|
 |
 |
|
| ||||
          | |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
 |
« Previous Entry | Main | Next Entry » Which Is Better for the Economy: Spreading Money Around or Spending It in One Place? Name:
Curt Carpenter
Question: I have a "nanoeconomy" question. Most of us go to the grocery store once a week. Which would be better for the economy overall if everyone did it: to go to the same store every time, or to try to go to a different store each time? Spread our money around, or concentrate it in one place? Paul Solman: What an intriguing question, Curt. (One of my favorite authors, BTW, George Ainslie, has written a book called Picoeconomics. I'd recommend starting with his Breakdown of Will, however. I found the book mind-altering.) But back to your question. I don't think there's any generalizable answer. My only response is to tell you what I've done that sort of relates. During the crisis, I've been trying to patronize stores I like -- and worry about -- even if there's nothing I remotely need. My older daughter occasionally twits me about bringing home "fanciful cr*p" for the grandkids and it's true, I guess. But the motivation is long-term and self-interested: to keep the marginal merchants on whom I rely in business, as best I can. -- Posted October 22, 2009 | Comments (3) | Permalink
 TrackBacksListed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Which Is Better for the Economy: Spreading Money Around or Spending It in One Place?. TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/1730 3 CommentsLeave a comment |
|
|
 |
||
|
 |
 |
|
ABOUT US |  |
FEEDBACK | |
SUBSCRIPTIONS / FEEDS: |  
| |
|
        |
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
Paul: Your logic here seems to be the same logic that has brought us to this crisis, spending to try to manipulate, not based on real need or real choices. Jeez, haven't we learned yet, that all our grand schemes don't work?! How about economizing, and if you're fortunate enough to have extra to spend, buy someone a fishing pole (or a business course, etc.) so they can make enough money to spend on their needs, maybe even enough to buy someone else a pole! Advancing the economy based on real needs, not superficially manipulating.
Curt, again go with reality. Which store best provides the goods and services you really need? I am so fed up with this whole market driven economy crap. I remember being told by management our wages couldn't be increased because they were paying market value, yeah, yeah controlled by the market. Well, that theory has certainly been shown to be full of holes. Seems that old value was to be applied to us lesser folk only.
So just get real, base your decisions on what is really happening, think about what is just and productive, not just how that brain you've been given can conform to the arrogant CW of the business world bent on manipulating us all to their advantage based on greed.
I hadn't really thought about this- but at the very extreme level, if we all pumped our grocery dollars into "store A", rather than "store B", and store B went out of business- then store A might be less inclined to remain price competitive in the long term?
As a person who needs to use a wheelchair to get around, my criteria for where I will spend my limited disposable income starts with how accessible is the store? While I would love to support the local businesses on Main Street in my hometown by spending my money there, I can't get into most of the stores in my wheelchair - there are either one or more steps at the entrances or the doorways are too narrow to allow a wheelchair to pass. So my only other options are the internet or big retailers like Walmart that understand that the disabled need and want to shop too.