|
|
#42
11-25-2003, 03:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Whoah There, Nelly
[ QUOTE ]
Hi eastbay, Would you at least concede that someone who is performing a job which society deems "essential" ought to be able to live on the income from that job? Cris [/ QUOTE ] Grocery checkout clerks are no longer essential, with automated check out aisles. Even if they were not replaceable by machines that doesnt entitle them to a "living wage" for that level of work. The job can easily be filled by second income earners, retirees, students, etc. who do not require a "living wage" to support their families. 
|
|
#43
11-25-2003, 05:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whoah There, Nelly
Hi Eastbay,
I'd say I'm facing the unpleasant reality. That the table has been tilted by the rich for the rich. Mainly by the families that got big during the early industrial revolution. However, whenever I suggest that just maybe the game is rigged and that there must be a better way, everyones feathers seem to get ruffled and lots of defenses of capitalism... often laced somehow with the idea that "democracy = capitalism" ... seem to emerge. Yet, as I see it, any thinking person who's worked hard most of thier life and still stuck in middle-classdom or worse can easily see that the BS we've been fed most of our lives is just that BS. Recent Wall Street debacles should serve to illustrate the point nicely. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to be mega-rich too. Obviously. But show me one fast way to do that, that at the same time doesn't involve cheating, game playing, @ss kissing, doesn't suck etc. and doesn't involve luck. I.E. you can plan on it working. Sincerely, AA
|
|
#44
11-25-2003, 05:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whoah There, Nelly
Hi Copernicus,
Something to keep in mind. The last century was the century of capitalism, markets, etc. It was also one of the bloodiest there has ever been. I think there has to be a better way. That said... 1. "You take claim to wealth as being the enabler of both divorce and longevity of marriage. Sorry, you cant have it both ways." A. Yes you can. It enables one who wants to leave to not have to worry about the cost to one's life style. On the other hand, if you have $$$, the ladies are less likely to dump you for someone who does! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] 2. " The mortgage interest deduction disproportionately favors the middle class, far outweighing all other tax breaks combined." A: Perhaps as a whole it may favor the middle class. But to any given individual worker bee I doubt it. Were it not for the number of people who' retirement account is basically thier house, I'd say housing prices *need* to plumet. Having to pay 30 years for a pile of bricks is rediculous. Everyone but the owner makes a ton of money, except for the inflationary effect. But then that's a numbers game no matter how you slice it. And it still favors the rich (inflation that is). Since the rich own the most assets that inflate on a per person basis (perhaps not collectively... but then again maybe... I keep reading the 1% or whatever hold xx% percent of the total wealth. Just ask Allen Greenspan... When employment is too high... "Oh that's inflationary... gotta 'cool down' the economy". Read that... when the workers can apply financial pressure to the rich.. THAT'S inflationary. But when the things the wealthy hold the most of or sell... "That's 'capital appreciation'. Please learn to see past the word games... please! [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] 3. "So, who says the status quo isnt the closest thing to "perfect" as is currently feasible? Just because its there doesnt make it wrong." A: Me and all the other worker bees that are fed up. 4."There are so many incorrect statements and non sequiters above that its not worth responding to each one. The essential problem with all of it is that you incorrectly define "fair price" to suit your incorrect cost/benefit analysis. "Fair price" is what someone is willing to pay for something, period. The excess of that price over the simple cost of inputs, which is your definition of "profit" does not correctly reflect the exchange...it is not 1 1/2 loaves for 1 loaf. When a party is willing to pay more than the cost of inputs it is because they themselves do not have the education, expertise, technology, time or some other resource to produce that product themselves from the same inputs. "Profit" is the compensation for investment, whether it is a surgeons investment in his education, or General Motors investment in robotics. There can never be "unfair" profit unless a monopoly exists for an indispensible product or service, or there is regulation to artificially support prices." A: Boy I'll tell ya... you really did suck up all that B-School stuff didn't ya! You're just wrong. The loaf of bread illustration is 100% on the money in a reductionist sense. It's because you and a bazillion other's can't see this fair price illustration (unless of course you're an options trader or insurance actuarial) that we'll eventually burn the planet out because of *your* point of view's dependance on constant "growth". Sorry guy. The material mass of the world is relatively constant. 