A conspiracy? Well, I guess it's up to you what you call it but the 1971 default on the dollar initiated an acceleration of money printing unlike anything seen before, leading to the 1% and later 0% interest rates manipulated by the Federal reserve and USA Treasury (of-course with the approval of Congress). The calculations of inflation were revised many times and will continue being revised and if the modern calculation was done based on the same formula as was used back in the 1970s, inflation would have been much higher than the 4% inflation number that prompted (an incorrect) policy of fixing prices and wages by government control.
You might be too young or otherwise ignorant, but try to hide your ignorance at least a bit or better yet learn something.
Inflation is expansion of the money supply and the prices are rising to reflect this trend. The actual inflation numbers are many times greater than what the government is reporting, which is why there is no such thing as 'economic recovery' and the so called 'jobless recovery' is nonsense. It is jobless because it is not a recovery. The GDP is negative, USA has been in recession (likely a depression) since 2008. Meanwhile the prices that actually matter are up by double digit percentages every year and thus the standard of living is down by double digit percentages every year since people's salaries and savings are reduced by these amounts and they can afford less and less.
Without the incessant money printing we would have seen prices falling as they should due to the deflationary pressures of the recession and depression that is actually happening. Due to inflation the prices are actually rising rather than falling by double digit percentages and ignoramuses are looking at all this and pointing out that government tells them something else, so they must not believe their lying eyes. I guess some people are just more blind than others.
Right, that's exactly what 99% of the economic ignoramuses out there are made to believe. Government inflation is what is causing the massive economic destruction starting since 1971 default on the dollar and it is now at the point where economic annihilation of USA (and some other economies) is inevitable.
The global economy is battling the Fed and USA Congress cancer.
USA Federal reserve and USA Congress are the primary engines for the weakness, creating inflation and debt that cannot be repaid, pushing a huge part of the rest of the world to weaken their currencies and to get into debt in response to Fed's manipulation.
As far as the eye can see manufacturing and other forms of production and business formation are suffering from complete absence of actual savings and thus capital investments due to destruction of the principle of savings. The leverage created by the chase for the return in a completely manipulated anti-return (anti-savings) centrally planned collectivist market inflated prices for everything in the market, punishing people who have no real money (fiat is not) and whose salaries are not growing anywhere near the growth of prices caused by money printing and borrowing at governmental levels.
Basically people are too broke, that's why sales are falling, and it is not only the computer sales that are down, sales are down on everything that is more expensive.
AFAIC at this point we need a massive financial deleveraging and this will not happen without debt restructuring starting at government levels, starting with the USA dollar and bond holders getting hit.
There needs to be and will be a moment in time, when government bonds will finally be seen for what they are: debt that cannot ever be repaid in any money that is worth something real as opposed to printed paper. For money to be worth something real, a productive base must support it, not just a baseless belief that things will go on forever as they are today.
The consumer is broke because the consumer has no job that pays anywhere near enough what he needs to be able to consume and that job doesn't exist because there is no savings to create that job while there are plenty taxes, rules, laws and regulations that prevent that job from existing.
We will get over this of-course eventually, too bad it has lasted this long and will cause so much pain before it gets any better.
So your point is that there is no 'liberal media' and I will say: you are right, there is no liberal media. Whether it is Fox or Facebook or MSNBC the dissenting opinions will not be televised, which is why Ron Paul, Rand Paul were silenced.
The government never actually told me to accept dollars
- the government decrees the paper known as 'dollars' (which are not actually dollars by any stretch of imagination) to be money and this decree makes that paper fiat. That's the purpose of the word 'fiat' and its definition.
Gold is money without government declaring it so, whether you personally understand it or not doesn't change that fact. People have accepted gold (and silver and some other) coins as money based on just weight and purity, regardless of the mint. So for example the word 'dollar' came from Joachimsthal, the name of a silver coin minted in Czech republic about 500 years ago. Thaler was the short name of that coin. Eventually Thaler became Dollar and Spanish Dollars were a common coin accepted by people around the world without any government telling them to but simply for being recognized as a specific weight in silver.
