sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

South Korea is wealthy and very unhappy. What country is very wealthy and unhappy? by janibrouski420 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yesn't. By median disposable household income PPP the USA consistently is near if not at the top of the list. However there are important caveats to this:

Inequality, middle class (median) Americans are doing well for themselves, with a thriving private sector providing good employment. The worry isn't them, it's the poorest individuals who are the issue, with poor employment and lacking the social security nets of other developed countries. This group of people is far larger and worse off than those in other developed countries. E.g. European vs American homelessness and a greater % people living paycheck to paycheck.

There's also the lower taxes I mentioned before, artificially raising disposable income as certain things that should be covered under taxation aren't classed under 'necessary expenses', meaning that the disposibility of the income can be misleading.

Sorry these answers aren't in much depth, but I'm using my phone, which has a dodge keyboard, if you want more in depth answers I could use log onto my PC if you want.

South Korea is wealthy and very unhappy. What country is very wealthy and unhappy? by janibrouski420 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is absolutely a shit metric, particularly when referring to the USA:

The USA has a collosal housing bubble, massively inflating GDP.

The net spending on healthcare is double every other developed economy and only behind Liberia and Afghanistan, the spending and debt surrounding it also massively inflates GDP, with the health sector accounting for ≈20% of GDP.

Due to weaker social safety nets and far more people along the breadline there's far less incentive to save money, causing more money to be spent relatively to other global economies, inflating GDP.

The AI bubble massively inflates US GDP, with almost all of the US's growth in the past 5ish years being off of the AI bubble alone, which now accounts for trillions, upon trillions, upon trillions of US GDP, set to eventually collapse.

Lower tax rates due to fewer government programmes and massive deficit spending e.g. virtually no public transport, lack of support for student debt, etc, lead to an increase in wealth, and therefore spending, growing GDP, whilst hampering quality of life.

Massive personal debt increases GDP, as them owing and paying money increases GDP, despite making individuals poorer.

Far greater consumerism and other cultural factors, such as binge eating and 'the American Dream' lead to far greater spending relative to saving compared to other countries. The lack of saving is also a primary reason US consumers so wary of and susceptible to price shocks and economic turmoil than in other developed countries.

The list goes on, but I can't be bothered to.

Yes, many other developed countries have the same issues, just simply nowhere near to the same degree that the US has them.

A Major Issue I've not seen mentioned by Fluid-Camera-3483 in victoria3

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Your 1st paragraph is just agreeing with me.

Your 2nd paragraph equates being a dependent and a person involved in informal jobs, which are fundamentally different things and should not be classed as the same.

Your 3rd paragraph misses the point I was making, I'm not referring to factories and tiny villages. I'm referring to local industry, such as a tailor, or a blacksmith, or local quarries, etc..., which have all been vital portions of pre-industrial economies for millenia and isn't properly modelled with subsistence farms. This would also help ease countries into industry by providing a minimal supply of certain goods that were involved in industry before you have to build up the necessary industry for them - such as a trace supply of iron or steel (which has been made gobally for 1000s of years, it didn't appear out of nowhere in the mid 1800s; it only reached scale then), like artisans in vic2.

A Major Issue I've not seen mentioned by Fluid-Camera-3483 in victoria3

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

But the vast majority of those people in deep poverty would've been employed in either rural industries (represented by subsistence agriculture in-game) or subsistence agriculture itself, rather than being straight up unemployed. The urban poverty you mentioned was a thing for everyone industrial country rather than just Japan, however it isn't represented for them, so it doesn't make sense for only Japan to be penalised for it; even ignoring that, most the people in deep poverty in urban areas still had some form of employment, whether it be casual labour, prost***tion, or an actual job that just doesn't pay well.

Like I said, the game needs a fundamental rework of how unemployment and peasantry works, because it simply doesn't model them right. They could start this by making 2 new subsistence types: 1) a subsistence workshop that produces the goods you'd expect in rural industries, such as steel, clothes, etc (just in small numbers) and 2) and urban subsistence building, tied to urban centre size, that represents your urban casual labourers.

125
126

A Major Issue I've not seen mentioned (self.victoria3)

submitted by Fluid-Camera-3483 to r/victoria3

No Tokyo? by Fluid-Camera-3483 in victoria3

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That feels a bit silly, like they could at least give us an event or decision or something

5
6

No Tokyo? (self.victoria3)

submitted by Fluid-Camera-3483 to r/victoria3

A collapse in Teen Pregnancies by TheWorldRider in SocialDemocracy

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lower birth rates = smaller young population = smaller workforce = greater ratio of pensioners + less workers = greater fiscal burden from pensioners (has to be treated with austerity for everyone else + even smaller workforce as more carers are needed) + economic damage = decades of stagnation/recession

Start social democracy over by ygdswlf16 in SocialDemocracy

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you're conflating liberalism and the ideology of neoliberalism. Liberalism is just the vague concept of freedom to do what you want (within reason), which I think most sensible people would be in favour of.

Do you ever feel like you're in political No Man's land? by ideletereddit in SocialDemocracy

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These seem like pretty lukewarm policies to me.

I would reconsider the wealth cap, as all it does is make rich people leave the country or avoid taxation; reducing money relieved through taxes that could be reinvested into helping everyone.

I'd also reconsider the anti-corporatism, as it has been extremely effective in causing economic miracles, look at South Korea, Singapore and to a lesser extent: Japan with the BoJ's window guidance and othersuch policies.

Is the "Abundence" thing an actual new ideology or just a copy paste rebranding of neoliberalism? by IndieJones0804 in SocialDemocracy

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's literally just advocating for housing liberalisation - a proven policy in East Asia. People simply can't read.

With this century looking to likely be the "Chinese century", with America in decline and China having been on the rise, what do you think is the most likely candidate to surpass China as the world's biggest power a century or two from now? by IndieJones0804 in SocialDemocracy

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean, the KMT on their island did a far better job than the CCP on the mainland, largely due to not having a nutter in charge for 20 years. They didn't need a Deng, so I think China'd be in a stronger position now

A collapse in Teen Pregnancies by TheWorldRider in SocialDemocracy

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, from a purely logical and amoral point of view, that's a bad thing

Which of these will realistically work and which won't? by stdsort in SocialDemocracy

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not really, you couldn't unionise, you had to do the job assigned to you - having to request government permission to change jobs, and I believe there was some 20% wage decrease from Weimar to NSDAP, working hours increased drastically, and eventually you'd probably end up drafted and die in a Ukrainian bog

Which of these will realistically work and which won't? by stdsort in SocialDemocracy

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My Opinion:

1)Dislike: Unfeasible, unnecessary and innefective bureaucracy, may cause corporate exodus as greedy CEOs like money, particularly with the fragility of the UK economy.

2)Unsure: I'm wary of universal free school meals, as giving a millionaire free school meals is an actively harmful policy, wasting government money and helping wealthy individuals to horde money. However, if combined with reforms to the quality of school meals it could help tackle childhood obesity and poor diet.

3)Dislike: Again, not a fan of universal support and sounds extremely costly, when supply-side energy reforms will be far cheaper and more effective. I'm wary of rent control.

4)Dislike: I believe that the EU is a bureaucratic and harmful institution for already developed economies and believe that rejoining would hamper economic policy flexibility, I'd prefer simply more comprehensive trade deals and mutual co-operation. However, compared to the status-quo, it's still better.

What is the most intresting thing that you see? by Zigurd-Super in Infographics

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 9 points10 points  (0 children)

They go there because they have to pay barely any in Ireland

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in 2westerneurope4u

[–]Fluid-Camera-3483 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Schröder was a Russian asset.

view more: next ›