Its The Economy, Stupid - Economic & Business News From Around The World

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
10,318

Uber slashed their prices and offered a cheaper car and this bloke is evicted. Is it Uber's fault? They could have kept the prices high and no one takes Uber and some low cost version of Lyft starts taking all the market share. Is that a better outcome?
 

formby002

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,099
no its not about that at all. being rich is a relative thing. hoarding wealth to the detriment of society is an entirely separate issue.

What do you mean by hoarding wealth. Sticking it under their mattresses or something?
 

doghouse

King Of The Elite Idiots
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
10,972
What do you mean by hoarding wealth. Sticking it under their mattresses or something?

Dead money. Vast amounts of capital is doing nothing active but accruing itself more capital. From a societal perspective, having it out producing growth to the real economy would be far preferable as it did in mid century America.

This is one of the few economic issues Rambo Rambo and I agree on actually.
 

formby002

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,099
Dead money. Vast amounts of capital is doing nothing active but accruing itself more capital. From a societal perspective, having it out producing growth to the real economy would be far preferable as it did in mid century America.

This is one of the few economic issues Rambo Rambo and I agree on actually.

The Fable of the Bees...
 

doghouse

King Of The Elite Idiots
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
10,972
The Fable of the Bees...

Not really a Mandevillian concept. Simply wealth is being sucked out of general society and concentrated. At some point 99% of society has no wealth at all and that's when the bloodshed starts.
 

formby002

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,099
Not really a Mandevillian concept. Simply wealth is being sucked out of general society and concentrated. At some point 99% of society has no wealth at all and that's when the bloodshed starts.

I'm merely pointing out that the argument that hoarding wealth (there's some debate whether hoarding is the same as thrift) is bad for the economy is essentially the Paradox of Thrift. This paradox is often associated with Mandeville (The Fable of the Bees) but is actually much older. I think its correct.
 

doghouse

King Of The Elite Idiots
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
10,972
(there's some debate whether hoarding is the same as thrift

Sure, and it's a valid debate. But that is a totally different conversation than what is being discussed here. And not even because of scale, though that is probably another point of differentiation. No one is talking about billionaires being thrifty or throwing gold coins in the bank vault like Scrooge McDuck. It's the systemic issue with the current economic structure. I don't remember who said it recently, but we basically have welfare for corporations. We are literally sucking wealth from the vast majority of the populace to line the pockets of the mega wealthy in a systemic fashion. Look at how much tax corporations and super wealthy individuals pay vs. an average middle class earner. The middle class individual in many cases pays more in actual dollars, not just percentage. Its insane.

I say this as an ardent capitalist whose only interest is in getting capitalism back to the great prosperity engine it used to be, because what we have right now isn't tenable and the whole thing will come crashing down.
 

formby002

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,099
Sure, and it's a valid debate. But that is a totally different conversation than what is being discussed here. And not even because of scale, though that is probably another point of differentiation. No one is talking about billionaires being thrifty or throwing gold coins in the bank vault like Scrooge McDuck. It's the systemic issue with the current economic structure. I don't remember who said it recently, but we basically have welfare for corporations. We are literally sucking wealth from the vast majority of the populace to line the pockets of the mega wealthy in a systemic fashion. Look at how much tax corporations and super wealthy individuals pay vs. an average middle class earner. The middle class individual in many cases pays more in actual dollars, not just percentage. Its insane.

I say this as an ardent capitalist whose only interest is in getting capitalism back to the great prosperity engine it used to be, because what we have right now isn't tenable and the whole thing will come crashing down.

Oh I agree, the wealthy should pay their taxes, and if they are paying less in actual dollars than the average middle class person then that is obscene and needs to stop.
 

Rambo

Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
30,940
Sure, and it's a valid debate. But that is a totally different conversation than what is being discussed here. And not even because of scale, though that is probably another point of differentiation. No one is talking about billionaires being thrifty or throwing gold coins in the bank vault like Scrooge McDuck. It's the systemic issue with the current economic structure. I don't remember who said it recently, but we basically have welfare for corporations. We are literally sucking wealth from the vast majority of the populace to line the pockets of the mega wealthy in a systemic fashion. Look at how much tax corporations and super wealthy individuals pay vs. an average middle class earner. The middle class individual in many cases pays more in actual dollars, not just percentage. Its insane.