USA dollar of today has no connection to any weight of silver or gold, it has no value storing power but it is accepted by banks and other institutions because the government has the monopoly on fiat printing and fights anybody (case in point this specific story on/.) who threatens their monopoly.
She might have been right though, he is an 'economics' prof, in today's world some ofthese people should be considered terrorists, causing mass confusion of simple ideas and leading to world wide terror.
Dumbass, fiat means by government decree. People accept gold as money without government telling them to. Nobody had an economic downturn due to too much gold, a nonsensical statement like that can only be made by a complete nincompoop ignoramus, so congrats achieving that title.
You are making a perfect argument against government money monopoly. Gold is money, fiat based on nothing but desire of the mob to vote themselves a bunch of free stuff is not money at all.
What should the interest rate be for an infinite money supply? Basically nobody wants to receive payment in worthless currency, so the contracts can be made in gold.
Who is 'you'? Government promised something to you? They never did, scotus clarified that government has no obligation to pay out anything based on the payroll tax because it is levied based on general taxing power of Congress. Payroll taxes are not assigned. Government has no obligation to pay SS. Also from economic point of view there is no SS fund, there are bonds but that was my point about Trump presidency in my original comment. USA economy is unrecoverably indebted. The debts will never be repaid in any money that have purchasing power, so from this perspective Trump promising a restructuring is actually the most honest way to default. It is either that or extreme (if not hyper) inflation (money printing), destroying the value of USD. Would you rather be paid in worthless currency that buys nothing and see any of your other USD assets destroyed or would you rather not get the SS but still have a functioning economy and whatever savings you have actually be worth something at all? You decide this November. I say Trump defaulting honestly on the debt is the best long term outcome for the USA economy.
After the interview Trump gave basically promising to restructure USA debt (not pay 100 cents on the dollar to the bond holders), I changed my mind on him. I say Trump for POTUS. The fake money, that USA is printing and lending (bonds) need to have proper market rate interest applied to them. Once that happens, USA will stop being world police for good, it won't be able to afford to intimidate anybody and that is a good thing. USA was created on a principle, that principle is now but a lip service, it is a joke. Americans will have to take responsibility for their own lives once more after the interest rates go where they must be and no government can borrow so much and no bank will have a fake guarantee to keep you whole. The banking system will reform with the government reform.
This guy, going to prison for the 'crime' of trying to break the modern day slave shackles is a political prisoner and the government is the Mafia, a bunch of thugs taking down competition.
The government cannot be punished, which is why people have rights - protections against government abuse. At this point individual rights are nothing bit history and this cannot stand.
Trump for POTUS. Not for any good reason other than this - restructure the debt, get the interest rates up, where they are supposed to be and lose most of the government spending. Yes, this means no more SS and other ponzi schemes that the government is running. But it also means people will have their rights back. Being a free person is worth something, more than the 30 pieces of not so silver coins politicians buy you with.
Even if I buy 0 liters of gasoline, even if I use 0 electrical power, even if I live entirely on a single piece of land that I work myself, then the pollution will inevitably impose itself on me.
- sure deal, so that's between you and every user of the resources that may end up creating pollution that you may end up paying for.
Whoever and however the product is used, the product is causing significant harm, therefore the product should be priced in such a fashion as to reflect the harm it does.
- what are you, a central politburo, deciding what things cost, how costs are calculated, etc? Who told you that you are good at figuring out costs before they are actually incurred? Who told you that governments are good at figuring out costs exactly? When was the last time that a government did anything within any type of budget?
Who told you that a centralized model 'calculated' (invented out of ass) by politicians for paying for things is better than a distributed model that occurs on its own?
It is the CONSUMER that is using these products and causing pollution, not the producer that gives you the ABILITY to use them. So if as a consumer you end up paying for what you are using in ways that not part of the purchase price that makes most sense, definitely more sense than some central government body trying to get their fingers into things they actually do not understand or know or even can know about.
