The only real 'trickle down' is in production, not in consumption. People who invest their savings into businesses create opportunity for new products, new services, new jobs and new investments for others. That's the only real trickle down and what is called 'trickle down' in modern society is no such thing. 'Trickle down' based on spending is very limited, very narrow and is sporadic (so somebody spends a few hundred thousand dollars today, he is not going to spend the same amount tomorrow).
Besides, any spending that takes place disperses the investment capital and makes it less likely to be used as an investment. The real trickle down is working very well, but it's working in China, not in US or Europe. It's working where people invest and produce.
As a side note any taxes also destroy investment capital and prevent economy from growing for the same reason - this stuff is not used for meaningful production, only to subsidize consumption one way or another.
Nope. That's not a fix. That's not supposed to happen by the law that the Constitution is. By the law that the Constitution is, the government is not authorized to deal in business, to print paper currencies, to regulate individuals in business, to meddle with the economy, to set prices, especially prices on money.
Sure, you can say that some business people changed the government structure in a way to benefit them, because the government is not being held responsible and accountable for not following the Constitution.
But the way it was done, you must admit, it was with the will of the people. It's not possible to change the government like this without the tacit complicity of the population. The people are the key to changing the government and throwing away the law that is supposed to rule the government. The people were bought off with the promises, and of-course the younger generations have been made to pay for this transgression of their ancestors, who have voted themselves the easy money policy of getting free cheese from the government.
You can say that the biggest businesses and government today are one and the same and that the people are accomplices and this merging of conflicting interests achieves the goals - for the population the goal of socialized medicine, socialized retirement, all of their preferred pet peeves, like having FDA (which is not authorized again, nor any other unelected departments). For the monopolies in finance and insurance etc., it's the free money, gov't contracts, monopoly protection via regulations and taxes, all of that.
But whoever GOVERNS is the government, so it's government that regulates and destroys the economy by destroying individual liberties.
The real problem is that there wasn't excess capacity.
- well, if YOU see such an opportunity in excess capacity of hard drives and their components, why don't you enter the market yourself and produce them? If you are right, you'll make a good living, maybe become one of the top 1%.
Hope you guys are enjoying the invisible hand of the ingrown corrupt super-capitalist market which you worship. It's more like an invisible phallus raping you in your sleep.
- oh yeah, the shortage of HD is like somebody raping you while you are asleep. Makes perfect sense, you asshole.
This is not only about professional licensing, this is about any licensing. It's used to increase the costs, destroy competition, prevent new business from competing with existing ones that are paying the politicians.
Any business licensing at all should never be done by governments, all business licensing is a private matter.
But the same applies to product licensing, an example is FDA - no food and drugs need government licensing. People should be able to buy any food and drugs without licensing of the companies by the government. If a private interest is generated towards licensing, then there is market pressure for it and a business opportunity to make some profit by doing private licensing, otherwise it's all monopoly creation and raising of the costs and decline of quality.
you're an idiot. far more people have lost their jobs due to lack of regulations than because of existence of regulations.
- why don't you get an account and post from it?
Since 1971 the US has been steadily losing jobs, all thanks to regulations and cost of labor. Europe is stuck, US is stuck, all due to regulations, taxes and counterfeiting of the money. Where jobs are created is easy to see, just follow the trade deficit trail, but I bet you can't figure that out, must be because you are super smart?
except that they do. it's called private property, you can't just take it because you want to use it
- it's called earning by working. You work and earn money and you buy your own private piece of land. There is always a sale at the right price.
vast majority of people around the world don't own any property.
- they can earn some money and buy a piece of land, it's not that hard. There is plenty of land that is very cheap. There are millions of square kilometers of extremely cheap land out there.
the amish have owned their property for a very, very, long time. and they aren't about to sell it to you. and the answer to your question is up above.
- who says you have to buy from the Amish? You are a weirdo.
where are the eggs going that they need brakes?
- oh, did your grammatometer go off the scale or what?
so you are saying that people who currently have jobs, and are getting paid to work, are actually stuck in welfare mentality? what color is the sky in your world?
- right. The 8.6 official and over 22% unofficial. That's the unemployment rate in US.
USA had affordable private health care prior to 1965, people preferred it to Blue Cross / Shield. You can read it in my journal, there are links to data there too.
