Weimar Republic destroyed its currency via money printing, deflation should have been allowed to work its course, it wasn't.
USSR was printing trillions every year and had no production at all to justify any of that printing. It collapsed once it pretty much ran out of gold to buy food.
100 years of currency destruction in USA got you from a well working private rail road system, largest in the world at the time, to a bunch of unsustainable government subsidised roads, that cause massive pollution by burning all that oil that gets the Americans from their unsustainable suburbs to where they actually need to be - near some jobs that are still there and back. However the actual productivity is destroyed, instead of being world's largest creditor nation, as USA became over the 19th century, it is now largest debtor in history of the world, probably largest debtor in our Galaxy, running 500Billion USD/year trade deficits.
By the way cars and airplanes in USA were a product of the previous economy, the productive economy. Modern economy in USA would not have produced any of that, modern economy in USA has failing airlines and failing car companies all in need of being shut down and restructured, but instead being bailed out time and again.
Enjoy your 'win', I think it will not last for too long.
Prices would be rising much faster of-course if the foreigners weren't absorbing the inflation (taking US dollars in exchange for their production). What do you think 20 years of 500 Billion USD / year trade deficit means? It means that the money that is printed in the USA is transferred to companies that provide the USA with the products it consumes. The foreigners then take the US dollars to the foreign banks, the foreign banks buy the US dollars (exchange to the local currencies). The foreign central banks are just as responsible in this case, they also print money in response to the USA printing, so they take in the US dollars and either hold those dollars or buy US bonds with them.
Not only the USA was and still is benefiting from foreign productivity with all this money printing, it is also benefiting from foreigners buying up its debt, financing USA government spending.
In the short run (and I am talking about a few decades this has been happening) this gave Americans a boosted standard of living they couldn't pay for (they weren't producing themselves).
In the long run this destroyed productivity in the USA, because with all this debt financed consumption and growing government the only economy that USA is left with is taxes. USA lives off of other people's productivity and it's economy is tax and borrow and spend type of economy and this economy produced enough government, enough regulations, enough costs that manufacturing sector left the country.
So in the long term, what this created is a situation where Americans have no productive capacity of their own, the population is no longer able to produce, there are almost no factories, there are almost no skilled workers, able to work in factories, there is no real capital, only printed money, thus the real interest rates are sky high, which is why there is now more business destruction (starting in 2014) than new business creation in the States. More businesses shut down and/or left the country than were started in 2014.
That's the long term damage of inflation, that and also of-course all of the pensioners, who have to come out of their retirement, because they can no longer have any return on their life savings, there is no return on the money that is saved, the savers in USA are destroyed, the debtors are favoured. This policy is the government policy, the policy of the biggest debtor - the government.
The government will pretend that inflation doesn't exist because the wages aren't going up, well, the labour costs are going up, the wages are not, that's not a paradox, that's stagflation and depression, that's expected unlike the Keynesians believe it to be an impossibility.
The reality is that USA has no productivity gains, very few people in USA are more productive than before, the share buy back programs the socialists in the media and government are touting as an example of greedy corporations, hiding their money is another example of this problem, since vast majority of that cash that is on hold by companies is borrowed. The money is borrowed, the large companies that actually have large assets and thus can get the loans (based on newly created fiat) from the banks (unlike new businesses), believe that the future value of money is lower than relative value of their shares, so they borrow money at these artificial rates and use it to buy back their stock, thus also artificially boosting the stock prices. But hey, I would do that too if I could get my hands on cheap money from government, why not? That seems to be a much simpler way to 'boost earnings' in USA now than actually growing sales, which is impossible at this point, consumers are out of money, out of credit, the new housing bubble that the Fed was inflating is bursting already, so the 'wealth effect' will work in reverse now.
In any case, I am sure you will be just fine, so don't worry about it. What do you care what I think?
Agreed, there is no need to push for any particular subject beyond ability to read, write and do basic arithmetic. Once those are covered, the kids should no longer be required to be in school. Should be able to go into trades (probably for most), trade schools, should let those, who are truly interested to continue education by removing huge artificial demand created with all the government subsidised debt (student loans) and should get rid of the minimum wage laws and laws that prevent 15 year olds from being hired.
In Germany there is a separation into different type of schooling, where most kids end up in Hauptschule and may actually start working from around age 15 (vocational training, training at work).
