Far-left, Anti-Austerity Party Triumphs in Greek Election.

[Warren Dew]

You can't cut your way out of recession. It's never happened and it never will.

Actually, that's exactly what happened to the recession of 1920, which started out worse than the Great Depression:

The economic situation in 1920 was grim. By that year unemployment had jumped from 4 percent to nearly 12 percent, and GNP declined 17 percent. No wonder, then, that Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover — falsely characterized as a supporter of laissez-faire economics — urged President Harding to consider an array of interventions to turn the economy around. Hoover was ignored.

Instead of "fiscal stimulus," Harding cut the government's budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Harding's approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third.

http://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920

The result was the end of the depression and the boom of the 1920s.

[Warren Dew]

Apparently the rest of Europe isn't willing to let Greece just have all that money without paying it back, so the new junta has come up with another idea. Ready?

Borrow more money.

Yep. When you are 323 billion Euros in debt, the best thing to do is borrow more money. But not to worry, it's not actually borrowing more money, not really, it's swapping existing debt (due later this month) for "growth bonds". Well, not exactly a swap, more like a partial swap, a bit of cash, and a guarantee for the banks that the Eurozone bailed out on the last go round. And not ordinary bonds, the kind that you have to pay back on a certain schedule, no these new bonds will only come due after the Greek economy "grows". That's why they're "growth" bonds, geddit? No indication of the metrics they'll use to measure growth, but details, details. We need to look at the big picture here.

Hey, color me ready to invest! Just because they reneged on every previous promise doesn't mean they're going to renege on this one. Greeks are really trustworthy, particularly when they're bringing a gift.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/03/news/ec ... index.html

I'll call this "Wimpy Economics", as in "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hundred billion Euros today".

I find it hilarious that Tsipras thought the EU would give him more money immediately after he abrogated Greece's agreements on spending cuts. I look forward to his being unable to pay pensions and government employees. Tyrannical will be even more pleased, as Tsipras will lose half his seats to Golden Dawn.

Unless, of course, Putin bails him out. Then he can drag Putin down with him. Even better!

[piscator]

You can't cut your way out of recession. It's never happened and it never will.

Actually, that's exactly what happened to the recession of 1920, which started out worse than the Great Depression:

The economic situation in 1920 was grim. By that year unemployment had jumped from 4 percent to nearly 12 percent, and GNP declined 17 percent. No wonder, then, that Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover — falsely characterized as a supporter of laissez-faire economics — urged President Harding to consider an array of interventions to turn the economy around. Hoover was ignored.

Instead of "fiscal stimulus," Harding cut the government's budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Harding's approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third.

http://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920

The result was the end of the depression and the boom of the 1920s.

Andrew Mellon was in charge of US monetary policy as Secretary of the Treasury after Harding took office in March of 1921, when unemployment was already falling from its high during the Election of 1920. Having the world's foremost bond rater at the helm did more to lower yields and consequently National Debt than anything the ineffective Harding managed.

Von Mises is a stopped clock. You can count on them for hilarity, because most of them know about as much of macroeconomics as the Rush Limbaugh fans that make up their readership.

[Seth]

And this is the job of unemployed people to do??

The job market is just like any other market. You advertise your skill set and negotiate a price for using it. Others try to do the same. Supply and demand. In today's legal climate, if I were starving and saw an illegal working in a job I could do as well or better, I'd go to the employer and negotiate with him to take that job by convincing him that it's cheaper to hire me, and he'll get better service, than it is to pay the penalties for hiring an illegal alien. The illegal can go back to his own country and do the same thing there.

Or, in Libertarian parlance, I'd offer my superior skill set for a lower price than what he's paying someone else (anyone else) and work to "sell" myself as a better employee. That's how free markets work.

[Seth]

You can't cut your way out of recession. It's never happened and it never will.

Actually, that's exactly what happened to the recession of 1920, which started out worse than the Great Depression:

The economic situation in 1920 was grim. By that year unemployment had jumped from 4 percent to nearly 12 percent, and GNP declined 17 percent. No wonder, then, that Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover — falsely characterized as a supporter of laissez-faire economics — urged President Harding to consider an array of interventions to turn the economy around. Hoover was ignored.

Instead of "fiscal stimulus," Harding cut the government's budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Harding's approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third.

http://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920

The result was the end of the depression and the boom of the 1920s.

That's why they called it "The Roaring Twenties" and it was indeed a time of nearly unparalleled prosperity in America.

You see, the sensible thing to do when you spend too much money and have to keep borrowing is to stop spending money.

[pErvinalia]

And this is the job of unemployed people to do??

The job market is just like any other market. You advertise your skill set and negotiate a price for using it. Others try to do the same. Supply and demand. In today's legal climate, if I were starving and saw an illegal working in a job I could do as well or better, I'd go to the employer and negotiate with him to take that job by convincing him that it's cheaper to hire me, and he'll get better service, than it is to pay the penalties for hiring an illegal alien. The illegal can go back to his own country and do the same thing there.

