Arelor wrote to Dennisk <=-w
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Dennisk to Andeddu on Wed Aug 05 2020 08:26 pm
I think what happened is the end result of Capitalism. Capitalists (people
ho have capital) brought this about, wanted the bail outs. Therid
are two types of "Capitalism". The economic ideology, the system based on
eals and axiom, and the real Capitalism, the system that resultsthem.
when Capitalists bend the system to work in their benefit.
Bailouts are a fundamental part of Capitalism, because Capitalists want
Capitalism is what Capitalists do, not what the unacheivablei
ideal is.
I agree they should have gone broke, no bailout. Agree. But such a system
s where one those who own and control capital don't have as muchCapitalist
power as they do. So we have a paradox here. To be closer to the
"ideal", we actually have to take political and economic power
away from Capitalists.
You are implying that being filthy right and having lots of megabucks
in participations and firm shares makes you a capitalist. Which it doesn't.
Lots of filthy rich (or not so filthy rich people) is quite Keynessian
and would have no ethical issue with bailouts and the like.
Andeddu wrote to Dennisk <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Dennisk to Andeddu on Wed Aug 05 2020 08:26 pm
I think what happened is the end result of Capitalism. Capitalists (people who have capital) brought this about, wanted the bail outs. There are two types of "Capitalism". The economic ideology, the system based on ideals and axiom, and the real Capitalism, the system that results when Capitalists bend the system to work in their benefit.
Bailouts are a fundamental part of Capitalism, because Capitalists want them. Capitalism is what Capitalists do, not what the unacheivable ideal is.
I agree they should have gone broke, no bailout. Agree. But such a system is where one those who own and control capital don't have as much power as they do. So we have a paradox here. To be closer to the Capitalist "ideal", we actually have to take political and economic power away from Capitalists.
Capitalism in practice has a finite shelf life. It's the same as saying communism works... which it does, but only in theory. When people in power, use that power to maintain and expand their power, they can
corrupt either ideology to their will.
Perhaps there's a need for a new and permanant economic constitution
based on the theoretical ideals of capitalism that worked so well for
the US in the past.
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Andeddu to Moondog on Mon Aug 03 2020 04:20 pm
relation to jobs that cannot be exported overseas. The fast food indust will soon become close to fully automated, driver/haulage industry
well for quite a long time, every once in a while i hear about a pizza makin
a bigmac and cheeseburger vending machine would be a hit at my workplace. ou
On 08-05-20 16:24, Andeddu wrote to Warpslide <=-
@VIA: VERT/AMSTRAD
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Warpslide to Andeddu on Tue Aug 04 2020 05:38 pm
Until all the various AI's form a union & go on strike... ;)
Haha, one day they'll realise there's no logic in obeying their meatbag overlords!
Underminer wrote to Andeddu <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Andeddu to Dennisk on Wed Aug 05 2020 06:00 pm
Bailouts are a fundamental part of Capitalism, because CapitalistsCapitalism in practice has a finite shelf life. It's the same as saying
Eh, not really. At least not when you're talking about a human
workforce. The big issue is that a fully laisez-faire reality can allow for too much exploitation of some, so you do want some oversight and regulation. Problem is that when you allow state regulation, suddenly
you have those that become big players pushing for regulation that
locks out competitors from dethroning them, and that kind of cronyism
is bad for everyone. Trouble is figuring out where an appropriate line
is.
Once we get into more automated scenarios though, the cost of entry
into certain markets will keep new and smaller players out.
Post scarcity should be good for everyone, but we're going to have a
very trying time between now and then trying to navigate through the in between and transitionary phases.
We're already seeing scenarios where not everyone can
have a decent paying job unless we're artificially increasing the technology costs, but those who still can work are going to (understandably) feel betrayed by any changes that they see rewarding those who don't work while they still have to.
Some level of socialization would at first blush seem to be an answer,
but if the 20th century taught us anything, it was that putting too
much power or control in the hands of the state is the most potentially dangerous thing possible for the citizenry. That leaves us with some implementation of UBI as the only solution likely to be able to
navigate those waters, but there's some major challenges, questions,
and roadblocks from making that a reality.
