Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: 1% own half the world's wealth


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: 1% own half the world's wealth Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 12:31:48 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline 		if you are referring to the link i posted----i hope you are not, because it does an excellent job of very objectively pointing out the value positions between left and right.

if you are referring to my position of wishing liberals would leave the country and go live somewhere else---this might help you understand me a bit more: liberals are the enemy and they either need to be converted, or defeated.

that said. here's another "Kool-Aid" drinker for you:

http://reason.com/archives/2015/01/22/income-inequality-is-a-problemwhen-cause

"Income Inequality Is a Problem—When Caused by Government Meddling

"Unlike market inequality, political-economic inequality is unjust and should be eliminated.

"How? By abolishing all direct and indirect subsidies; artificial scarcities, such as those created by so-called intellectual property; regulations, which inevitably burden smaller and yet-to-be-launched firms more than lawyered-up big businesses; eminent domain; and permit requirements, zoning, and occupational licensing, which all exclude competition. These interventions and more protect incumbent firms from conditions that would lower prices to consumers, create self-employment and worker-ownership opportunities, and improve bargaining conditions for wage labor."


(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 12:33:58 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		You keep using that word "objective." I do not think it means what you think it means.


(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 12:59:25 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Who cares whether proposals for change are this -ism or that -ism? Or whether the ideas proposed conform to the dictionary definiton of this -ism or that -ism? The point is to find ideas and proposals that will work.

The current situation - with wealth increasingly concentrated in the hands of the very few at the expense of the very many - is unsustainable. It is undesirable that such enormous obscene disparities of wealth and power are allowed to continue. Even if one finds no fault with the existing arrangements, one could argue for change if only to maintain the status quo with minimal changes. If current polarising trends continue, then a violent bloody redistribution of wealth seems inevitable sooner or later.

Across the world, hundreds of millions of people eke out an existence on less than $2 per day while the fortunate few wallow in billions. It is unconscionable that some individuals are allowed to garner huge fortunes while others die every day for lack of food potable drinking water housing or elementary medicine. Even at a purely economic level, the loss of talent and potential is unpardonable. In the language of discredited free market economics, the current arrangements are inefficient and do not lend themselves to an optimal use of resources and capital. If the great mass of people are left without any stake in the system, why should they care whether the system endures or collapses? Is there any one who is arguing that the current arrangements are the best possible and should be allowed to continue without any substantial changes to make access to resources and wealth more democratic?

So the problem is not a lack of resources or wealth but how existing resources and wealth is distributed. How then should we arrange things so that resources and wealth are put to use to benefit 100% of the population instead of 1%?

That is the point of the OP and in corporatism/capitalism...don't hold your breath. Since the 60's/70's, the US economy and society have existed to serve [it/them] not the other way around.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 1:31:02 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

this page here shows the heart of the matter for every single issue occurring in the forum and I hope everyone will please read it.

the question then becomes, how to take two very different and competing sides and have them live together.

http://news-basics.com/2010/liberal-vs-conservative-values/

for my part---and I hope what I am about to say here doesn't discourage anyone from reading that webpage, I just wish all the liberals would move to Sweden, or cuba, or china...

and yes, cuba's doing great...that's why so many of their citizens risk death on the open seas to come to America (economic freedom anyone?) or why people who live there (and other socialist countries) seek high end health care in the more capitalistic countries.

I've written before, income inequality reduces dollar velocity...less dollars in less hands.

It is a proven economic fact that the higher the dollar velocity, i.e., more dollars in more hands...results in higher demand which results in more jobs which results in yet higher demand and yet more jobs and the cycle keeps going.

Income inequality is produced by too little production but paper trading. Then adjusted accordingly to a very favorable tax code...draws insufficient taxes and at a rates little as 1/3 of the highest paid labor, i.e., money form actually doing something or making something. (for only 1 big example, GE has for years, made more of its profits from financial deals than by services or products they offer)

Romney for example was a net job killer because of the profits from rules and lower taxes on paper trading as reflected by the companies Bain took over bought/sold or invested in. Hence the kindest description of him as being a vulture capitalist. Good word as [he]and [his] work...never benefited society at all.

As for Staples and Sports Authority, they were not start ups, Romney & Co. came late to the game and only after many million$ had already been invested and then paid 15% federal tax about the same as those making $20-$30,000/yr. Work incentives do not exist in the tax code, only investment incentives that concentrate wealth and rather reduce employment.