Finally if you don't mind 'paying more for gas' right now due to stupid carbon taxes, what is your problem for paying for the same thing but based on the actual market forces?
You are full of collectivist nonsense. You are the one benefiting most from fossil fuels. You are purchasing gasoline, you heat up your home, you are buying food, medicine, clothing, electronics, electricity, transportation, entertainment, everything that makes your life bearable or enjoyable at all has fossil fuels in it, directly or not. You are the one reaping the profits, the companies are profiting from selling to you, you are profiting by using it all.
This entire 'externalized cost' argument completely glosses over the usage of all the products provided to you. If you end up paying something somewhere that has to do with pollution or health care or anything else for that matter that results from usage of fossil fuels then actually the market is doing its job. It's putting the cost of all this pollution onto the people directly responsible for it, which is consumers.
A company can sell you a gun, you are the one putting a bullet into somebody's head. A company can sell you a barrel of acid. If you dump that acid into the local river or onto the ground, that's on you.
Except that there is no such thing as 'externalized cost' for energy production. The companies selling you oil products and all other products that use oil during production and transportation are giving you something that you are using. You are the end cause of any pollution related to use of such products.
If a company sells you 1000 litres of gasoline, you are the one burning it. If you also end up paying for pollution through some means, you are paying for part of the use of the product that you like and want to use every day of your life.
To answer your question: because there shouldn't be any income taxes or wealth taxes at all, that's why. AFAIC all income and wealth taxes are slavery and that about sums it up. An individual building a company creates value that did not exist before the company existed. The country is based on companies that individuals create, not the other way around, and the entire world is going to learn that lesson this century, after the last few decades were spent destroying savings and thus capital investments by government generating inflation through money printing tax and government growth in general, that requires never ending growing amount of money just to exist.
Companies are finding ways to exit the systems that are trying to enslave them, but those systems were built by those companies. Once the companies exist, those systems will collapse, which is demonstrated in all the bubbles that are blown by government money printing and borrowing operations that truly became more pronounced in the last few decades, once the companies started exiting due to the government legalized slavery became too unbearable while the world becoming more global.
Nothing gets propped up by money printing except for politicians, who get bailed out based on their promises to deliver everything to everybody. Money gets destroyed by printing and bonds are promises to pay money in the future, so of-course they also get destroyed.
This guy is a complete moron. He manages largest privately held bond fund, he wants his bonds to be propped up by printing, he wants to be 'made whole' when his fund goes belly up (and it will). What he does not seem to understand or care about is that bonds are promises to pay dollars in the future. Well, his idea is leading towards destruction of the dollar itself. He mentions Ron and Rand Paul in his idiotic piece there as well, saying that 'they would be good at it', at what? At dropping dollars out of helicopters? He is a complete nincompoop, Ron Paul stands for sound market money, he is 100% against fiat and fiat printing and always argues against easy money.
Bill Gross proves this: in the age of fake money even a braindead zombie can 'manage a fund'.
The real problem of course is that governments and politicians of the world are limiting human knowledge and discoveries by sticking their shitty hands and noses where they do not belong at all - science. The real problem of ethics is the ignoramuses of the general public and their ignoramus pieces of shit 'representatives' destroying individual freedom of scientists to run any experiments they need to run on cells, tissues just because those cells and tissues can at some point become a human. Well, if they do end up making a human this way - great. It is about time we figured out how to do that without getting all sweaty.
Sure, but I am running an experiment on myself for my own sake, not for anybody else and I am not proposing that anybody follows me. My point is that we should be deciding what we are and what we do with ourselves, not any government or any other outside collective.
So unlike everybody who commented before me here (just ACs so far), I actually read what was written and apparently the experiment worked.
I've been running an experiment of my own for 21 years now. For the first 8 years only ate raw veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds. For the last 13 years eating cooked food, only veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds but also cheeses, yoghurt and some breads.
