Gatekeeper
Senior Member
So your contention is that consumers purchase labor saving devices like washing machines so that they can WORK more? In the world I live in end consumers purchase labor saving devices so that they have more leisure time and thus a higher quality of life.A washing machine on itself is also a very economically good product: it increases effeciency (people who buy washing machines have more time to do other things: f.e. working), people with washing machines will be able to work longer (because they spend less time washing clothes) => working longer at a factory will create more products for the company that produce & sell them and the worker will also earn more money to spend (possibly on another washing machine ). Conclusion this investment does not generate money directly, but it does provide you with the means to create make that extra money: time. And as an economist you can say "time = money" (at least if you re a guy who likes to work for his money).
WoW, if so, you've just come up with a fallacious argument that belongs right up there with the broken window fallacy in the annals of inaccurate assumptions about economics.
Let's try a little hypothetical experiment shall we?
You try to make a million dollars by spending and I'll try to make a million dollars by investing and we'll:
*see which one of us gets there first
*see which one of us ends up creating more net economic output
K?
Srry, you misunderstood me: in this case I used "working" as an example (f.e. = for example), I didn't say that people would only work in the time they saved by using this washing machine. But it is true that the combination of all labor saving devices has allowed us to work more, in the past it was impossible for a couple to both have jobs: now this has changed because of labor saving devices! It has effectively doubled the workforce of almost all western countries!
And another thing you overlooked: spending = investing
there is no difference: wether you say that you "spend" your money on stocks or you "spend" it on buying a washing maching OR you say you "invest" your money in stocks or "invest" it in a washing machine is saying the same thing.
Again you make the mistake of only viewing at an individual case (a company) and then generalising it for the whole economy. If there is one thing we should ve learned from the recent economical crisis then it is that an economy depends on consumers! no consumers = no companies, yet you refuse to accept reality ...
housing crisis = consumers went broke (because of the policies of certain companies) -> result: companies that rely on them crash down
That cartoon for the Nobel Prize didn't have the correct picture when opened by BHO.
Nobel Prize credibility is near ZERO anyway, after this fiasco.
It should have been a picture of a giant rectal orifice.