What makes health care expensive is government money. Same thing that makes education expensive.
can currently improve browser performance by 1 to 10 times
- this reminds me of the quote from the historical documents:
-Good Lord! That's over 5000 atmospheres of pressure! -How many atmospheres can the ship withstand? -Well, it was built for space travel, so anywhere between zero and one.
I think anyone just uses what he/she wants to and it doesn't matter if there are more languages out there. For the last 2 years I've been building a system in Java and I don't bother with any of the new nonsense in it that started with Java 5, I do use the latest JDKs and JVMs, but I don't use any of the new features (like annotations, autoboxing/unboxing, varargs, generics, etc.) It's completely unnecessary for me, it would be more useful to have standard ways to communicate with peripherals as part of standard libraries, but that's not getting done.
Building new languages seems sexy for people who don't have a specific business problem to solve, but that's OK too, there is enough room for more of the same, so go ahead.
Pain happens, government causes unnecessary amounts of pain to prop up the chosen people, whoever they are at any given time.
So Corzine gets to sit in a Congressional hearing, an ex-governor of a State, an ex GS CEO and now MF Global CEO and he gets to say as a response to the question "where are hundreds of millions of dollars that your company took from deposits" and he gets to respond: I DO NOT KNOW.
OTOH there are tens of millions of unemployed people because of government regulations, taxes and because government allows people like Corzine to steal hundreds of millions of dollars by propping him up every step of the way. This is the guy who helped Obama administration with certain, let's say 'ideas' on economy.
So yes, any government action is going to end up causing much more pain than anything else could cause, and yet people like Corzine are going to cruise by saying "I do not know where my company put those hundreds of millions of dollars".
There must be no government involvement in economy on any level, it produces too much unnecessary pain, misallocates resources and gives the gravy to guys like Corzine.
Yes, the best thing that the society can achieve is to automate every single job, I stand by that.
The way to get there is not by government making labor too expensive, because this way it will not be optimal, it will cause capital misplacement, it will create unnecessary automation right now that will cost much more than it should and it will decrease the overall ability of economy to eventually support itself, so expect huge amounts of pain for the poor, much more pain when it's done this way with gov't making labor too expensive.
It's always the wrong idea to have gov't regulate business, the results will always be sub-optimal.
the subsistence farmers of 200 years ago did not live in urban societies without access to the land to grow what they needed
- you know, nobody stops you from buying your own or renting a piece of land a becoming a subsistence farmer. The Amish seem to be able to do it, so why can't you? Go ahead.
A lot of those people in between then and now died because they lacked access to medical care and a host of other conveniences we take for granted, because they could not afford them.
- can't make an omelet without braking some eggs.
How do you suppose a transition can happen without serious restructuring and without some pain? It's impossible. Pain is what forces us to go forward.
In order for a few people to live a life of leisure these days
- the number of farmers that feed 100% of population is very low compared to 200 years ago. Likely less than 5% of the entire globe is actually doing something related to production of food as farmers. It's a good thing, not a bad one. The fewer people we need to do hard, every day work related to basic things like farming, energy, transport, health care, all the usual stuff, the better.
Sure, some of that work can be automated, but then the people being replaced are surplus to requirements and simply aren't needed, so there there is no need to provide support for them.
- CORRECT.
You can't have it. You cannot have a large portion of the population taken out of the economic loop and given a nice and easy way to move out of the previous economy, they are going to get stuck in the welfare mentality and will never move forward.
There has to be pain, hopefully without too much death to move forward.
It's not a good thing. Without regulations the optimal path to more profit would likely include hiring much more people, but the efficiencies would be much higher.
In the battle of capital and labor, there is a balance that is found by the market. Regulations just distort that balance and create inefficiencies, because often it is more efficient to hire labor than to use capital for more automation.
Gov't creates waste, and capital that is spent on automating some jobs that actually could be done CHEAPER by people without using that capital investment is a waste.
Thus your understanding of what I said is incomplete and your point is invalid.
The question is, how do we get from here to there in an orderly manner? IANAEconomist, but restructuring the planetary economy doesn't look like an easy task!
- there is no such thing as 'orderly manner', there is no planning for this, there is nothing to do for any planner or government. This is the natural consequence of market and that's what H&M is doing here, this is the story.
Every time somebody finds a way to automate another piece of work we are getting more efficient at doing that work and the costs go down. Without gov't intervention the lowering costs create more opportunity for profit, which is why competition becomes viable and rises and then there is more production and prices fall.
