Pages:
Author

Topic: When I hear "people should spend all of their money" instead of saving... - page 2. (Read 4328 times)

legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
When I hear a statist, keynesian economist talking about how people from all walks of life shouldn't save their money and how they should spend their paychecks completely, I think of natural disasters, economic collapses or other personal crises and how people will be running towards the government for assistance. Instead of using their own means to recover, they will depend on a higher power to get back up again.

To me, the whole notion of not saving money is very authoritarian. To say people shouldn't prepare and save is like saying every man is the government's bitch and your survival is dependent on their ability to bring you up again. It implies the government can never fail, which is clearly wrong.

Just my 2 cents.

As for the effectiveness of depending on the government when shit happens, that's an entirely different debate that could be discussed here.

My point is hoarding has its purpose: Stored wealth is supposed to be your safety net when times are bad. At the very least, it's mine. I don't think of going on welfare or to the food bank when I lose my job among other things. I think of my own Plan B. I believe you should consider doing the same.
I very much agree.  It's time people wake up and take responsibility for themselves and their own financial situations.
member
Activity: 110
Merit: 10
So, if a country wants to increase GDP, they need to increase savings and decrease spending (both consumer and government).

Not necessarily; there is also the golden rule savings rate to consider. For a country with high consumption, increasing investment can lead to higher consumption. For a country with high investment/savings, increasing consumption can actually be beneficial.(The wikipedia article is a bit technical. The theory is based on the idea that an over-invested economy will lose value due to over-capacity and depreciation of capital.)

I would say China is an example of a country that saves too much and as a result, the people have a lower standard of living than they would in a more balanced economy.

I think that encouraging people to spend more is intended as a short-term solution to a short-term problem. Recessions create dead-weight losses to the economy; skills and industries are lost that don't spontaneously reappear in the good times. Spending more in the short-term could keep them going until a recovery becomes self-sustaining. In the longer term, though, a rebalancing to a less consumer dominated economy is probably in everyone's interests.
hero member
Activity: 839
Merit: 1004
aren't we right now in the "LIVE NOW PAY LATER" generation?

most people i know got loans to pay back for shitty cars they already crashed...

...and I love raking in that interest.   Grin
legendary
Activity: 4354
Merit: 3260
People saying we should spend more and save less need a quick lesson in macro (Keynesian) economics.

Y = C + I + G + X

Y is total spending (GDP), C is consumption (a.k.a. consumer spending), I is investment (a.k.a. savings), G is government spending, and X is exports (less imports).

Please note that if you increase C by decreasing I, Y does not change. In other words, spending more and saving less does not increase GDP. Furthermore, growth of GDP depends on I. So, if a country wants to increase GDP, they need to increase savings and decrease spending (both consumer and government).
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500
aren't we right now in the "LIVE NOW PAY LATER" generation?

most people i know got loans to pay back for shitty cars they already crashed...
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
You are WRONG!
buy bitcoins or gold. ie. spending them on a store of value
legendary
Activity: 1973
Merit: 1007
It has its merits. If the government were to collapse, you may be hard pressed to convince someone a hundred dollar bill is worth a weeks worth of food. On the other hand, the guy who spent all of his money( assuming he didn't spend it all on hookers and blow) may have some tangible goods to trade.
jr. member
Activity: 56
Merit: 1
When I hear a statist, keynesian economist talking about how people from all walks of life shouldn't save their money and how they should spend their paychecks completely, I think of natural disasters, economic collapses or other personal crises and how people will be running towards the government for assistance. Instead of using their own means to recover, they will depend on a higher power to get back up again.

To me, the whole notion of not saving money is very authoritarian. To say people shouldn't prepare and save is like saying every man is the government's bitch and your survival is dependent on their ability to bring you up again. It implies the government can never fail, which is clearly wrong.

Just my 2 cents.

As for the effectiveness of depending on the government when shit happens, that's an entirely different debate that could be discussed here.

My point is hoarding has its purpose: Stored wealth is supposed to be your safety net when times are bad. At the very least, it's mine. I don't think of going on welfare or to the food bank when I lose my job among other things. I think of my own Plan B. I believe you should consider doing the same.
Pages:
Jump to: