/biz/ - Business & Finance

What kind of questions?

>>15814413
Good schools have economics professors that are multi millionaires.

Crypto might redefine economics by creating a global system of Austrian economics with built in security
Why are you going to school?
I dropped out and doubt I'd ever go back after making my first million from bitcoin

>>15814455
he didn't make it yet

>>15814466
Oh lol I thought it was implied he made it and was using some new economic argument to back it up
Acting autistic with some community college econ teacher won't get OP anywhere

>>15814413
this is pretty fucked up but completely true. what could your education in economics possibly be worth if you didn't learn enough to become wealthy.

>>15814413
Enjoy failing your class

>>15814413
Also, just because you are an expert in abstract theory doesnt mean youre an expert in execution.
For example. You might know how an internal combustion engine works. Ok. Now engineer one. Ok. Now build it.
Faggot

>>15814413
Knowing how governments can create the conditions that maximize wealth won't make you rich, but it's more important for economics professors to know than anything that would make them rich is.

And most don't know it, whether or not they're personally wealthy.

>>15814568
>>15814598
if the majority of the money thinks the market will do well, they will invest and the market will do well.
if the majority of the money thinks the market will fall, they will take their money out of the market and the market will fall
economics is just is finding ways to trick the people with the money to invest in the market

>>15814413
Back in high school I asked my economics teacher if the government should raise the minimum wage. He said yes I asked why.
He said why not

>>15815674
Good teacher.

>>15815674
based and redpilled

>>15815674
based teacher putting anon in his place

>>15815683
>>15815802
>>15815823

I hope they raise min. wage so automation is ushered in faster. Poor fags have disgusting hygiene.

>>15814568
That's the problem with college these days. You can't call your professors out on their bullshit anymore because college degrees hold too much importance. I had a lot of libtard professors in my school but i just smiled and nodded because i wanted my degree.

>>15815674
My economics professor was pretty cool, taught everyone that raising the minimum wage would just raise the price of everything.

>>15815930
Then your economics professor was an idiot.

Raising the minimum wage will raise the price of some things, but not everything. Not everything depends on minimum wage workers, and competition from product outside the jurisdiction of your minimum wage laws would prevent some sellers from raising their prices.

Also, a higher minimum wage would encourage businesses to automate more, reducing their costs.
And higher wages also encourage businesses to focus on producing higher value products, which is ultimately of benefit to everyone.

Whether a higher minimum wage is advantageous overall is a surprisingly complicated question - looking at it in isolation will not give you a meaningful answer.

>>15815854
That's the problem with college students these days - they're too cowardly to call their professors out on their bullshit any more because they think it will adversely affect their grades. If the students were to engage with the professors more, it's likely both would learn a lot more.

>>15816720
>That's the problem with college students these days - they're too cowardly to call their professors out on their bullshit any more because they think it will adversely affect their grades.
Right. All college students secretly have strong opinions on the subjects studied in class. But they're afraid to speak up. It isn't because they don't care about the subject, and/or don't want to unintentionally say something stupid in front of everyone.

/s

>>15816720
>Also, a higher minimum wage would encourage businesses to automate more, reducing their costs.
only reduces their costs insofar as hiring is more expensive. if there was no min wage, automation would cost more.

>>15815662
That's not how it works. Suppose everyone believes that a mine holds lots of steel, but it doesn't. They invest in equipment/labor to mine the steel. So they lose a lot of money, despite their faith.

Repeat for any other type of business.

>>15816720
>higher wages also encourage businesses to focus on producing higher value products
Why? If anything it'd just relegate more of their money to paying employees than buying high quality products.

>Not everything depends on minimum wage workers
Money going to employees is money not going to something else. "You want CEOs pocket to be fat" is not an argument either, as they will never cut themselves a lower check, any unnecessary expenses will just show up somewhere else in the company.

>That's the problem with college students these days - they're too cowardly to call their professors out
Very rarely. most of them are just NPCs there to take their tests, get their useless piece of paper and say they fit in to society. they dont care about what theyre studying

>>15815823
>>15815802
>>15815683

>>15816875
>Why?
Because when your wage bills are high, it isn't profitable to make low value products. Ideally businesses would do that anyway, but human nature is such that businesses are more eager to implement innovations when under pressure.

>If anything it'd just relegate more of their money to paying employees than buying high quality products.
This is about what businesses produce, not what they buy.