5. "If you feel like a mouse in a wheel that is your fault for not finding the way off it. It is a voluntary state of being that can be remedied by prudent investment. " A: This is just BS. I lived for 10 years in one room. Saved. Invested. Got a high tech degree. The 90's wiped it all out. And I didn't have a dime in the market either. The megatrends nailed me to a cross essentially. As it did many many others. And the megatrends are created by our "leaders". Essentially our richie riches. 6. "At some point consumption will outstrip natures ability to replenish the party supplies. At that point cultivation/production becomes necessary, and it is the enterprising and ambitious that will dominate. As they invest their time and resources a market will be established leading to some economic structure. Capitalism has proven to be the most capable and fair structure." A: You've just accepted one of my tenents. That the earth is a limited pile of matter. Sound to me like you're a social darwinist. So given that... If I kill my next door neighbor and say... "This stuff is now mine"... is that OK? 7. "what more? how about facts for rhetoric, and logic instead of whining? " A: You're just a pompous @ss. Sounds like you were born into some money or perhaps bought off on the status quo. Perhaps you're in sales? Far as I can see you can't see beyond what you've been schooled to believe. I see no evidence of thinking on your part. Just parroting of rhetoric. And you call yourself "Copernicus"? How'd that happen? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Sincerely, AA
|
|
#45
11-25-2003, 06:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whoah There, Nelly
Hi Chris,
Thank god, one thinking person in the pack! Sincerely, AA
|
|
#46
11-25-2003, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whoah There, Nelly
Perhaps... just maybe... technology should be used to replace all the grunt jobs and people shouldn't work except were absolutely neccesary.
Then we should build a utopia and all enjoy our few decades on the planet. Rather than make our old folks do menial work! Ya think? Sincerely, AA
|
|
#47
11-25-2003, 06:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whoah There, Nelly
Hi DanS,
So tell me is East Bay an wealthy area or a more modest one? Just curious as I don't follow the reference. Sincerely, AA
|
|
#48
11-25-2003, 11:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whoah There, Nelly
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Eastbay, I'd say I'm facing the unpleasant reality. That the table has been tilted by the rich for the rich. Mainly by the families that got big during the early industrial revolution. [/ QUOTE ] However, whenever I suggest that just maybe the game is rigged and that there must be a better way, everyones feathers seem to get ruffled and lots of defenses of capitalism... often laced somehow with the idea that "democracy = capitalism" ... seem to emerge. Yet, as I see it, any thinking person who's worked hard most of thier life and still stuck in middle-classdom or worse can easily see that the BS we've been fed most of our lives is just that BS. Recent Wall Street debacles should serve to illustrate the point nicely. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to be mega-rich too. Obviously. But show me one fast way to do that, that at the same time doesn't involve cheating, game playing, @ss kissing, doesn't suck etc. and doesn't involve luck. I.E. you can plan on it working. Sincerely, AA [/ QUOTE ] I'm not mega-rich, FWIW. I never defended capitalism in my posts, although I think facets of it are defensible as long as there are tempering factors in a socio-economic system. Capitalism as religion or value system seems clearly disastrous to me. I don't have any easy answers for you, although I consider your "doesn't suck" and "I won't kiss ass" (para-)phrases as red flags. * Don't work hard, work smart * Significant results in most any endeavor require teamwork and teamwork requires being a soldier before being the general, by analogy. This isn't necessarily "ass kissing". * Nothing worth having in this world doesn't require a lot of hard work, which often sucks when viewed in the small. Keeping eyes on the large can temper the suckiness of it all. Trying to get mega-rich is a good way to stay broke. Try to get a little more than you've got now, if you can find legitimate reasons to need it. You quite possibly don't need it, btw. That's all my philosophizin' I've got in me right now. Good luck with everything.
|
|
#49
11-26-2003, 02:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Utopia can not and will not exist
|
|
#50
11-26-2003, 03:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whoah There, Nelly
"Don't get me wrong, I'd like to be mega-rich, too."
Why would you aspire to join a group of people that you so clearly loathe?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