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Arelor to Andeddu on Wed Aug 05 2020 04:52 pm
Civilizations have a finite shelf life. From some head-extrapolations I have done with old civilitations, I expect the Western model to crash in a matter of
decades. We have already entered the "introspection" phase that
I've heard some people say that countries tend to last about 200 years before they start to fall apart, so the US is a little bit past that time now.
Nightfox
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Andeddu to Dennisk on Wed Aug 05 2020 06:00 pm
Bailouts are a fundamental part of Capitalism, because CapitalistsCapitalism in practice has a finite shelf life. It's the same as saying
Eh, not really. At least not when you're talking about a human workforce. The big issue is that a fully laisez-faire reality can allow for too much exploitation of so
so you do want some oversight and regulation. Problem is that when you allow state regulation, suddenly you have those that become big players pushing for regulation
that locks out competitors from dethroning them, and that kind of cronyism is bad for everyone. Trouble is figuring out where an appropriate line is.
Once we get into more automated scenarios though, the cost of entry into certain markets will keep new and smaller players out.
Post scarcity should be good for everyone, but we're going to have a very trying time between now and then trying to navigate through the in between and transitionary
phases.
We're already seeing scenarios where not everyone can
have a decent paying job unless we're artificially increasing the technology costs, but those who still can work are going to (understandably) feel betrayed by any
changes that they see rewarding those who don't work while they still have to.
Some level of socialization would at first blush seem to be an answer, but if the 20th century taught us anything, it was that putting too much power or control in th
hands of the state is the most potentially dangerous thing possible for the citizenry. That leaves us with some implementation of UBI as the only solution likely to b
able to navigate those waters, but there's some major challenges, questions, and roadblocks from making that a reality.
Interesting times.
Maximizing individual liberty is usually the right answer in my mind. Corporations are non-living entities and emphatically *NOT* individuals
and should not be treated as such imo.
On 8/5/2020 4:43 PM, Nightfox wrote:
I've heard some people say that countries tend to last about 200 years before they start to fall apart, so the US is a little bit past that time now.
Definitely interresting times. We're overdue by a couple years for a
major conflict... beyond this, I find it hard to believe that anyone can actually be anti-2a at this point.
--
Michael J. Ryan
tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS
You are implying that being filthy right and having lots of megabucks in participations and firm shares makes you a capitalist. Which it doesn't.
I am saying that. I am saying that if you are in the business of earning money by owning capital (ie, owning investments, companies, etc, which many many filthy rich
people do), then you are de facto, a Capitalist. How can you not be? You are literally fulfilling the defintion of a Capitalist by playing the role of one. Just
because you THINK differently, doesn't mean you aren't what you are.
There are capitalists too, there are people who believe in the ideals of Capitalism, and often I find these people are employees, so their role is to serve Capital an
Capitalists. That is a different type of capitalist. I'm talking about Capitalists. (note the capitalisaion, pun intended). The opinion of capitalists don't matte
squat as employees. Our system is Capitalism, not Employeeism.
Lots of filthy rich (or not so filthy rich people) is quite Keynessian and would have no ethical issue with bailouts and the like.
Quite so. Why the hell would people who own Capital want to get rid of tax-payer funded bailouts, and of regulation and laws that can cripple their competition? Why
would Jeff Bezos want to be put into a position where he has to pay employees a living wage, instead of having his labour subsidised by tax-payer funded welfare? Why
would people who own investment properties not want the tax-payer subsidised Negative Gearing and other concessions? Of course they would vote for and support that!
Why would Bill Gates want in the 1990s fairer competition?
You don't become a filthy rich Capitalist by having "ethical issues"!! Imagine you were responsible for a major financial entity, that was to be bailed out, and a
"capitalist" employee starting agitating for and end to bail outs, in his own private life. A good Capitalist wanting to keep their money and power would fire such a
person, they are not acting in the interests of the Capital!