And higher value isn't synonymous with higher quality. Increasing quality is not the only way to increase value.

>Money going to employees is money not going to something else.
From the business's point of view, that is correct.

>"You want CEOs pocket to be fat" is not an argument either, as they will never cut themselves a lower check, any unnecessary expenses will just show up somewhere else in the company.
I don't know why you're addressing arguments I didn't make when you've failed to address most of the ones I did make.

>Very rarely. most of them are just NPCs there to take their tests, get their useless piece of paper and say they fit in to society. they dont care about what they're studying
The NPC thing is just a meme, but even if the students don't care about what they're studying (which is really too big a problem to address in this thread) they'd learn a lot more if they questioned their professors properly instead of basing their decisions on the false belief that the professors want unquestioning students!

>>15816720
>>15817589
>"I'm a socialist but I've read a couple of things about capitalism that I feel like I can shit an opinion now" - The Post

>and competition from product outside the jurisdiction of your minimum wage laws would prevent some sellers from raising their prices.
no, it would make the business go bankrupt

>Also, a higher minimum wage would encourage businesses to automate more, reducing their costs.
hurr durr automation is magic that can fix everything.

>Because when your wage bills are high, it isn't profitable to make low value products.
Learn about basic fucking supply and demand and normal goods and inferior goods. Not everyone wants or can afford to pay for higher value.

>And higher value isn't synonymous with higher quality. Increasing quality is not the only way to increase value.
Please tell us more about this. In what way would you increase Customer Perceived Value without incurring higher costs. Keep in mind that you've already increased the wages, so your costs are already higher than mine. I'm also incetivized to increase customer perceived value, but the difference between me and you is that I have more money to allocate for that. In what scenario do I not fuck up your business and make you close shop, since I'm doing everything that you're doing, but I have more operational cash flow to do it?

>>15817589
>when your wage bills are high, it isn't profitable to make low value products.
It isn't profitable to make low value products period.

>This is about what businesses produce, not what they buy.
My mistake. I meant buy as in capital investment.

>And higher value isn't synonymous with higher quality. Increasing quality is not the only way to increase value.
If by value you mean price, you are correct. Another way to increase the price of an item is by inducing artificial restrictions in the form of minimum wage that drive up the price of a product to the end-consumer, regardless of quality.

>>15817769
>It isn't profitable to make low value products period.
Not entirely true: though competing with imports is difficult for low value products, it's possible if production is highly automated.

Regarding buying capital equipment, the point is it saves you wage bills, particularly when wages are high.

Of course value doesn't mean price; putting up prices doesn't make anything more useful. (despite a few luxury brands managing to get it perceived as such). But people will pay more for higher value items.

>>15817716
Before we go any further, let me make one thing clear: I'm not a communist and never have been.
Whether I'm a socialist or a capitalist (or neither or both) depends on the definitions you use, as both ideologies cover a very broad range of policies, some of which I support and some of which I oppose.

>no, it would make the business go bankrupt
That is one possible outcome, and the profitability of businesses is something that ought to always be considered before raising the minimum wage.

>hurr durr automation is magic that can fix everything.
There's nothing magic about it, as you well know, Nor can it fix everything, but it can greatly boost productivity per employee, hence reducing the impact of labour costs on the business.

>Learn about basic fucking supply and demand and normal goods and inferior goods. Not everyone wants or can afford to pay for higher value.
Settling for inferior products is usually a false economy.

>Please tell us more about this. In what way would you increase Customer Perceived Value without incurring higher costs.
By better meeting customer needs. And yes, there are cost involved, but there is significantly more money to be made.

>Keep in mind that you've already increased the wages, so your costs are already higher than mine.
Different businesses have different cost structures, and wage costs are just one cost of many - others to consider include power costs, transport costs, and the cost of leasing premises.

>I'm also incetivized to increase customer perceived value, but the difference between me and you is that I have more money to allocate for that.
Your incentive isn't as strong, as your lower wage costs mean it isn't a necessity.
And I see you're assuming my access to credit is so restricted that it prevents me from making profitable investments.

(to be continued)

>>15816720
College professors have you by the balls these days idiot. They know this and so they force their kike liberal propoganda on the students because if you're paying 40k a year to go to school and take on debt, you're not gonna say shit.

>>15814598
you're the teacher that OP was talking about huh?

>>15814413
I agree. I'm 25 and already set for life. I have 3 different businesses giving me dividends, only because I started making money at 18 instead of wasting my productive years going to Uni.

