to-understand online resources, could you please post them so i can do some "studying."

[bemildred]

1. You might want to post this request in non-fiction too.

I'll see what I can dig up.

[shireen]

2. thanks, I really appreciate that.

[bemildred]

3. Oh my.

I googled "keynesian economics" and "progressive economics" and lots of things popped up:

The Progressive Economics Forum

The Origins and Evolution of Progressive Economics

Economic progressivism

Keynesian economics

[shireen]

4. thank you

my problem is i do not know which are reputable websites that are not distorted by Republicans. The first two links look good, but I'm pretty cautious about info from Wikipedia.

[jtuck004]

5. Read the references in whatever Wiki post and make up your own mind.

Would you trust a textbook more, one you got from a public school? Especially since you very likely paid part or all of the cost? Probably shouldn't, especially in History. To knock a source such as Wiki just because of a some imagined odor is a mistake in logic, despite the popularity of such an excuse. What I hear is that people are unsure of their own ability to tell propaganda and opinion from fact. Rather than beat up on the source, they should read and decide for themselves.

Wiki, and many other sources, are nothing more than data, and you should decide what it means, not depend on someone else to tell you.

Especially your friends

[bemildred]

7. I agree with jtuck004.

Read around, skip and sample, follow your interests, pay attention to the quality of the writing, think the arguments over and compare them with your own experience and observation. Think about who the authors are and what their interest in the subject might be. Are they making things clearer, or muddying things up? On what do they base their arguments?

There are no authoritative sources on such subjects, this is politics, skepticism is always warranted, and in the end you as a citizen can and should make up your own mind.

Economics, also, is not a well understood subject, and there is much in dispute. Genuine progressive sources are many, and they will agree about much if not all of the basic stuff, I have no qualms about any of those I posted, though I might find things to disagree with, if I read extensively in them. One of them is Canadian.

[Mattias]

6. Progressive economics

Basically the difference between progressive economics and what is called new classical economics that the republicans embrace is to be a bit populist facts. Today’s progressive economics to simplify is based on the theory that not everything always goes as it should do. For example the classical Keynesian thinking equals lowering taxes with increasing public expenditure as medication to depressions. This has shown to be a fallacy since lowering taxes in times of recessions will inevitably hit high income households that will equally inevitably save more. Increasing public spending with the same amount as you would decrease a tax will have far more positive effects as increased spending inevitably goes to those who cannot choose to save or spend but much spend. An unemployed getting employment will need to get ahead of mortgage payments, to buy essentials basically having to consume much of any income increase. Theoretically in economics how you stimulate the economy is irrelevant. What progressive economics has incorporated is the actual behavior of people. As people are in the end the definers of the economy that is the big steps forward as an example are the fundamentals of the economy. The capital stock (which is economic speak for factories, inventory and such) is the same 2012 as in 2006. The human capital stock (which is economic speak for educational, skill and productivity of the working force) is the same 2012 as in 2006. The technological level is higher 2012 than 2006. Still US is balancing on recession 2012 and was far from one 2006. That is the human factor, when households perceive bad times there will be bad times. When households perceive good times there will be good times. But without incorporating the human behavior in economic theory we will never understand or know what to do.
That is a simplified model of course it is not as easy as that.
Where the republicans are stuck today is in a model that promises no hope and no remedy. Market will solve everything without question, less is always better than more. This model is based on the assumption that people always act rational. A computer that yesterday cost 1 000 dollar that cost 500 dollar today is a bargain, a rational person would see this. But when at the same time that person don’t know if there is a job for them tomorrow they don’t see it as a bargain they see it as a risk. The big mistake from republicans is to assume that people that don’t exist exist. That lowering taxes is the same as stimulating the economy. That believes in a model that is dead and already has had gravestone erected. As long as republicans stick to this they will never be able to win the economic agenda. Where progressives use reality to guide them and the map as a supplement. The republicans use the map to guide them and should a mountain not be on the map they walk right into it refusing to believe it exists.

[shireen]

8. Thanks for the links, everyone.

Lot of good information to absorb. Now I need to find some time to do it ....