What you are asking for, is impossible, a paradox. The ideal "capitalist" world is just as fanciful as the ideal Marxist world.
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: MRO to Andeddu on Tue Aug 04 2020 10:26 pm
well for quite a long time, every once in a while i hear about a pizza making machine or even that mcdonalds had a burger making machine that worked great. they still dont have them anyplace. i wonder why that is.
a bigmac and cheeseburger vending machine would be a hit at my workplac our vending machine food is dogshit.
Vending machine food usually is fairly basic.. Usually the kinds of things
you could really expect much from a vending machine, but freshly-prepared h
Nightfox
On 8/5/2020 10:00 AM, Andeddu wrote:
Capitalism in practice has a finite shelf life. It's the same as saying communism works... which it does, but only in theory. When people in power that power to maintain and expand their power, they can corrupt either ide to their will.
Perhaps there's a need for a new and permanant economic constitution based the theoretical ideals of capitalism that worked so well for the US in the past.
I tent to think of Corporatism as a wierd offshoot of Capitalism. I'm mostly a pragmatic libertarian, and feel that like limited government,
the power granted to corporations should also be limited. Corporations
are supposed to be a reasonable exchange for allowing limited liability
in exchange for collective capital use. IMO this should mean that accounting should be open, even for privately owned corporations and
that they should not be given a voice in terms of politics without much
more transparency, if at all.
Most of the issues with corporatism are powers granted by government,
not an issue with those limited by government, though many of those
should be called into question as well.
And unlike most Libertarians, I'm only in favor of allowing free trade
with countries that have similar free-market behaviors (we should not
have free/open trade with Communist countries). And it should generally
be reciprocal. I'm also more pragmatic about border controls and immigration, but still more libertarian leaning than a typical Republican.
Maximizing individual liberty is usually the right answer in my mind. Corporations are non-living entities and emphatically *NOT* individuals
and should not be treated as such imo.
--
Michael J. Ryan
tracker1 +o Roughneck BBS
UBI is not inherently different than any other messure of State control over the economy. The reason is that in order to pay everybody 500 bucks per month, those bucks have to be syphoned from elsewhere, and here is where Keynessians strike. They get to decide who pays it.
Arelor wrote to Dennisk <=-doesn
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Dennisk to Arelor on Thu Aug 06 2020 10:21 am
You are implying that being filthy right and having lots of megabucks in participations and firm shares makes you a capitalist. Which it
't.mon
I am saying that. I am saying that if you are in the business of earning
ey by owning capital (ie, owning investments, companies, etc, whichar
many many filthy rich
people do), then you are de facto, a Capitalist. How can you not be? You
e literally fulfilling the defintion of a Capitalist by playing theCapi
role of one. Just
because you THINK differently, doesn't mean you aren't what you are.
There are capitalists too, there are people who believe in the ideals of
talism, and often I find these people are employees, so their role isCapi
to serve Capital an
Capitalists. That is a different type of capitalist. I'm talking about
talists. (note the capitalisaion, pun intended). The opinion of capitalists don't mattetax-p
squat as employees. Our system is Capitalism, not Employeeism.
Lots of filthy rich (or not so filthy rich people) is quite Keynessian and would have no ethical issue with bailouts and the like.
Quite so. Why the hell would people who own Capital want to get rid of
ayer funded bailouts, and of regulation and laws that can cripple their competition? Whyemployees
would Jeff Bezos want to be put into a position where he has to pay
a living wage, instead of having his labour subsidised by tax-payer funded welfare? WhyImagi
would people who own investment properties not want the tax-payer subsidised
Negative Gearing and other concessions? Of course they would vote for
and support that!
Why would Bill Gates want in the 1990s fairer competition?
You don't become a filthy rich Capitalist by having "ethical issues"!!
ne you were responsible for a major financial entity, that was to be bailed out, and aown
"capitalist" employee starting agitating for and end to bail outs, in his
private life. A good Capitalist wanting to keep their money and power would fire such awo
person, they are not acting in the interests of the Capital!
