Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Thanks for warning us about these perils. I have emailed this to everyone I know so they can be aware of the danger. :)
    • Then hopefully they'll read my counter-argument, too. One primary tenet of economics (and one that's often not taught) is that in any given economic system, there tends to be an inverse correlation between efficiency and "fairness". If you go too far to either extreme, the systems can break down. One problem with many socialist countries is that they have strived so hard for "fairness" that they tend to be less efficient and economies like the US tend to dominate. Witness the economic doldrums of France

      • Witness the economic doldrums of France as a classic example.

        I guess I'll have to step up to the plate on this one ;--)

        Not being an economist, I won't comment on figures and if the French economy is really that bad though. I will just give an example of why I can't really comment ;--)

        My favourite economic example is a perfect illustration of a line that should be familiar to you: "There Is More Than One Way To Do It". See I used to work for Airbus, a German-French_English (with a smidgen of Spanish thrown in for good measure) conglommerate. They build planes. The French branch, which was state owned until recently, doesn't lay-off people. They don't even fire them. When I joined the company I was handed a leaflet from a union that asked for "stable jobs for us and our families",you would get a better chance to be hired if a member of your family was already working for the company. The business of selling plane is very cyclic, so there were years when finished planes would be stockpiled around the buildings, and people kept their jobs. Does it get more socialist than that? On the other side of the pond, their main competitor, Boeing, goes through phases where they lay-off 40 000 employees, only to hire back 50 000 a few tears later when the market picks-up again.

        The 2 companies have had roughly 50% of the market for quite a few years now..

        (Preemptively: I know about the state subsidies, both companies get some. I could also elaborate on what I think are the reasons for the similar performances of the 2 companies, but that is not the point here.)

        --
        mirod