The next level of schooling is called Realschule, this one allows you to move to the next level if you can (Gymnasium) or to do vocational training. Gymnasium is your preparation for further education in a university.
What would make much more sense in USA would be to get rid of minimum wage laws, allow people to work for small compensation and train at work. If my company was based in USA I would hire 15 year olds in a heartbeat. I would train them for a couple of months if I wasn't forced to pay anybody anything more than they are worth if there were no laws that would make this arrangement prohibitively expensive. A 15 year old, who is interested in learning a profession and is willing to be an apprentice is not in any way worse than a 21 year old, who finished university with a worthless degree in women studies and is now unemployable, because the debt prevents him or her from taking a low paying job, while at the same time they have 0 skills (no more than a 15 year old without such 'education' would).
* 205,000 jobs added to the economy * U3 unemployment rate rose from 6.1% to 6.2% * Not in Labor Force, but Want a Job Now: up 144,000 to 6.259 million * Employment/population ratio ages 25-54: down from 76.7% to 76.6%
* the overall employment to population ratio for all ages 16 and above rose 0.1% from 58.9 to 59.0%, and has risen by +0.3% YoY. The labor force participation rate rose from 62.8% to 62.9, and has fallen by -0.5% YoY (but remember, this includes droves of retiring Boomers).
25-54 year olds lost net 142,000 jobs.
16-19 year olds gained 44,000 jobs. 20-24 year olds gained 43,000 jobs. 55-69 year olds gained159,000 jobs.
So teenagers are finding part time jobs in the economy (summer), the so called 'retired' are coming out of retirement, because they can't afford to be retired in this economy anymore and the people in the main working age bracket have fewer permanent jobs and out of the 205,000 jobs created, that's just the delta, it doesn't show how many good, well paying permanent jobs were actually lost and how many part time jobs were created.
While the net jobs created are 205,000, most of the jobs created are part time, lower paying jobs, while jobs that are lost are full time, better paying jobs.
So what is going on with the job market exactly? Well, the same thing that is going on with the economy. The numbers can be demonstrated to be 'good' if you do not pay attention to the details. The reality is the opposite, the numbers are not good.
I would say that the USA economy needs fewer people in the universities and more people in trade, more people picking up skills as apprentices, skills that would make them employable without getting into gigantic debt with all the student loans.
It is expensive to hire people in USA, while the wages are not very high, the actual labour cost to the employees is high due to various laws, regulations, taxes, litigati
The gold dollar was about to put a check on Lyndon Johnson's 'Great Society' crapola, but Nixon defaulted on the gold dollar, crossed the words 'I owe you' from 'I owe you X dollars' from the bank notes and called the little paper previously known as the 'Federal reserve note' into 'dollars'. This is what allowed the government to perpetuate its growth to the gargantuan size it is today and it is what killed USA economy reversing the economic growth in USA and eventually wiping out the economy completely.
As to statistics, some peoplecompile this data, of-course unemployment rate shows some of this but the details of unemployment are much more important than the compiled averages, the poorer segment of society, the black Americans have suffered higher unemployment rate since the programs against poverty started, than ever before. Actually before the minimum wage was introduced in the 1938, unemployment among blacks youth (16-25, formative work years) was lower than among whites by 15%. Actually each 10% increase in minimum wage mandate had a disproportionate decrease in employment upon the minorities, which is counterproductive if the goal is to decrease poverty, of-course it was not, the goal was to turn people into dependants, voting for bigger and bigger government, while growing the said government.
The gold dollar was not allowing the government to carry with that goal and Nixon chose to default on the actual dollar than to abandon big government ideology.
I see a lot of negativity in your post directed at Microsoft and I wonder what kind of confusion of ideas turns a person into what you are, you are absolutely on the side of governments and against the individual freedoms and liberties. What happened, did you get beat up a lot as a child or something?
Not as simple as saying that 'everyone' is all people. What is 'all people'? All Chinese residents? All people on this planet? All people that are paying taxes and who will actually be force to pay for this, or is it maybe all consumers of the goods that will have higher prices on them (and likely fewer choices of products) due to these 'heavy restrictions'?
Does 'everyone' include those, who are still in poverty in China (plenty more people are still very poor) and who want to move up in class but who will be prevented if prices for everything go up due to all the new regulations, licensing, taxes and generally growth of government that 'heavy restrictions' assumes?