Gov't is not the force that is willing or capable of any actual innovation, efficiencies, reduction of cost and reduction of spending. It's the exact opposite of that. So again, saying "orderly manner". I find it hilarious when somebody throws around: "market will go down in orderly manner". Yeah, like that ever happens. The moment you figure out your position is going down you don't want an orderly manner, you want to get out and leave the rest of them to hold the hot potato and you want to win in the game of musical chairs, right?
There is nothing orderly and there is nothing easy and nothing painless about moving from one type of economy to another. It wasn't easy and painless to move from subsistence farming to industrial capitalist society, it's not going to be easy going forward either. But it's worth the effort and only the private chase for profit can do it.
Profits are there to signal to us that there is more money to be made, so we increase production capacity. Lack of profit signals that we must reallocate the resources into something else. That's why gov't also sucks at economy - it can continue ANY enterprise without profit for a very long time, because it subsidizes it one way or another and destroys the economy in the process.
What we do is we increase the individual liberties dramatically, allow people to innovate in the chase of profit and the efficiencies and these 'replicators' will eventually be created.
All those poor subsistence farmers 200 years ago... all that capitalism and industrialization and automation of farming, it was a total waste of time. Everybody died.
Slashdot Mirror
The only real 'trickle down' is in production, not in consumption. People who invest their savings into businesses create opportunity for new products, new services, new jobs and new investments for others. That's the only real trickle down and what is called 'trickle down' in modern society is no such thing. 'Trickle down' based on spending is very limited, very narrow and is sporadic (so somebody spends a few hundred thousand dollars today, he is not going to spend the same amount tomorrow).
Besides, any spending that takes place disperses the investment capital and makes it less likely to be used as an investment. The real trickle down is working very well, but it's working in China, not in US or Europe. It's working where people invest and produce.
As a side note any taxes also destroy investment capital and prevent economy from growing for the same reason - this stuff is not used for meaningful production, only to subsidize consumption one way or another.
--
PS. I said it on 16th of September that holding deposits in banks has become dangerous, because banks will just steal the deposits.
On October 25, 2011 MF Global reported a $191.6 million quarterly loss as a result of trading on European government bonds. On October 31, 2011 MF Global filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Depositors lost money, not 'investors' or traders - depositors. The bankers are now stealing deposits as I said they would, so stay clear of banks.
Nope. That's not a fix. That's not supposed to happen by the law that the Constitution is. By the law that the Constitution is, the government is not authorized to deal in business, to print paper currencies, to regulate individuals in business, to meddle with the economy, to set prices, especially prices on money.
Sure, you can say that some business people changed the government structure in a way to benefit them, because the government is not being held responsible and accountable for not following the Constitution.
But the way it was done, you must admit, it was with the will of the people. It's not possible to change the government like this without the tacit complicity of the population. The people are the key to changing the government and throwing away the law that is supposed to rule the government. The people were bought off with the promises, and of-course the younger generations have been made to pay for this transgression of their ancestors, who have voted themselves the easy money policy of getting free cheese from the government.
You can say that the biggest businesses and government today are one and the same and that the people are accomplices and this merging of conflicting interests achieves the goals - for the population the goal of socialized medicine, socialized retirement, all of their preferred pet peeves, like having FDA (which is not authorized again, nor any other unelected departments). For the monopolies in finance and insurance etc., it's the free money, gov't contracts, monopoly protection via regulations and taxes, all of that.
But whoever GOVERNS is the government, so it's government that regulates and destroys the economy by destroying individual liberties.
how many more times do you need to be shown that governments' ability to regulate business is only a way to steal and sell power?
say thanks for the government creating and enforcing copyright (and patent) law, which is what allows the monopolists to maintain their monopolies.
you have a funny obsession with my comments, yet you don't exist AC.
and if you take 24 and rotate, you'll get the answer to life, the universe and everything.
The real problem is that there wasn't excess capacity.
- well, if YOU see such an opportunity in excess capacity of hard drives and their components, why don't you enter the market yourself and produce them? If you are right, you'll make a good living, maybe become one of the top 1%.
Hope you guys are enjoying the invisible hand of the ingrown corrupt super-capitalist market which you worship. It's more like an invisible phallus raping you in your sleep.
