Skip to main content

View Diary: An Economy cannot be based on CONSUMPTION (285 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  99% (0+ / 0-)

    where are you getting your numbers?

    •  It's a hypothetical (0+ / 0-)

      To illustrate the absurdity of the notion that having a big health care sector is a good thing.

      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

      by Sparhawk on Thu Sep 29, 2011 at 08:06:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  it's a worthless hypothetical (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        nightsweat, cocinero

        there are NO goods or services for which it would be a good thing to have 99% of our economy focused on that one thing.

        so this sheds no light on health care in particular.

        •  Health care... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          soros, NoMoreLies

          ...it would be best if no one got sick and 0% of our economy was health care. If your health care sector is big, it means lots of people are sick. Bad.

          Street sweeping, most defense, insurance, etc etc the same. The more of this stuff you need and are spending money on, the worse off you are.

          All of these activities are "necessary", but the optimal amount of them is always zero. They are non-value-add activities.

          The bigger any of these areas are in terms of your total economy, the worse off you are.

          (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
          Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

          by Sparhawk on Thu Sep 29, 2011 at 08:51:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  just because (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            andgarden, cocinero, bryduck

            it's bad if people are sick, that does not mean that there no value added to curing them.

            you are very, very confused. you are using the lack of sickness as the baseline, where the real baseline is people being sick.

            •  No, you are confused (0+ / 0-)

              Cutting non-value-add activity and reducing the need for it as much as possible is a net win for society (the losses by purveyors of that service are more than balanced by the gains by the rest of us).

              (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
              Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

              by Sparhawk on Thu Sep 29, 2011 at 09:31:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  health care (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                cocinero, SwedishJewfish

                IS "reducing the need for more of it"

                a ton of our healthcare costs go for reducing the need for even more. antibiotics may keep you from having a foot amputated, for example.

                you are not stating the issue accurately.

                without health care, people get sick and die, reducing output. there is value added from it in a purely productive way (even if you want to ignore the suffering it prevents).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site