- Joined
- Jul 16, 2007
- Messages
- 49,276
- Reaction score
- 2,462
Well he's correct. "Stock" as a term refrs to human. And the currency in which the world operates is human production.
Awkward phrasing, but the statement itself is not a big deal.
You are correct that the statement is not a big deal. One can agree or disagree with his view, but clearly he wasn't saying anything insulting.
I'll add that the phrasing is only awkward because it is economics jargon. For example, consider the much discussed paper by Ben Jones titled, The Human Capital Stock: A Generalized Approach.
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.104.11.3752. That's from 2014.
Google the phrase, skip the first few pages of articles about the outrage of a Trumpista using the term, and you'll find plenty of articles using that exact phrase, usually in specialized pieces. Here's another example from 1996, Evaluating the Impacts of Human Capital Stocks and Accumulation on Economic Growth, but there are many: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12347512/
The people purporting to be outraged by this are ignorant or lying. The people in this thread calling me a liar for pointing out that it was a fairly straightforward economics term are also either ignorant or lying.
Human capital is a collection of traits – all the knowledge, talents, skills, abilities, experience, intelligence, training, judgment, and wisdom possessed individually and collectively by individuals in a population.
Human capital is the stock of habits, knowledge, social and personality attributes (including creativity) embodied in the ability to perform labour so as to produce economic value
Members of both parties support young men having to sign their freedom away to the government to avoid felony charges. Young men are meat for the grinder as far as Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump are concerned. That's far more offensive than the OP.
Good boy. You've earned a pat on the head from the leader.