Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

What proportion of the GDP should be control

kalamdhesi
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.
David_Debates
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 7:53:29 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

The Government should have the least possible control over the economy. Their job is to enforce and protect people's rights, not meddle with the market.
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2016 5:02:20 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Exactly 0%.
TimGabz
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.
Babazonke
David_Debates
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.
TimGabz
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%
Babazonke
David_Debates
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2016 5:32:32 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%

So let's talk about what is necessary. And let's see how much GDP we'd need the government to control to accomplish these needs.
As the example, let's use the USA as a model. What does the Government have an obligation to do and what should it not do? And how much of the GDP is necessary to accomplish those duties?
ptarkington
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2016 10:59:22 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 8/29/2016 5:32:32 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%

So let's talk about what is necessary. And let's see how much GDP we'd need the government to control to accomplish these needs.
As the example, let's use the USA as a model. What does the Government have an obligation to do and what should it not do? And how much of the GDP is necessary to accomplish those duties?

1. Protect the people- police and military
2. Provide Public Utilities- Water, Electricity, Internet access
3. Provide Public Transportation- Busses
4. Provide adequate roads
5. Provide free education
"Capitalism is the belief the wickedest of men, will engage in the wickedest of dealings, for the greater good of all of us." -Keynes
David_Debates
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2016 10:51:36 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/3/2016 10:59:22 AM, ptarkington wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:32:32 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%

So let's talk about what is necessary. And let's see how much GDP we'd need the government to control to accomplish these needs.
As the example, let's use the USA as a model. What does the Government have an obligation to do and what should it not do? And how much of the GDP is necessary to accomplish those duties?

1. Protect the people- police and military

Let's call that protecting people's rights to life.

2. Provide Public Utilities- Water, Electricity, Internet access

Internet access? Electricity? Last time I checked, those were provided by 3rd parties, like Edison Electric and Verizon, to name a few.

3. Provide Public Transportation- Busses

Provided we pay for the fares.

4. Provide adequate roads

I'll agree with you there.

5. Provide free education

As in...? How far up are we going?
ptarkington
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2016 11:34:34 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/3/2016 10:51:36 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:59:22 AM, ptarkington wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:32:32 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%

So let's talk about what is necessary. And let's see how much GDP we'd need the government to control to accomplish these needs.
As the example, let's use the USA as a model. What does the Government have an obligation to do and what should it not do? And how much of the GDP is necessary to accomplish those duties?

1. Protect the people- police and military

Let's call that protecting people's rights to life.

I'm indifferent between what we call it, have it your way. The fire department is another.

2. Provide Public Utilities- Water, Electricity, Internet access

Internet access? Electricity? Last time I checked, those were provided by 3rd parties, like Edison Electric and Verizon, to name a few.

My aim was not to describe what is provided, rather to describe things in which should be made public goods as they are necessities that are provided by oligopolistic markets you're describing.

3. Provide Public Transportation- Busses

Provided we pay for the fares.

Why should one have to pay for a basic need so fundamental as such?

4. Provide adequate roads

I'll agree with you there.

5. Provide free education

As in...? How far up are we going?

High enough to provide talented youths with opportunities to get the education necessary to exercise those talents in the competitive market.
"Capitalism is the belief the wickedest of men, will engage in the wickedest of dealings, for the greater good of all of us." -Keynes
David_Debates
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 12:14:33 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/3/2016 11:34:34 PM, ptarkington wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:51:36 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:59:22 AM, ptarkington wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:32:32 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%

So let's talk about what is necessary. And let's see how much GDP we'd need the government to control to accomplish these needs.
As the example, let's use the USA as a model. What does the Government have an obligation to do and what should it not do? And how much of the GDP is necessary to accomplish those duties?

1. Protect the people- police and military

Let's call that protecting people's rights to life.

I'm indifferent between what we call it, have it your way. The fire department is another.

2. Provide Public Utilities- Water, Electricity, Internet access

Internet access? Electricity? Last time I checked, those were provided by 3rd parties, like Edison Electric and Verizon, to name a few.

My aim was not to describe what is provided, rather to describe things in which should be made public goods as they are necessities that are provided by oligopolistic markets you're describing.

I'm not advocating for an oligopolistic market. What makes you think that?
I'm stating that we ought to privatize things like electricity or internet service. They shouldn't be provided by the government.

3. Provide Public Transportation- Busses

Provided we pay for the fares.

Why should one have to pay for a basic need so fundamental as such?

Because you're using a service. It ought to have a cost, but only for those that use the service.

4. Provide adequate roads

I'll agree with you there.

5. Provide free education

As in...? How far up are we going?

High enough to provide talented youths with opportunities to get the education necessary to exercise those talents in the competitive market.

