No, I don't think GS is ever 'innocent' actually. I think GS people and government are pretty much the same people. I think that to accuse GS of fraud and to go to court with that argument is equivalent of shining the light on the behaviour of the government officials and systems. This behaviour (AFAIC) is treasonous, and it is most definitely unethical and stupid economically speaking. It is not stupid from point of view of expedience though.
What I am saying is that the government system would rather have GS pay a 'fine' to sweep this under the rug rather than having dirt dug up that would lift the cover from behind the curtain dealings that are happening on the government level.
- you are mistaking fiat paper for money. Money can store value and can be traded for goods and services regardless of the mint that coined them, US dollars cannot.
Then why aren't they ?
- they are, you are not paying attention. The Chinese are consuming what they are producing in more and more numbers, they are also not purchasing new US bonds and letting the old ones expire.
Well, most companies are ran by people who have been conditioned by the government Mafia 'to pay or else', so this is the only way they know. I don't have any issues going directly after the specific people that want to steal from me, most folks out there cannot even imagine doing that.
Well, actually since GS got TARP it stands to reason that it 'paid' that 5 billion with free money. It is likely easier for them to pay that 'penalty' than to go through the court proceedings, which would bring to light facts about government pushing the economy of the world into this calamity by manipulating money and interest rates.
AFAIC GS had a talk, where it was made clear that no government official must be shown to have been involved in this and GS would have to 'fall on the sword' so to speak to cover up the real reasons behind the failure of the USA government not to push the world towards this collapse with all the massive inflation since 1980s
Likely people's pay is not going to go up significantly but rather many companies will hire more people to fill the gap. As a side benefit this should help unemployment.
- actually many full time employees will be fired and replaced with part time ones. Sure it will 'help' unemployment like every other thing for the last few years 'helps' unemployment by destroying full time jobs and creating part time ones. Having more part time jobs than full time jobs pushes the overall number of jobs up, this 'helps' the unemployment numbers as reported by the government.
The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through
My point is that for every rule that the government invents to make itself look populist there are ways to get around the rules. Give me a limit of 50,000, I can do something about it. Give me a number of hours per week or per day or per month, I can do something about it.
In reality of-course your pay will not go up, you may lose your job, while somebody's pay may go up. The number of dollars available to a business is not based on the desires of the politicians to buy votes, it is based on the ability of a business to generate revenue. This ability does not improve when another rule comes out that makes it more difficult to hire and pay workers.
I am just going to add this: the number of well paying full time jobs in the USA is falling while the number of part time jobs is going up. For each full time job that is lost, maybe 2 or 3 (or more!) part time jobs can be created. Of-course as the number of part time jobs goes up, so does the ability of government to declare 'job growth'.
They are not reporting on the quality and compensation for those jobs, they are just using total numbers, which makes it seem like the unemployment is getting better while in the reality it's getting worse.
Wrong, I am not a Libertarian, I am an anarcho capitalist, objectivist. I look at things as they are objectively, without bias of any form of 'morality' or 'social justice'.
I am correct and I am not trying to be popular, my expression is just fine. Besides, the responses here allow me to see very quickly who is who and who represents what. There are a small number no bullshit people here, but they are a minority.
I know very well the value of people, some people represent much higher value to me than others, that much is also quite certain. What do you know about value to talk about it here?
I guess you need to learn quite a bit there. Interstate rail traffic was private, government could not withhold any funds from a State to make it comply, does that make it clearer for you?
Once again, legislating the reality fails and it is not only true for the digits of Pi or abstinence only laws, it's true for manufacturing, where the rubber hits the road, so to speak.
You want to talk about how government destroying individual freedoms incidentally caused massive pollution? How about the FDR's 1944 Highway Act? Destruction of private property started before that time of-course, but government destroyed most of the working rail truck systems and replaced them with government subsidised (read - controlled) road systems designed to control the commerce by applying interstate commerce powers that wouldn't be there otherwise.
