Inflation -> recession

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
What the heck are you smoking? You must enjoy job destruction... capping wealth at such a low number, and stifling innovation w/o angel investors to fund new r/d.
"Jobs" are one of the big failings of capitalism. You and some of your friends may love your jobs, but that's because you're the bosses. Most other people would rather be doing anything but working.

And nobody "needs" more than about $10 million. If it's such a low number, PM me for my bank info so your friends can write me a check for such a "low" amount. I'll be more than happy with it. In fact, it's enough so my siblings and niece will never need to work again.
Machines produce essential goods? ROFL.
Not there yet but it's coming. Even Musk said it. Eventually more and more jobs will be taken over by automation. His idea is to tax the robots, then distribute it to everyone as a monthly UBI check.
Practically every single client I have would have to sell their business w/ a 10M cap, breaking it up into parts. Economies of scale would vanish.
I'm talking about individual wealth, not corporate or government wealth.
And where, pray tell, would the money come from to absorb these broken up businesses? Santa? Easter Bunny?
No need to break them up. The cap on wealth simply means no more huge mansions, yachts, private jets, etc.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
Those are fringe actions, you just hear about them due to better flow of information.

Almost every single person is better off than they were 10/20/30/40 years ago. We have faster access to better & cheaper goods. Infant mortality dropping. Maternal mortality dropping. Cancer survival going up. We have more college grads. Etc.

streaming video
online ordering
khan academy
youtube
wikipedia


People still risk life/limb to come to the US.

We are at the intersection of 1) covid killing ~1% of the US 2) boomer retirement 3) declining birth rates 4) long covid 5) china's needlessly long/strict lockdown 6) the fed trying to slow down inflation to due the above labor shortages w/ only one type bullet in its gun.

We are ~12+ months into some rough water. Stocks are on sale... stock up.
You're crediting all those things to capitalism, and yet the countries where people are generally happiest and healthiest are a mix of capitalism and socialism, with a heavy emphasis on the latter to ensure people don't fall through the cracks.

Guess who invents most of those advancements? It's typically very smart, often very idealistic, people with strong technical and medical backgrounds. They aren't doing it mainly for money. Indeed, look at all the open source stuff where people are literally sharing their ideas for free.

Capitalism isn't as great at innovation as you seem to think. Great products which might benefit many people, but which have low profit margins, often don't see the light of day. Look at the medical field. They push expensive cancer treatments (read "treatment" not "cure" because in most cases they prolong life for a few months/years) but we don't hear much about low-cost things which might keep people from getting sick in the first place. Capitalism is great at convincing people to buy products those producing them make high profits on. You want innovation, get a bunch of very smart idealists who want to make the world a better place but don't expect you'll make much money off them.
 

chillinn

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
2,527
Location
Mobjack Bay
Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of the world unite! The proletariat will rise up and take hold of their destiny!

No other economic system in the history of the world has been remotely as successful as capitalism. The current unemployment rate is 3.5%. China's unemployment rate is nearly 6%, Russia's almost 7%. Entrepreneurial spirit and a sense of enterprise is what allowed two guys in a garage to create the world's most valuable company within 35 years. employing over 160K workers and creating over 2M jobs nationwide. It didn't get there by repressing the masses, but through vision, innovation and a lot of hard work by serious individuals trying to make the world a better place, and making a living while doing it.

Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma – which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of other's opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.
—Steve Jobs

tl;dr: get a job and save your money, kid
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
I don't consider unemployment rate any kind of measure of a successful system. In fact, in the end the purpose of any such system is ultimately to provide people with the goods and services they need. Jobs are incidental, not the primary goal. In fact, a system under which people have what they need, but more free time (read fewer jobs) to do what they want is arguably a more successful system. Automation can help get us there.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
20,457
Location
NYC
Doling out wealth/resources 100% equally shouldn't be the goal of any system. Consider that some people might not even know what to do with material things beyond those which are necessities. Other people might need all kinds of things to keep mentally stimulated. The idea is to at least make sure everyone has food/shelter/medical care/education at least at what we consider middle class standards. Anything beyond that you can earn if it's that important to you.

Note that the highly gifted doctor might be compensated in other ways, such as praise.

I kind of suggested that. Machines do all the grunt work of society. People are given a certain amount of goods/services via a UBI. As the machines produce more over time, the UBI, and hence the minimal standard of living, increases. Those who wish can earn more if they have special talents but at least everyone has a decent life without needing to work. Having to work, as opposed to wanting to work, is one of the big failings of capitalism. Free time is really one of the most valuable commodities since we all have a limited amount of time on this planet. Capitalism steals our time for us, and typically solely for the base purpose of making the rich even richer.
Unfortunately, we're going to need people put in charge of making sure that there is an equal distribution of the important necessities as you mentioned above. Even those with limited power, can easily go corrupt. Skimming off the top. Shipments of food get "re-directed." Sold off on the Black market to those who will inevitably fall through the cracks of any existing system. Or, perhaps shipments of the best and freshest food gets re-directed or "lost" instead.

Shelter? Close family members and friends, or those willing to bribe get pushed to the top of the list for the best homes in the best neighborhoods. As far as medical goes, oh; could you imagine the level of corruption that would exist there? It would be a nightmare! Need to see a specialist? Sorry, that's going to be 8 months down the road. We'll just put you on the list. Or, grease the right palms; see one two days later on a date most convenient for you. That's just reality.

Speaking of which.... I'm sorry but it is just unrealistic to expect a doctor to accept a great deal of praise over financial compensation for his skills, knowledge, and ability. Here's the reality, true story involving my dad when we lived in the Soviet Union at the time. He had been scheduled for gall stone surgery. Week before his surgery, he goes to the hospital and asks about the best doctors they have on staff who are skilled with a scalpel. Finds one, pulls him aside, speaks to him. Pulls out a wad of money from his pocket, hands it to the doctor. We're talking the equivalent of nearly $1,000. Doctor agrees to do his surgery in a week. Everything goes great for my dad.

He knew how things worked. He understood human nature. If you don't pay people what they're actually worth, they're not going to put in any real effort. Why should they? No incentive for them to do that. They will do the absolute minimum of work. In those days, that meant that experienced doctors simply oversaw the work of those who were fresh out of medical school. If you had surgery scheduled, you got one of those! The result?.... As my dad was lying down in the large, open recovery room for everyone who just had gall stone surgery, he told me how he couldn't get a wink of sleep. While he was feeling great, everyone around him was screaming in absolute horrific pain! Everyone around him was operated on by a fresh-faced, very inexperienced new graduate from medical school. Yeah, doctors are human too. They want proper financial compensation. Praise? Literally can't buy anything with that.

While I agree with you that Capitalism is horribly flawed, due to Greed corrupting those with money and power. Unfortunately we are not to the point yet where machines or robots can take over the vast majority of the work that people currently do. Still, I absolutely agree that human-beings were never meant to work 40 or above hour weeks in a mind-numbing existence of eat, shower, go to work, come home, eat, sleep and repeat for 5 days straight. Okay, enjoy your just over 2 days off. (If you're lucky to even get that much off-time.) Spend most of it catching up on your sleep. Just as you start to relax, TIME FOR WORK! It's disgusting. Sadly, ultimately at this rate, Capitalism will be seen by future generations as a miserable failure in which the majority of citizens barely got by.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
20,457
Location
NYC
I don't consider unemployment rate any kind of measure of a successful system.
Have to disagree there. Low unemployment means more jobs. Yes, less free time. But free time without money to enjoy that free time doesn't mean much. It simply means anxiety to those trying to find work before their compensation checks run out. (Speaking from experience there.)

Obviously not all jobs are created equal. But a steady paycheck is a heck of a thing. Bills paid, rent paid, car note being paid off. No need to fear if the lights or heat will be shut off. No need to fear if an aggressive land-lord literally throws you and your stuff out onto the street. (Yeah, it's illegal. But it happens all the time. Suing takes money and a long amount of time.) No need to worry that your car will be dangling from a repo-man's hook as it disappears into the distance.

Seriously, the car market for both new and used cars is so bad, that repo-men are making a fortune nowadays plying their trade. Forget being a doctor or lawyer, get into the repo business if you want a ton of money in a short amount of time.
 

orbital

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
4,350
Location
WI
+

Oil is $77/barrel
from $120 ten months ago.

Why are gas prices still high?
 

bykfixer

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 9, 2015
Messages
20,573
Location
Dust in the Wind
Last time I looked my money tree out back had been stolen so I actually went out and got a job. It's amazing how it works. Boss says go cut that grass, I cut said grass and money shows up at my bank with my name on it. Other boss says "hey you do that well, work for me and I'll pay you X"... wow look a pay raise.