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 1/23/2015 2:20:37 PM >

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 1:49:46 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Well, sort of. MV = PQ. If velocity increases, what happens next depends on what happens with the other variables. For example, if the money supply remains constant, and production remains flat, prices will rise. Velocity doesn't necessarily *cause* increased production.

But, it is true that, if the money supply remains constant, either production or prices will drop. But you have the causal link a little skewed. What happens next depends on supply and demand, not vice versa.

Demand is a range of quantities demanded at different price levels at a given point in time, within the constraints of what people are willing and able to pay.
Supply is a range of quantities supplied at different price levels at a given point in time, within the constraints of what people are willing and able to produce.
The market will be where these intersect, and that will determine Price and Production. Increasing V means we don't need as high a money supply.

That said -- it's not velocity of dollars per se that's healthy for the economy, but rather the ease of exchange of goods and resources that smooths the path to production, increasing supply, and lowering price, which spurs demand (given favorable elasticity of both supply and demand).

Income inequality isn't about dollars -- it's about allocation of resources, represented in dollars (i.e., a number showing value, vs actual money supply).

But you've got the general idea correct -- if resources become parked, the economy slows, as availability of resources in circulation diminishes essentially, at least in the short run. Trickle down assumes all resources are re-invested, and that's not necessarily true -- there's leakage.

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 2:26:29 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Well, sort of. MV = PQ. If velocity increases, what happens next depends on what happens with the other variables. For example, if the money supply remains constant, and production remains flat, prices will rise. Velocity doesn't necessarily *cause* increased production.

But, it is true that, if the money supply remains constant, either production or prices will drop. But you have the causal link a little skewed. What happens next depends on supply and demand, not vice versa.

Demand is a range of quantities demanded at different price levels at a given point in time, within the constraints of what people are willing and able to pay.
Supply is a range of quantities supplied at different price levels at a given point in time, within the constraints of what people are willing and able to produce.
The market will be where these intersect, and that will determine Price and Production. Increasing V means we don't need as high a money supply.

That said -- it's not velocity of dollars per se that's healthy for the economy, but rather the ease of exchange of goods and resources that smooths the path to production, increasing supply, and lowering price, which spurs demand (given favorable elasticity of both supply and demand).

Income inequality isn't about dollars -- it's about allocation of resources, represented in dollars (i.e., a number showing value, vs actual money supply).

But you've got the general idea correct -- if resources become parked, the economy slows, as availability of resources in circulation diminishes essentially, at least in the short run. Trickle down assumes all resources are re-invested, and that's not necessarily true -- there's leakage.

What I wrote was that higher dollar velocity increases demand as there are more dollars in more hands. Each additional [hand] represents and in most cases, results in new demand.

New demand means more production and this more jobs and thus even more demand and so on.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 2:33:33 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		I know.

And that might happen. It might even be what commonly happens. But it doesn't necessarily happen, and that's why looking at all variables is important before setting course.

You're assuming things as inherently causal that are not.



< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 1/23/2015 2:34:07 PM >

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 2:44:07 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		MV = PQ.


This of course is an oversimplification of realities, each of those letters (and I am in some close agreement with MM) is in and of itself in the real world a very very very complex googleplex of variables.

Here is a crystal clear demonstration of why.

let M remain constant, if we increase the velocity of money by say paying every man, woman, and child that gets money (no matter the source, welfare payments, wages, contract fulfillments and so on, just money) from once a contract, or once a month to weekly or (since it is an oversimplification, daily) it is prima facie tautology that the velocity of money will increase (DoUCY?) but that is not to boost it from 12 to 52 in the case of a monthly payout to a weekly payout. So, with the other variables, boost the shit out of production....supposedly we have with great efficiencies.........and that has added to the economy, but is there an y=mx + b relationship here? Nope.


The point is, there is no point here, and no magic.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 2:46:17 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

this page here shows the heart of the matter for every single issue occurring in the forum and I hope everyone will please read it.

the question then becomes, how to take two very different and competing sides and have them live together.

http://news-basics.com/2010/liberal-vs-conservative-values/

for my part---and I hope what I am about to say here doesn't discourage anyone from reading that webpage, I just wish all the liberals would move to Sweden, or cuba, or china...

and yes, cuba's doing great...that's why so many of their citizens risk death on the open seas to come to America (economic freedom anyone?) or why people who live there (and other socialist countries) seek high end health care in the more capitalistic countries.