It's not as simple as saying 'continue reducing pollution in the air'. In the USA when Lyndon Johnson came out with the 'Great Society' crap the level of poverty was very low and falling, then the government stepped in and reversed that trend categorically. The free market was working towards reducing poverty, there was no need for anything called 'Great Society' (and as always, there is no truth in advertising that comes from government, less truth in government advertising than in any other).
Free market capitalism works towards improving the standard of living of the market participants, but a poor economy cannot fix pollution, only a wealthy economy can and you do not make an economy into a wealthy one with 'heavy restrictions'.
Poor economies do not let people even to get their heads up, never mind thinking about such rich problems as not burning coal but instead going nuclear. Interestingly enough, while China is burning plenty of coal (so does USA) but China is building up nuclear power plant capacity and USA is not.
China will fix its pollution by following free market capitalist principles of searching for cheaper sources of energy and nuclear will be the cheapest source.
"Less then the medical cost, and loss of habitat costs." - how living a life of poverty, does not count as a cost to a society? I say it does. A life of poverty doesn't help you with medical costs and habitat costs either.
Why should polluter be allowed to force their pollution on others for free?
- nothing is free, people are paying for the energy, food, water and all other products that they consume and the prices that they pay reflect the economy they are in. By adding 'heavy restrictions' to the economy you are not helping to fix anything, you are ensuring that the economy will be poorer than it could otherwise and thus preventing the fixes, not promoting them.
Ironically, China is moving to greener solutions faster the the US is.
- it is not ironic at all, USA is destroying its economy with all the government and destruction of individual freedoms and China allows individual freedoms and mostly free market capitalism to work its way towards prosperity, which is crucial to having pollution free environment.
It would be cheaper for everyone to just fix the pollution problem by putting heavy restrictions on emissions.
- take a look at what you wrote. This sentence is self-contradictory and at best you just didn't understand it.
It would be 'cheaper for everyone' to 'fix pollution' by putting 'heavy restrictions'.
Ok, who is 'everyone', what does it mean to 'fix pollution' and how much do 'heavy restrictions' cost to everyone?
This guy put together a 'low cost solution for everyone' who wants to 'fix pollution' and he didn't force any 'heavy restrictions' on anybody either. So anybody who is actually worried about the pollution can now pay for it to be fixed for themselves.
Now, of-course this doesn't fix overall pollution, but it is a distributed method of fixing pollution locally on a voluntary basis that is provided by free market capitalism (private property ownership and operation without government interference).
As a society progresses from pre-industrial (China before 1970s) to industrial (the last 40 years) its residents become wealthier and more affluent and as they become wealthier and more affluent they can now afford to start thinking about their environment and the best way to fix environment is to allow free market enterprise to market the fixes straight to the public, which then will decide whether it wants to pay anything at all (or more or less) for any such fixes, be it fixes on large scale or small distributed local fixes like this one.
To put 'heavy restrictions on emissions' means to restrict wealth generation in the country that was able to move 350,000,000 people out of poverty over the last 40 years (while the rest of the globe has been moving hundreds of millions into poverty by destroying individual freedom and thus destroying capitalism, destroying the free market).
China will be fine, it will fix its environmental problems and it will do so without advice from the economic failures that scold it here.
Expanding fiat currency leads to economic reduction, stagnation and often collapse, history is on my side, you don't have anything on yours. 1971 - the year of default on the US dollar was the beginning of the end of USA economy, since then the productivity has been shrinking, deficits and debts growing, government growing and individual freedoms shrinking at an increasing rate.
That's one example, obviously there are thousands, including USSR, Weimar Republic and at least 30 examples of countries destroying their currency that way in only the last 100 years.
As to whether any amount of inflation of fiat currency is bad, yes, theft and thus misallocation of resources from those who produce to those who do not produce in the free market (not enough to be compensated for it by more than what the stolen or inflated currency allowed) is not good by any stretch of imagination, unless you have your head stuck all the way up into your ass.
As to 'increased money supply being always bad' - you are putting words in my mouth.
Expanding FIAT currency, as in paper not backed by anything is always bad and the history is my witness, every time it was done it led to long term economic damage.
Wrong, you are talking about 'gazonk', you do not get to point at shit, call it cheesecake for your political agenda and expect everybody to accept your nonsense.
I build and supply retail chain management systems and part of the platform is a store management system, which communicates with POS machines (in most cases via a share). So our solution to what you are describing (a common problem with POS systems) is to put our store management system on a Linux machine that has 2 network cards in it, one is the Internet connection and the other is LAN, this Linux machine runs the store management system and it becomes local network manager and a firewall.