I think people should be free to experiment with their own bodies, we only live once. Some people climb rocks, others eat shit, who knows, maybe something will come out of it. I personally would like to go through the DNA procedure to increase the length of the telomeres like that lady in South America did, I don't want to wait for any government approval for any of it, it's my life.
I understand it, I just reject it. People are not hammers. I find it odd that you can't understand that sentience makes a world of difference.
- sure, people are not hammers outside of my business. If you are not working for me, you are not part of my instrument. If you are not working for the organization that I have created to execute specific tasks I assigned to you, you are just another person out there somewhere. I do not even see people within the organization as 'cogs', only their function.
The function of a person within my company is that of a cog in the machine that I have created. If that human function for a cog can be replaced with an automated cog it does not mean that I have somehow reduced the human to a machine part, it means the job that the human was doing is now reduced to an automated process.
Humans are not cogs maybe, but they sell that functionality when they apply for a job.
There is a hole in your mind.
- I disagree, there is a blindspot in your mind, you are clearly unable to separate the form from the function.
But for the many contributions of others, you would at best be sitting naked in a cave, probably without a fire. More likely you would have died after a short brutal life.
- I respect people who invent things, people who run things, make machines. They are inspirational.
I don't see how hiring somebody to play a particular role is reducing them to anything, if anything at all, it provides them with a place to work to earn money honestly while actually contributing to society by helping to push forward my plan. Now, whether my plan is contributing to society or not, this question is answered by looking at the company's profits, if there are profits, then there is an actual positive contribution. What I make with the machine that I created is valuable if somebody uses it, just like fire is valuable because people use it.
I notice you claim the accomplishments for yourself because you trained your employees. Why don't you ascribe it all to your parents who made and trained you? (a lot more than you did for your employees)
- again, you are missing the point. I train my developers, but I don't train my accountant. This point is incidental.
My accomplishment is in thinking of a business, taking my own savings (the money I earned while working for others), deciding what to do with the people and money to create the products that I am creating.
The machine that is my business lets me do just that - create the products that I want to create but faster than if I was trying to do it on my own, which by the way I did as well, building my first product by myself and it was a much longer and slower process.
The fact that you cannot recognize that somebody is making somebody through a higher order machine that they create that is their company is the hole in your mind. I don't care if you fix it or not.
You may be surprised to learn that I own a business and that I hire and sometimes fire people.
- well, many people do things without actually understanding what they are doing. Would I be surprised that you are doing something without understanding what you are doing? No.
The problem here is that you don't understand that you are NOT the alpha and omega.
- you are reading waaaay too much into my point. Are you 'alpha' for being able to use a hammer?
This is the same thing precisely. I craft my hammer by putting together people, money, land, and processes. That's my hammer.
I can also use another higher level tool - a washing machine. I put in the detergent, the dirty clothes and turn the knobs. The machine washes for me, I was the one who decided that there will be a machine and that it will was clothing that I want to wash. I decided where the machine is located, what detergent it will use. I decided when it will work and when it will sit idle. In your weird world I just declared myself to be 'alpha' for running a washing machine.
If I could replace the people working for me with other pieces of automation today, I would do that exact thing. My company would produce what I want it to produce, I would be more productive because my company would be more efficient maybe. I would have 0 employees and yet I would produce things with my company, which is the tool that I have created.
Consider, if you don't do what the accountant needs, he'll get another employer that does better.
- that's just fine. Just like a belt can break in a washing machine and would have to be replaced.
You are clearly unable to understand my point or even what you are doing (when and if you are hiring/firing people).
No, I did not teach them how to eat or wipe their asses. I did teach themto code, in some cases from scratch, but that is not even relevant. I did not teach my accountant anything, I simply hired him. He is doing what I need but if he does not I will find another. He is part of the machine I built to make myself more productive. Each of my workers are as productive as they can be individually. My productivity is the function of the organization that I have created. My company is my tool to do what I desire to do but faster than if I was doing it singlehandedly.
Like I said, I don't expect you to understand any of it though it is not rocket science (and literally unlike Musk, I do not build rockets).