The problem with that link is that it is wrong. The so-called conservative role for govt. has been to bail out banks that as a result...hardly play in a 'free' market. Same thing with all other forms of collective rather than free market insurance.

What the conservatives should suggest is that if a banker can't 'be responsible for themselves' just like you and me, govt. has no business in bailing them out.

YET that's what 'conservatives' are all too eager to do. It's called socialism for the rich...capitalism for the poor and the same goes for the whole banking system, investor support and agriculture.

Modern conservative values would have us believe that if a sick patient can't 'be responsible for themselves' they can just go ahead and die. I say let the banking system die. Does anyone know for a fact the economy would have been any worse ?

Our founding fathers...conservatives all, would have sent those wall street bankers home...tarred feathered and bankrupt. They'd tell farmers who couldn't make a living in farming...to get out of farming. They'd tell anyone who invests overseas...do so at their own risk.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 3:18:06 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Our founding fathers...conservatives all,

I'd be curious about your logic here.

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 3:40:27 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Indeed, will a failure to democratise wealth lead to violent revolution?


As a matter of interest, Tweak, have you ever looked at the ideas of the ecomarxists? One of the ideas promoted by ecomarxists is that revolution is made much more likely given global ecological problems. It's one thing, for instance, for workers to be living in poverty. It's another thing entirely, though, to be living without water - as could happen - and very soon - given enough global warming to make it impossible to survive in certain, already very arid, areas of the world. We're talking about the very bottom level of Maslow's pyramid of values, here.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 4:45:05 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Staleek


If you give money to an unemployed person he will spend it on clothes, or food, or get stuff done with it. All of which employs people.

If you give money to someone who has so much he can't even spend it all you do is add to inflation and the income disparity.

Money is NOT the same thing as value!



At some point, giving money to the unemployed is no longer helping them through a tight spot. At some point it becomes rewarding laziness, or setting them (and society itself) up for ultimate failure



Spoken like someone who doesnt have a clue.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 4:49:41 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline 		Vote gets me, is that many voters right of centre fall for the bullshit spouted about how good unbridled Capitalism is, yet dont see that its being spewed by media outlets owned by some of the worlds richest people.

Come on chaps, try and work out wtf is going on here.

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 4:52:30 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Our founding fathers...conservatives all,

I'd be curious about your logic here.

Well I am not sure where my logic fails in your eyes. Don't know that any politician as we would describe him or her today would be honestly be described as conservative in comparison to our founding fathers.

They abhorred the very idea of an income tax hence the need to amend the constitution for one and some say even that was corrupt and never happened. (federal court 2003) None wanted federal banking (save Hamilton) or federal subsidies or bailouts. They were an entirely different lot and nothing like today's so-called conservatives.

My point being that conservatives today still try to talk a good game but don't walk it. They themselves are not really conservative and during the Reagan years living in no. Va. many conservatives in my acquaintance, didn't at all support his deficit spending and crazy tax code and thought his cold war rhetoric good but policies anything but conservative.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 5:04:24 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage

Bob Dylan, this month's AARP cover boy(!), weighs in on the 1% in a new interview. Statists aren't going to like what he had to say.

http://www.aarp.org/entertainment/style-trends/info-2015/bob-dylan-aarp-magazine.3.html

We all do at certain points, but it’s like water — it slips through your hands. As long as there’s suffering, you can only be so happy. How can a person be happy if he has misfortune? Some wealthy billionaire who can buy 30 cars and maybe buy a sports team, is that guy happy? What then would make him happier? Does it make him happy giving his money away to foreign countries? Is there more contentment in that than in giving it here to the inner cities and creating jobs?
The government’s not going to create jobs. It doesn’t have to. People have to create jobs, and these big billionaires are the ones who can do it. We don’t see that happening. We see crime and inner cities exploding with people who have nothing to do, turning to drink and drugs. They could all have work created for them by all these hotshot billionaires. For sure that would create lot of happiness. Now, I’m not saying they have to — I’m not talking about communism — but what do they do with their money? Do they use it in virtuous ways?

