Economics and free market

[Mike C]

Mike C, you think we are ''bashing '' the poor. How about looking at it another way. If the whole country believed that the poor need help other than just handing them a welfare check, which does nothing to improve their mind or job chances, maybe we could stop coddling them and offer constructive ways they can climb out of poverty.

 

Like I said in Nature, there is no poverty there. So why do we have poverty in our country that promotes itself as the most advanced form of an economy in the world?

Why do we not have Universal healthcare for our citizens? We are the only industrialized nation in the world without UHC.

Why has the explosions of the corporate leaders incomes go into the billionaire catagory? Do they really deserve those incomes while people are losing their houses, healthcare benefits and wage reductions in this current era?

These are just SOME of the questions I am asking.

By the way, the US dollar is also shrinking in value. The people holding these dollars will be soon 'jumping out of windows' like they were in 1929.

 

I hate to write this kind of stuff, but when I do, it is because I support a TRUE Constitutional Democracy rather than a vatican republic.

 

Mike C

 

 

 

Mike C

[Mike C]

Mike C, you think we are ''bashing '' the poor. How about looking at it another way. If the whole country believed that the poor need help other than just handing them a welfare check, which does nothing to improve their mind or job chances, maybe we could stop coddling them and offer constructive ways they can climb out of poverty.

 

This is another reply to this post.

 

My Brand Of Socialism would 'guarantee' jobs for anyone who wants one.

That is constructive help for all citizens to earn their security.

 

Mike C

[questor]

Mike, in answer to your questions. There is no country in the world now or ever that doesn't have some people poorer than others. It is not the fault

of the economic system but of the difference in people. You may give this some thought since no system has ever eliminated poverty and you must admit that all people are not mentally or physically endowed equally.

The corporate compensations are a farce, but they have nothing to do with the poor. They involve the corporations and their shareholders, and the shareholders should reject these huge salaries and bonuses. Poverty cannot be erased by taking the income from a producer and giving to someone who will not work. Poverty could be greatly diminished if everyone would aspire to a good education and became motivated to work hard. Do you know of any people who became wealthy by sitting on their butt and not contributing anything to society? It doesn't matter what you call the economic system you live under, it matters what opportunities are available for a person to achieve his highest goals. You are in the same boat as I am. What you get is going to be determined by your willingness to work, education, attitude, and talent. Do not waste your time waiting for a new economic system to make

you wealthy, you will spend your life in bitterness.

[Mike C]

Mike, in answer to your questions. There is no country in the world now or ever that doesn't have some people poorer than others. It is not the fault

of the economic system but of the difference in people. You may give this some thought since no system has ever eliminated poverty and you must admit that all people are not mentally or physically endowed equally.

The corporate compensations are a farce, but they have nothing to do with the poor. They involve the corporations and their shareholders, and the shareholders should reject these huge salaries and bonuses. Poverty cannot be erased by taking the income from a producer and giving to someone who will not work. Poverty could be greatly diminished if everyone would aspire to a good education and became motivated to work hard. Do you know of any people who became wealthy by sitting on their butt and not contributing anything to society? It doesn't matter what you call the economic system you live under, it matters what opportunities are available for a person to achieve his highest goals. You are in the same boat as I am. What you get is going to be determined by your willingness to work, education, attitude, and talent. Do not waste your time waiting for a new economic system to make

you wealthy, you will spend your life in bitterness.

 

Questor,

I am not driven by the dollars except to achieve a level of 'subsistence' to my satisfaction.

So that is all I need. A roof over my head and enough food to satisfy my needs. Throw in the necassary transportation and money for entertainment is all that I need.

 

I am not competing with anyone except to promote the 'truth' on thr internet

as I have been doing for years.

 

Surplus UNneeded income is 'stagnant' income because it is not being spent.

When dollars are spent, they create demand that creates more jobs. So that creates a prosperous economy.

So this stagnant income should be taxed to the limit for the highest earners and graduated to the lowest earners.

The only tax I weould eliminate is the sales tax that is really a consumer tax because here, the spender is taxed.