Slashdot Mirror
A conspiracy? Well, I guess it's up to you what you call it but the 1971 default on the dollar initiated an acceleration of money printing unlike anything seen before, leading to the 1% and later 0% interest rates manipulated by the Federal reserve and USA Treasury (of-course with the approval of Congress). The calculations of inflation were revised many times and will continue being revised and if the modern calculation was done based on the same formula as was used back in the 1970s, inflation would have been much higher than the 4% inflation number that prompted (an incorrect) policy of fixing prices and wages by government control.
You might be too young or otherwise ignorant, but try to hide your ignorance at least a bit or better yet learn something.
Inflation is expansion of the money supply and the prices are rising to reflect this trend. The actual inflation numbers are many times greater than what the government is reporting, which is why there is no such thing as 'economic recovery' and the so called 'jobless recovery' is nonsense. It is jobless because it is not a recovery. The GDP is negative, USA has been in recession (likely a depression) since 2008. Meanwhile the prices that actually matter are up by double digit percentages every year and thus the standard of living is down by double digit percentages every year since people's salaries and savings are reduced by these amounts and they can afford less and less.
Without the incessant money printing we would have seen prices falling as they should due to the deflationary pressures of the recession and depression that is actually happening. Due to inflation the prices are actually rising rather than falling by double digit percentages and ignoramuses are looking at all this and pointing out that government tells them something else, so they must not believe their lying eyes. I guess some people are just more blind than others.
Right, that's exactly what 99% of the economic ignoramuses out there are made to believe. Government inflation is what is causing the massive economic destruction starting since 1971 default on the dollar and it is now at the point where economic annihilation of USA (and some other economies) is inevitable.
The global economy is battling the Fed and USA Congress cancer.
USA Federal reserve and USA Congress are the primary engines for the weakness, creating inflation and debt that cannot be repaid, pushing a huge part of the rest of the world to weaken their currencies and to get into debt in response to Fed's manipulation.
As far as the eye can see manufacturing and other forms of production and business formation are suffering from complete absence of actual savings and thus capital investments due to destruction of the principle of savings. The leverage created by the chase for the return in a completely manipulated anti-return (anti-savings) centrally planned collectivist market inflated prices for everything in the market, punishing people who have no real money (fiat is not) and whose salaries are not growing anywhere near the growth of prices caused by money printing and borrowing at governmental levels.
Basically people are too broke, that's why sales are falling, and it is not only the computer sales that are down, sales are down on everything that is more expensive.
AFAIC at this point we need a massive financial deleveraging and this will not happen without debt restructuring starting at government levels, starting with the USA dollar and bond holders getting hit.
There needs to be and will be a moment in time, when government bonds will finally be seen for what they are: debt that cannot ever be repaid in any money that is worth something real as opposed to printed paper. For money to be worth something real, a productive base must support it, not just a baseless belief that things will go on forever as they are today.
The consumer is broke because the consumer has no job that pays anywhere near enough what he needs to be able to consume and that job doesn't exist because there is no savings to create that job while there are plenty taxes, rules, laws and regulations that prevent that job from existing.
We will get over this of-course eventually, too bad it has lasted this long and will cause so much pain before it gets any better.
So your point is that there is no 'liberal media' and I will say: you are right, there is no liberal media. Whether it is Fox or Facebook or MSNBC the dissenting opinions will not be televised, which is why Ron Paul, Rand Paul were silenced.
The government never actually told me to accept dollars
- the government decrees the paper known as 'dollars' (which are not actually dollars by any stretch of imagination) to be money and this decree makes that paper fiat. That's the purpose of the word 'fiat' and its definition.
Gold is money without government declaring it so, whether you personally understand it or not doesn't change that fact. People have accepted gold (and silver and some other) coins as money based on just weight and purity, regardless of the mint. So for example the word 'dollar' came from Joachimsthal, the name of a silver coin minted in Czech republic about 500 years ago. Thaler was the short name of that coin. Eventually Thaler became Dollar and Spanish Dollars were a common coin accepted by people around the world without any government telling them to but simply for being recognized as a specific weight in silver.