- oh yeah, the shortage of HD is like somebody raping you while you are asleep. Makes perfect sense, you asshole.
This is not only about professional licensing, this is about any licensing. It's used to increase the costs, destroy competition, prevent new business from competing with existing ones that are paying the politicians.
Any business licensing at all should never be done by governments, all business licensing is a private matter.
But the same applies to product licensing, an example is FDA - no food and drugs need government licensing. People should be able to buy any food and drugs without licensing of the companies by the government. If a private interest is generated towards licensing, then there is market pressure for it and a business opportunity to make some profit by doing private licensing, otherwise it's all monopoly creation and raising of the costs and decline of quality.
you're an idiot. far more people have lost their jobs due to lack of regulations than because of existence of regulations.
- why don't you get an account and post from it?
Since 1971 the US has been steadily losing jobs, all thanks to regulations and cost of labor. Europe is stuck, US is stuck, all due to regulations, taxes and counterfeiting of the money. Where jobs are created is easy to see, just follow the trade deficit trail, but I bet you can't figure that out, must be because you are super smart?
except that they do. it's called private property, you can't just take it because you want to use it
- it's called earning by working. You work and earn money and you buy your own private piece of land. There is always a sale at the right price.
vast majority of people around the world don't own any property.
- they can earn some money and buy a piece of land, it's not that hard. There is plenty of land that is very cheap. There are millions of square kilometers of extremely cheap land out there.
the amish have owned their property for a very, very, long time. and they aren't about to sell it to you. and the answer to your question is up above.
- who says you have to buy from the Amish? You are a weirdo.
where are the eggs going that they need brakes?
- oh, did your grammatometer go off the scale or what?
so you are saying that people who currently have jobs, and are getting paid to work, are actually stuck in welfare mentality? what color is the sky in your world?
- right. The 8.6 official and over 22% unofficial. That's the unemployment rate in US.
Oracle supports stored procedures in Java as an example. Personally I prefer postgresql.
USA had affordable private health care prior to 1965, people preferred it to Blue Cross / Shield. You can read it in my journal, there are links to data there too.
What makes health care expensive is government money. Same thing that makes education expensive.
see how a moderator's brains don't change? Hard to teach the old dogs new tricks.
May I suggest one to ten pinches?
How is it that this is still passed around as fact. This idea is incredibly outdated.
- it's because adult brains aren't supposed to change much.
can currently improve browser performance by 1 to 10 times
- this reminds me of the quote from the historical documents:
-Good Lord! That's over 5000 atmospheres of pressure!
-How many atmospheres can the ship withstand?
-Well, it was built for space travel, so anywhere between zero and one.
SQL is still here because it's domain specific and since the domain is still here (relational DB) the language is still here.
There is PL/SQL for complex stuff and people can write in their preferred language in many databases anyway, including C, Java, Perl, Python, TCL....
I think anyone just uses what he/she wants to and it doesn't matter if there are more languages out there. For the last 2 years I've been building a system in Java and I don't bother with any of the new nonsense in it that started with Java 5, I do use the latest JDKs and JVMs, but I don't use any of the new features (like annotations, autoboxing/unboxing, varargs, generics, etc.) It's completely unnecessary for me, it would be more useful to have standard ways to communicate with peripherals as part of standard libraries, but that's not getting done.
Building new languages seems sexy for people who don't have a specific business problem to solve, but that's OK too, there is enough room for more of the same, so go ahead.
Pain happens, government causes unnecessary amounts of pain to prop up the chosen people, whoever they are at any given time.
So Corzine gets to sit in a Congressional hearing, an ex-governor of a State, an ex GS CEO and now MF Global CEO and he gets to say as a response to the question "where are hundreds of millions of dollars that your company took from deposits" and he gets to respond: I DO NOT KNOW.
OTOH there are tens of millions of unemployed people because of government regulations, taxes and because government allows people like Corzine to steal hundreds of millions of dollars by propping him up every step of the way. This is the guy who helped Obama administration with certain, let's say 'ideas' on economy.
So yes, any government action is going to end up causing much more pain than anything else could cause, and yet people like Corzine are going to cruise by saying "I do not know where my company put those hundreds of millions of dollars".
There must be no government involvement in economy on any level, it produces too much unnecessary pain, misallocates resources and gives the gravy to guys like Corzine.
