WSJ: Liberals vs. Conservatives concerning knowledge of basic economics.

#2
#2
The other questions were: 1) Mandatory licensing of professional services increases the prices of those services (unenlightened answer: disagree). 2) Overall, the standard of living is higher today than it was 30 years ago (unenlightened answer: disagree). 3) Rent control leads to housing shortages (unenlightened answer: disagree). 4) A company with the largest market share is a monopoly (unenlightened answer: agree). 5) Third World workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited (unenlightened answer: agree). 6) Free trade leads to unemployment (unenlightened answer: agree). 7) Minimum wage laws raise unemployment (unenlightened answer: disagree).

LG want to still argue these aren't basic economic questions?
 
#3
#3
I like it how the poll is purposely ambiguous and how it focuses on blatant ignorance instead of "open-minded acceptance of ideas that have valid points that contrast with your own."
 
#6
#6
the standard of living is higher by any metric possible (income, material wealth, education, % in poverty). except i suppose by people watching leave it to beaver or something.
 
#7
#7
droski said:
the standard of living is higher by any metric possible (income, material wealth, education, % in poverty). except i suppose by people watching leave it to beaver or something.
Click to expand...

The percentage below poverty rate hasn't changed much at all in the last 40 years. Also, the personal consumer debt rate is far higher now than in 1970, for example. Sure, you have access to more material wealth but you're in debt to gain access to it.
 
#8
#8
depends what you define as % in poverty. our poor today would not be considered poor in 1960. the consumer debt rate is higher because home ownership is FAR higher and that is not a negative IMO even with the housing market collapse.
 
#9
#9
droski said:
depends what you define as % in poverty. our poor today would not be considered poor in 1960. the consumer debt rate is higher because home ownership is FAR higher and that is not a negative IMO even with the housing market collapse.
Click to expand...

But that's just the thing. There truly isn't a standard across-the-board definition of "Standard of Living" that would be equatable between the present and the past (30-40 years). I'm only stating that it was completely ambiguous on purpose. If you had any thoughts or reservations as a pollster you would not have gone for an adamant disagree. The topic is still too vague to state unequivocally.

And, for that matter, I agree with you in that debt, if managed, is a healthy and necessary part of the economy.
 
#10
#10
personally i think inflation adjusted incomes, education, and material wealth are definetly valid ways to determine standard of living. unless you want to poll people as to how happy they are. . .
 
#11
#11
droski said:
personally i think inflation adjusted incomes, education, and material wealth are definetly valid ways to determine standard of living. unless you want to poll people as to how happy they are. . .
Click to expand...

I would think access to dental and health-care, disposable income and continued access to running water/electricity are the most concrete forms to gauge progress.
 
#12
#12
DC Vol said:
I would think access to dental and health-care, disposable income and continued access to running water/electricity are the most concrete forms to gauge progress.
Click to expand...

ok then we've undoubtably progressed.
 
#13
#13
Personally, I don't feel like we have progressed to our potential (circa 1960) and I think we have mortgaged our future to the point that we will have to reduce the quality of life just to remain solvent.

It would be interesting to compare (if such data were available and adjusted for inflation) between 1960 and today such things as average household wealth, average household income, etc. keeping in mind that now both Mommy and Daddy work.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top