I say this as an ardent capitalist whose only interest is in getting capitalism back to the great prosperity engine it used to be, because what we have right now isn't tenable and the whole thing will come crashing down.
look at my future radical in training. i'm so proud!
 

Rambo

Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
30,940
You're faulting people for being rich?
well rich is a relative term. if you have a million you're rich. if you have a billion you're rich. which one is worse for society as a whole? the billionaire, obviously.

What about people who inherit their wealth?
there should be a 99% estate tax. getting rid of the estate tax was one of the worse things we've ever done.
 

Rambo

Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
30,940
I just want more love for the Scrooge McDuck reference.
Thinking back on that cartoon is a real mind fuck. Like no one ever wondered why this duck has so much more money than every other duck? He swims in money for fucks sake.
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
10,318
well rich is a relative term. if you have a million you're rich. if you have a billion you're rich. which one is worse for society as a whole? the billionaire, obviously.


there should be a 99% estate tax. getting rid of the estate tax was one of the worse things we've ever done.

Why is it bad for society for a person to accumulate wealth? They're not all accumulating by being robber barons. Jeff Bezos did give someone a job sorting packages in a warehouse somewhere with barely any education.

99 percent estate tax just promotes horrible ethics - spending all the money before you die, not encouraging people to accumulate any wealth or your kid keeps you on life support as an invalid and so he/she can continue tapping into the trust fund.
 

Rambo

Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
30,940
Why is it bad for society for a person to accumulate wealth? They're not all accumulating by being robber barons. Jeff Bezos did give someone a job sorting packages in a warehouse somewhere with barely any education.
again, we're talking matters of degrees here. you and bezos are two completely different cases. he's got more money than god and he's using it to be the shittiest human on earth.

99 percent estate tax just promotes horrible ethics - spending all the money before you die, not encouraging people to accumulate any wealth or your kid keeps you on life support as an invalid and so he/she can continue tapping into the trust fund.
we have to put a stop to the scourge of rich failsons and faildaughters. if you have other suggestions im open to them.
 

doghouse

King Of The Elite Idiots
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
10,972
Why is it bad for society for a person to accumulate wealth? They're not all accumulating by being robber barons. Jeff Bezos did give someone a job sorting packages in a warehouse somewhere with barely any education.

99 percent estate tax just promotes horrible ethics - spending all the money before you die, not encouraging people to accumulate any wealth or your kid keeps you on life support as an invalid and so he/she can continue tapping into the trust fund.


Again, wealth accumulation is not specifically bad. Here is a excerpt from a recent column rightly outlining Biden voters as pushback from the tired Trump voter trope. It's basically what I said upthread.

They know government cannot make us all economically equal, but they do think government should stop increasing the gap between rich and poor.

spending all the money before you die,

I'm not sure that's necessarily bad? I don't advocate 99% estate tax or anything, don't misunderstand, but people spending is good.

again, we're talking matters of degrees here. you and bezos are two completely different cases. he's got more money than god and he's using it to be the shittiest human on earth.


we have to put a stop to the scourge of rich failsons and faildaughters. if you have other suggestions im open to them.

Honestly, Bezos isn't even in the top 1,000 of shittiest humans.

The Estate Tax is hard, because it ends up taking family homes and shit if you aren't careful, especially in things like the agriculture sector. There's reasonable limits on cash inheritance to be had.
 

Rambo

Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
30,940
especially in things like the agriculture sector.
come on stop it. you know damn well im not talking about imposing a cap that would harm a fucking farmer. now if we're talking about taking down the ceo of monsanto, then i'm game.
 

doghouse

King Of The Elite Idiots
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
10,972
come on stop it. you know damn well im not talking about imposing a cap that would harm a fucking farmer. now if we're talking about taking down the ceo of monsanto, then i'm game.
Well if you just wantonly say 99% estate tax that is what happens. And why it's a difficult problem to solve.
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
10,318
Why is it necessary for the state to solve this?