I started college this semester just because it is free in my country, and because now I have more free time. Buy it's seriously hard to take an economics professor seriously when I literally make more money than him.

>>15817716
(continued from >>15818860 )
>In what scenario do I not fuck up your business and make you close shop, since I'm doing everything that you're doing, but I have more operational cash flow to do it?
That would depend on how profitable the business is, how innovative it is, and how similar our products are. And in some circumstances you could put me out of business. And from a macroeconomic viewpoint, that's a good thing: t's called creative destruction, and it frees up resources and workers to be put to more productive use elsewhere.
One caveat, though, is that creative destruction only works when the economy is strong; when it's weak there won't be much demand for the freed up resources, and the workers will be idle which won't benefit anyone.

I hope now that I've explained this, you can understand my original point: Whether a higher minimum wage is advantageous overall is a surprisingly complicated question - looking at it in isolation will not give you a meaningful answer.

>>15818889
You honestly think they'd punish you for failing to keep quiet when they disagree with you?

>>15818954
Yet you still don't have a girlfriend?

>>15818860
>>15818965
lets cut through the shit
the only reason you're advocating that minimum wage is "a complicated question" is because you think the government can sort things better than the free market.

the fact that you think that businesses going bankrupt:
>frees up resources and workers to be put to more productive use elsewhere.
means that you somehow forgot the simple fact that workers are not slaves. They are free to go work wherever they want.

Why would I want the government to EVER impose a minimum wage when the only consequence is that businesses would go bankrupt, people not qualified enough to work for minimum wage will be unemployed and the so called benefit is that "it frees up workers to be put to more productive use elsewhere", when they can already do that in a free market.

Miss me with that bullshit about automation and higher value for customers. You know what else leads to innovation and higher value? Competition.
Thinking that you need to government to get involved in the free market to stimulate innovation is as communistic as it can get.
Every time the government steps in to regulate the free market, it only fucks things harder in the end. So yeah, it's not a complicated question. The minimum wage should not exist at all. It literally has no benefit that isn't already inherent in the free market, and it only causes more harm than good.

As a sidenote, the government in my country decided to raise the minimum wage a while back even though many entrepreneurs told them that they are operating on razor thin profit margins. They did it anyway. The consequence was that dozens of factories went bankrupt, some left the country while others just shut down because it wasn't worth it anymore. Nobody came to replace them with magic robots and the workers weren't freed up to be productive elsewhere because they were low skilled and only suitable to do that type of job. Now they are sitting on wellfare, and the inflation rises to pay for gibs

>>15819360
>Why would I want the government to EVER impose a minimum wage when the only consequence is that businesses would go bankrupt,

If they can't afford to pay a minimum wage they should go bankrupt and let more competent business owners thrive. Besides, there's no evidence that minimum wage laws actually cause more unemployment.

>>15819378
a retard has appeared

>If they can't afford to pay a minimum wage they should go bankrupt and let more competent business owners thrive.
I, the government, knowing what's best for the economy, I will now declare that the minimum wage is 100$ per hour because I want every citizen to be wealthy and happy. All the companies that can't afford to pay that should go bankrupt and let more competent business owner thrive. Before I, the government, didn't impose a $100 per hour minimum wage, the more competent business owners couldn't thrive for some reason.

>Besides, there's no evidence that minimum wage laws actually cause more unemployment.
jesus christ

>>15819440
Yeah yeah. Maybe come up with actual statistics instead of screeching

>>15814455
peak delusion

>>15815674
damn... really makes you think

>>15814455
>Crypto might redefine economics by creating a global system of Austrian economics with built in security
Checked. It MUST do this or we are fucked.

>>15816720
>t.

>>15814413

>Economics professor
>Not a millionaire

You actually do have a good point. Someone who can't find a way to become a millionaire on an economics professor's salary is not qualified to teach economics.

>>15816861
>thinks steel can be mined raw

Well that's the first sign the mine was in trouble

>>15814598
Or you may not want the risk.
Not everyone is a greedy fuck who day-trades and has connections to investments.
I've had plenty of economics professors who are more than happy to make a decent amour of money, own a house, and drive a decent reliable car. They aren't interested in finding the next unicorn or some shit.

>>15815674
I'm pointing out how retarded his answer was. Those who agree with him are the same libtards that vote for singularity. I pity yall