What you are asking for, is impossible, a paradox. The ideal "capitalist"
rld is just as fanciful as the ideal Marxist world.
There is a Spanish saying. "Against the vice of begging, the vistue of dennying."
Of course it is in the best interest of any minority to use the power
of the government to its own ends. The question is how in the hell does the general population allow such thing to happen. If there was just a little more cultural resistence against tax increases and the like, corporative statism would not have the leverage it does (because there
is less money for them to leverage).
According to your definition, a Socialist government is a big
Capitalist agent. So I am going to borrow that one in order to get my fieds pissed off :-)
Civilizations have a finite shelf life.From some head-extrapolations I have done with old civilitations, I expect the Western model to crash in a matter of decades. We have already entered the "introspection" phase that precedes the oblitaration of powerful civilitations. We are outsourcing our burdens to "lesser civs", citizens are no longer combative against threats, and we hate ourselves. Give us a century tops.
I think Capitalism is more resistant than you credit it for, on the other hand, because improving your own position via exchanging something with somebody else is ptretty much the way of the world. Everybody wants to do it. WHen they try to prevent the population from doing it, people does it anyway. Look at those Argentinians, Venezuelans and Cubans dealing American Dollar. Or all the URSS corruption that went on because people bought their way out of the limits impossed by The System with bribe money.
Once the West self-destructs, the survivors will exchange gunpowder for bullets.
The big issue is that a fully laisez-faire reality can allow for too much exploitation of some, so you do want some oversight and regulation. Problem is that when you allow state regulation, suddenly you have those that become big players pushing for regulation that locks out competitors from dethroning them, and that kind of cronyism is bad for everyone. Trouble is figuring out where an appropriate line is.
Capitalism is structurally flawed. Like many ideological systems, it has to accept "exceptions" to maintain power. The big one is the loss of self governmance when someone goes to "Work". The workplace is an odd exception in western civilisation, because somehow it is considered outside of our civlisation, a place where property rights and right to self-governance are suspended. Capitalism maintains this 'dual system' notion, where at any other time, we are citizens with property rights, but at "work", we cease to become so. The closest we were to a capitalist ideal was post-feudalism, when most people were self-sufficient, living off the land.
We need to fully realise this ideal, which never really existed in the first place.
I don't know what "Communism works in theory" is supposed to mean. Does that mean there is a theory proven correct? I've never seen proof that it can work, even in theory. The "labour theory of value" is theoretically wrong.
Andeddu wrote to Dennisk <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Dennisk to Andeddu on Thu Aug 06 2020 10:45 am
Capitalism is structurally flawed. Like many ideological systems, it has to accept "exceptions" to maintain power. The big one is the loss of self governmance when someone goes to "Work". The workplace is an odd exception in western civilisation, because somehow it is considered outside of our civlisation, a place where property rights and right to self-governance are suspended. Capitalism maintains this 'dual system' notion, where at any other time, we are citizens with property rights, but at "work", we cease to become so. The closest we were to a capitalist ideal was post-feudalism, when most people were self-sufficient, living off the land.
We need to fully realise this ideal, which never really existed in the first place.
I don't know what "Communism works in theory" is supposed to mean. Does that mean there is a theory proven correct? I've never seen proof that it can work, even in theory. The "labour theory of value" is theoretically wrong.
Interesting... I never thought of capitalism being hypocritical in a
sense by way of this 'dual system' intertwined in a person's work/home life.
I don't know if communism could ever work. I suppose such a society
could exist if carried out by an incorruptible AI dictator strictly adhering to the tenants of the ideology, as it's clear no human can
handle absolute power.
I don't know if communism could ever work. I suppose such a society could ex if carried out by an incorruptible AI dictator strictly adhering to the tena of the ideology, as it's clear no human can handle absolute power.