Still another boss says "well if you had this skill too I'll pay you more than that other guy pays you". After work I go to this place called a college, get the skill and poof I make more money. Hey, now I can buy a better car or move to a nicer apartment.

Kinda bests the crap outta waiting on the gubment to allow me to have what they say I can have. Free time means more idle time, means more time to do dumb stuff instead of focusing on a better station in life. I know it sounds old fashioned but the good ole American dream is still alive and well for those willing. Trouble is too many people take advantage of the once gubment saftey net now turned hammock and then complain about not having what those people on tv have.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
Unfortunately, we're going to need people put in charge of making sure that there is an equal distribution of the important necessities as you mentioned above. Even those with limited power, can easily go corrupt. Skimming off the top. Shipments of food get "re-directed." Sold off on the Black market to those who will inevitably fall through the cracks of any existing system. Or, perhaps shipments of the best and freshest food gets re-directed or "lost" instead.

Shelter? Close family members and friends, or those willing to bribe get pushed to the top of the list for the best homes in the best neighborhoods. As far as medical goes, oh; could you imagine the level of corruption that would exist there? It would be a nightmare! Need to see a specialist? Sorry, that's going to be 8 months down the road. We'll just put you on the list. Or, grease the right palms; see one two days later on a date most convenient for you. That's just reality.

Speaking of which.... I'm sorry but it is just unrealistic to expect a doctor to accept a great deal of praise over financial compensation for his skills, knowledge, and ability. Here's the reality, true story involving my dad when we lived in the Soviet Union at the time. He had been scheduled for gall stone surgery. Week before his surgery, he goes to the hospital and asks about the best doctors they have on staff who are skilled with a scalpel. Finds one, pulls him aside, speaks to him. Pulls out a wad of money from his pocket, hands it to the doctor. We're talking the equivalent of nearly $1,000. Doctor agrees to do his surgery in a week. Everything goes great for my dad.
My thoughts here are by the time machines can produce most goods/services (which implies pretty advanced AI) that same AI can also distribute them. The idea is to get corrupt and corruptible humans out of the picture entirely, at least with regards to essential stuff.

I'm not suggesting government or AI decide where people live. That opens a whole can of worms. Let people decide themselves. Lots of people might choose to stay right where they are. What AI/machines would do is build lots of new housing quickly, dropping housing prices dramatically in the process. That would make most housing affordable with the UBI payment.
He knew how things worked. He understood human nature. If you don't pay people what they're actually worth, they're not going to put in any real effort. Why should they? No incentive for them to do that. They will do the absolute minimum of work. In those days, that meant that experienced doctors simply oversaw the work of those who were fresh out of medical school. If you had surgery scheduled, you got one of those! The result?.... As my dad was lying down in the large, open recovery room for everyone who just had gall stone surgery, he told me how he couldn't get a wink of sleep. While he was feeling great, everyone around him was screaming in absolute horrific pain! Everyone around him was operated on by a fresh-faced, very inexperienced new graduate from medical school. Yeah, doctors are human too. They want proper financial compensation. Praise? Literally can't buy anything with that.
Obviously even under my idea those with more talents could sell what they do, and have more than UBI as income. I'm simply suggesting that sometimes there are non-monetary ways to get compensated. No, those can't be your entire compensation, but they could still motivate you. So can the idea that you're making the world a better place. I'd rather work for less money, so long as it's enough to live decently on, if I have a job where I'm making things better, as opposed to a job where the only purpose is making rich people richer.
While I agree with you that Capitalism is horribly flawed, due to Greed corrupting those with money and power. Unfortunately we are not to the point yet where machines or robots can take over the vast majority of the work that people currently do. Still, I absolutely agree that human-beings were never meant to work 40 or above hour weeks in a mind-numbing existence of eat, shower, go to work, come home, eat, sleep and repeat for 5 days straight. Okay, enjoy your just over 2 days off. (If you're lucky to even get that much off-time.) Spend most of it catching up on your sleep. Just as you start to relax, TIME FOR WORK! It's disgusting. Sadly, ultimately at this rate, Capitalism will be seen by future generations as a miserable failure in which the majority of citizens barely got by.
Totally agree. What you described is how 95% of us live, and it's not a life, it's an existence. We both agree we need a new way, and it's neither capitalism nor communism.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
Have to disagree there. Low unemployment means more jobs. Yes, less free time. But free time without money to enjoy that free time doesn't mean much. It simply means anxiety to those trying to find work before their compensation checks run out. (Speaking from experience there.)