The POS machines are on the LAN only, no Internet connection for them, the store management system connects to the retail management system that is external to the store (controls the entire chain). This way we can avoid this huge security breach.
Well, whether this practice is common or not is probably irrelevant, it is still not a prudent thing to do.
I build and supply retail chain management software to a number of chains, there are dozens of stores that use it, we switch at least one computer in a store to a Linux machine that runs the store management software (the chain management software is a central system and it doesn't run in a store, but all stores talk to it.)
Store management system is on the Linux machine that faces the Internet, it has 2 network cards, one is the Internet and the other is LAN (the same machine controls the LAN). Since this is Linux, iptables is used to filter out any unnecessary traffic.
I think there should be some sort of packet filter on Internet facing equipment, POS or anything else.
It's the inflation in play here, just like in the economy, the units of measurement are being stretched now, so the same mass measured in different units gives a nominally different answer;)
Nonsense, inflation is expansion of money supply, nothing else. Rising prices (or prices that are failing to fall) can be a result of inflation. Inflation changes the size of the measurement units of the economy, value of the currency. Inflation does not improve economy in any way, it destroys the economy both by destroying value of savings and rising prices of real savings, thus denying access to capital for productive purposes and pushing up nominal prices of assets, creating asset bubbles, making it look like economy is growing (faking the GDP), while in reality the economy stays the same (or shrinks), only the units change.
You are using this in an Orwellian fashion to confuse the population on the causes of inflation and its effects.
Socialism is fascism. Socialists want to control companies and companies fight back and buy political power, but the only reason political power can be bought is because socialists allow government to usurp all that power.
The reason for all this debt is lack of productivity and substitution of a real economy with a fake one.
Americans are an extremely unproductive bunch, living at the expense of the productive Chinese and others, printing money and 'buying' products created by others that they themselves do not produce, thus the 500 Billion USD/year trade deficits for a couple of decades now.
There is no 'your' definition, the definition that you are cheering for is the definition of propaganda, redefining the meaning of words in order to promote wilful ignorance.
Fake money cannot boost real productivity regardless of any conditions, it is shamanism through and through. But relax, nobody is fucking you in the ass, you don't need to squeeze that hard.
Ha ha, as I said, once you redefine the words you can claim all sorts of nonsense.
1927, New Century Dictionary Inflation: "The act of inflating, or the state of being inflated, specifically expansion or increase of the currency of a country by the issuing of paper money especially paper money not redeemable in specie or that is insufficiently secured by precious metal."
Not even a mention of prices.
Deflation is defined as the opposite of inflation.
Of-course the earlier in the dictionary world you go the more correct the definition, and the closer to the present, the more propaganda and nonsense is added to the definition, inserting the level of prices into definition of expansion and contraction of money supply. Prices do not inflate or deflate of-course, only total supply of money inflates and deflates. Inflation and deflation are changes in the measurement units, not changes in the economic output. Once you redefine the meanings of the words you lose all meaning altogether.
Once you ask the wrong question it doesn't matter what the answer is.
They will talk about drought and bandits and weather and climate and every single excuse under the Sun except for the actual real cause of this nonsense: inflation.
"Read my lips: no new taxes." "Iraq has WMDs." "If you like your plan, you can keep it."
that came to my head in just 1 millisecond. You can find millions more just like those ones. I mean I do not have a problem fining all those involved into those lies enough to rebuild the economies and societies, I would also jail them all, but the world doesn't really work like that. I suggest starting by educating yourself and buying into propaganda, whatever it may be.
Slashdot Mirror
Weimar Republic destroyed its currency via money printing, deflation should have been allowed to work its course, it wasn't.
USSR was printing trillions every year and had no production at all to justify any of that printing. It collapsed once it pretty much ran out of gold to buy food.
100 years of currency destruction in USA got you from a well working private rail road system, largest in the world at the time, to a bunch of unsustainable government subsidised roads, that cause massive pollution by burning all that oil that gets the Americans from their unsustainable suburbs to where they actually need to be - near some jobs that are still there and back. However the actual productivity is destroyed, instead of being world's largest creditor nation, as USA became over the 19th century, it is now largest debtor in history of the world, probably largest debtor in our Galaxy, running 500Billion USD/year trade deficits.