Most socialists want a degree of control over others that I find disturbing. am libertarian in that sense, but I think when it comes to engagement with others, then your liberty ends, and overall natural rights take over. One o hand, we are told that the core axiom of Capitalism, is that an individual w blends their labour with something, is the rightful owner, yet the BULK or productive activity, seems to exclude this. Likewise with democray, the bul of our day is spend in an organisation where such rights don't exist.
Andeddu wrote to Arelor <=-
I believe we are very near the end of our current system... our
form of capitalism will likely end once our banking system fails,
and I can't see that lasting more than five years. The monetery
system we have, which is based on fiat currency, has no where
else to go now other than hyper-inflation... once all the bubbles
crash (and they will simultaneously) it'll pretty much be the end
of the west. This is why I am banking on AI automation to
mitigate the collapse and bring on a sharper recovery. Technology
shall save us all!
The problem is that somebody has to code the AI in the first place. And once he does, it is easy for him to code the AI to Favor áArelor at Any Cost. Just saying.
Not to mention the lower echelons of a communist system always end up trying to bribe their way out of the system anyway.
Andeddu wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
The new iPhone SE is based off of the iPhone 8. I think it's the
perfect size as the old SE, based off of the iPhone 5, is a little too small for modern usage. You could get by, but I think the extra screen space is much more comfortable on the eyes.
Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-
Vending machine food usually is fairly basic.. Usually the kinds of things I see in vending machines are snacks like crackers, cookies,
chips, drinks, etc., and maybe occasionally something more fancy like a packaged sandwich or something.
I believe we are very near the end of our current system... our
form of capitalism will likely end once our banking system fails,
and I can't see that lasting more than five years. The monetery
system we have, which is based on fiat currency, has no where
else to go now other than hyper-inflation... once all the bubbles
crash (and they will simultaneously) it'll pretty much be the end
of the west. This is why I am banking on AI automation to
mitigate the collapse and bring on a sharper recovery. Technology
shall save us all!
Oh waiter! I'll have some of what this guy is smoking!
Yeah, phones have gotten bigger, coincidentally, as my eyes have
gotten worse. I remember when I had to get rid of my beloved
Blackberry Pearl because the screen was just too small for everyday
reading.
That thing was rock-solid, and I got to the point where I could fly
typing on their T9-like system.
Andeddu wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Gamgee to Andeddu on Sat Aug 08 2020 07:16 pm
I believe we are very near the end of our current system... our
form of capitalism will likely end once our banking system fails,
and I can't see that lasting more than five years. The monetery
system we have, which is based on fiat currency, has no where
else to go now other than hyper-inflation... once all the bubbles
crash (and they will simultaneously) it'll pretty much be the end
of the west. This is why I am banking on AI automation to
mitigate the collapse and bring on a sharper recovery. Technology
shall save us all!
Oh waiter! I'll have some of what this guy is smoking!
I was trying to put a positive spin on a terrible situation...
the reality is, we're all doomed!
Honestly, I see very little in your numerous posts that has
anything to do with "positive".
I think you can calm down a little. Capitalism isn't going
anywhere, and the robots taking over is still a century or two
away.
Really. It's true.
Andeddu wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Gamgee to Andeddu on Sun Aug 09 2020 05:54 pm
Honestly, I see very little in your numerous posts that has
anything to do with "positive".
I think you can calm down a little. Capitalism isn't going
anywhere, and the robots taking over is still a century or two
away.
Really. It's true.
While it's impossible to predict the future with 100% accuracy, I
believe we are at the end of our current economic system. Wishful
thinking is all most people have left in relation to the continuation
of consumerism. Most reliable analysts are in agreement that we are
about to face an economic collapse which will dwarf the likes of the
'29 Wall Street Crash. Millions of people died in the USA as a result
of that crash from famine, disease and abject poverty -- imagine how
bad things could get for us as everything's inflated to a ridiculous
level & the currency is teetering off a cliff. I hope I am waaay off,
but I just can't see it.