Obviously not all jobs are created equal. But a steady paycheck is a heck of a thing. Bills paid, rent paid, car note being paid off. No need to fear if the lights or heat will be shut off. No need to fear if an aggressive land-lord literally throws you and your stuff out onto the street. (Yeah, it's illegal. But it happens all the time. Suing takes money and a long amount of time.) No need to worry that your car will be dangling from a repo-man's hook as it disappears into the distance.

Seriously, the car market for both new and used cars is so bad, that repo-men are making a fortune nowadays plying their trade. Forget being a doctor or lawyer, get into the repo business if you want a ton of money in a short amount of time.
Fact is most jobs just suck, especially the ones you can't do from home. Anyway, I was talking about the entire system. Yes, under today's highly flawed system more jobs are better because for most people that's how their bills get paid. Under a better system their needs would still be met, but they would have a heck of a lot more free time. Seriously, a 5 day work week is ridiculous. I'd say 2 days, three days max. Basically swap the days off and days working under today's system.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
Last time I looked my money tree out back had been stolen so I actually went out and got a job. It's amazing how it works. Boss says go cut that grass, I cut said grass and money shows up at my bank with my name on it. Other boss says "hey you do that well, work for me and I'll pay you X"... wow look a pay raise.

Still another boss says "well if you had this skill too I'll pay you more than that other guy pays you". After work I go to this place called a college, get the skill and poof I make more money. Hey, now I can buy a better car or move to a nicer apartment.
If only it really worked that way. It's more like come early, stay late, take on any extra work I give you, and maybe you'll get a promotion or raise 5 or 10 years from now. Or I might be just as likely to lay you off if I can find someone who will work for less.

Maybe if this stuff was in writing. You do A, B, C, and D, and I'll do W, X, Y, and Z.

Or on a societal level, you do well in school, get into a good college, do well there, and we pay for your school, and get you a good job using the skills you acquired in school. Instead, the reality is take out loans equivalent to a mortgage to go the school. When you graduate, you're on your own to find work. Those who know the right people, even if they're a lot dumber than you, get the good jobs. If you can't find work soon after graduating, those loans go into default. Once they do, you're essentially an indentured servant because with collection fees you'll be stuck paying until you die.
Kinda bests the crap outta waiting on the gubment to allow me to have what they say I can have. Free time means more idle time, means more time to do dumb stuff instead of focusing on a better station in life. I know it sounds old fashioned but the good ole American dream is still alive and well for those willing. Trouble is too many people take advantage of the once gubment saftey net now turned hammock and then complain about not having what those people on tv have.
People not knowing what to do in their idle time is a failing of our educational system. I really pity the person who doesn't know what to do if they're not working. That means we failed to instill initiative into this person.

I happen to think it would be a great world if people only worked if they wanted to, doing something they enjoy, as opposed to needing to work just for bare necessities. Automation, AI, and UBI has the potential to get us there.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
20,457
Location
NYC
My thoughts here are by the time machines can produce most goods/services (which implies pretty advanced AI) that same AI can also distribute them. The idea is to get corrupt and corruptible humans out of the picture entirely, at least with regards to essential stuff.

I'm not suggesting government or AI decide where people live. That opens a whole can of worms. Let people decide themselves. Lots of people might choose to stay right where they are. What AI/machines would do is build lots of new housing quickly, dropping housing prices dramatically in the process. That would make most housing affordable with the UBI payment.

Obviously even under my idea those with more talents could sell what they do, and have more than UBI as income. I'm simply suggesting that sometimes there are non-monetary ways to get compensated. No, those can't be your entire compensation, but they could still motivate you. So can the idea that you're making the world a better place. I'd rather work for less money, so long as it's enough to live decently on, if I have a job where I'm making things better, as opposed to a job where the only purpose is making rich people richer.

Totally agree. What you described is how 95% of us live, and it's not a life, it's an existence. We both agree we need a new way, and it's neither capitalism nor communism.
I can definitely see an issue with machines controlling distribution. Driver-less trucks that can reliably function are unfortunately still in the realm of Sci-Fi. And, once you get the products to a destination, robots reliably being able to unpack and store away everything is simply unheard of. No, you'll still need people for that. And, that becomes the point where goods can be ripped off.

