Economic Models: What would you choose?

By on April 2, 2013 2:30:04 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums


Join Date 09/2012

There is vicious debate about ethical theories, economical modeling, utopian fantasies of capitalists and socialists and the realities that plagued them both. Therefore, I would like to ask if you had 100% of the national wealth, how would you distribute it and what rules and regulations would you have?

To keep things civil and to the point, I propose that each post contains two things. A claim, and A response. Lets try to keep things ethical, and make use of economic, ethical, and social theories where possible. I would like to focus on Strain Theory, Virtue Ethics, Eudaimonia and the Golden Mean, and Utilitarianism.


These lenses should be used to explain why you have the stance you have, and the reasoning behind your logic.


In conclusion, Epictetus said the best tool of knowledge is often not either side of an argument or discussion, but the discourse itself. An impartial observer who happens to stumble in might find a source of wisdom within the reasoning methods observed.

Locked Post 12 Replies
Search this post
Subscription Options

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 3:42:16 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Sounds like someone needs help with an assignment!

It is not reasonable within our current reality to possess 100% of a country's wealth. You would not even be able to own 100% of its capital, given that no country is completely shut off from the outside. But if we are playing with the idea; then I suppose I would simply keep paying the wages that I am currently paying to my employees ( = the country's workforce). They certainly wouldn't be slaves, which owning 100% of a country's wealth implies. Almost all decisions of a political nature I would leave to an elected riksdag, which in turn would elect a government to execute said plans. Unless the people made the rules themselves, there'd be a revolution any day anyway.

I think my focus would lie in implementing a strong banking system to loan money to entrepreneurs and those wishing to purchase homes and such. This would allow my wealth to spread and benefit the population directly over time, without simply being a money-sink.

Given that I wouldn't own slaves, and the people would most certainly vote for open border trade, my 100% share of wealth would be a memory within the hour. If the process was too slow, I would encourage foreign capital to move into the country on a free market basis. This would provide a higher salary over time than my single business could provide.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 4:04:20 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

I just finished a series of assignments, so the topic is fresh in my mind. Besides, i enjoy the discourse and comparing my stance and ideas with that of other people.


Of course no person can own 100% of the wealth: that is why I ask not "how would you use it" but "how would you distribute it among the populace?" Thus, you don't "own all the wealth", you simply "own the authority to distribute it". You could say that you award it all for yourself, however that would defeat the merit of the argument, because the question itself is asking what economic models you would use, what rules would be in your economy and how this model compares to "current ideas".


There are 2 considerations.


1. How wealth is distributed up front.

2. What happens when the ball starts rolling.


Number 2 is where problems occur for any theory on any issue using this simple model.


Would there be any rules on how your banking system does business? Do you have policies at work to ensure the banks create wealth for the nation, or is this, like religion, a faith based system where the banks could "go evil" at any moment? What incentives would you give to bring in foreign capital? I find that there is little focus in our current system of making money from imports, and likewise most don't consider foreign capital as an import; I think it would be a most valuable import, because you could "weave" your own economy into the countries you do business with and present a "Morton's Fork" that if your business partner tries to screw you it will cost them more than they could ever gain. The other side of the fork is that being friends is beneficial for itself and of itself, so the one being "forked" is neither party in the agreement, but the notion of treachery itself, regardless where it could come from.


I also agree that government shouldn't operate on a money sink, however I question how you would allow the wealth to slowly work its way into your populace over time. Is there a distribution model of wages and taxation you prefer? How do you envision living in this society once the ball is rolling? What would be the limits of government, and the rights of business? Would you give businesses their own constitution or give them personhood similar to America? I just want to see how your nation would handle the "strain" of the "rolling ball" once it starts moving.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 6:39:51 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Just nitpicking, but

Therefore, I would like to ask if you had 100% of the national wealth, how would you distribute it and what rules and regulations would you have?

implies I own the wealth, not only that I control it. But never mind that, let's say I merely control it (in which case Democracy isn't really an interesting answer).


For me, wages for work and promotion based on merit would be the primary means of re-distribution of wealth. Hopefully I would get at least equal value out of every dime I pay, but unlikely considering I am now the government (=inefficient).

As for how the banks would be modelled, assuming we have no national standards already, they'd be modelled after international European banks where standard statistical analysis would provide reasonable interest rates.

My primary reason for bringing in international capital would be to expose the country to market forces. I mean, assuming I control all the wealth, then the country is effectively 100% stagnated until I make a decision in any matter. Stagnation is bad. 50-100 years from now I want a modern country, not the same country I have today. Banks being a focus are with the same purpose - to spread opportunity and risk to the population in order for it to develop on its own.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Sign Up or Login and this ad disappears!
There are many great features available to you once you register. Sign Up for a free account and browse the forums without ads.
April 2, 2013 7:18:33 AM from WinCustomize Forums WinCustomize Forums

Quoting Heavenfall,
Sounds like someone needs help with an assignment!

Does, doesn't it?