Andeddu wrote to Gamgee <=-
While it's impossible to predict the future with 100% accuracy, I
believe we are at the end of our current economic system. Wishful
thinking is all most people have left in relation to the
continuation of consumerism. Most reliable analysts are in
agreement that we are about to face an economic collapse which
will dwarf the likes of the '29 Wall Street Crash. Millions of
people died in the USA as a result of that crash from famine,
disease and abject poverty -- imagine how bad things could get
for us as everything's inflated to a ridiculous level & the
currency is teetering off a cliff. I hope I am waaay off, but I
just can't see it.
I've heard about the impending crash since I was little. I think more likely, is that instead of a crash, we will have a series of crisis, and our standard of living will just erode and erode and erode.
See, the economy is just trying to finds it natural level, and it may do so with most of us just impoverished. That future generation which will not own a house, live in a small apartement, have no job security, be controlled, never have good savings for old age, THAT is how the economy will compensate.
"Most reliable analysts" think we are about to crash, and worse
than '29???
Funny how there isn't any news coverage of that, eh?
Where are these reliable analysts located, and what are their
credentials? Where can one read their predictions?
Andeddu wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Gamgee to Andeddu on Mon Aug 10 2020 08:20 pm
"Most reliable analysts" think we are about to crash, and worse
than '29???
Funny how there isn't any news coverage of that, eh?
Where are these reliable analysts located, and what are their
credentials? Where can one read their predictions?
Strange that there wasn't any news coverage either of the '08
credit crunch up until the time it happened. I don't consider
mainstream financials to be particularly trustworthy... we even
had Jim Cramer on Mad Money talking about "The DOW's best week
since 1938" with the headline below clearly stating "More than
16M Americans have lost jobs in 3 weeks"... I think there's a
clear disconnect there with these analysts invariably attempting
to inject calm into the market.
I particularly like Peter Schiff, the CEO of Euro Pacific Capital
and ex-Lehman Brothers investment banker. He was laughed at back
in 2007 while on CNN for warning of an impending crash... wel,
the other analysts didn't get the chance to laugh for long.
I guess my philosophy is to expect the worst, but hope for the
best.
Andeddu wrote to Dennisk <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Dennisk to Andeddu on Tue Aug 11 2020 09:58 am
I've heard about the impending crash since I was little. I think more likely, is that instead of a crash, we will have a series of crisis, and our standard of living will just erode and erode and erode.
See, the economy is just trying to finds it natural level, and it may do so with most of us just impoverished. That future generation which will not own a house, live in a small apartement, have no job security, be controlled, never have good savings for old age, THAT is how the economy will compensate.
So far that's what's happened. We have had a series of smaller crashes over a period of a half-century. I don't disagree that we in the West
are living far in excess of our means, so your overall assessment is something I can agree with. I believe the next crash will be a much
sorer one than anything we've experienced previously after which there will be a noticible difference in life before/after the crash.
I guess it depends on how you view it... I don't think it'll be a civilisaiton ending crash, but it will result in serious impoverishment for large swathes of the population. Adding in other factors such a
large spike in crime, the defunding of the police, etc... we could be
in for some ride.
You're not really answering the questions that are asked...
Naming a couple of obscure "investment bankers" does not
constitute the opinions of "most analysts". The truth is that
most analysts are not saying anything remotely close to what you
are claiming.
Sorry, but my philosophy is that facts speak more loudly than
conspiracy theories and hand-wringing claims with no basis.
I think we are staring a new "dark age" in the face here. And most of it is because our "managerial class", that is, the people who get into management positions and positions of power, are intellctually, morally and behaviourally not up to the task of preserving or creating civilisation.
Andeddu wrote to Dennisk <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Dennisk to Andeddu on Wed Aug 12 2020 09:17 pm
I think we are staring a new "dark age" in the face here. And most of it is because our "managerial class", that is, the people who get into management positions and positions of power, are intellctually, morally and behaviourally not up to the task of preserving or creating civilisation.
