Which is more important to you - economical or social issues?

[Roses Ablaze]

Please excuse my bad/limited vocabulary...

I think social issues are more predominant because they're easier to understand (or at least seem that way), but what's more important? The economy does affect everyone, but social issues can't be ignored...

 

[ChaosRocket]

I think the biggest problem people have is trying to seperate them when really they're inseperable.

 

[Fig]

Depending, of course, on what you mean by "social issues" exactly.

 

[Barb]

By social issues, I'm assuming she's referring to gay marriage, euthanasia, etc. They certainly get more press coverage than economical issues.

 

[The Big Al]

Well, the economy does need some monitoring. I've watched utter stupidity and greed strangle General Motors. I wish the government didn't need to watch the economy and regulate it but corportate leaders don't play by the rules.

On social issues. They aren't issues. Is it the government's business that there is abortion and gay marriage? No, their personal freedoms and this country was formed on personal freedoms.

In short
It's the economy stupid.

 

[Girafarig_Magcargo]

Well, the economy does need some monitoring. I've watched utter stupidity and greed strangle General Motors. I wish the government didn't need to watch the economy and regulate it but corportate leaders don't play by the rules.

On social issues. They aren't issues. Is it the government's business that there is abortion and gay marriage? No, their personal freedoms and this country was formed on personal freedoms.

In short
It's the economy stupid.

Eh, the economy's in a pretty good place right now. And obvioulsy it wasn't the economy last time around, stupid.

 

[Barb]

I think the biggest problem people have is trying to seperate them when really they're inseperable.

Like Girafarig Magcargo and Big Al. :ksmile:

 

[Girafarig_Magcargo]

How are economic issues linked with social issues?

 

[Barb]

We're not debating whether or not they're linked, we're debating which of the two (social or economical) is more important.

 

[Ket Makura]

It's hard to say, really. For me, they are important for different reasons. I tend to feel more strongly about social issues, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is the more important of the two.

 

[The Big Al]

Eh, the economy's in a pretty good place right now. And obvioulsy it wasn't the economy last time around, stupid.

Good compared to what? Good compared to the bottom after 9/11 or good compared to the Clinton years?

The jobs created are of lower quality than the jobs lost. Also, if a person gets two jobs, it's counted as two jobs in the labor reports. So if x number of jobs are created, it doesn't mean x number of people were employed. Also, is isn't long term growth. The main increase has been the service sector and we need to restore the manufacturing base.

When you look at the big and long term picture, the economy isn't as good as the Bush administration is claiming.

EDIT: People are stupid. They are easily sucked in by the bastards in the NRA and wackos like Pat Roberts. It's not my fault they can be lied to they believe it. 48% of American voters did believe it was the economy.

 

[Mozz]

:looks at Al's post:

:yawns:

 

[The Big Al]

Lovely.

You may have a degree in the economy, but I live it. The economy on paper is very different from the economy when put into practice.

 

[Mozz]

According to sources, the economy in one city is a very minute part of the national economy. Just because your community is dying economically like the old steel towns doesn't mean the American economy is tanking.

 

[The Big Al]

Not at the moment but I'm talking in the long term. Depending on the impact of the town, they could drag other communities down with them which would drag other communities. It's the problem with the current economy, its growing but we haven't fixed the foundation yet.

Example.
A factory closes. The workers are outf job and are no longer making their typical wages. The businesses that serviced the factory workers lose money because the factory workers aren't going out to the movies and other activities that would pay them. The people providing services to those business lose money. And so on and so on.

So one community going under could disrupt the economy of the entire region which would have an affect on the national economy but would be lessened by the coverage. However, if you have entire states having these problems, especially production states, then yes the national economy could be drastically affected.

 

[Girafarig_Magcargo]

Not at the moment but I'm talking in the long term. Depending on the impact of the town, they could drag other communities down with them which would drag other communities. It's the problem with the current economy, its growing but we haven't fixed the foundation yet.

Example.
A factory closes. The workers are outf job and are no longer making their typical wages. The businesses that serviced the factory workers lose money because the factory workers aren't going out to the movies and other activities that would pay them. The people providing services to those business lose money. And so on and so on.

So one community going under could disrupt the economy of the entire region which would have an affect on the national economy but would be lessened by the coverage. However, if you have entire states having these problems, especially production states, then yes the national economy could be drastically affected.

Unless the factory produced something you couldn't find elsewhere, it wouldn't have much effect on the region. In fact, it would stimulate growth in the rest of the region by providing more labor.

Funny how tbe generic "scientist" here thinks he knows more about economics than the economics major.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

My problem with the whole economic side of things is that I keep hearing the economy's getting better, but I never hear WHY it's getting better, aside from references to the rising stock market (which, even knowing how little I know of economics, canNOT be the only factor), and yet when I hear it's getting WORSE, I can point to specific incidents (and given a little time and GoogleMap, could provide pictures). I hear someone say the economy's improving...but never HOW it's improving. Then the next day I hear about another company declaring bankruptcy or firing hundreds of employees.

But, for me, social issues are more important. I'd much rather deal with why people are doing things and social trends are always more interesting to me than economic ones. What can I say? The economy just isn't as intriguing to me as social change.

 

[The Big Al]

Unless the factory produced something you couldn't find elsewhere, it wouldn't have much effect on the region. In fact, it would stimulate growth in the rest of the region by providing more labor.

With this statement, you have just proven how naive you are about the economy. For your theory to work there must be
1. Jobs that need to be filled.
2. Those jobs must provide equal or better pay that the jobs lost.

Unfortunately this is rarely the case.

Also, you're working backwards. I'm not talking about the removal of supply, I'm talking about the removal of the demand. That isn't as easy to solve as what you suggested.

Funny how tbe generic "scientist" here thinks he knows more about economics than the economics major.

Considering the economics major can't get past the economy on paper.

 

[Girafarig_Magcargo]

With this statement, you have just proven how naive you are about the economy. For your theory to work there must be
1. Jobs that need to be filled.
2. Those jobs must provide equal or better pay that the jobs lost.

Unfortunately this is rarely the case.

Also, you're working backwards. I'm not talking about the removal of supply, I'm talking about the removal of the demand. That isn't as easy to solve as what you suggested.

Considering the economics major can't get past the economy on paper.

Pay cut > no pay.

And while a large unemployment wave may hurt other stores in one town, it won't spread regionally.

 

[The Big Al]

Pay cut > no pay.

=/= good news.

And while a large unemployment wave may hurt other stores in one town, it won't spread regionally.

If it's kept to that one town. However, we're talking about whole states who are stil struggling to get their economies on track due to outsourcing of industrial labor. That will put a dent in the economy and stifle growth overall.