top | item 11961579

(no title)

zipppy | 9 years ago

But...those things aren't driving the economy. Those examples are mostly driving the profits of credit card companies; if people saved more responsibly and used their money responsibly, the could likely (and ironically?) afford to buy more goods, and not less.

Instead of large chunks of their income going to credit card companies (via interest), it could instead be spread out among more stores.

For me, the "free" service of a credit card is not worth my neighbors being saddled with debt.

edit: That cartoon bothers me more the longer I think about it; I know it's supposed to be humorous, but does the author really think that lottery tickets are driving the economy?

discuss

order

tclancy|9 years ago

>the could likely (and ironically?) afford to buy more goods

While that seems true it's messier than that. In your scenario people have to postpone consumption until they accumulate the cost of goods which would have a huge negative effect on the overall economy. The entire concept of interest rates is to smooth out this issue, rewarding those who can postpone consumption.

JonnieCache|9 years ago

>but does the author really think that lottery tickets are driving the economy?

No. The joke in most SMBC comics involves taking some faulty logic and driving it to absurd conclusions.

SilasX|9 years ago

It's a near-universal misconception that "the economy" depends on spending, without regard to what that spending is on.

ryandrake|9 years ago

> edit: That cartoon bothers me more the longer I think about it; I know it's supposed to be humorous, but does the author really think that lottery tickets are driving the economy?

Well, Wall Street is pretty much a giant casino, so it's not too much of a stretch to say that gambling defines a large portion of our economy.

ikeboy|9 years ago

>For me, the "free" service of a credit card is not worth my neighbors being saddled with debt.

Fine. But that means you'll pay an average of 2-3% more for items.

>Instead of large chunks of their income going to credit card companies (via interest), it could instead be spread out among more stores.

Yes. They would gain under a new system. People who are responsible now would lose under that system. It's a transfer , with credit card companies taking a cut.