By the way cars and airplanes in USA were a product of the previous economy, the productive economy. Modern economy in USA would not have produced any of that, modern economy in USA has failing airlines and failing car companies all in need of being shut down and restructured, but instead being bailed out time and again.
Enjoy your 'win', I think it will not last for too long.
Prices are rising.
Prices would be rising much faster of-course if the foreigners weren't absorbing the inflation (taking US dollars in exchange for their production). What do you think 20 years of 500 Billion USD / year trade deficit means? It means that the money that is printed in the USA is transferred to companies that provide the USA with the products it consumes. The foreigners then take the US dollars to the foreign banks, the foreign banks buy the US dollars (exchange to the local currencies). The foreign central banks are just as responsible in this case, they also print money in response to the USA printing, so they take in the US dollars and either hold those dollars or buy US bonds with them.
Not only the USA was and still is benefiting from foreign productivity with all this money printing, it is also benefiting from foreigners buying up its debt, financing USA government spending.
In the short run (and I am talking about a few decades this has been happening) this gave Americans a boosted standard of living they couldn't pay for (they weren't producing themselves).
In the long run this destroyed productivity in the USA, because with all this debt financed consumption and growing government the only economy that USA is left with is taxes. USA lives off of other people's productivity and it's economy is tax and borrow and spend type of economy and this economy produced enough government, enough regulations, enough costs that manufacturing sector left the country.
So in the long term, what this created is a situation where Americans have no productive capacity of their own, the population is no longer able to produce, there are almost no factories, there are almost no skilled workers, able to work in factories, there is no real capital, only printed money, thus the real interest rates are sky high, which is why there is now more business destruction (starting in 2014) than new business creation in the States. More businesses shut down and/or left the country than were started in 2014.
That's the long term damage of inflation, that and also of-course all of the pensioners, who have to come out of their retirement, because they can no longer have any return on their life savings, there is no return on the money that is saved, the savers in USA are destroyed, the debtors are favoured. This policy is the government policy, the policy of the biggest debtor - the government.
The government will pretend that inflation doesn't exist because the wages aren't going up, well, the labour costs are going up, the wages are not, that's not a paradox, that's stagflation and depression, that's expected unlike the Keynesians believe it to be an impossibility.
The reality is that USA has no productivity gains, very few people in USA are more productive than before, the share buy back programs the socialists in the media and government are touting as an example of greedy corporations, hiding their money is another example of this problem, since vast majority of that cash that is on hold by companies is borrowed. The money is borrowed, the large companies that actually have large assets and thus can get the loans (based on newly created fiat) from the banks (unlike new businesses), believe that the future value of money is lower than relative value of their shares, so they borrow money at these artificial rates and use it to buy back their stock, thus also artificially boosting the stock prices. But hey, I would do that too if I could get my hands on cheap money from government, why not? That seems to be a much simpler way to 'boost earnings' in USA now than actually growing sales, which is impossible at this point, consumers are out of money, out of credit, the new housing bubble that the Fed was inflating is bursting already, so the 'wealth effect' will work in reverse now.
In any case, I am sure you will be just fine, so don't worry about it. What do you care what I think?
Agreed, there is no need to push for any particular subject beyond ability to read, write and do basic arithmetic. Once those are covered, the kids should no longer be required to be in school. Should be able to go into trades (probably for most), trade schools, should let those, who are truly interested to continue education by removing huge artificial demand created with all the government subsidised debt (student loans) and should get rid of the minimum wage laws and laws that prevent 15 year olds from being hired.
In Germany there is a separation into different type of schooling, where most kids end up in Hauptschule and may actually start working from around age 15 (vocational training, training at work).
The next level of schooling is called Realschule, this one allows you to move to the next level if you can (Gymnasium) or to do vocational training. Gymnasium is your preparation for further education in a university.
What would make much more sense in USA would be to get rid of minimum wage laws, allow people to work for small compensation and train at work. If my company was based in USA I would hire 15 year olds in a heartbeat. I would train them for a couple of months if I wasn't forced to pay anybody anything more than they are worth if there were no laws that would make this arrangement prohibitively expensive. A 15 year old, who is interested in learning a profession and is willing to be an apprentice is not in any way worse than a 21 year old, who finished university with a worthless degree in women studies and is now unemployable, because the debt prevents him or her from taking a low paying job, while at the same time they have 0 skills (no more than a 15 year old without such 'education' would).
