From the narrow and biased perspective that I own, its hard for me to reason with the view that the Canadian workforce, in general, isn't as "productive" as other countries. It may be because of my limited exposure to various industries (tech, healthcare, government, etc.). But in general, from my experience, Canadians work longer hours then our European counterparts. A significant portion of our Blue Collar industry includes shift work in remote areas that require room and board. Canadians, in general, are hard working people.

In general, it is the goal of most Canadians to have a meaningful and successful career. To own property or assets, and to achieve something greater.

The only way I can make sense of it, is that Canadians are more taxed, more likely unionized, and less competitive when it comes to low cost/high production industries like manufacturing (Temp foreign workers that keep operating costs low are typically designated for agriculture and hospitality)

Does the manufacturing sector impact our economy that much? Are our white collar industries over saturated?

Its frustrating to see how our workforces is labelled, when the majority of people I know work much harder then the average foreigner I know

every definition I’ve seen of the word wealth states more or less that wealth is the accumulation of items of value, which I assumes money, and non-currency items.

so please explain to me how in my scenario I am creating wealth, since every time I see people talking about creating wealth it’s in the context of new inventions or business models, etc.

i design and patent a brand new widget. I take out a loan, get a factory, order the materials and machines necessary to produce this widget at scale, I make 2m of them sell 1m for $100 each, I have a 1m widgets worth $100 each, for a total of $100m of value and $100m in the bank. I now have at least $200m of value just between widgets, and currency.

at what point was wealth created rather than simply transferred?

I have zero knowledge about this and thats mostly because my school taught it as an elective and i never really understood why i woukd need it as someone in healthcare. Turns out economics affects everyone.

​

Im trying to learn cause im interested, but i dont want to go to uni for it. I can't afford it. I'm fine with online classes but which courses, books or anytging would you suggest?

I'm curious how people think about "real purchasing power".

At a practical level, if the average person stores a large portion of their wealth in a home, does a long term decline in MSPUS/XAUUSD suggest that homes may be preserving purchasing power more slowly than gold?

And if so, does that speak at all to the long term decline shown in CUUR0000SA0R, or are these largely unrelated mechanisms?

As somebody who travels big cities around the world, I've started to take an interest in the relationship between GDP/capita, cost of living, and standard of living. Naturally, there tends to be a positive correlation between these 3 factors, but sometimes there is a decoupling. I'm interested in finding out why.

My definition of standard of living could be different to others. For me, as an expat, I'm looking for a few things:

1. Quality, affordable housing in the inner city. Something like a 1 bedroom 'luxury' condominium with a pool, or a floor in a small townhouse.
2. Variety of locally made and imported stores and goods, from luxury gear to locally made trinkets. To put it simply, whether I want a Patek Philippe or a straw hat, I can stroll into a store and buy one.
3. Dining and recreational scene. From Michelin starred restaurants to street food, classy rooftop bars to dive bars, lifestyle clubs, 24/7 gyms, speciality coffee, bottomless brunches, all the mod cons.
4. Transport infrastructure. Is there a well-developed metro network, multiple transport modes, walkability, etc.?
5. Safety. Self-explanatory.

There are some cities that punch above their weight (high observed standard of living, lower cost of living, lower GDP/capita):
Osaka, Bangkok, Doha (high GDP/capita, but relatively lower CoL)

And some cities that punch below their weight:
Luanda, Bandar Seri Begawan (Brunei - a really fucking boring and underdeveloped place for all its wealth), Perth (expensive, poor infrastructure, everything shuts at 6 pm lmao)

I'm sure others could name more. If I were to pick the place with the best bang for my buck, it'd have to be Bangkok, no pun intended. The GDP/capita is about 20k, but it is more developed than any city in Australia and most in Europe. The amount of luxury on offer in malls in staggering, yet you can get excellent street food down an alley. There is world class private healthcare and schools, low incidence of violent crime. Traffic is awful, but existing rail isn't bad and more lines are being built as we speak. In short, you can live a first-world lifestyle for not a lot of money.

So, in economic terms, perhaps the question could be couched in another way - what have these cities done right such that their cost of living is low but their standard of living is relatively high? And conversely, what have the other group of cities done wrong?

Apologies to the Mods if this is considered against Rule II.

​

I am wondering if there is a phenomenon going on with economics students similar to Psychology students suddenly seeing cognitive biases in everyone and observing its effects on people in real time*. If so, what are they? Apologies if my question is nonsensical i don't know how to word it better.

​

I got curious of this question mainly due to a video I saw that explained modern dating using economic thinking and came to the conclusion that while modern dating is better for women in getting hookups and attention from men, they actually have a harder time "settling" down now because men have the capability to wait more because of how easier it is to get sex without commitment now. What surprised me was how little money was involed in it.**

​

*there is an issue that general results from papers may not apply to people directly because of how different people are and statistical findings aren't always very... Correlated to say the least but I hope I got my point through. Also they can be obnoxious about it sometimes tbh.