Q: So they should be moving their focus here instead of …

A: Well, I think they should, yeah, because there are a lot of things that are wrong in America, and especially in the inner cities, that they could solve. Those are dangerous grounds, and they don’t have to be. There are good people there, but they’ve been oppressed by lack of work. Those people can all be working at something. These multibillionaires can create industries right here in America. But no one can tell them what to do. God’s got to lead them.

Q: And productive work is a kind of salvation in your view? To feel pride in what you do?

A: Absolutely.


I am unsure if your partial quote of Dylans words was due to ignorance or stupidity, so i have added it to your post and BOLDED it.

Either way your post completely changed the context as to what he was actually saying.

(in reply to hot4bondage)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 5:06:17 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

MV = PQ.


This of course is an oversimplification of realities, each of those letters (and I am in some close agreement with MM) is in and of itself in the real world a very very very complex googleplex of variables.

Here is a crystal clear demonstration of why.

let M remain constant, if we increase the velocity of money by say paying every man, woman, and child that gets money (no matter the source, welfare payments, wages, contract fulfillments and so on, just money) from once a contract, or once a month to weekly or (since it is an oversimplification, daily) it is prima facie tautology that the velocity of money will increase (DoUCY?) but that is not to boost it from 12 to 52 in the case of a monthly payout to a weekly payout. So, with the other variables, boost the shit out of production....supposedly we have with great efficiencies.........and that has added to the economy, but is there an y=mx + b relationship here? Nope.


The point is, there is no point here, and no magic.

Well what you describe is not on point. With the concentration of wealth, i.e., more money in fewer hands spending (over all consumption) is thus lowered and demand is lowered. Demand for production is down, jobs are down.

With more money say through a raise in min, wage in worker's lands i.e., more hands, they create a greater demand as that money will be spent and thus dollar velocity increases. More money in far more (labor/jobs) hands and soon...more money in more hands and the cycle continues.

It is just that in addition to the GI Bill and VA lending cycle that drove demand post WWII. Dollar velocity was at or near its highest.

I am talking about the rate at which money is exchanged from one transaction to another, and how much a unit of currency is used in a given period of time. More money in more hands increases the volume of those transactions and the speed at which the same money (dollar) moves through circulation. (economy)

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 1/23/2015 5:11:25 PM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 5:15:56 PM   
Staleek


Posts: 361
Joined: 6/1/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Staleek


If you give money to an unemployed person he will spend it on clothes, or food, or get stuff done with it. All of which employs people.

If you give money to someone who has so much he can't even spend it all you do is add to inflation and the income disparity.

Money is NOT the same thing as value!



At some point, giving money to the unemployed is no longer helping them through a tight spot. At some point it becomes rewarding laziness, or setting them (and society itself) up for ultimate failure



Ohhh... so unemployment is due to laziness. That's interesting.

Of course, back in the early 1900s nobody was lazy, but later when we had the great depression in the 1930s, and everyone coincidentally started being really lazy. After the second world war people progressively stopped being lazy, and hardly anyone was lazy by the 1970s. Of course "Reaganomics" was instituted in the 1980s, which resulted in mass laziness (which was coincidental to the economies of both the USA and Europe being completely demolished). People gradually got less lazy over the years following this in the 1990s and 2000s, right up until the financial crisis of 2008, and then another bout of laziness ensued....

I always thought that unemployment was caused by poor economic performance, a lack of demand for labor, the skillset of a workforce not matching the demands of the workplace, or sometimes disability or mental health issues. But no, laziness it is.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 9:20:12 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
Republicans have a hot idea to boost the wealth and fortune of the middle class. Thank god they are taking real action this time.

Republican Plan

(in reply to Staleek)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 10:05:56 PM   
GoddessManko


Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Republicans have a hot idea to boost the wealth and fortune of the middle class. Thank god they are taking real action this time.

Republican Plan


Who even buys stock over $30 a share unless it's Elon Musk at the helm?

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: 1% own half the world's wealth - 1/23/2015 10:23:46 PM   
Dvr22999874


Posts: 2849
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline 		Very few people were lazy in those two world wars..............apart from those lazy bastards who lie down in the middle of the battlefield and refused to ever get up again. They should have had their social security payment stopped and made to stand in a corner.
Big business is so fucking good to the workers though, isn't it. What was the first thing that happened to the crew of the Titanic (or any other british ship) when she sank and yes, I mean even during the war ?

(in reply to GoddessManko)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: 1% own half the world's wealth Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109