 

Mike C

[questor]

Mike the ''stagnant income tax'' theory may have some merit, but that income can also come back to the economy in the form of philanthropy. Witness the recent merger of the fortunes of Bill Gates and Warren Buffet to improve school systems, or the numerous other philanthropic gifts to our society. The actuality of the situation is this: if you rob the rich to pay the poor,you are stealing the work of the rich to give to those who have done nothing to deserve it. Unless the poor do something to help themselves, or society,why do they deserve sharing in money made by honest work of others? This goes counter to human nature, the so called rich resent being forced to share with the lazy, and the lazy never improves his life. This is a lose-lose situation. Why don't you figure how to make it a win-win situation then you may have something? Socialism sets up a robber type system in which the least productive benefit the most.

[freeztar]

The only tax I weould eliminate is the sales tax that is really a consumer tax because here, the spender is taxed.

 

Mike, have you heard of "Fair Tax"?

Americans For Fair Taxation: FairTax.org

 

I agree with the thinking of fairtax.org that sales tax is the best way to provide equity amongst different social classes. If you don't buy much, you don't pay a lot of taxes and conversely, if you have a lot of money and buy lots of stuff, then you pay more.

[Zythryn]

I would second the fair tax.

A tax on corporations? That ends up being a tax on the consumer. Tax the wealthy business owners? They will up the end cost of the consumer so they still make more money.

Taxing people at the point of sale is a sure way to make sure that the people that buy really expensive stuff, or lots of stuff (or both) pay more taxes.

[Michaelangelica]

Mike, have you heard of "Fair Tax"?

Americans For Fair Taxation: FairTax.org

 

I agree with the thinking of fairtax.org that sales tax is the best way to provide equity amongst different social classes. If you don't buy much, you don't pay a lot of taxes and conversely, if you have a lot of money and buy lots of stuff, then you pay more.

"Fair' "Tax' :confused:

 

We have, in Australia, a 10% GST on most things.

So if I am poor most of my money goes on food, housing and booze (so I'm not so miserable)

The relative % that the rich spend on these items is very small.

CEOs here earn 10-20 million $ + a year + share options + have most of their travel etc expenses paid by the company (EG Macquarie Bank)

 

The rich also travel and buy duty free.

[questor]

If the rich have it so good, why not do the things to make yourself rich?

Are certain people forbidden to get rich in your country? I would say the same for the US, there are no rules here that forbid someone to became rich.

[InfiniteNow]

"Fair' "Tax' :confused:

 

We have, in Australia, a 10% GST on most things.

So if I am poor most of my money goes on food, housing and booze (so I'm not so miserable)

The relative % that the rich spend on these items is very small.

CEOs here earn 10-20 million $ + a year + share options + have most of their travel etc expenses paid by the company (EG Macquarie Bank)

 

The rich also travel and buy duty free.

 

If the rich have it so good, why not do the things to make yourself rich?

Are certain people forbidden to get rich in your country? I would say the same for the US, there are no rules here that forbid someone to became rich.

 

More condescending unsupported oversimplifications from questor. It's posts like that which give Hypography it's wonderful scientific reputation. :wink:

 

 

or, I could buy into questor's approach and say...

 

 

Yeah Mike, why are you such a dumbass? Just move to the US and go make yourself rich you lazy bastard. There are no rules stopping you. :)

[Mike C]

Questor and Infinite;

 

All people are not driven by this 'self serving' mentality of 'I Am King'.

 

I live in the US that went through a revolution to get rid of these types of predators.

Yes, capitalism is a predatory enterprise. They do not do any 'manual' work that creates the 'real' wealth.

 

Maybe that is the reason why they want this wealth to 'avoid' this manual labor.

 

I am also not advocating absolute equality. As a matter of fact, I advolcate a method of paying that was called 'piece' work based on productivity.

This way, those that want to work harder, can do so and be payed for it.

But since speed makes scrap. I would also advise these people that scrap means deductions in pay.

 

I want to repeat again that brains do not create 'material' wealth. Only a pair of hands can do that.

That is why I believe that the workers should get a fairer share of the wealth that they produce.

 

If one person hoards all the wealth, this reduces the mass purchasing power of the people. So they then cannot buy the houses, cars, boats and any other needs like 'healthcare' and 'pensions' for their retirements that capitalism denies them.

By spreading the wealth, this contributes to a more prosperous economy.

 

Sorry to be so blunt but this is an important issue that involves our lives and survivals.

 

Mike C

[Pyrotex]

...I want to repeat again that brains do not create 'material' wealth. Only a pair of hands can do that. That is why I believe that the workers should get a fairer share of the wealth that they produce....

I vehemently disagree.