We definitely agree that affordable, new housing is very much needed. Unfortunately corrupt politicians love to use so-called building code violations to literally tear them down whenever they are built. While I don't think Tiny Homes are ideal for young, growing families, depending on the design; they could work for single individuals. While folks accept the concept of Studio apartments and trailer park homes, the Tiny Homes concept just hasn't caught on in America.

Again, alternatives to financial compensation just don't work when it comes to people in general. Salary issues can be compensated for, yes; but only with a different form of financial compensation. Nothing else will work with folks. A better idea would be some sort of Tier pay-scale. Different pay rates at different tiers based on the job involved, and experience. That way, the very brightest and most talented don't sit around and simply supervise because they have no motivation to put in any effort. Of course, folks can travel up the tier system based on how much work they do and how much education they get.

I do agree that most jobs suck. The issue is, few employers will be willing to pay more money (or even the same amount) for fewer days worked. Just not happening anytime soon. Heck, convincing employers to institute a 4 day work week with 12 hour days might be possible. Anything short of that just isn't happening. Unfortunately.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
I can definitely see an issue with machines controlling distribution. Driver-less trucks that can reliably function are unfortunately still in the realm of Sci-Fi. And, once you get the products to a destination, robots reliably being able to unpack and store away everything is simply unheard of. No, you'll still need people for that. And, that becomes the point where goods can be ripped off.
All this is sort of like the rocket SpaceX launched the other day. Yes, it failed, but they'll get it right eventually. I have little doubt machines will be able to do most jobs humans do, and better, in less than a generation. Right now driverless vehicles still drive better than most humans. The problem is they're not perfect. We tolerate human drivers killing over 40,000 a year in the US alone, but for some reason we won't tolerate AI drivers killing even a few tens of people.
We definitely agree that affordable, new housing is very much needed. Unfortunately corrupt politicians love to use so-called building code violations to literally tear them down whenever they are built. While I don't think Tiny Homes are ideal for young, growing families, depending on the design; they could work for single individuals. While folks accept the concept of Studio apartments and trailer park homes, the Tiny Homes concept just hasn't caught on in America.
Add in the fact that the real estate industry, along with investors who buy up real estate, will fight tooth and nail against more housing as it'll hurt their "investment". And that's really among the problems of capitalism, especially the kind we have now. We commoditize virtually anything into some sort of way for rich people to get richer, without any thoughts of the negative effects on everyone else.
Again, alternatives to financial compensation just don't work when it comes to people in general. Salary issues can be compensated for, yes; but only with a different form of financial compensation. Nothing else will work with folks. A better idea would be some sort of Tier pay-scale. Different pay rates at different tiers based on the job involved, and experience. That way, the very brightest and most talented don't sit around and simply supervise because they have no motivation to put in any effort. Of course, folks can travel up the tier system based on how much work they do and how much education they get.
I'm all for true merit-based pay. If something requires more schooling and/or experience, it should pay more. Also, yes, I totally agree the best and brightest should be doing what they're trained for, not supervising. In fact, it's a shame that many talented engineers are lost as supervisors because that's the only path for them to increase their salaries. Many would rather just continue doing the engineering work they love, but they want or need the higher pay.
I do agree that most jobs suck. The issue is, few employers will be willing to pay more money (or even the same amount) for fewer days worked. Just not happening anytime soon. Heck, convincing employers to institute a 4 day work week with 12 hour days might be possible. Anything short of that just isn't happening. Unfortunately.
I'd say all jobs suck, if you define a job as something you do at least 40 hours a week. There are plenty of things I've loved doing in my life, but I'd hate all of them if I had to do them 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, for years on end.
 

PhotonMaster3

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 9, 2020
Messages
103
What the heck are you smoking? You must enjoy job destruction... capping wealth at such a low number, and stifling innovation w/o angel investors to fund new r/d.

Machines produce essential goods? ROFL.

Practically every single client I have would have to sell their business w/ a 10M cap, breaking it up into parts. Economies of scale would vanish.

And where, pray tell, would the money come from to absorb these broken up businesses? Santa? Easter Bunny?
Ha yep. You could take everyone's money and distribute it equally… and in a few years the same people would be rich again and the same ones would be **** *** broke again
 

turbodog

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
6,425
Location
central time
...

I'm talking about individual wealth, not corporate or government wealth.