USA dollar of today has no connection to any weight of silver or gold, it has no value storing power but it is accepted by banks and other institutions because the government has the monopoly on fiat printing and fights anybody (case in point this specific story on /.) who threatens their monopoly.
She might have been right though, he is an 'economics' prof, in today's world some ofthese people should be considered terrorists, causing mass confusion of simple ideas and leading to world wide terror.
Dumbass, fiat means by government decree. People accept gold as money without government telling them to. Nobody had an economic downturn due to too much gold, a nonsensical statement like that can only be made by a complete nincompoop ignoramus, so congrats achieving that title.
You are making a perfect argument against government money monopoly. Gold is money, fiat based on nothing but desire of the mob to vote themselves a bunch of free stuff is not money at all.
What should the interest rate be for an infinite money supply? Basically nobody wants to receive payment in worthless currency, so the contracts can be made in gold.
Who is 'you'? Government promised something to you? They never did, scotus clarified that government has no obligation to pay out anything based on the payroll tax because it is levied based on general taxing power of Congress. Payroll taxes are not assigned. Government has no obligation to pay SS. Also from economic point of view there is no SS fund, there are bonds but that was my point about Trump presidency in my original comment. USA economy is unrecoverably indebted. The debts will never be repaid in any money that have purchasing power, so from this perspective Trump promising a restructuring is actually the most honest way to default. It is either that or extreme (if not hyper) inflation (money printing), destroying the value of USD. Would you rather be paid in worthless currency that buys nothing and see any of your other USD assets destroyed or would you rather not get the SS but still have a functioning economy and whatever savings you have actually be worth something at all? You decide this November. I say Trump defaulting honestly on the debt is the best long term outcome for the USA economy.
After the interview Trump gave basically promising to restructure USA debt (not pay 100 cents on the dollar to the bond holders), I changed my mind on him. I say Trump for POTUS. The fake money, that USA is printing and lending (bonds) need to have proper market rate interest applied to them. Once that happens, USA will stop being world police for good, it won't be able to afford to intimidate anybody and that is a good thing. USA was created on a principle, that principle is now but a lip service, it is a joke. Americans will have to take responsibility for their own lives once more after the interest rates go where they must be and no government can borrow so much and no bank will have a fake guarantee to keep you whole. The banking system will reform with the government reform.
This guy, going to prison for the 'crime' of trying to break the modern day slave shackles is a political prisoner and the government is the Mafia, a bunch of thugs taking down competition.
The government cannot be punished, which is why people have rights - protections against government abuse. At this point individual rights are nothing bit history and this cannot stand.
Trump for POTUS. Not for any good reason other than this - restructure the debt, get the interest rates up, where they are supposed to be and lose most of the government spending. Yes, this means no more SS and other ponzi schemes that the government is running. But it also means people will have their rights back. Being a free person is worth something, more than the 30 pieces of not so silver coins politicians buy you with.
Even if I buy 0 liters of gasoline, even if I use 0 electrical power, even if I live entirely on a single piece of land that I work myself, then the pollution will inevitably impose itself on me.
- sure deal, so that's between you and every user of the resources that may end up creating pollution that you may end up paying for.
Whoever and however the product is used, the product is causing significant harm, therefore the product should be priced in such a fashion as to reflect the harm it does.
- what are you, a central politburo, deciding what things cost, how costs are calculated, etc? Who told you that you are good at figuring out costs before they are actually incurred? Who told you that governments are good at figuring out costs exactly? When was the last time that a government did anything within any type of budget?
Who told you that a centralized model 'calculated' (invented out of ass) by politicians for paying for things is better than a distributed model that occurs on its own?
It is the CONSUMER that is using these products and causing pollution, not the producer that gives you the ABILITY to use them. So if as a consumer you end up paying for what you are using in ways that not part of the purchase price that makes most sense, definitely more sense than some central government body trying to get their fingers into things they actually do not understand or know or even can know about.