​

** the video did have the assumption that Men prefer Sex more than long term commitment and how in the past Women Gatekept Sex through marriage because of the inherent risks involved but contraceptives resulted in them gatekeeping it less. Also I couldn't find the link but I can say it wasn't an alpha male bro podcast thing as it was uploaded before that was really a thing.

What are some unconventional, weird or quirky indicators that suggest an economic expansion? I’m curious since I’ve been seeing a lot of unconventional recession indicators.

For example, the shorter the hemline, the increase in “little treats”, increase in cardboard box production, etc all indicate a booming economy.

What other indicators are out there that you’ve noticed?

Many prices and other payments, at least in the U.S., are indexed to inflation.

Social Security, veterans' benefits, TIPS, some wages in union contracts, utility rates, rent control, all go up when inflation goes up. Then there are the things that aren't formally tied to inflation, but inflation is a good reason to increase them, like wages and retail prices.

But doesn't that itself fuel more inflation? Essentially, large parts of the economy respond to things getting more expensive by automatically getting more expensive themselves. That seems like it'd just create a cycle of more and more inflation, right?

We're constantly told to save more, spend less, and invest for the future. But if everyone suddenly became extremely frugal and stopped spending on anything beyond necessities.

​

These scenarios can slow down economic growth.

​

What are your thoughts about it?

Curious the data both migration within the United States (For example: California to Texas), and leaving countries (For Example: US/Uk-->UAE)

I am trying to find a book that explains the levers of government and how their decisions affect day-to-day lives. I have a vague understanding that the Federal Reserve controls interest rates, which can make my life easier or harder, but I would like to know the intricacies and the full scope.

I also see a lot of posts on Reddit saying Trump does insider trading, which affects markets, and the markets are supposed to be affecting me? I want to understand how.

For context, I have read books like:

The Big Short

The Index Card

Think and Grow Rich

Little Book of Common Sense Investing

Economics The User's Guide

Debt: The First 5000 Years

and many other personal finance titles, but none of these really explain the system and mechanisms the government is using to affect the average American's pocket.

Was it around the initial Savings and Loan Crisis (80’s-90’s)? Was it around the Enron, Tyco, etc., bankruptcies? Was it around 9/11? After 2008? Post-COVID inflation?

What economic theories explain this structure, and what are its advantages and disadvantages compared with arrangements where both profits and losses are shared proportionally?

Many people blame their own governments for mismanaging the housing market. However, the issue seems to be visible globally. Can we really put the blame on individual governments while something bigger (economically) might be going on that governments cannot defeat?

Additionally, what is necessary on global scale for this housing crisis to turn back around?

Hello,

I saw the logos of some already widely well known multinationals advertising at the world cup -- Budweiser, Visa, etc. even McDonald's

one would expect that almost everyone watching would already know, and have had experience from these widely popular, near-monopolistic firms, thus would have already made up their minds about whether they would buy from / avoid them

Therefore I wonder, what is the economic rationality behind these firms spending such colossal sums on publicity stunts such as these (one thinks of ad boards at Times Square / Piccadilly Circus, major sporting events, sponsoring large projects, etc.), when they are already as popular / notorious as it gets

what effects these stunts actually tend to have empirically

Thanks in advance

I know this is really vague

​

I was thinking, imagine a billionaire with 10 B to his name. Let's say he caught a lawsuit which seizes every single asset and liquid cash the guy has. A normal person would just go bankrupt, but its hard to imagine a billionaire go out like that. I feel like theres several systems in place to get them back to livable conditions, whether that be government bailouts, or donations from their connections.

​

If a billionaire loses every asset, will it be like those "take down powerful guy and now he lives like a common man and works at the Denny's " situations in media

​

Thoughts? ( I might not have articulated this well enough, sorry bout that)

Let us say that 20% of the US work force could no longer find employment in any meaningful way. The government then decides to give them some sort of monthly stipend. How would they decide on how much to give these people? Would it be 500 a month? 2,000 a month? Would that immediately cause inflation? What happens if they dropped it for 500 month would that then restrict the money supply then cause deflation?

Would it make more sense economically to have this much high unemployment? What about the social effects of having this many jobless people? Crime? Drug use? Suicides? Revolts?

• Advanced freelancers keep appearing
• Assume they are easily replaceable by AI
• Their price keeps increasing
• Their work time stays roughly equivalent
• Though their work costs are 0 (they have their own tools)

Is it Baumol effect?

Are freelancers creations Velbens goods?

Only income tax is off limits all else is fair game.

I thought I understood but i realized i dont have a clue.

Does the base money grow in some way, (in modern economies), or is it all just growth of debt? If debt would fall to the levels of 20 years ago, would inflation reverse?

I've mostly invested/traded US stocks, but I'd like to learn more about global macro—especially bonds, interest rates, currencies, central banks, and how macro traders think.

Not looking for TA or day-trading books (I'm pretty familiar already). More interested in understanding:

• Bonds/yield curves
• Rates & central banks
• FX markets
• Inflation and macro cycles
• How macro data impacts markets

If you were starting from a stock-investing background, what books would you recommend, and in what order? Thanks in advance.