People are able to work hard and accumulate wealth. Hopefully each generation becomes more successful and builds on the previous one. But if you have crappy children and they squander everything, why is it the government's problem?

I'm trying to put another scenario into the context of we need to control the distribution of wealth. If everyone makes more money - there are no issues.
 

doghouse

King Of The Elite Idiots
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
10,972
Why is it necessary for the state to solve this?

People are able to work hard and accumulate wealth. Hopefully each generation becomes more successful and builds on the previous one. But if you have crappy children and they squander everything, why is it the government's problem?

I'm trying to put another scenario into the context of we need to control the distribution of wealth. If everyone makes more money - there are no issues.

Maybe if I repost this another 137 times it will sink in.

They know government cannot make us all economically equal, but they do think government should stop increasing the gap between rich and poor.
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
10,318
Maybe if I repost this another 137 times it will sink in.

You make it sound like the government has set up a system and treats their middle to lower class citizens like immigrant cabbies who have to rent the car, rent the medallion and in spite of driving and doing business goes into debt because they have to pay for gas and mileage.

The working poor motif.
 
Last edited:

doghouse

King Of The Elite Idiots
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
10,972
You make it sound like the government has set up a system and treats their middle to lower class citizens like immigrant cabbies who have to rent the car, rent the medallion and in spite of driving and doing business goes into debt because they have to pay for gas and mileage.

The working poor motif.
Essentially, yes.
 

Rambo

Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
30,940
You make it sound like the government has set up a system and treats their middle to lower class citizens like immigrant cabbies who have to rent the car, rent the medallion and in spite of driving and doing business goes into debt because they have to pay for gas and mileage.

The working poor motif.
Yes, exactly!
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
10,318
here you go Fwiffo Fwiffo


Two things jump to my mind. In an ocean (aka society) there are whales, tuna, some other fish smaller than tuna down to little tiny parasite fish that need the bigger fish to survive. The rich people are getting richer so bigger whales but that doesn't mean as a small fish you can't eat by following them as a school. It also doesn't mean small fish are starving and dying. The population is growing.

We're not at a point where we are in a medieval caste system where if you're born a Nemo clownfish you can't work hard and become a tuna. There is still upward mobility.

Can everyone become a whale? No. Should everyone be a small parasite fish? No. Can you be a small parasite fish and die because you decided not to swim with the school so you can suck plankton off the whale? Yes. That's reality.

The second thing that jumps out is this retrospective romance with the Gilded Age and the dismantling of corrupt politics (Tammany Hall etc), robber barons, monopolies and all the bad things that led to the Great Depression. I'm not a student of US history but if people think the ensuing 12 years of FDR plus a term of Truman and a world war that galvanized a nation fixed everything...why was Eisenhower warning us about the military-industrial complex when he was about to end his second term? The same sinister corporate and political forces still existed. They just hid themselves better. Or more likely people made more money after the war so they didn't care if things were a bit dodgy here and there.
 

Pimpernel Smith

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,595

The decisive period will be the first few months of 2021, that will be the foundations of a bounce back or a global recession.

I was with the auditors yesterday and they were bleak, many clients close to the edge of going under, or will be at the end of this lockdown. The government support isn't enough. One poor lady who's business was over leveraged in a lockdown has had full nervous breakdown.

There's a price to pay for ending vast swathes of economic life, one is that we will be a lot poorer at the end of this.
 

Rambo

Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
30,940

The Shooman The Shooman if you wonder why young people are turning away from capitalism in droves, this is it.
 

The Shooman

A Pretty Face
Messages
3,019

The Shooman The Shooman if you wonder why young people are turning away from capitalism in droves, this is it.

Shut down these greedy globalists and start encouraging local manufacturing again. Also encourage people to buy local quality and bring back tradition. Stop the government funding all this silly unnecessary education (much of it is useless indoctrination of the leftist spector)! Get rid of the internet (too easy to pollute people's heads) and computers and go back to tradition.

