By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 20 December 2011
Edit Thread
richardhutnik said:
Kasz216 said:
richardhutnik said:
Kasz216 said:

I'd consider the results a bit dubius.

Considering that banking is 1/10th England's economy.

Lets due some due diligence and look up the New Economics Forum...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economics_Foundation

Well... I think that pretty much sums it up pretty well.

You should really due some research before you post some of this stuff rather then just blindly beleiving it.

Do you believe an economy is healthy if 10% of it is based on banking?  If an economy were 50% banking, would that be healthy?

10% sure why not?

50%, No, i certaintly wouldn't shoot my economy in the head though and greatly ruin the lives of everyday people.  I'd diversify my economy first.

Diversification of the economy is critical.  It is important to see long-term trends going on.  As it is now, the percentage of the GDP has been increasingly involving the financial sector.  This article has a graph in it that shows this trend:
http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/26/friends-don%E2%80%99t-let-friends-get-into-finance/ 

This is from the article:

 

An analysis of MIT’s graduate-employment data shows that the financial sector increased its hiring from 18 percent of its graduates in 2003 to 25 percent in 2006. So not only are the investment banks siphoning off hundreds of billions of dollars from our economy with financial gimmicks like CDOs; they are using our best engineering graduates to help them do it. This is the talent that our country has invested so much resource in producing.

When most sectors of the economy grow, new companies are created. The authors found, however, that the finance sector is not driving firm formation; it is cannibalizing entrepreneurship in the U.S. economy by offering wage and skill premiums to individuals who might otherwise have started companies. It is also causing far greater volatility among publicly traded firms and a reduction in the quality of businesses started.

 

 

 

End result is there is no free lunch.  When a sector of the economy diverts away from innovation, into games of playing with making money off financial instruments that have already been sold, and don't raise money for start ups, and also don't properly fund new ventures, or come up with new ventures to begin with, you will end up with the future growth being shortened, and you see a trend where the financial sector continues to consume more and more of GDP.

Your arguement is that grad students who have huge student loans aren't becoming entrepenuers risking all of their money to start up companies.

Weren't you just complaining on your wall about people "Falling down and having almost no chance of recovery."

Failing a startup company (most do) while you have a huge amount student loan debts is one of the few ways it's possible to do that.

This is why I keep saying your arguements are contradictory, you keep saying we have these vast completey opposing problems where one can't exist if the other exists... when the reality is.... it's neither.