14 karma · joined August 21, 2017
Everybody in Germany is eligible for social benefits, which includes material things like paying the rent, health insurance and a certain amount of money to get though the month. The food banks make it easier to get through the month if you don't have much money, but they don't imply that people can't get by without them. Often articles about poverty in Germany forget to count in the free health care and free rent, which is worth a couple of hundred EUR at least. I bet many Americans would kill for having that kind of health care, in fact. Unemployed receive the same level of health care are everybody else.
Sometimes there are issues with bureaucracy, for example people are forced to move into a smaller flat even if their current larger flat is cheaper, because of regulations (benefits recipients can only have so much space or whatever). That sucks and needs to be remedied. Those are hiccups in the system, though, not a large scale phenomenon.
Also there are people who don't accept help, like homeless people with mental issues.
Other than that, the issue is really overblown.
I don't think it is easy to answer, clearly not allowing people to take risks is also taking away there freedom and chances for making a better living. Not allowing people to take risks (and consequently, start businesses) ultimately leads towards a communist worlds were people can only pick from a selection of government ordained jobs.
In the same vein, many people criticize economics for seemingly being obsessed with money. It is not, they just use it as a convenient proxy for value.
That was and is a fine approach, nothing wrong with it. I think one of the principles was "people react to incentives" or something along the line. I think about it often. I think Mankiw's book is great (I have only read the German version, which might differ in details from the US version - for example it uses examples from Germany).
How do I know I can trust this "new economics" textbook? What if it was written by communists or some other ideological group?
I also don't agree that economics did a bad job explaining the 2008 crisis. It's just that people don't want to hear certain economic truths. Also, economists disagree on some things, so it seems odd to say "economics doesn't explain x" - some economists do, others don't.
I am skeptic of anybody whose approach to criticizing modern economics is the rational actor model. Economists know that it is just a model. It is still very useful, and even if real world actors are not rational in the short term, evolution ensures that actions are rational in the long term, for the most part.
All that said, in general of course it is great to make a free economics text book available.
So the usual fuss about nothing, looking at meaningless income averages, neglecting the individual choices and circumstances that actually explain things.
If Nginx Unit could host flask applications, it would be great news.
Prices could probably rise even more, though, if the sponge approach makes the city more attractive.
If I don't provide sources, and the accusers don't provide sources, who should we believe?
I think a lot also depends on the content.