Just how many trucks are on the roads today where rail road would have been a much cleaner, better, safer, cheaper, longer lasting solution? Literally millions of trucks. How much pollution is that?
Legislating for control, for expedience of the coming elections instead of for actual long lasting economic prosperity led to this. Diesel cars are irrelevant in the large schema of things. When governments of the world wage wars they put out untold amounts of pollution, death, misery, economic destruction. Diesel cars? Ha!
The Americans are not buying, they are taking with a promise to buy. Buying means trading, printing and using printed paper to take is not trading. Americans cannot afford Chinese products otherwise, that is what the 500,000,000,000 USD a year trade deficit is showing. Chinese are perfectly capable of consuming their own products and they have the money (productive output) actually to pay for the purchases.
The price that you are talking about is an hourly wage. Businesses are faced with government rules that make hiring certain categories of people more expensive than their market price. Government prices people out of work. This is what minimum wage is, this is what laws for anti discrimination, laws regarding hiring and firing people are - taxes that price certain categories of people out of market.
Do you shop for more expensive or less expensive consumer items? An employee is what businesses pay for and businesses also shop around. If government made it too expensive for you to buy some type of food, you would shop around for a substitute, there is no difference there.
It is not stupid to avoid older workers if the government sets up rules that make it more expensive to hire them. It should be obvious that absent government oppression businesses would only care about best value for their money (ratio of quality to price). Once a business can be sued for anything related to entitlements provided to groups of people, once businesses are forced to carry extra expenses related to entitlements provided by government regulations, businesses will choose to avoid these groups altogether. Enjoy.
Nah, I am very well versed in following conversations, you on the other hand, cannot even follow one train of thought in your own head. You are the one who should read the shit that you wrote and think about it a little more than your primitive miniscule brain allows.
Sociopaths hate humans, collectivists hate humans. Sociopaths hate humans as individuals as as the collective. Collectivists hate humans as individuals.
A humanist does not hate humans at all, a humanist respects rights of individual people and sees the sociopathic collective for what it is: the destroyer of individual rights.
1. You cannot force people into communism. It was tried unsuccessfully too many times to count, it fails but in the process it murders people and economies. Communism, like any other form of collectivism goes against the principles of individual freedom and it goes against the natural desire of individuals to better their own lives rather than having been enslaved for the benefit of others.
2. Using the Internet does not make anybody 'part of the system' anymore than the simple act of being born makes somebody 'part of the system'. Being born into slavery does not take away natural desire to break the chains.
3. I did not quote anybody in any more way than I quoted common sense.
4. Money is MADE. Money is the productive output of my work. Fiat currency is medium of exchange that is accepted today because of government encroachment into the economy but the paper itself is no more money than the name of something is that thing. Money is store of value, medium of exchange and unit of account. Government fiat is no store of value, it is the means of control and incidentally it acts as the medium of exchange and unit of account, but storing value? It cannot store value, it has no value.
No, sociopaths hate humans, their freedoms, it takes a sociopath to be a collectivist. It takes a humanist to see through this envy and class warfare and call the sociopath collectivists for what they are.
That's not a failure, that's a triumph of Capitalism. Not requiring people to fulfil current jobs but automating all of that away would be an enormous testament to the virtue of Capitalism, its ability to produce everything that people need without requiring those people to do the tasks themselves. It's basically paradise.
Now, having that type of productive ability means a huge abundance of supply and this creates huge pressures to lower prices, if there is no human involved, the prices can drop all the way to the cost of mining materials and energy and distribution chain and management of the involved resources. Nothing will be free but the prices will be extremely low compared to prices of today.
In an economy with extremely low prices all you need is freedom from government intervention to allow people to create/run more businesses that would provide the income for the now many unemployed.