Go fish me some more of my quotes.
Yes, the best thing that the society can achieve is to automate every single job, I stand by that.
The way to get there is not by government making labor too expensive, because this way it will not be optimal, it will cause capital misplacement, it will create unnecessary automation right now that will cost much more than it should and it will decrease the overall ability of economy to eventually support itself, so expect huge amounts of pain for the poor, much more pain when it's done this way with gov't making labor too expensive.
It's always the wrong idea to have gov't regulate business, the results will always be sub-optimal.
the subsistence farmers of 200 years ago did not live in urban societies without access to the land to grow what they needed
- you know, nobody stops you from buying your own or renting a piece of land a becoming a subsistence farmer. The Amish seem to be able to do it, so why can't you? Go ahead.
A lot of those people in between then and now died because they lacked access to medical care and a host of other conveniences we take for granted, because they could not afford them.
- can't make an omelet without braking some eggs.
How do you suppose a transition can happen without serious restructuring and without some pain? It's impossible. Pain is what forces us to go forward.
In order for a few people to live a life of leisure these days
- the number of farmers that feed 100% of population is very low compared to 200 years ago. Likely less than 5% of the entire globe is actually doing something related to production of food as farmers. It's a good thing, not a bad one. The fewer people we need to do hard, every day work related to basic things like farming, energy, transport, health care, all the usual stuff, the better.
Sure, some of that work can be automated, but then the people being replaced are surplus to requirements and simply aren't needed, so there there is no need to provide support for them.
- CORRECT.
You can't have it. You cannot have a large portion of the population taken out of the economic loop and given a nice and easy way to move out of the previous economy, they are going to get stuck in the welfare mentality and will never move forward.
There has to be pain, hopefully without too much death to move forward.
It's not a good thing. Without regulations the optimal path to more profit would likely include hiring much more people, but the efficiencies would be much higher.
In the battle of capital and labor, there is a balance that is found by the market. Regulations just distort that balance and create inefficiencies, because often it is more efficient to hire labor than to use capital for more automation.
Gov't creates waste, and capital that is spent on automating some jobs that actually could be done CHEAPER by people without using that capital investment is a waste.
Thus your understanding of what I said is incomplete and your point is invalid.
The question is, how do we get from here to there in an orderly manner? IANAEconomist, but restructuring the planetary economy doesn't look like an easy task!
- there is no such thing as 'orderly manner', there is no planning for this, there is nothing to do for any planner or government. This is the natural consequence of market and that's what H&M is doing here, this is the story.
Every time somebody finds a way to automate another piece of work we are getting more efficient at doing that work and the costs go down. Without gov't intervention the lowering costs create more opportunity for profit, which is why competition becomes viable and rises and then there is more production and prices fall.
Saying: 'orderly manner', implies some sort of 'intelligent path' (design), which is what people think is the role of government, but it's not. Gov't isn't there to do any of it, it cannot and it won't, because it makes no sense. Gov't just wants to take a role of Santa Clause (give everybody a job, even if it's digging and filling in ditches and hope for wars and maybe even wars with aliens, as Krugman would tell you.)
Gov't is not the force that is willing or capable of any actual innovation, efficiencies, reduction of cost and reduction of spending. It's the exact opposite of that. So again, saying "orderly manner". I find it hilarious when somebody throws around: "market will go down in orderly manner". Yeah, like that ever happens. The moment you figure out your position is going down you don't want an orderly manner, you want to get out and leave the rest of them to hold the hot potato and you want to win in the game of musical chairs, right?
There is nothing orderly and there is nothing easy and nothing painless about moving from one type of economy to another. It wasn't easy and painless to move from subsistence farming to industrial capitalist society, it's not going to be easy going forward either. But it's worth the effort and only the private chase for profit can do it.
Profits are there to signal to us that there is more money to be made, so we increase production capacity. Lack of profit signals that we must reallocate the resources into something else. That's why gov't also sucks at economy - it can continue ANY enterprise without profit for a very long time, because it subsidizes it one way or another and destroys the economy in the process.
What we do is we increase the individual liberties dramatically, allow people to innovate in the chase of profit and the efficiencies and these 'replicators' will eventually be created.
only in your mind regulation leads to anything that is good.
All those poor subsistence farmers 200 years ago... all that capitalism and industrialization and automation of farming, it was a total waste of time. Everybody died.