In normal times, I'd agree. I just think there's something more now
that we have advanced technology... there must be a way to alleviate
the crushing poverty of the lowest rungs of society. We haven't seen
that as yet so I guess you're merely being a realist about a new "Dark Age" however if we just kick the can down the road a little longer &
build some kind of solid automated or even non-automated manufacturing infastructre, perhaps the next crash won't be as bad as a lot of people are saying it will be. Either way, it's not looking good and we have
some tough times ahead. I would welcome a slower decline, as you said, much like the Fall of Rome, rather than a crescendo moment swallowing
us all up whole.
I don't think anyone is really trying to preserve society, everyone appears to be rushing, single-mindedly, trying to "fill their boots"
that they've forgotten that civilisations need to be maintained,
otherwise they become divided, decline and eventaully, they fall.
Andeddu wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Gamgee to Andeddu on Tue Aug 11 2020 07:57 pm
You're not really answering the questions that are asked...
Naming a couple of obscure "investment bankers" does not
constitute the opinions of "most analysts". The truth is that
most analysts are not saying anything remotely close to what you
are claiming.
Sorry, but my philosophy is that facts speak more loudly than
conspiracy theories and hand-wringing claims with no basis.
I'll link a video which quickly encapsulates my beliefs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkBUv_-OqiE
"The Global Monetary Crisis Will be a Dollar Crisis, says Peter
Schiff"
You can also access it by typing "maneco64 peter schiff" into
YouTube.
I recently read a mainstream article on The New York Times by the legendary Nobel Prize winning economist, Paul Krugman. He boils
it down in simple terms to: We need to print more money to
stimulate the economy.
We're pretty much in a recession therefore it's nigh on
impossible to stimulate the economy. We'll also have the worst unemployment figures for decades and, in addition, non-stop
lockdowns to contend with. There's no stimulating the economy,
especially given that the US economy is service based, not
manufacturing based.
Even quantitative easing with the intent of helicopter drops to
the public won't stimulate the economy as people are too
uncertain about their jobs/futures to make large purchases,
they'll save whatever money they get. Printing cash and
purchasing government and corporate debt seems to work, but like
Schiff said, that'll just inflate ALL the debt bubbles and cause
an even bigger crash down the road. Also the US national debt is
so large that interest rates can NEVER normalise... for instance, increasing the interest rate to 5% would result in the US having
to spend 50% of ALL tax revenue on servicing the national debt.
The US goverment borrow trillions of dollars each year and this
year are well over five trillion dollars in the red. Totally unsustainable.
Once the USD crashes, it'll be a global problem. China can see
the writing on the wall which is why it's using its trade USDs on
US company stock, property and foreign assets, offloading it as
quickly as possible whilst expanding their influence across the
world.
Watch the video, and tell me why we shouldn't be worried. And
also let me know how we can prevent another depression.
I keep hearing that corporations are treated like people, but last time I checked, they don't have the same fundamental constitutional rights either in my country or the
US. At all.
The clinic I work with had a BIG problem with an ISP that managed to screw the access to some service. In Spain, phisical people has the right to fill a claim to the
Defender of the Consumer. If you are a firm you will need to fill a claim in court with your own layers since the Defender of the Consumer won't do it for you.
In the US, 4th and 5th ammendments don't apply to juridical people,
which basically means a corporation does not have a constitutional
right to privacy. If the cops walk into Necrocomp's headquarters and
demand any explanation about any given incident, Necrocomp's
employees can't call the 5th, unless they admit to be involved. But
that is troublesome for them.
Besides, any firm that grows big enough mutates into a branch of the government, specially in socialist states. Working for the government
is usually just more profitable since you can funnel lots of tax
dollar into your pockets.
I don't think technology will save us. Technology alone doesn't create prosperity, it needs the right social conditions as well. This discussion is about how technology will free us from labout, yet look, so, so many people are working full time jobs, two jobs, and still struggling. We are not gaining from productivity improments due to a poor economic/political system.
The Dark Ages were called that due to a lack of historical records (comparitively so) and historical significant. The Eastern Roman empire continued on though, and what we now know as Byzantium was probably the
I watched all I could of it (about 10 minutes). This Schiff guy
is a nobody, completely unknown at the national level, and quite
frankly, appears to be a fringe/niche whacko. I wonder why he now
lives in Puerto Rico... No offense to you, but I put zero stock
in people such as this. It's easy (and common) to be a doom-sayer
and make bold predictions about how the world is crashing down.