Of-course USA job numbers came out for July 2014
* 205,000 jobs added to the economy
* U3 unemployment rate rose from 6.1% to 6.2%
* Not in Labor Force, but Want a Job Now: up 144,000 to 6.259 million
* Employment/population ratio ages 25-54: down from 76.7% to 76.6%
* the overall employment to population ratio for all ages 16 and above rose 0.1% from 58.9 to 59.0%, and has risen by +0.3% YoY. The labor force participation rate rose from 62.8% to 62.9, and has fallen by -0.5% YoY (but remember, this includes droves of retiring Boomers).
25-54 year olds lost net 142,000 jobs.
16-19 year olds gained 44,000 jobs.
20-24 year olds gained 43,000 jobs.
55-69 year olds gained159,000 jobs.
So teenagers are finding part time jobs in the economy (summer), the so called 'retired' are coming out of retirement, because they can't afford to be retired in this economy anymore and the people in the main working age bracket have fewer permanent jobs and out of the 205,000 jobs created, that's just the delta, it doesn't show how many good, well paying permanent jobs were actually lost and how many part time jobs were created.
While the net jobs created are 205,000, most of the jobs created are part time, lower paying jobs, while jobs that are lost are full time, better paying jobs.
So what is going on with the job market exactly? Well, the same thing that is going on with the economy. The numbers can be demonstrated to be 'good' if you do not pay attention to the details. The reality is the opposite, the numbers are not good.
I would say that the USA economy needs fewer people in the universities and more people in trade, more people picking up skills as apprentices, skills that would make them employable without getting into gigantic debt with all the student loans.
It is expensive to hire people in USA, while the wages are not very high, the actual labour cost to the employees is high due to various laws, regulations, taxes, litigati
The gold dollar was about to put a check on Lyndon Johnson's 'Great Society' crapola, but Nixon defaulted on the gold dollar, crossed the words 'I owe you' from 'I owe you X dollars' from the bank notes and called the little paper previously known as the 'Federal reserve note' into 'dollars'. This is what allowed the government to perpetuate its growth to the gargantuan size it is today and it is what killed USA economy reversing the economic growth in USA and eventually wiping out the economy completely.
As to statistics, some people compile this data, of-course unemployment rate shows some of this but the details of unemployment are much more important than the compiled averages, the poorer segment of society, the black Americans have suffered higher unemployment rate since the programs against poverty started, than ever before. Actually before the minimum wage was introduced in the 1938, unemployment among blacks youth (16-25, formative work years) was lower than among whites by 15%. Actually each 10% increase in minimum wage mandate had a disproportionate decrease in employment upon the minorities, which is counterproductive if the goal is to decrease poverty, of-course it was not, the goal was to turn people into dependants, voting for bigger and bigger government, while growing the said government.
The gold dollar was not allowing the government to carry with that goal and Nixon chose to default on the actual dollar than to abandon big government ideology.
I see a lot of negativity in your post directed at Microsoft and I wonder what kind of confusion of ideas turns a person into what you are, you are absolutely on the side of governments and against the individual freedoms and liberties. What happened, did you get beat up a lot as a child or something?
Not as simple as saying that 'everyone' is all people. What is 'all people'? All Chinese residents? All people on this planet? All people that are paying taxes and who will actually be force to pay for this, or is it maybe all consumers of the goods that will have higher prices on them (and likely fewer choices of products) due to these 'heavy restrictions'?
Does 'everyone' include those, who are still in poverty in China (plenty more people are still very poor) and who want to move up in class but who will be prevented if prices for everything go up due to all the new regulations, licensing, taxes and generally growth of government that 'heavy restrictions' assumes?
It's not as simple as saying 'continue reducing pollution in the air'. In the USA when Lyndon Johnson came out with the 'Great Society' crap the level of poverty was very low and falling, then the government stepped in and reversed that trend categorically. The free market was working towards reducing poverty, there was no need for anything called 'Great Society' (and as always, there is no truth in advertising that comes from government, less truth in government advertising than in any other).
Free market capitalism works towards improving the standard of living of the market participants, but a poor economy cannot fix pollution, only a wealthy economy can and you do not make an economy into a wealthy one with 'heavy restrictions'.
Poor economies do not let people even to get their heads up, never mind thinking about such rich problems as not burning coal but instead going nuclear. Interestingly enough, while China is burning plenty of coal (so does USA) but China is building up nuclear power plant capacity and USA is not.