Probably because it's the sort of postulation you only get from a social retard with leather patches on his elbows who has neither been laid nor had an actual intelligent thought in his sad pathetic life as a.....




Meanwhile the real world just....

...gets on with it...



....with whatever money they actually have...or have not.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 8:11:22 AM from WinCustomize Forums WinCustomize Forums

Wealth is not "Distributed" it is created. Who do you currently believe "distributes" wealth......I want his number so I can go get some.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 11:47:40 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Wealth is created and distributed systemically and there is no single distributor or owner. There was never a moment in time where a person came up with "wealth" and distributed it according to economic and moral principles.


My questions asks what you would do if you if the nations wealth was placed into your hands for the purpose of distribution. How would you allocate it, what would you fund, what rules would you make and what kind of economic system would you desire. How would people advance in your economy, or be held back and what mechanisms are in place surrounding that.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 12:21:22 PM from WinCustomize Forums WinCustomize Forums

That very thought of this happening brings many things to mind. 

Though in order to start any type of analysis of what you project one would need to know what you are defining as the nations wealth.  Surely you are not talking paper money or currency because in and of itself it has no value.  Raw materials would I believe be considered part of a nations wealth along with it's capability to manufacture items.  More than likely the nations ability to trade on the open market would also be part of it's wealth.

Now how do you go about breaking down a nations wealth and distributing it.  One could imagine that once you tried to do that it would have the effect of diminishing the value of the nations wealth. 

They only thing that makes any sense it taking the net results of the benefits of the nations wealth and redistrubuting those.  In other words how are the nations people provided for, healthcare and education for instance.

Just my thoughts and opinions, nothing more.  


Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 2:30:50 PM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Quoting thadianaphena,
My questions asks what you would do if you if the nations wealth was placed into your hands for the purpose of distribution.

Completely useless mental masturbation, to paraphrase Jafo, but first thing I'd do is hire an army, navy & air force to protect my ass from the distributees.  Sorta like what the Department of Homeland Security is doing now.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 2:45:11 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I'd get the government out of the business of redistribution of wealth. You keep what you earn and earn what you keep. Don't earn enough, then work harder. Want a handout, move to a different country.


Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 2, 2013 3:23:20 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

One of the major problems with wealth is the idea of what is wealth. For example, would you pay for manure? There are those that need that material, and it is wealth. The idea of wealth distribution that people refer is that everybody wants a particular item, how do you distribute this item to everyone in a fair and impartial way. Oddly enough there is a lot of mathematics here that has already demonstrated that it is impossible to distribute things fairly amongst other people.

Thus, wealth distribution can be a bad idea. If you are to force people to take something they don't want, you will have problems. If you deny people things that they need you will have problems. Thus, to answer your question one needs to identify what your citizens need, and for the government satifying that need there needs to be a payment in service. When the payment of things from the government is not met by the service back to the government, things will result in a bad government in the long run. If you read deeply in the exercise, what is it you are truly distributing? What is the distribution suppose to accomplish. Even in a utopian society where everybody has everything they need and want, there needs to be a service provided for the collective good. So, the idea is then if things are provided, service must be given back. But if you wish to avoid this service to the government, donate some of your wealth, but at some point this can lead to some real problems. Basically as you can have poor that do not contribute service, you can also have those with wealth not contribute service just the same.

It doesn't matter how much wealth you have if something needs to be fixed and nobody around can fix it (or wants to for any price). You need to get off your duff and fix it yourself.

The measure of wealth does not equate to the measure of that persons laziness.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
April 3, 2013 6:11:05 AM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Distributing wealth by production and allowing production to be the source of wealth speaks of a resource based economy, reminiscent of Jacques Fresco and his ideas.


Wealth distribution already occurs. When an employee cashes a paycheck, they are distributed a portion of "money." Often, this money is not actually wealth, because factoring in costs and expenses, wealth can only be counted out of what is left after paying expenses such as food, medication, electricity, etc. What is spent on this, is distributed from the person back into different corporations such as the grocery store, pharmacy or electric company who in turn distributes some of it to their own employees. Throughout this distribution cycle, taxation occurs at every stage, I wonder how many times the same "dollar" is taxed within its lifetime.


The reason of the question about how you would distribute the wealth is because everyone has different ideas about an ideal economy, and beliefs about how to make the best economy. Most people are stuck somewhere in the realm of Capitalism vs Globalism. I want to provoke a different type of conversation, centered not around "who is bad and why" or "why x doesn't work", but centered around "if wealth were distributed in this form, society and economy would be better off because..."

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
May 25, 2013 2:27:27 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

National dividend and annihilation of dynasty wealth is required with apathy towards rent seeking paradigms coupled with a strict separation of government, business and religion on top of a healthy dose of religious rights < science.


Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Stardock Forums v1.0.0.0    #108432  walnut2   Server Load Time: 00:00:00.0000313   Page Render Time:

Home | About | Privacy | Upload Guidelines | Terms of Service | Help
WinCustomize © 2016 Stardock Corporation. All Rights Reserved.