Economy 101

[Texas_tea]

Yes...it is odd that the creator of this thread doesn't even understand what makes the economy work.

LOL ....
Odd ...yes
Shocker .....no!

 

[Johnny Tremain]

The democrats live in the bizarro world.
How else could they have offered up and supported Obama?
Reality--economy--rational thinking--all flew right out the window.

 

[Texas_tea]

The democrats live in the bizarro world.
How else could they have offered up and supported Obama?
Reality--economy--rational thinking--all flew right out the window.

One word my good friend ...

COMMUNISM!

 

[Johnny Tremain]

One word my good friend ...

COMMUNISM!

I concur--100%.
Foreign based--and funded--attempted coup d' etat.
With full complicity of the Traitor of all time--the democrat party.

 

[Texas_tea]

I concur--100%.
Foreign based--and funded--attempted coup d' etat.
With full complicity of the Traitor of all time--the democrat party.

Maybe locally funded ...
George Soros?

 

[Johnny Tremain]

Maybe locally funded ...
George Soros?

I think it ALL comes from abroad--funneled through various sappers.
Look into how Clinton got his start--financially.
The democrat party sold out their own nation.
In the future--mark my words--when you say 'democrat party'--people will turn downwards and look askance and spit to the ground.

 

[Texas_tea]

I think it ALL comes from abroad--funneled through various sappers.
Look into how Clinton got his start--financially.
The democrat party sold out their own nation.
In the future--mark my words--when you say 'democrat party'--people will turn downwards and look askance and spit to the ground.

Spot on Mr. Tremain ....

 

[dogtowner]

One immediate objection is that your desire to amass wealth means working 3 jobs- and that jobs are finite in number.

Yes, in my opinion it is morally wrong to take three jobs when others are looking for work.

and I'm assuming you believe that the proverbial pie is finite also despite clear history to the contrary.

but aside from that, workers compete for jobs and employers seek the best possible candidate to fill their needs. if Gen convinces these businesses he is better qualified does that sleak to his ability or the lack thereof of the others ?

 

[Texas_tea]

Production is the product of a person's ability to think, wealth is the product of greed.

Many, many very smart people are not wealthy. And many wealthy people are not smart. Anyone greedy enough will find a way to gain wealth.

And a greedy man is one who collects more than he can consume, and consumes what others have produced.

What a worthless line of communist crap ....

 

[Texas_tea]

It amazes me that even after two World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, the Cold War and countless other skirmishes fought over socialism and communism that these communist IDIOTS come on here and still try to convince people that capitalism and American exceptionalism is wrong, "greedy" and/or immoral!

I have many veterans in my family who fought in all these wars to protect our citizens from the very kind of ********* these IDIOTS espouse. I am sure their solutions in combat to these IDIOTS and their communist ideologies is the only way to handle the disease known as socialism/communism!

 

[Johnny Tremain]

By most historical measurements--socio-communism is directly responsible ​

for the horrible and violent deaths of at least ​

100,000,000 people in the 20th century.​

​

USSR, Europe, China, SE Asia, Africa. ​

Everywhere it has ever been implemented--and then thrown out with utter revulsion.​

Just a fact leftists are incapable of digesting.​

Socio-communists are the greatest cause of violent death on Earth in all of recorded history.​

​

Yet--they claim to be for something good.​

Don't you believe it.​

​

Remember--what is called "socialism" can only be enforced by communism. ​

They are inseparable. ​

 

[Texas_tea]

And, these communist wack jobs come on here and post and expect to be taken seriously.

Whatever .....

 

[GenSeneca]

Suffice it to say that it would help the discussion if you would address what I actually posted.

I will not waste my time responding to your ad hominem and strawman fallacies, instead I will point out that I did address what you actually posted:

You proposed an economy based on 100% spending and 0% savings - true or false

If the answer is False, then I have misinterpreted your proposal, I apologize for the misunderstanding, and I request that you be more specific.

However, if the answer is True, then I have addressed what you actually posted and my statements are valid - demonstrably so.

Now let's examine the proposed economic "system" of 100% spending...

The average mean income for the US is roughly $47,000 a year. At current income tax rates an individual will pay $7,780 in income tax and an additional $2,656 in FICA taxes, leaving them with an adjusted after-tax annual income of $36,564. Now to be generous, let's say they get paid every 2 weeks, that's $1406.30 per paycheck and, according to your "system", they have to spend all that money and save nothing.

Under your "system" no individual could ever purchase any single item with a cost greater than $1,406.30 - Congratulations, your "system" just killed the entire economy of the United States: The realty industry is dead, can't buy a new home for $1400... The auto industry is dead, can't buy a new car for $1400... The construction industry is dead, can't build a new building for $1400... Every industry that sells products or services in excess of $1400 has gone broke AND the entire stock market has collapsed as every penny of capital has been drained out of it and there is no more capital in the form of savings and investments available to purchase stocks and bonds, thus bankrupting every major company and industry overnight....

And what's this person supposed to do for income in retirement? He wasn't allowed to save anything, so once he retires, he's flat broke... Perhaps your plan is to cart him off to the Glue Factory in true Animal Farm fashion, or maybe soylent green is more your style...

Since you're so keen on accusing me of not understanding reality, and not comprehending economics, and you refuse to discuss economic growth as it pertains to the proposed "system" by pretending that it's unrelated to the topic, perhaps you can explain how your "system" realistically leads to something other than total economic collapse.

 

[GenSeneca]

One immediate objection is that your desire to amass wealth means working 3 jobs- and that jobs are finite in number.

Anyone more qualified than myself could be hired in my place. Additionally, if a different company, or companies, offers me a greater profit than what I currently obtain from my current employers, I could choose to work there instead and leave my old position to be filled by someone else.

That's how the labor market works.

Yes, in my opinion it is morally wrong to take three jobs when others are looking for work.

Would that be the Altruist morality that says I must sacrifice the good of myself for the good of others? I do not sacrifice myself to the good of others nor do I sacrifice the good of others to myself. I am a trader, I exchange value for value on a purely volitional basis. The companies I work for consider the value I add to their company to be greater than the cost of employing me. I consider the compensation I get to be of a greater value to me than the work that I'm doing. This concept may seem unusual to you but it's known as a mutually beneficial exchange, as both myself, and the companies I work for, profit by the exchange.

 

[GenSeneca]

The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits. - Thomas Jefferson

-It's possible to take this too literally- building ports, roads, bridges and infrastructure is "aiding the people" in their pursuits. Loaning money to businesses is "aiding" them. Educating a workforce is "aiding" the business owner. Taxing anyone is "restraining " them. Would Mr. Jefferson oppose these things? No.

Actually, he did oppose such things...

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson

"To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it." - Thomas Jefferson

But many conservatives will use his words to imply that helping the poor is wrong.

Using the government's monopoly on the legal use of force to benefit some at the expense of others is wrong.

Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others. - Ayn Rand

Well said! I am pleased to see that Ms Rand would oppose incentives for businesses to outsource their labor, which benefits the shareholder and manager at the expense of the worker.

What's that? She would probably support the government interference that helps business owners- only objecting to the interference that protects the least powerful?

Oh well . . . I guess we don't expect intellectual honesty from fiction authors, anyway.

Rand made no exceptions, hence the word "Every"... You offered a strawman by suggesting that Rand would have supported a position that would utilize the power of government to provide a benefit to some at the expense of others when she did no such thing, you also used an appeal to ridicule to poke fun at her for having written fiction novels with an appeal to authority which suggests that fiction authors have no credibility on the subject matter, and finally you used an ad hominem by attacking her as being intellectually dishonest.

Should we lower our expectations and stop expecting you to reply in a manner that's consistent with intellectual honesty?