With more and more automation and productivity based on it prices should be falling, instead of-course governments prevent prices from falling by pumping more and more fake liquidity into the system (fake, as in nobody worked to create it, it was conjured up out of thin air by the magic of the Federal reserve and the likes of them).
Pumping prices up lets government pretend that the nominal GDP is growing, which lets the government to collect more taxes in absolute values. The entire 'inflation is good' notion is absolutely erroneous, government manipulating money supply, interest rates, inflation numbers, GDP numbers, employment records, all this stuff is what is leading to destruction of the economies and of the societies built by these economies.
Production and automation is the good thing, regulation, manipulation of money supply, interest rates, taxation of income (slavery) is a bad thing. In simple terms: you want more of the good thing and less of the bad thing.
Oh, really? You work with 'census data' for living? Were you alive before the IRS was established? Do you have data that could show the approval rating of income taxes at any levels on the entire population? Because IRS was established at the same time as the alcohol taxes were discontinued due to pressure from feminist anti-saloon movement and the original collectivist ideology was to set a 7% tax on the top 1 % of income earners to offset the 50% loss of tax revenues that used to come from alcohol consumption. Who exactly would have supported the idea of income taxes on all people before IRS existed? Nobody did, they supported to rob the top 1%, but that is how all collectivist movements present themselves: we will only steal from those, who are in a tiny minority so the rest of us, the ones in the huge majority can impose our will onto them through this 'democracy' (nothing more than theft by the mob).
However you are correct on one thing: the attitudes of people did not change throughout millions of years: take from those who have more than I do and give it to me, that much is certainly true. Of-course it kills the economies, but it's true.
I see, so the USA would be better off without Apple products, salaries, investment opportunities. I submit you would be better off without a nose to spite your face.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I don't think GS is ever 'innocent' actually. I think GS people and government are pretty much the same people. I think that to accuse GS of fraud and to go to court with that argument is equivalent of shining the light on the behaviour of the government officials and systems. This behaviour (AFAIC) is treasonous, and it is most definitely unethical and stupid economically speaking. It is not stupid from point of view of expedience though.
What I am saying is that the government system would rather have GS pay a 'fine' to sweep this under the rug rather than having dirt dug up that would lift the cover from behind the curtain dealings that are happening on the government level.
Money has been around for thousands of years.
- you are mistaking fiat paper for money. Money can store value and can be traded for goods and services regardless of the mint that coined them, US dollars cannot.
Then why aren't they ?
- they are, you are not paying attention. The Chinese are consuming what they are producing in more and more numbers, they are also not purchasing new US bonds and letting the old ones expire.
Well, most companies are ran by people who have been conditioned by the government Mafia 'to pay or else', so this is the only way they know. I don't have any issues going directly after the specific people that want to steal from me, most folks out there cannot even imagine doing that.
Well, actually since GS got TARP it stands to reason that it 'paid' that 5 billion with free money. It is likely easier for them to pay that 'penalty' than to go through the court proceedings, which would bring to light facts about government pushing the economy of the world into this calamity by manipulating money and interest rates.
AFAIC GS had a talk, where it was made clear that no government official must be shown to have been involved in this and GS would have to 'fall on the sword' so to speak to cover up the real reasons behind the failure of the USA government not to push the world towards this collapse with all the massive inflation since 1980s
Likely people's pay is not going to go up significantly but rather many companies will hire more people to fill the gap. As a side benefit this should help unemployment.
- actually many full time employees will be fired and replaced with part time ones. Sure it will 'help' unemployment like every other thing for the last few years 'helps' unemployment by destroying full time jobs and creating part time ones. Having more part time jobs than full time jobs pushes the overall number of jobs up, this 'helps' the unemployment numbers as reported by the government.
The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through
My point is that for every rule that the government invents to make itself look populist there are ways to get around the rules. Give me a limit of 50,000, I can do something about it. Give me a number of hours per week or per day or per month, I can do something about it.