Finally if you don't mind 'paying more for gas' right now due to stupid carbon taxes, what is your problem for paying for the same thing but based on the actual market forces?
You are full of collectivist nonsense. You are the one benefiting most from fossil fuels. You are purchasing gasoline, you heat up your home, you are buying food, medicine, clothing, electronics, electricity, transportation, entertainment, everything that makes your life bearable or enjoyable at all has fossil fuels in it, directly or not. You are the one reaping the profits, the companies are profiting from selling to you, you are profiting by using it all.
This entire 'externalized cost' argument completely glosses over the usage of all the products provided to you. If you end up paying something somewhere that has to do with pollution or health care or anything else for that matter that results from usage of fossil fuels then actually the market is doing its job. It's putting the cost of all this pollution onto the people directly responsible for it, which is consumers.
A company can sell you a gun, you are the one putting a bullet into somebody's head. A company can sell you a barrel of acid. If you dump that acid into the local river or onto the ground, that's on you.
Except that there is no such thing as 'externalized cost' for energy production. The companies selling you oil products and all other products that use oil during production and transportation are giving you something that you are using. You are the end cause of any pollution related to use of such products.
If a company sells you 1000 litres of gasoline, you are the one burning it. If you also end up paying for pollution through some means, you are paying for part of the use of the product that you like and want to use every day of your life.
To answer your question: because there shouldn't be any income taxes or wealth taxes at all, that's why. AFAIC all income and wealth taxes are slavery and that about sums it up. An individual building a company creates value that did not exist before the company existed. The country is based on companies that individuals create, not the other way around, and the entire world is going to learn that lesson this century, after the last few decades were spent destroying savings and thus capital investments by government generating inflation through money printing tax and government growth in general, that requires never ending growing amount of money just to exist.
Companies are finding ways to exit the systems that are trying to enslave them, but those systems were built by those companies. Once the companies exist, those systems will collapse, which is demonstrated in all the bubbles that are blown by government money printing and borrowing operations that truly became more pronounced in the last few decades, once the companies started exiting due to the government legalized slavery became too unbearable while the world becoming more global.
Nothing gets propped up by money printing except for politicians, who get bailed out based on their promises to deliver everything to everybody. Money gets destroyed by printing and bonds are promises to pay money in the future, so of-course they also get destroyed.
This guy is a complete moron. He manages largest privately held bond fund, he wants his bonds to be propped up by printing, he wants to be 'made whole' when his fund goes belly up (and it will). What he does not seem to understand or care about is that bonds are promises to pay dollars in the future. Well, his idea is leading towards destruction of the dollar itself. He mentions Ron and Rand Paul in his idiotic piece there as well, saying that 'they would be good at it', at what? At dropping dollars out of helicopters? He is a complete nincompoop, Ron Paul stands for sound market money, he is 100% against fiat and fiat printing and always argues against easy money.
Bill Gross proves this: in the age of fake money even a braindead zombie can 'manage a fund'.
The real problem of course is that governments and politicians of the world are limiting human knowledge and discoveries by sticking their shitty hands and noses where they do not belong at all - science. The real problem of ethics is the ignoramuses of the general public and their ignoramus pieces of shit 'representatives' destroying individual freedom of scientists to run any experiments they need to run on cells, tissues just because those cells and tissues can at some point become a human. Well, if they do end up making a human this way - great. It is about time we figured out how to do that without getting all sweaty.
Hold on, hold on, let me write this down, who do they sue once the food I choose to eat kills me?
Sure, but I am running an experiment on myself for my own sake, not for anybody else and I am not proposing that anybody follows me. My point is that we should be deciding what we are and what we do with ourselves, not any government or any other outside collective.
So unlike everybody who commented before me here (just ACs so far), I actually read what was written and apparently the experiment worked.
I've been running an experiment of my own for 21 years now. For the first 8 years only ate raw veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds. For the last 13 years eating cooked food, only veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds but also cheeses, yoghurt and some breads.
