- May 9, 2014
The whole point of calling certain economic ideas "crybaby economics" is to insult those ideas, insult the theorists who advocate those ideas, and insult the voters the advocates of those ideas attract the votes of. Debating what is or is not "crybaby economics" therefore amounts to debating who should be insulted.The Citizens dividend appears to be just a different version of "crybaby economics". Once you utter "deserve a larger share", it is "crybaby economics".
No, the words "share" and "deserve" are not always crybaby ideas. ... "Crybaby Economics" best describes the protectionist trade economics of demagogues like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. ...
No, that's not what the debate is. It's legitimate in a debate to clarify a term which is being misused, as the term "crybaby" was misused here. This term has a legitimate use. Just because it has an "insult" element to it does not make it illegitimate. It's OK to use a strong term for emphasis.
Who should be insulted is not a scientific question.
That's not the question here. There is a secondary question about what "crybaby" means, which should be clarified. But the main question is why benefits should be given to some which end up making society worse off overall because of the costs imposed onto everyone else.
So if you think Economics belongs in the Science section rather than the Political Discussions section, you should stop using the word "crybaby".
No, it's OK to use an "insult" term, or metaphor, as long as the meaning fits the logic of the one being insulted.
E.g., what is the reasoning of someone who demands lower gas tax?
They ignore the damage done by carbon emissions and demand something which gives instant gratification to people now, at a cost to someone later, whose interest is ignored, who must pay the cost for the instant gratification we want now.
That's what a baby does, who has no idea of the cost for whatever it demands. All it knows is what it demands now, and throws a tantrum to get what it wants, regardless of the cost or sacrifice someone has to make.
So it's a "crybaby" demand when some interest group demands something which all the rest of us have to pay for, or later generations have to pay for, or suffer the consequence for. While the one demanding it doesn't care that the someone else has to pay for it, or suffer the consequences. They ignore that cost others have to pay and just pretend that it's only their narrow interest that matters. Or they pretend there is no cost or damage to others.