In reality of-course your pay will not go up, you may lose your job, while somebody's pay may go up. The number of dollars available to a business is not based on the desires of the politicians to buy votes, it is based on the ability of a business to generate revenue. This ability does not improve when another rule comes out that makes it more difficult to hire and pay workers.
I am just going to add this: the number of well paying full time jobs in the USA is falling while the number of part time jobs is going up. For each full time job that is lost, maybe 2 or 3 (or more!) part time jobs can be created. Of-course as the number of part time jobs goes up, so does the ability of government to declare 'job growth'.
They are not reporting on the quality and compensation for those jobs, they are just using total numbers, which makes it seem like the unemployment is getting better while in the reality it's getting worse.
A humanist respects the right of any individual not to be oppressed to prevent any other individual or a group of people from starving.
Wrong, I am not a Libertarian, I am an anarcho capitalist, objectivist. I look at things as they are objectively, without bias of any form of 'morality' or 'social justice'.
I am correct and I am not trying to be popular, my expression is just fine. Besides, the responses here allow me to see very quickly who is who and who represents what. There are a small number no bullshit people here, but they are a minority.
I know very well the value of people, some people represent much higher value to me than others, that much is also quite certain. What do you know about value to talk about it here?
By the way, you should be happy, the vast majority of /. readers are overwhelmingly on your side. My comments are extremely unpopular, even most seemingly uncontroversial ones are moded down, what more can you possibly want?
I know the value of things, value is what you get for the money you are able (or willing) to pay. Do you know the value of things? I think you do not.
I guess you need to learn quite a bit there. Interstate rail traffic was private, government could not withhold any funds from a State to make it comply, does that make it clearer for you?
Once again, legislating the reality fails and it is not only true for the digits of Pi or abstinence only laws, it's true for manufacturing, where the rubber hits the road, so to speak.
You want to talk about how government destroying individual freedoms incidentally caused massive pollution? How about the FDR's 1944 Highway Act? Destruction of private property started before that time of-course, but government destroyed most of the working rail truck systems and replaced them with government subsidised (read - controlled) road systems designed to control the commerce by applying interstate commerce powers that wouldn't be there otherwise.
Just how many trucks are on the roads today where rail road would have been a much cleaner, better, safer, cheaper, longer lasting solution? Literally millions of trucks. How much pollution is that?
Legislating for control, for expedience of the coming elections instead of for actual long lasting economic prosperity led to this. Diesel cars are irrelevant in the large schema of things. When governments of the world wage wars they put out untold amounts of pollution, death, misery, economic destruction. Diesel cars? Ha!
The Americans are not buying, they are taking with a promise to buy. Buying means trading, printing and using printed paper to take is not trading. Americans cannot afford Chinese products otherwise, that is what the 500,000,000,000 USD a year trade deficit is showing. Chinese are perfectly capable of consuming their own products and they have the money (productive output) actually to pay for the purchases.
The right product means the best you can get at the price you can afford.
The price that you are talking about is an hourly wage. Businesses are faced with government rules that make hiring certain categories of people more expensive than their market price. Government prices people out of work. This is what minimum wage is, this is what laws for anti discrimination, laws regarding hiring and firing people are - taxes that price certain categories of people out of market.
Do you shop for more expensive or less expensive consumer items? An employee is what businesses pay for and businesses also shop around. If government made it too expensive for you to buy some type of food, you would shop around for a substitute, there is no difference there.
It is not stupid to avoid older workers if the government sets up rules that make it more expensive to hire them. It should be obvious that absent government oppression businesses would only care about best value for their money (ratio of quality to price). Once a business can be sued for anything related to entitlements provided to groups of people, once businesses are forced to carry extra expenses related to entitlements provided by government regulations, businesses will choose to avoid these groups altogether. Enjoy.
Nah, I am very well versed in following conversations, you on the other hand, cannot even follow one train of thought in your own head. You are the one who should read the shit that you wrote and think about it a little more than your primitive miniscule brain allows.