China will fix its pollution by following free market capitalist principles of searching for cheaper sources of energy and nuclear will be the cheapest source.
"Less then the medical cost, and loss of habitat costs." - how living a life of poverty, does not count as a cost to a society? I say it does. A life of poverty doesn't help you with medical costs and habitat costs either.
Why should polluter be allowed to force their pollution on others for free?
- nothing is free, people are paying for the energy, food, water and all other products that they consume and the prices that they pay reflect the economy they are in. By adding 'heavy restrictions' to the economy you are not helping to fix anything, you are ensuring that the economy will be poorer than it could otherwise and thus preventing the fixes, not promoting them.
Ironically, China is moving to greener solutions faster the the US is.
- it is not ironic at all, USA is destroying its economy with all the government and destruction of individual freedoms and China allows individual freedoms and mostly free market capitalism to work its way towards prosperity, which is crucial to having pollution free environment.
It would be cheaper for everyone to just fix the pollution problem by putting heavy restrictions on emissions.
- take a look at what you wrote. This sentence is self-contradictory and at best you just didn't understand it.
It would be 'cheaper for everyone' to 'fix pollution' by putting 'heavy restrictions'.
Ok, who is 'everyone', what does it mean to 'fix pollution' and how much do 'heavy restrictions' cost to everyone?
This guy put together a 'low cost solution for everyone' who wants to 'fix pollution' and he didn't force any 'heavy restrictions' on anybody either. So anybody who is actually worried about the pollution can now pay for it to be fixed for themselves.
Now, of-course this doesn't fix overall pollution, but it is a distributed method of fixing pollution locally on a voluntary basis that is provided by free market capitalism (private property ownership and operation without government interference).
As a society progresses from pre-industrial (China before 1970s) to industrial (the last 40 years) its residents become wealthier and more affluent and as they become wealthier and more affluent they can now afford to start thinking about their environment and the best way to fix environment is to allow free market enterprise to market the fixes straight to the public, which then will decide whether it wants to pay anything at all (or more or less) for any such fixes, be it fixes on large scale or small distributed local fixes like this one.
To put 'heavy restrictions on emissions' means to restrict wealth generation in the country that was able to move 350,000,000 people out of poverty over the last 40 years (while the rest of the globe has been moving hundreds of millions into poverty by destroying individual freedom and thus destroying capitalism, destroying the free market).
China will be fine, it will fix its environmental problems and it will do so without advice from the economic failures that scold it here.
Expanding fiat currency leads to economic reduction, stagnation and often collapse, history is on my side, you don't have anything on yours. 1971 - the year of default on the US dollar was the beginning of the end of USA economy, since then the productivity has been shrinking, deficits and debts growing, government growing and individual freedoms shrinking at an increasing rate.
That's one example, obviously there are thousands, including USSR, Weimar Republic and at least 30 examples of countries destroying their currency that way in only the last 100 years.
As to whether any amount of inflation of fiat currency is bad, yes, theft and thus misallocation of resources from those who produce to those who do not produce in the free market (not enough to be compensated for it by more than what the stolen or inflated currency allowed) is not good by any stretch of imagination, unless you have your head stuck all the way up into your ass.
Wrong, you do not get to rename rising prices into inflation and expansion (inflation) into rising prices.
As to 'increased money supply being always bad' - you are putting words in my mouth.
Expanding FIAT currency, as in paper not backed by anything is always bad and the history is my witness, every time it was done it led to long term economic damage.
Wrong, you are talking about 'gazonk', you do not get to point at shit, call it cheesecake for your political agenda and expect everybody to accept your nonsense.
* Men don't have to worry as much because their sizes are measured in inches.
- another type of Milky Way?
I build and supply retail chain management systems and part of the platform is a store management system, which communicates with POS machines (in most cases via a share). So our solution to what you are describing (a common problem with POS systems) is to put our store management system on a Linux machine that has 2 network cards in it, one is the Internet connection and the other is LAN, this Linux machine runs the store management system and it becomes local network manager and a firewall.
The POS machines are on the LAN only, no Internet connection for them, the store management system connects to the retail management system that is external to the store (controls the entire chain). This way we can avoid this huge security breach.
Well, whether this practice is common or not is probably irrelevant, it is still not a prudent thing to do.