No need to break them up. The cap on wealth simply means no more huge mansions, yachts, private jets, etc.

If given a choice, most people work. Fact. Plenty of research on this.

My wealthiest clients are usually the ones that 1) could have quit decades ago and 2) show up at 6am.

Individual = corporate for owners. My business is worth a decent amount, and it's an asset. It's wealth.

no yachts = job destruction
no private jets = job destruction

We've never solved a problem by cutting back and conserving. We innovate and grow out of problems.

Lest you forget, the US would have defaulted in the past if not for loans from the wealthy. Buffet singlehandedly saved General Electric from bankruptcy in ~2008.

And 10M is not that much, certainly not excessive.

Right now, private citizens, businesses, etc are benefiting from a 'project' of a client of mine across the northern USA, and will continue for the next 50 years.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
If given a choice, most people work. Fact. Plenty of research on this.

My wealthiest clients are usually the ones that 1) could have quit decades ago and 2) show up at 6am.
Again, they're the bosses/owners. Most likely have interesting jobs which they enjoy doing, plus if they want to take time off for any reason nothing is stopping them. Compare to the average worker who has no choice but to work, has a few weeks vacation (which they have to give advance notice to use) if they're lucky, most likely can't stand what they're doing, and can probably think of a thousand other things they would rather be doing. The latter is the majority by far. These people won't choose to work if their bills were paid.
Individual = corporate for owners. My business is worth a decent amount, and it's an asset. It's wealth.
But it remains corporate wealth until the owner takes it out of the company, either as salary or shares of stock. The line is more blurry for unincorporated sole proprietorships but those are often one man operations where the owner/operator is never going to earn millions.

Your business is a paper asset until such time as you sell it. Big difference from having actual money in the bank or in investments.

no yachts = job destruction
no private jets = job destruction
And what about the environmental destruction those things create when they're used? The carbon footprint per capita of rich people is huge. And as I said, who cares about jobs? The idea is everyone has essential goods/services. If/when that can all be provided by machines, all the better.

Don't things the poor and middle class buy create a whole lot more jobs than building yachts?

We've never solved a problem by cutting back and conserving. We innovate and grow out of problems.
Unfortunately it seems people are averse to innovation because it means change. Look at all the pushback against using innovations like LED lighting, for example. Or just read the ongoing EV thread here. What good are innovations if people refuse to use them?
Lest you forget, the US would have defaulted in the past if not for loans from the wealthy. Buffet singlehandedly saved General Electric from bankruptcy in ~2008.
So Buffet gave GM a privately-funded bailout? For a whole host of reasons, bailouts are a horrible idea. Let companies fail if they can't adapt, are poorly managed, etc. Isn't that what capitalism is supposed to be about, survival of the fittest? I would have let it all burn in 2008. Greater short term pain but in the long run it would have put the economy on a more solid footing. Lately it's starting to look like 2008 all over again, especially the housing market. When the bubble bursts, it ain't going to be pretty.
And 10M is not that much, certainly not excessive.
$10M isn't excessive, but getting much over that is. The idea is once you have enough to live a middle to upper middle life without working that's enough.
Right now, private citizens, businesses, etc are benefiting from a 'project' of a client of mine across the northern USA, and will continue for the next 50 years.
Sure, I never said the business owner is the sole beneficiary of their business. My big complaints about capitalism are concentrating too much wealth in too few hands, plus the fact you're forcing a good portion of the population to essentially exist as laborers just for essential goods/services.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
Ha yep. You could take everyone's money and distribute it equally… and in a few years the same people would be rich again and the same ones would be **** *** broke again
That's a straw man argument because nobody was ever suggesting that. The general idea is that automation will be able to eventually provide everyone with a certain standard of living. It might be what we consider lower middle class now in the beginning. As machines make more, the UBI increases, and so does this minimal standard of living. Nothing is preventing people from earning more if they want to sell goods/services to others. Just as an example, there might be a market for hand-made goods in an era of identical machine-produced goods. Obviously there are also creative endeavors like music, acting, arts, etc. Essentially, we would be creating an artisan economy as a means to earn anything above the UBI.

In a fitting bit of irony, even though it's not the primary intention, the wealthy might eventually see most of their wealth evaporate under this idea. After all, they're essentially competing against "free" goods produced by machine. Any companies producing these items would eventually be worthless.
 

Latest posts

Top