So, I'd assume that's up to high school?
ptarkington
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 12:27:11 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/4/2016 12:14:33 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/3/2016 11:34:34 PM, ptarkington wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:51:36 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:59:22 AM, ptarkington wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:32:32 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%

So let's talk about what is necessary. And let's see how much GDP we'd need the government to control to accomplish these needs.
As the example, let's use the USA as a model. What does the Government have an obligation to do and what should it not do? And how much of the GDP is necessary to accomplish those duties?

1. Protect the people- police and military

Let's call that protecting people's rights to life.

I'm indifferent between what we call it, have it your way. The fire department is another.

2. Provide Public Utilities- Water, Electricity, Internet access

Internet access? Electricity? Last time I checked, those were provided by 3rd parties, like Edison Electric and Verizon, to name a few.

My aim was not to describe what is provided, rather to describe things in which should be made public goods as they are necessities that are provided by oligopolistic markets you're describing.

I'm not advocating for an oligopolistic market. What makes you think that?
I'm stating that we ought to privatize things like electricity or internet service. They shouldn't be provided by the government.

If what we're talking about is the internet and cell service providers like verizon and their competitors, I find it hard to acknowledge a greater example of oligopoly in the real world.

3. Provide Public Transportation- Busses

Provided we pay for the fares.

Why should one have to pay for a basic need so fundamental as such?

Because you're using a service. It ought to have a cost, but only for those that use the service.

I can get on board with a cost, so long as it is one of monopsony kind, and the public pays only the cost of capital, labor inputs, and refuel costs.

4. Provide adequate roads

I'll agree with you there.

5. Provide free education

As in...? How far up are we going?

High enough to provide talented youths with opportunities to get the education necessary to exercise those talents in the competitive market.

So, I'd assume that's up to high school?

Certainly, so long as a high school education provides students with the skills necessary to need no more formal education to achieve prosperity.
"Capitalism is the belief the wickedest of men, will engage in the wickedest of dealings, for the greater good of all of us." -Keynes
David_Debates
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 2:37:47 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/4/2016 12:27:11 AM, ptarkington wrote:
At 10/4/2016 12:14:33 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/3/2016 11:34:34 PM, ptarkington wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:51:36 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:59:22 AM, ptarkington wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:32:32 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%

So let's talk about what is necessary. And let's see how much GDP we'd need the government to control to accomplish these needs.
As the example, let's use the USA as a model. What does the Government have an obligation to do and what should it not do? And how much of the GDP is necessary to accomplish those duties?

1. Protect the people- police and military

Let's call that protecting people's rights to life.

I'm indifferent between what we call it, have it your way. The fire department is another.

2. Provide Public Utilities- Water, Electricity, Internet access

Internet access? Electricity? Last time I checked, those were provided by 3rd parties, like Edison Electric and Verizon, to name a few.

My aim was not to describe what is provided, rather to describe things in which should be made public goods as they are necessities that are provided by oligopolistic markets you're describing.

I'm not advocating for an oligopolistic market. What makes you think that?
I'm stating that we ought to privatize things like electricity or internet service. They shouldn't be provided by the government.

If what we're talking about is the internet and cell service providers like verizon and their competitors, I find it hard to acknowledge a greater example of oligopoly in the real world.

Just to clarify, this is your definition of oligopoly, right?
Oligopoly: a state of limited competition, in which a market is shared by a small number of producers or sellers.

3. Provide Public Transportation- Busses

Provided we pay for the fares.

Why should one have to pay for a basic need so fundamental as such?

Because you're using a service. It ought to have a cost, but only for those that use the service.

I can get on board with a cost, so long as it is one of monopsony kind, and the public pays only the cost of capital, labor inputs, and refuel costs.

How would you make it a monopsony? Do you think the Government ought to have no competition when it comes to transportation?

4. Provide adequate roads

I'll agree with you there.

5. Provide free education

As in...? How far up are we going?

High enough to provide talented youths with opportunities to get the education necessary to exercise those talents in the competitive market.

So, I'd assume that's up to high school?

Certainly, so long as a high school education provides students with the skills necessary to need no more formal education to achieve prosperity.

By that requirement you just set forth, should we as a country foot the bill for someone who wants to compete in the legal market?
ptarkington
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 3:45:56 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/4/2016 2:37:47 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/4/2016 12:27:11 AM, ptarkington wrote:
At 10/4/2016 12:14:33 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/3/2016 11:34:34 PM, ptarkington wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:51:36 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 10/3/2016 10:59:22 AM, ptarkington wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:32:32 AM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/29/2016 5:26:53 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/25/2016 8:44:42 PM, David_Debates wrote:
At 8/25/2016 7:34:14 AM, TimGabz wrote:
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

Govt should first and foremost focus on enabling the economy to grow continuously, maintain economic health and consolidate those gains.

The one area I find Keynesian Economics fails is through cherry picking resulting in overspending.

When it comes to economic panic, where the market over reacts there should be a buffer system to prevent destruction of wealth.

That doesn't answer the question. How much of the GDP should be controlled by the Government? Give a percent, or at least an estimation.