I build and supply retail chain management software to a number of chains, there are dozens of stores that use it, we switch at least one computer in a store to a Linux machine that runs the store management software (the chain management software is a central system and it doesn't run in a store, but all stores talk to it.)
Store management system is on the Linux machine that faces the Internet, it has 2 network cards, one is the Internet and the other is LAN (the same machine controls the LAN). Since this is Linux, iptables is used to filter out any unnecessary traffic.
I think there should be some sort of packet filter on Internet facing equipment, POS or anything else.
It's the inflation in play here, just like in the economy, the units of measurement are being stretched now, so the same mass measured in different units gives a nominally different answer ;)
Nonsense, inflation is expansion of money supply, nothing else. Rising prices (or prices that are failing to fall) can be a result of inflation. Inflation changes the size of the measurement units of the economy, value of the currency. Inflation does not improve economy in any way, it destroys the economy both by destroying value of savings and rising prices of real savings, thus denying access to capital for productive purposes and pushing up nominal prices of assets, creating asset bubbles, making it look like economy is growing (faking the GDP), while in reality the economy stays the same (or shrinks), only the units change.
You are using this in an Orwellian fashion to confuse the population on the causes of inflation and its effects.
Socialism is fascism. Socialists want to control companies and companies fight back and buy political power, but the only reason political power can be bought is because socialists allow government to usurp all that power.
The reason for all this debt is lack of productivity and substitution of a real economy with a fake one.
Americans are an extremely unproductive bunch, living at the expense of the productive Chinese and others, printing money and 'buying' products created by others that they themselves do not produce, thus the 500 Billion USD/year trade deficits for a couple of decades now.
Inflation is rampant, of-course the publicly 'educated' children do not understand what inflation is or why it is bad and they revolt at that thought.
There is no 'your' definition, the definition that you are cheering for is the definition of propaganda, redefining the meaning of words in order to promote wilful ignorance.
Fake money cannot boost real productivity regardless of any conditions, it is shamanism through and through. But relax, nobody is fucking you in the ass, you don't need to squeeze that hard.
Ha ha, as I said, once you redefine the words you can claim all sorts of nonsense.
1927, New Century Dictionary
Inflation: "The act of inflating, or the state of being inflated, specifically expansion or increase of the currency of a country by the issuing of paper money especially paper money not redeemable in specie or that is insufficiently secured by precious metal."
Not even a mention of prices.
Deflation is defined as the opposite of inflation.
Of-course the earlier in the dictionary world you go the more correct the definition, and the closer to the present, the more propaganda and nonsense is added to the definition, inserting the level of prices into definition of expansion and contraction of money supply. Prices do not inflate or deflate of-course, only total supply of money inflates and deflates. Inflation and deflation are changes in the measurement units, not changes in the economic output. Once you redefine the meanings of the words you lose all meaning altogether.
Once you ask the wrong question it doesn't matter what the answer is.
No, you are the idiot. Deflation is not a price but is a monetary phenomena. As I said, wilful ignorance. Good luck.
Of-course I completely forgot to mention all of the service prices that are rising, from accounting, to lawyers, to court fees, to mailing, to education, to car repair, etc.
Did I forget to mention coffee and coffee shops?
Obviously water
They will talk about drought and bandits and weather and climate and every single excuse under the Sun except for the actual real cause of this nonsense: inflation.
You are not buying stuff at the same price as 6 years ago, maybe you should actually pay attention to the receipts.
beef, pork, avocado, fruits, veggies, almonds, pinenuts, walnuts, mozarella, cheddar, other cheeses, seafood, grains, soy, soy, palm oil, milk, gasoline, beer and more beer, limes, canadian bacon, barley, restaurants, restaurants, restaurants,electrical energy, car rentals, hotel rooms, cab fairs,
air travel and air travel gets more expensive in many other ways, various extra fees, less room, more seats on planes
aluminium,
I suggest starting by educating yourself
and not buying into propaganda, whatever it may be.
I also suggest /. gets an edit button that maybe can be used for 3 minutes after any comment is posted rather than wasting time on fucking beta.
"Read my lips: no new taxes."
"Iraq has WMDs."
"If you like your plan, you can keep it."
that came to my head in just 1 millisecond. You can find millions more just like those ones. I mean I do not have a problem fining all those involved into those lies enough to rebuild the economies and societies, I would also jail them all, but the world doesn't really work like that. I suggest starting by educating yourself and buying into propaganda, whatever it may be.