Globalists, over education, made-in-China etc all add to the problem. Capitalism can work if the system is run better. People always had jobs and could afford houses, and it can be that way again. Capitalism does work, it is a God given blueprint for how humans live. BUT once globalists and greedy people interfere the system becomes warped and doesn't operate properly, and suddenly lots of part time jobs become available while full time jobs are harder to get, and the poor get poorer and earn less while the rich get richer. The key is to develop small - medium local business and to develop manufacturing again, and keep the power of socialists and plutocrats well under control. In the old days the rich were few and far between, only the privileged few had big businesses. The internet and China has made too many rich...there needs to be far less rich people again so the capitalist system can operate properly.

Am l completely right? Probably not. The problems are complex. But the way we have done things is certainly not the right way, globalism is a disaster....people are just a number, and many are getting poorer with no future. People need real jobs again.

Computer jobs, selling to China, manufacturing cheap junky products, selling cheap junky products, teaching modern education, and working part time in retail at night etc = not real jobs. Tradition is where it is at!!!

When we get our heads straight and stop supporting silly nonsense, we'll be o.k. We are slowly starting to wake up now. Trump is leading the way.
 

Sammy Ambrose

Well-Known Member
Messages
199
Shooey: Capitalism only worked for the labouring classes in innovative capitalist countries because of cheap raw materials and large numbers of consumers made available by colonisation.

Since, colonisation collapsed, capitalism has been in the main nothing more than a Ponzi scheme. But now the chain letters are no longer being forwarded.

Save your pennies and learn how to grow potatoes, batter fish and shear a woolly, Shooey. Or learn to fire a rifle.
 

sirloin

Well-Known Member
Messages
869
Shut down these greedy globalists and start encouraging local manufacturing again. Also encourage people to buy local quality and bring back tradition. Stop the government funding all this silly unnecessary education (much of it is useless indoctrination of the leftist spector)! Get rid of the internet (too easy to pollute people's heads) and computers and go back to tradition.

Globalists, over education, made-in-China etc all add to the problem. Capitalism can work if the system is run better. People always had jobs and could afford houses, and it can be that way again. Capitalism does work, it is a God given blueprint for how humans live. BUT once globalists and greedy people interfere the system becomes warped and doesn't operate properly, and suddenly lots of part time jobs become available while full time jobs are harder to get, and the poor get poorer and earn less while the rich get richer. The key is to develop small - medium local business and to develop manufacturing again, and keep the power of socialists and plutocrats well under control. In the old days the rich were few and far between, only the privileged few had big businesses. The internet and China has made too many rich...there needs to be far less rich people again so the capitalist system can operate properly.

Am l completely right? Probably not. The problems are complex. But the way we have done things is certainly not the right way, globalism is a disaster....people are just a number, and many are getting poorer with no future. People need real jobs again.

Computer jobs, selling to China, manufacturing cheap junky products, selling cheap junky products, teaching modern education, and working part time in retail at night etc = not real jobs. Tradition is where it is at!!!

When we get our heads straight and stop supporting silly nonsense, we'll be o.k. We are slowly starting to wake up now. Trump is leading the way.
Sound like taken right out of "Small is Beautiful" by E.F. Schumacher. Have you read it?

I'm with Shooey on this one. Think globally, trade locally.
 

Fwiffo

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Messages
10,318
_116228421_nasdaq_composition-nc.png


"The Nasdaq, for instance, has seen a huge rise since the start of the year. But just five companies - Google owner Alphabet, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Facebook - have the same value as the remaining 95 combined."


Are we shaming people for being successful now?
 

Rambo

Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Moderator
Supporter
Messages
30,940
View attachment 35946

"The Nasdaq, for instance, has seen a huge rise since the start of the year. But just five companies - Google owner Alphabet, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Facebook - have the same value as the remaining 95 combined."


Are we shaming people for being successful now?
I think we're shaming our lack of regulatory control
 
Top Bottom