I think people should be free to experiment with their own bodies, we only live once. Some people climb rocks, others eat shit, who knows, maybe something will come out of it. I personally would like to go through the DNA procedure to increase the length of the telomeres like that lady in South America did, I don't want to wait for any government approval for any of it, it's my life.
I understand it, I just reject it. People are not hammers. I find it odd that you can't understand that sentience makes a world of difference.
- sure, people are not hammers outside of my business. If you are not working for me, you are not part of my instrument. If you are not working for the organization that I have created to execute specific tasks I assigned to you, you are just another person out there somewhere. I do not even see people within the organization as 'cogs', only their function.
The function of a person within my company is that of a cog in the machine that I have created. If that human function for a cog can be replaced with an automated cog it does not mean that I have somehow reduced the human to a machine part, it means the job that the human was doing is now reduced to an automated process.
Humans are not cogs maybe, but they sell that functionality when they apply for a job.
There is a hole in your mind.
- I disagree, there is a blindspot in your mind, you are clearly unable to separate the form from the function.
But for the many contributions of others, you would at best be sitting naked in a cave, probably without a fire. More likely you would have died after a short brutal life.
- I respect people who invent things, people who run things, make machines. They are inspirational.
I don't see how hiring somebody to play a particular role is reducing them to anything, if anything at all, it provides them with a place to work to earn money honestly while actually contributing to society by helping to push forward my plan. Now, whether my plan is contributing to society or not, this question is answered by looking at the company's profits, if there are profits, then there is an actual positive contribution. What I make with the machine that I created is valuable if somebody uses it, just like fire is valuable because people use it.
I notice you claim the accomplishments for yourself because you trained your employees. Why don't you ascribe it all to your parents who made and trained you? (a lot more than you did for your employees)
- again, you are missing the point. I train my developers, but I don't train my accountant. This point is incidental.
My accomplishment is in thinking of a business, taking my own savings (the money I earned while working for others), deciding what to do with the people and money to create the products that I am creating.
The machine that is my business lets me do just that - create the products that I want to create but faster than if I was trying to do it on my own, which by the way I did as well, building my first product by myself and it was a much longer and slower process.
The fact that you cannot recognize that somebody is making somebody through a higher order machine that they create that is their company is the hole in your mind. I don't care if you fix it or not.
Cheers.
You may be surprised to learn that I own a business and that I hire and sometimes fire people.
- well, many people do things without actually understanding what they are doing. Would I be surprised that you are doing something without understanding what you are doing? No.
The problem here is that you don't understand that you are NOT the alpha and omega.
- you are reading waaaay too much into my point. Are you 'alpha' for being able to use a hammer?
This is the same thing precisely. I craft my hammer by putting together people, money, land, and processes. That's my hammer.
I can also use another higher level tool - a washing machine. I put in the detergent, the dirty clothes and turn the knobs. The machine washes for me, I was the one who decided that there will be a machine and that it will was clothing that I want to wash. I decided where the machine is located, what detergent it will use. I decided when it will work and when it will sit idle. In your weird world I just declared myself to be 'alpha' for running a washing machine.
If I could replace the people working for me with other pieces of automation today, I would do that exact thing. My company would produce what I want it to produce, I would be more productive because my company would be more efficient maybe. I would have 0 employees and yet I would produce things with my company, which is the tool that I have created.
Consider, if you don't do what the accountant needs, he'll get another employer that does better.
- that's just fine. Just like a belt can break in a washing machine and would have to be replaced.
You are clearly unable to understand my point or even what you are doing (when and if you are hiring/firing people).
No, I did not teach them how to eat or wipe their asses. I did teach themto code, in some cases from scratch, but that is not even relevant. I did not teach my accountant anything, I simply hired him. He is doing what I need but if he does not I will find another. He is part of the machine I built to make myself more productive. Each of my workers are as productive as they can be individually. My productivity is the function of the organization that I have created. My company is my tool to do what I desire to do but faster than if I was doing it singlehandedly.
Like I said, I don't expect you to understand any of it though it is not rocket science (and literally unlike Musk, I do not build rockets).