Whew, 7% is as good a guess as any. % isn't an answer because it should vary according to social support required in different economic climates. Certainly should not be over 25%

So let's talk about what is necessary. And let's see how much GDP we'd need the government to control to accomplish these needs.
As the example, let's use the USA as a model. What does the Government have an obligation to do and what should it not do? And how much of the GDP is necessary to accomplish those duties?

1. Protect the people- police and military

Let's call that protecting people's rights to life.

I'm indifferent between what we call it, have it your way. The fire department is another.

2. Provide Public Utilities- Water, Electricity, Internet access

Internet access? Electricity? Last time I checked, those were provided by 3rd parties, like Edison Electric and Verizon, to name a few.

My aim was not to describe what is provided, rather to describe things in which should be made public goods as they are necessities that are provided by oligopolistic markets you're describing.

I'm not advocating for an oligopolistic market. What makes you think that?
I'm stating that we ought to privatize things like electricity or internet service. They shouldn't be provided by the government.

If what we're talking about is the internet and cell service providers like verizon and their competitors, I find it hard to acknowledge a greater example of oligopoly in the real world.

Just to clarify, this is your definition of oligopoly, right?
Oligopoly: a state of limited competition, in which a market is shared by a small number of producers or sellers.

yes. one like that of the telecommunications market. Divided in to verizon, sprint, and AT&T. To be fair, there may indeed be one or two more, but I would argue beyond those three names, the companies compete on variables outside those outlined by these three giants.

3. Provide Public Transportation- Busses

Provided we pay for the fares.

Why should one have to pay for a basic need so fundamental as such?

Because you're using a service. It ought to have a cost, but only for those that use the service.

I can get on board with a cost, so long as it is one of monopsony kind, and the public pays only the cost of capital, labor inputs, and refuel costs.

How would you make it a monopsony? Do you think the Government ought to have no competition when it comes to transportation?

I used the term monopsony too loosely. Rather, bus riders should pay the cost of factors of having it provided but there should be no excess, as such it would imply a government engaging in profiting from the provision of a public good. Which in my personal view should never be the case.


4. Provide adequate roads

I'll agree with you there.

5. Provide free education

As in...? How far up are we going?

High enough to provide talented youths with opportunities to get the education necessary to exercise those talents in the competitive market.

So, I'd assume that's up to high school?

Certainly, so long as a high school education provides students with the skills necessary to need no more formal education to achieve prosperity.

By that requirement you just set forth, should we as a country foot the bill for someone who wants to compete in the legal market?

For clarification, by competing in the legal market are you asking if we should pay for a skilled lawyer to fund his law degree? I suppose thats just what the world needs right? If the government would just fund all of us to go to law school we may be the most skilled minded country in relative terms in all of human existence... Our persuasion would achieve a level that would allow for little more than rigorous debate. A comment which of course is to be taken lightheartedly.
"Capitalism is the belief the wickedest of men, will engage in the wickedest of dealings, for the greater good of all of us." -Keynes
TimGabz
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 6:41:14 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
Free this, free that. Nothing is free. Unless the GDP is growing equal or faster than the population the economy is failing the population.

Basic education and basic health is an investment in the economy and can't really be handled by companies. Government should do this for the economy.

I get calls from unemployed professionals with compromised degrees but have a problem getting a good artisan. Government interference is the cause. Applicable education to suit the person's aptitude so they have a sort of qualification when they leave school or go onto University.

Getting a degree should be linked to employment or paid for by the individual. A person employed should have access to distance education at nominal fees refundable after graduation. Why educate people who won't have a job?

The crux of the matter is Government needs to give good return on taxes, and with an improved economy get more tax revenues. Follow Keynesian model honestly.

They would do well listening to a janitor than an Ivory tower Economist who only hits the street to buy a hotdog.
Babazonke
Zamzua
Posts: 5
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2016 3:06:54 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
The funny thing is , with debt-based economies like the U.S , the government already controls a very large proportion of the GDP by default.
RonPaulConservative
Posts: 65
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/6/2016 12:26:55 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 8/13/2016 1:35:17 PM, kalamdhesi wrote:
What proportion of the GDP should be controlled by the state? . Has anyone have any views or thoughts on the topic.

0%
ptarkington
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 7:01:31 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
If you follow a normal Keynesian Macroeconomic model for GDP, namely:
Y=C+I+G+NX
or,
Y=C+I(r)+(T-G)+(X-M)
then government spending should account for the remainder after consumption, investments, and net exports are subtracted out. If we assume people consume half their income, save one fifth of their income, and are taxed about 30% of their income, and the government spends no more than it receives in revenue, then government spending should account for 30% of GDP. If this model holds, then we must import the same amount we export. If the goverment spends more than it's revenue, then it's easy to see that importing more than we export accounts for the correction we need to achieve our optimal GDP. So I suppose my answer is 30%, with the correction coming from net exports.
"Capitalism is the belief the wickedest of men, will engage in the wickedest of dealings, for the greater good of all of us." -Keynes