Open Mike: a site for economics
A site called http://www.ecnmy.org/ has set-up to promote economics contributions from a range of people, if not face to face discussion; I haven't quite got the hang of it yet in terms of who it's aimed at and what contributions help; it looks a bit like an alternative to a first economics textbook, rather like http://www.core-econ.org. Neither has a search function that I can find.
I wrote a general post about discussions but didn't like it the next morning and put something better in its place, which is also a new paragraph on better economics teaching post. It is an extra theory beyond the ideas of a "public good" that economics textbooks quote as justifying a compulsory tax or subscription to a service. I think it's essential to understanding state spending.
national insurance / social insurance / social security / welfare state
My economics textbook says
nothing little except under very odd headings
They are different to those taught in history or subjects like social work; they are just odd covers for a failure to engage with reality. I have just found a concept of payment related benefits slipped-in to my textbook half way through an obscure chaptor on taxation, and not indexed. It seems to contradict the points made more strongly that come-over from the US edition of the same book.
Notes in progress about social policy, a subject I had previously not heard of, which covers the welfare state and ought to shove some very clear economic theory up economists' trousers, but doesn't.
economics teaching - some related posts
This is one reason why I blog. After looking for EU-funded regional development schemes after illness in 2002-5, I found that London ones had been diverted to a campaign against local manufacturing and in favour of a membership organisation with public subsidy. It was probably linked to Millenium Development Goals and the aftermath of Make Poverty History - in fact Pants to Poverty is quite open about this as an origin. It preached that tariffs around welfare states are bad, payments by taxpayers in such states to schemes in Bangladesh or maybe steelworks in China are good, and that social insurance is not a fit topic to discuss when talking about poverty in Bangladesh. I didn't want to talk about poverty in Bangladesh; I wanted schemes like London Fashion Week and Esthetica, the room that sounds like "ethical" but isn't, to close-down and for government to save the money or spend on a scheme of business support as intended. My web page on the subject has slipped down the rankings so I will give it a link: http://veganline.com/ethical-fashion-forum.htm The page is headed "Ethical Fashion Forum: goods from badly-countries" I've added a heading to this link: "brands are over-done; ethical fashion blogs don't mention national insurance, ethical fashion companies seem a bit glib and to ignore UK manufacturing as the main priority, ethical fashion definitions are rigged by a house of lords committee and a group at London College of Fashion sponsored by Nike, ethical fashion designers are a daft idea because you have to make the stuff". So now you know.