Sociopaths hate humans, collectivists hate humans. Sociopaths hate humans as individuals as as the collective. Collectivists hate humans as individuals.
A humanist does not hate humans at all, a humanist respects rights of individual people and sees the sociopathic collective for what it is: the destroyer of individual rights.
1. You cannot force people into communism. It was tried unsuccessfully too many times to count, it fails but in the process it murders people and economies. Communism, like any other form of collectivism goes against the principles of individual freedom and it goes against the natural desire of individuals to better their own lives rather than having been enslaved for the benefit of others.
2. Using the Internet does not make anybody 'part of the system' anymore than the simple act of being born makes somebody 'part of the system'. Being born into slavery does not take away natural desire to break the chains.
3. I did not quote anybody in any more way than I quoted common sense.
4. Money is MADE. Money is the productive output of my work. Fiat currency is medium of exchange that is accepted today because of government encroachment into the economy but the paper itself is no more money than the name of something is that thing. Money is store of value, medium of exchange and unit of account. Government fiat is no store of value, it is the means of control and incidentally it acts as the medium of exchange and unit of account, but storing value? It cannot store value, it has no value.
Good luck there.
No, sociopaths hate humans, their freedoms, it takes a sociopath to be a collectivist. It takes a humanist to see through this envy and class warfare and call the sociopath collectivists for what they are.
That's not a failure, that's a triumph of Capitalism. Not requiring people to fulfil current jobs but automating all of that away would be an enormous testament to the virtue of Capitalism, its ability to produce everything that people need without requiring those people to do the tasks themselves. It's basically paradise.
Now, having that type of productive ability means a huge abundance of supply and this creates huge pressures to lower prices, if there is no human involved, the prices can drop all the way to the cost of mining materials and energy and distribution chain and management of the involved resources. Nothing will be free but the prices will be extremely low compared to prices of today.
In an economy with extremely low prices all you need is freedom from government intervention to allow people to create/run more businesses that would provide the income for the now many unemployed.
With more and more automation and productivity based on it prices should be falling, instead of-course governments prevent prices from falling by pumping more and more fake liquidity into the system (fake, as in nobody worked to create it, it was conjured up out of thin air by the magic of the Federal reserve and the likes of them).
Pumping prices up lets government pretend that the nominal GDP is growing, which lets the government to collect more taxes in absolute values. The entire 'inflation is good' notion is absolutely erroneous, government manipulating money supply, interest rates, inflation numbers, GDP numbers, employment records, all this stuff is what is leading to destruction of the economies and of the societies built by these economies.
Production and automation is the good thing, regulation, manipulation of money supply, interest rates, taxation of income (slavery) is a bad thing. In simple terms: you want more of the good thing and less of the bad thing.
Oh, really? You work with 'census data' for living? Were you alive before the IRS was established? Do you have data that could show the approval rating of income taxes at any levels on the entire population? Because IRS was established at the same time as the alcohol taxes were discontinued due to pressure from feminist anti-saloon movement and the original collectivist ideology was to set a 7% tax on the top 1 % of income earners to offset the 50% loss of tax revenues that used to come from alcohol consumption. Who exactly would have supported the idea of income taxes on all people before IRS existed? Nobody did, they supported to rob the top 1%, but that is how all collectivist movements present themselves: we will only steal from those, who are in a tiny minority so the rest of us, the ones in the huge majority can impose our will onto them through this 'democracy' (nothing more than theft by the mob).
However you are correct on one thing: the attitudes of people did not change throughout millions of years: take from those who have more than I do and give it to me, that much is certainly true. Of-course it kills the economies, but it's true.
And a fcourse the conversation degenerates into this, envy, class warfare, mobocracy. Apple is John Galt - the capital is on strike.
I see, so the USA would be better off without Apple products, salaries, investment opportunities. I submit you would be better off without a nose to spite your face.