Or, in Libertarian parlance, I'd offer my superior skill set for a lower price than what he's paying someone else (anyone else) and work to "sell" myself as a better employee. That's how free markets work.

A race to the bottom. A libbos wet dream! Meanwhile, back in the real world...

[Seth]

And this is the job of unemployed people to do??

The job market is just like any other market. You advertise your skill set and negotiate a price for using it. Others try to do the same. Supply and demand. In today's legal climate, if I were starving and saw an illegal working in a job I could do as well or better, I'd go to the employer and negotiate with him to take that job by convincing him that it's cheaper to hire me, and he'll get better service, than it is to pay the penalties for hiring an illegal alien. The illegal can go back to his own country and do the same thing there.

Or, in Libertarian parlance, I'd offer my superior skill set for a lower price than what he's paying someone else (anyone else) and work to "sell" myself as a better employee. That's how free markets work.

A race to the bottom. A libbos wet dream! Meanwhile, back in the real world...

Why would you think you deserve to be paid more than your skill set is worth? And why would you think that your inferior skill set should be favored over someone else's superior skill set?

You want a better job, get a better skill set. Otherwise you get nothing, which is what you're entitled to. Root, hog, or die.

[JimC]

All employers dream of setting their workers to compete ferociously for their jobs.

Luckily, unions ensure that this is only a pipe dream, and that by acting together, workers can ensure that the monied end of town isn't the only one that can flex its muscles...

[piscator]

The workers are the ones doing the producing, and in most cases the ones optimizing the production process. Management is ipso facto organized, else they couldn't sell stock.
Since all parties are in it for profit motive, why shouldn't labor organize and maximize its profit on its product by charging what the market will bear?

[Seth]

All employers dream of setting their workers to compete ferociously for their jobs.

Of course they do, and why shouldn't they?

Luckily, unions ensure that this is only a pipe dream, and that by acting together, workers can ensure that the monied end of town isn't the only one that can flex its muscles...

Unions may have been necessary and desirable in the past, when labor regulations were scant, but they are neither necessary nor desirable today, as all they do is drive costs up and drive companies out of business with their outrageous demands for wages and compensation that the employer cannot afford.

Which is why, of course, unions are strangling on their own greed and are disappearing. They no longer represent the health and safety of the workers because the law now does that, they represent only the fat-cats at the top and their ability to wield political influence.

[Seth]

The workers are the ones doing the producing, and in most cases the ones optimizing the production process. Management is ipso facto organized, else they couldn't sell stock.
Since all parties are in it for profit motive, why shouldn't labor organize and maximize its profit on its product by charging what the market will bear?

They can. It only becomes undesirable when the government favors the unions in negotiations between employers and employees, which is what happens here with the NLRB, which is completely staffed by ex-union goons.

If workers want to band together to negotiate with an employer, that's perfectly fine, so long as the playing field is level, by which I mean if the union asks for more than the employer is willing to pay, the employer can fire all the union employees and hire other people who are willing to work for less.

[JimC]

Tough luck, employers and Seth - unions ain't going anywhere, and will always be around to defend the working man from the oppression of employers with the ethical standards of rabid ferrets.

Which is pretty well all of them...

[piscator]

The NLRB? So you want to blame the government when a company raises wages to avert a strike?

[pErvinalia]

And this is the job of unemployed people to do??

The job market is just like any other market. You advertise your skill set and negotiate a price for using it. Others try to do the same. Supply and demand. In today's legal climate, if I were starving and saw an illegal working in a job I could do as well or better, I'd go to the employer and negotiate with him to take that job by convincing him that it's cheaper to hire me, and he'll get better service, than it is to pay the penalties for hiring an illegal alien. The illegal can go back to his own country and do the same thing there.

Or, in Libertarian parlance, I'd offer my superior skill set for a lower price than what he's paying someone else (anyone else) and work to "sell" myself as a better employee. That's how free markets work.

A race to the bottom. A libbos wet dream! Meanwhile, back in the real world...

Why would you think you deserve to be paid more than your skill set is worth? And why would you think that your inferior skill set should be favored over someone else's superior skill set?

You want a better job, get a better skill set. Otherwise you get nothing, which is what you're entitled to. Root, hog, or die.

As usual, you are wrong. You are entitled to a minimum wage as an employee.

And you're still wrong about there being more job vacancies than unemployed people.

What's it like to be consistently wrong?

[Warren Dew]

All employers dream of setting their workers to compete ferociously for their jobs.

Quite the opposite, in the U.S. these days. Large employers are currently working to expand employment immigration plans that work like indentured servitude to prevent the workers from competing. They know that wages would go up in the current environment if there were a free labor market.

Using illegal immigrants is even better, since the employer can get them jailed if they try to change jobs.

Luckily, unions ensure that this is only a pipe dream, and that by acting together, workers can ensure that the monied end of town isn't the only one that can flex its muscles...

You're about 60 years out of date with regard to the U.S. Even in Australia, only about 17% of workers are unionized.