This guy has apparently been doing it for 20 years. Funny thing
is, the world is still going strong, and will be for a long time
to come. That includes the USA and it's system, which although
not perfect, is still the best in the world.
Maybe you should try to be a little more "glass-half-full"...?
;-)
Andeddu wrote to Dennisk <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Dennisk to Andeddu on Thu Aug 13 2020 09:35 am
I don't think technology will save us. Technology alone doesn't create prosperity, it needs the right social conditions as well. This discussion is about how technology will free us from labout, yet look, so, so many people are working full time jobs, two jobs, and still struggling. We are not gaining from productivity improments due to a poor economic/political system.
The Dark Ages were called that due to a lack of historical records (comparitively so) and historical significant. The Eastern Roman empire continued on though, and what we now know as Byzantium was probably the
It's quite staggering that despite all the technology we have, we are
all still bashing out 40-50 hour weeks cooped up in an office doing
jobs that, for the most part, don't really matter. Something's got to give, a country cannot rely on a service based economy forever... it's just not sustainable in any way, shape or form. The markets are going
to correct sooner or later and things are not going to be pretty. My
hope is that we will come to realise we cannot rely on other countries
to produce the goods we want with cheap labour and that we have to
produce these goods ourselves. Purchasing cheap goods with cheap money cannot lead to long-term economic prosperity.
I agree, we've long since past the Age of Enlightenment; there are no genuine thinkers anymore.
I agree, we've long since past the Age of Enlightenment; there are no
genuine thinkers anymore.
Have you heard of David Graeber? He is a bit of an Anarchist
politically speaking, but he has insighful things to say on this. Most people would not admit it, because they need their jobs, but really,
many know, deep down, a lot of what they do is not necessary. We have
this culture of just pushing more and more complexity and reporting requirements. Even for a charity I volunteer for, there is more and
more paperwork created, but no new charitable activities!
Have you heard of David Graeber? He is a bit of an Anarchist politically speaking, but he has insighful things to say on this. Most people would not admit it, because they need their jobs, but really, many know, deep down, a lot of what they do is not necessary. We have this culture of just pushing more and more complexity and reporting requirements. Even for a charity I volunteer for, there is more and more paperwork created, but no new charitable activities!
Andeddu wrote to Dennisk <=-
Re: Re: Fourth Industrial Rev
By: Dennisk to Andeddu on Fri Aug 14 2020 11:51 am
Have you heard of David Graeber? He is a bit of an Anarchist politically speaking, but he has insighful things to say on this. Most people would not admit it, because they need their jobs, but really, many know, deep down, a lot of what they do is not necessary. We have this culture of just pushing more and more complexity and reporting requirements. Even for a charity I volunteer for, there is more and more paperwork created, but no new charitable activities!
No, I've never come across Graeber. I've taken a look at his Wikipedia
bio and see he's written a book called Bullshit Jobs: A Theory... seems like an interesting read! I see YouGov undertook a poll in the UK of
which 37% of Britons surveyed thought that their jobs did not
contribute meaningfully to the world. We have a problem in the UK,
notably in the public sector, with "quangos"... highly paid
administrators in management positions who seem to do nothing but push more and more policy which does nothing but obstruct the actual workers from doing their jobs effectively & efficiently.
The public sector now seems incredibly bloated, and that's not
including all the people who are employed privately but contracted by
the government.
That happens in the private sector too. Managers want larger budgets, and want to have more people working for them. Inefficiencies are overlooked because to someone outside of the department, it can be hard to tell where the inefficiences are.
| Sysop: | deepend |
|---|---|
| Location: | Calgary, Alberta |
| Users: | 260 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 75:50:04 |
| Calls: | 1,834 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 4,202 |
| D/L today: |
2 files (6,142K bytes) |
| Messages: | 396,505 |