 

I've been in a wheelchair all my life. I cannot wield hammer and shovel, chisel and lathe, or whatever other tools you think enable a "worker" to "produce wealth".

 

However, I do have an inordinately good education, and I can type. I have made my living for 30 years "creating wealth" for companies and their employees: computer applications, more effective procedures, faster ways of analyzing data, training courses, communication techniques, proposals, designs, etc.

 

The Market Place decides automatically what each person's labor is worth.

[questor]

Mike,

''Yes, capitalism is a predatory enterprise. They do not do any 'manual' work that creates the 'real' wealth.''

 

what manual work creates real wealth? Is not the real wealth in the mind?

Are you saying that teachers, poets, physicists, inventors, music composers and the other workers of the mind do not create things of lasting ,true wealth? Do you want everyone to be a laborer or a farmer? what is your highest goal for a human being? Where do you think jobs come from? Isn't it that someone with a good mind creates jobs for others? When manually created things crumble with age or neglect, good ideas, beautiful music,and the benefits of science and technology will still be with us. What is ''real wealth''?

[Pyrotex]

Mike,

''Yes, capitalism is a predatory enterprise. They do not do any 'manual' work that creates the 'real' wealth.''...

I've seen that phrase before. "Predatory" is a red-flag word, a word that attempts to connect capitalism with a metaphor of preditory animals feeding on the (innocent) little lambs.

 

Bad metaphor. What capitalism IS, is a "competitive" enterprise. Ideally, everyone engages in labor that is in demand and that they have some talent for. If the demand exceeds the supply, then the "value" of that labor goes up, and the people who have the most skill charge the most. When supply exceeds the demand, then the "value" of that labor goes down, and those with the least skill go hungry, and (again, ideally) start training at a different job.

 

Read Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" (1776). The general state of economies thoughout Europe was oppressive in the extreme. The poor died by the many thousands every year. One of the root causes of the French Revolution was a drought, leading to crop failures, and then starvation on a scale we can't appreciate today. For those people, the rise of capitalism was a godsend and a blessing.

 

By the late 1800's, the flaws in capitalism became apparent, and many were the "Robber Barons" who found those chinks and used them to create monopolies, and corner the markets. Once again, oppression became a common state of affairs.

 

Now, what to do? Patch capitalism, or start over with state-controlled economies? Adam Smith's argument that competition and free trade was superior to state run economies is still as convincing today as it was back then. The collapse of the Soviet Union was largely the result of a lack of competition and free trade among its own people.

 

I vote we (once again) patch up capitalism to make it a bit more equitable and close off some of the egregious loopholes. But don't throw the baby out with bath water.

[Pyrotex]

Z, let me ask a few questions...

I'd like to try my hand at this too, if'n you don't mind. :shrug:

1. I did NOT vote for Bush, Jr in either presidential election. Nor in his election for governor of Texas.

2. I AM over 50

3. I AM pleased in my current job

4. My education does play a large part in my current job

5. The US should have better economic managers and fewer loopholes

6. The work week is fine

7. The rich should feel privileged to pay higher taxes for their blessed lifestyles, but not so much that it makes them give up their summer houses in Vermont.

8. Doctors' incomes are NOT the problem. Insurance companies are

9. I admire intelligence, self-restraint, sense of humor, responsibility, integrity, and curiosity.

[questor]

Pyro, the quote about predatory capitalism was from Mike C. I was replying to him.

[questor]

Pyrotex, thanks for taking my little test. It is somewhat poorly designed, but the purpose is to gain an insight into a person's attitude about his place in the world. I have read some of your posts and enjoy your courtliness and astuteness. According to some of the posters here, with your handicap,you should not have to work at all, but should be enjoying the fruits of your neighbor's labor. In your answers I see a man at peace with himself and the world he lives in, enjoying his life's work, and being responsible for himself and gainfully employed due to his own talent and effort. I have to disagree with you on item #7. ''The rich should feel privileged to pay higher taxes for their blessed lifestyles, but not so much that it makes them give up their summer houses in Vermont.''

I do think the rich ( over $500,000/yr. ) should probably pay a larger graduated percentage, but I don't see it a privilege to pay someone who has all the opportunities our country offers but does nothing in return. If they knew these people were poor through no fault of their own and were trying to work their way out of, I'm sure the feeling would be different.

Just out of curiosity, why did you not vote for Bush in his first election?