 | | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | (...) Left out an assumption, thank you, as usual, for not letting me get away with one atom's worth of implicitness. Sigh. Assume the same total revenue take. 40% across the board is surely more distortive than 5% on everything except food (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen
| | | | | | (...) And I wasn't thinking straight, or I'd have known what you meant. (...) Yes. And...? (...) When there is production that is going unbought because money that would have been used for consumption (in addition to there being larger production), (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | | (...) Actually, no. See, for example, any first year Macroeconomics text, for example Samuelson. Excess production (that is, more goods than wages) causes deflation. Excess consumption (that is, more wages than goods) causes inflation. Now, it so (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | |
