georgephillip
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #1,121
Suppose you loan at a usurious rate of interest? Do you believe all creditors are created equal?If I lend you money...... Why should you win any complaint that I have about you?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Suppose you loan at a usurious rate of interest? Do you believe all creditors are created equal?If I lend you money...... Why should you win any complaint that I have about you?
The negative effects of QE will be felt for a long time. There's a reason why it can't be done on a long term basis, as I've explained to you, but you are not capable of understanding. It can be done temporarily to head off a much worse economic collapse, but it's only a band-aid and doesn't provide a long term fix.QE seems be working in the US. When was all of the money printed recovered?328 million Americans * $1,000/month = $328 billion/month.
$328 billion/month * 12 months = $3.9 trillion/year.
Fun times indeed. Where is the almost $4 trillion going to come from, Bill Gates?
That's McConnell's response that kills the whole thing.
No one can make it on $1000 a month. The minimum should be $2000, and it would require price controls.
That would be $8T a year.
They print all the money they need already, at this point we just need electrons to fill the bank accounts. That's all "money" is at this point anyway. "Digits", it's not based on anything real or tangible. So just program the treasury computers to fill every American's account with $500 a week and let people who can work earn a little bit more.
It's not that hard.
Every country that has attempted that has ended up in ruins. Venezuela printed money. Zimbabwe. Argentina. Haiti.
You can't just print money, and give it away, and not have consequences. Supply and demand, works on money itself. You drastically increase the supply, without a comparable increase in demand, and the result is lower value.
You drastically increase the supply of dollars, without increasing the demand goods, and the result is lower value of money.
100 years of economic history has proven this every single time.
Amazon.com
Throughout history, rich and poor countries alike have been lending, borrowing, crashing―and recovering―their way through an extraordinary range of financial crises. Each time, the experts have chimed, "this time is different"―claiming that the old rules of valuation no longer apply and that the new situation bears little similarity to past disasters.
The old rules of how currency works are still true with the US today. Don't be stupid, and repeat the idiocracy of the past.
No one can make it on $1000 a month.
I have. And I know others that have.
If you want to earn more.... get a job that pays more. Learn something that pays more. Get a second job. I did.
If you simply eliminate all jobs that pay less, you simply won't have jobs that pay less.
No one is going to pay a burger flipper $25,000 a year. I wouldn't buy burgers from such a place. Thus such a place would shut down... thus they wouldn't earn $25,000 a year.
Suppose you loan at a usurious rate of interest? Do you believe all creditors are created equal?If I lend you money...... Why should you win any complaint that I have about you?
Haitian deforestation has more to do with charcoal, coffee, and French capitalists than with "government owned land."The reason is simple. On the DR side, they have a concept that is fundamental to all Capitalism, called "Private Property".
On the Haiti side, they have government owned land, that is "held in common". So that all people can benefit from the natural resources of the country equally... and thus... there are none.
Deforestation in Haiti - Wikipedia
"The rapid deforestation of Haiti began during the colonial period facilitated by slavery of captive Africans, and was intensified when coffee was introduced in 1730.
"Upland forests were cleared and fifty years later, a quarter of the colony's land was under coffee.
"The system of plantation monoculture and clean -cultivation between rows of coffee, indigo, tobacco, and sugarcane exhausted soil nutrients and led to rapid erosion[2]
"Following the Haitian revolution, the government was forced to export timber throughout the 19th century to pay off a 90 million franc indemnity to France for the 'loss' equivalent to the 'value' of the formerly enslaved population."
The oil and gas resources they exploit ARE part of the commons. It is only the capitalists' peculiar definition of "private property" that permits a few parasites to amass vast fortunes from the public domain.hese are for profit, capitalist companies, operating the oil fields in Alaska. They are not government run, they are for-profit. They are not 'held in common'.
Consumers should have their cases heard in public courts instead of private (corporate) tribunals.Consumers shouldn't automatically, or by default win.
Suppose you loan at a usurious rate of interest? Do you believe all creditors are created equal?If I lend you money...... Why should you win any complaint that I have about you?
I hate to burst your bubble, but "every" nation has poverty. There's just not enough wealth to go around. You talk a basic $1,000 dollars per month for every person. That's $12,000 per year and doesn't pay for much. Add to this, if the fake Democrats get their way, the border will fly open and millions will flood in. Add to this, the ridiculous "Green New Deal," Socialized Medicine and free education and it all can't be paid for. There's just so much money to go around.There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.Almost everyone's aware of Alaska's Permanent Fund:
"...The program began in 1976 after the discovery of oil on Alaska’s North Slope.
"The then-governor, a renegade Republican named Jay Hammond, concluded that this windfall was too good to just give to the oil companies.
"So he devised the program to share the revenue with Alaska residents...."
"OK, here’s the idea for President-elect Biden:
"Bring 20 of the Trumpiest-looking Alaskans to a press conference.
"Unveil a plan whereby every man, woman, and child gets a $1,000 check every month from the government.
"Finance it with taxes on large wealth, fossil fuels, financial transactions, and intellectual property resulting from taxpayer-funded public research.
"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.
"Dare Mitch McConnell to oppose it."
A Big, Simple, Winning Issue for Biden
The "American commons" are the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of society. In a time when the privileged few expand their vast fortunes despite a global pandemic and recession, it seems fitting to socialize the profits and privatize the losses.
Does anyone believe "Delaware Joe" will turn on his corporate benefactors?
Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.
If the average US family consists of 3.14 people, $3140 would pay for a great deal. In my case as a single retired adult, an additional $1000 a month would eliminate my dependency on my $244 a month SSI benefit and another $100/month Medicaid payment.I hate to burst your bubble, but "every" nation has poverty. There's just not enough wealth to go around. You talk a basic $1,000 dollars per month for every person. That's $12,000 per year and doesn't pay for much.
All you have is fake news. Why do you bother?You have yet to demonstrate any knowledge of the law. Nothing you've quoted has any relevance to UC.Too bad for you, there is no appeal to ignorance of the law. Just because You are that ignorant means nobody should have to take You seriously; no judge has to take You seriously, why should anyone else?How does that even relate to UC? You're just quoting random things, hoping desperately they relate, but they don't.No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.The point is, as it always has been, that there simply is no unequal protection under the law when it comes to UC, and at-will employment doesn't even relate to the topic. Yet you continue spouting the same worn out meaningless phrases as if they mean something. Do you understand that? You've never managed to demonstrate where the so-called unequal protection exists, ever.Employers are not required to hire anyone in an at-will employment State, not even in Right to Work States. What is your point?From your own statement, which has no link to any law, which means you could have just made it up, I submit the following: "Employment for a specified term means an employment for a period greater than one month". How do you reconcile that statement with your fantasy that it applies to people who never worked and never will?This is the law in question:We already have "Equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation". You have failed to demonstrate how we do not. The law doesn't discriminate against any skin color, sexual preference, or even favorite NFL team. That's the bottom line, if you're laid off, you can collect. If you never held a job or just don't want to, you can't. Equal protection.Have any women here been bragging about it?You must be very used to doing that.Isn't right wing fantasy wonderful. In left wing male fantasy I have to "bend over and say thank you ma'am, may I have another" every time I resort to fallacy and lose my argument.You've been publicly spanked in every thread on economics you've ever posted.Right wingers have no free market capitalism solutions only right wing fantasy that requires socialism on a national and international basis.You're going in the wrong direction.I used to vote republican, then I started working on recovering my mind.It's been said that a mind is a terrible thing to waste. They're right, so stop wasting yours.More "gospel Truth" than right wingers, that is for sure.It doesn't matter which thread he's on, he always says the same things.Because we have the expense of our social, war on poverty? Free market capitalists used to simply outlaw being poor not actually solve simple poverty.That’s funny because it’s been working so far as is. Where else do you see “poor” people with cell phones and big screen TVs?Means nothing, Labor has to be able to afford our first world economy.“Poverty” here in this country would be considered opulence innody of the rest of the world. This is a colossal mistake by some very ignorant people. All that will happen is an increase in the cost of living, putting people right back in “poverty” despite the free money.There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.Almost everyone's aware of Alaska's Permanent Fund:
"...The program began in 1976 after the discovery of oil on Alaska’s North Slope.
"The then-governor, a renegade Republican named Jay Hammond, concluded that this windfall was too good to just give to the oil companies.
"So he devised the program to share the revenue with Alaska residents...."
"OK, here’s the idea for President-elect Biden:
"Bring 20 of the Trumpiest-looking Alaskans to a press conference.
"Unveil a plan whereby every man, woman, and child gets a $1,000 check every month from the government.
"Finance it with taxes on large wealth, fossil fuels, financial transactions, and intellectual property resulting from taxpayer-funded public research.
"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.
"Dare Mitch McConnell to oppose it."
A Big, Simple, Winning Issue for Biden
The "American commons" are the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of society. In a time when the privileged few expand their vast fortunes despite a global pandemic and recession, it seems fitting to socialize the profits and privatize the losses.
Does anyone believe "Delaware Joe" will turn on his corporate benefactors?
Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.
WTF? Are you off your meds? Are you replying to the right thread?
Equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation is more economically efficient than our current regime.
We should have no homeless issues in our first world economy.
An employment, having no specified term, may be terminated at the will of either party on notice to the other. Employment for a specified term means an employment for a period greater than one month.
There are no for-cause criteria. EDD would have to prove a for-cause employment relationship existed in an at-will employment State.
There is no unemployment under free market capitalism only underpayment.
Also, saying there "is no unemployment under free market capitalism only underpayment" is also meaningless, because of course there is unemployment.
What negative effects? We must have a better understanding of economics since we don't have the rampant inflation pre-WWII Germany had.The negative effects of QE will be felt for a long time.
We are not allowing you sick Satanic Bastards to implement Globalist Great Reset so that you lazy bastards can sit on your couches and collect a paycheck at my expense.If the average US family consists of 3.14 people, $3140 would pay for a great deal. In my case as a single retired adult, an additional $1000 a month would eliminate my dependency on my $244 a month SSI benefit and another $100/month Medicaid payment.I hate to burst your bubble, but "every" nation has poverty. There's just not enough wealth to go around. You talk a basic $1,000 dollars per month for every person. That's $12,000 per year and doesn't pay for much.
If you believe an "invisible hand" automatically distributes wealth and income based solely on each worker's and investor's marginal utility, you are drastically underestimating the influence of our politically constructed laws and institutions on society.
If the average US family consists of 3.14 people, $3140 would pay for a great deal. In my case as a single retired adult, an additional $1000 a month would eliminate my dependency on my $244 a month SSI benefit and another $100/month Medicaid payment.I hate to burst your bubble, but "every" nation has poverty. There's just not enough wealth to go around. You talk a basic $1,000 dollars per month for every person. That's $12,000 per year and doesn't pay for much.
If you believe an "invisible hand" automatically distributes wealth and income based solely on each worker's and investor's marginal utility, you are drastically underestimating the influence of our politically constructed laws and institutions on society.
It's called getting off your worthless ass and working, dip.There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.Almost everyone's aware of Alaska's Permanent Fund:
"...The program began in 1976 after the discovery of oil on Alaska’s North Slope.
"The then-governor, a renegade Republican named Jay Hammond, concluded that this windfall was too good to just give to the oil companies.
"So he devised the program to share the revenue with Alaska residents...."
"OK, here’s the idea for President-elect Biden:
"Bring 20 of the Trumpiest-looking Alaskans to a press conference.
"Unveil a plan whereby every man, woman, and child gets a $1,000 check every month from the government.
"Finance it with taxes on large wealth, fossil fuels, financial transactions, and intellectual property resulting from taxpayer-funded public research.
"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.
"Dare Mitch McConnell to oppose it."
A Big, Simple, Winning Issue for Biden
The "American commons" are the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of society. In a time when the privileged few expand their vast fortunes despite a global pandemic and recession, it seems fitting to socialize the profits and privatize the losses.
Does anyone believe "Delaware Joe" will turn on his corporate benefactors?
Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.
There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.Almost everyone's aware of Alaska's Permanent Fund:
"...The program began in 1976 after the discovery of oil on Alaska’s North Slope.
"The then-governor, a renegade Republican named Jay Hammond, concluded that this windfall was too good to just give to the oil companies.
"So he devised the program to share the revenue with Alaska residents...."
"OK, here’s the idea for President-elect Biden:
"Bring 20 of the Trumpiest-looking Alaskans to a press conference.
"Unveil a plan whereby every man, woman, and child gets a $1,000 check every month from the government.
"Finance it with taxes on large wealth, fossil fuels, financial transactions, and intellectual property resulting from taxpayer-funded public research.
"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.
"Dare Mitch McConnell to oppose it."
A Big, Simple, Winning Issue for Biden
The "American commons" are the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of society. In a time when the privileged few expand their vast fortunes despite a global pandemic and recession, it seems fitting to socialize the profits and privatize the losses.
Does anyone believe "Delaware Joe" will turn on his corporate benefactors?
Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.
Consumers should have their cases heard in public courts instead of private (corporate) tribunals.Consumers shouldn't automatically, or by default win.
There have already been proposals along these lines from Democrats like Kamala Harris.Almost everyone's aware of Alaska's Permanent Fund:
"...The program began in 1976 after the discovery of oil on Alaska’s North Slope.
"The then-governor, a renegade Republican named Jay Hammond, concluded that this windfall was too good to just give to the oil companies.
"So he devised the program to share the revenue with Alaska residents...."
"OK, here’s the idea for President-elect Biden:
"Bring 20 of the Trumpiest-looking Alaskans to a press conference.
"Unveil a plan whereby every man, woman, and child gets a $1,000 check every month from the government.
"Finance it with taxes on large wealth, fossil fuels, financial transactions, and intellectual property resulting from taxpayer-funded public research.
"Invite the Alaskans to describe the joy of getting their checks: no middleman, no means tests, no government forms to fill out—just free money as everyone’s share of the American commons.
"Dare Mitch McConnell to oppose it."
A Big, Simple, Winning Issue for Biden
The "American commons" are the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of society. In a time when the privileged few expand their vast fortunes despite a global pandemic and recession, it seems fitting to socialize the profits and privatize the losses.
Does anyone believe "Delaware Joe" will turn on his corporate benefactors?
Personally I think they are a great idea. This is America, the richest, best country in the world. We should have no one living in poverty here.
Yep, this is America, a country where you can achieve just about any level of success you'd like. The only requirement is you gotta get off your ass.
Yet, it was the near communism of our wartime economy that achieved full employment and won WWII. How do you explain that? Nobody trusted Capitalism when it really really matters.The oil and gas resources they exploit ARE part of the commons. It is only the capitalists' peculiar definition of "private property" that permits a few parasites to amass vast fortunes from the public domain.hese are for profit, capitalist companies, operating the oil fields in Alaska. They are not government run, they are for-profit. They are not 'held in common'.
Well they shouldn't be part of the commons, because being part of the commons suck.
If you declare any resource at all, to be part of the 'commons', then it's no longer a resource, it's just a waste.
The Soviet Union was proof of this. By any and all possible measures.... the Soviet Union had more natural resources, than any nation that has ever existed in all human history.
And we're talking about any resource at all. Russia alone, separate from the Soviet Union, possesses rich reserves of iron ore, manganese, chromium, nickel, platinum, titanium, copper, tin, lead, tungsten, diamonds, phosphates, and gold, and the forests of Siberia contain an estimated one-fifth of the world's timber, mainly conifers. That does not include natural gas, oil, and coal.
Nor does it include the fact that Russia alone, not including the rest of the Soviet Union, had the 4th largest amount of arable farm land.
But here's the problems... it was owned by the state, not private companies. Thus, the country with the most natural resource wealth in the entire world, was having their citizens engage in cannibalism to survive.
Resources should never be part of the commons, where possible. They should all be privatized, because that is the only way to actually utilize them for the good of the country.
Look at Venezuela. They nationalized their oil companies, and production has been declining sharply ever since. Which by the way, was predicted by free-market Capitalists like myself, when Hugo Chavez did it in the early 2000s.
And no... it wasn't because of Sanctions that didn't happen for almost 20 years later, sorry.