Depends on what kind of capitalism we're talking about. If you mean free market capitalism (which itself just means that prices are governed by the forces of supply and demand) then we already have the "capitalist" ideal.
And no, the US is not in any way, shape, or form, definable as socialist (socialism is defined as the state owning the means of production, employing the workers, and setting prices.) Not even a little bit. We're actually pure free market capitalist. Europe is mostly the same way with the exception of their health care industries, which are in fact socialized.
Also do not confuse welfare programs with socialism; it's not the same thing. Furthermore, regulation and free markets are not incompatible so long as regulation doesn't establish price controls (which includes things like price ceilings and price floors.) To the best of my knowledge, the US doesn't currently have any direct price controls (except of course for products that the government itself offers.)
Actually they were in fact socialist. Socialist means that the government owns the means of production (i.e. they own the factories and employ the workers.)
Well Canada is a strange place. I went there once, the Queen queefed on me, and a mounted police says it's considered a great honor for that to happen. The whole place reminded me of an 8-bit video gone, and they only have one road.
That theory works well until you realize that most people end up foreclosing when they're upside down on a house. In fact, the people who bought the house we sold after the first bubble popped had it foreclosed. Now some rental company owns it, and from what I understand they're getting sued right now as some time after we moved out, somebody removed the gate around the pool we had and the first renters had a kid drown to death.
Paid what tax? My uncle is a tax accountant and he said that you don't have to pay any kind of capital gains tax on money earned from selling a house so long as you use it to buy another house within so many years (I think it was 5, but it doesn't matter because I intend on buying within the next two.)
In fact, in addition to what I posted, here's another example that breaks the ironclad rule you stated:
During this Halloween season, the demand and the price BOTH increase for candy, and the supply also rises to match the demand, meaning the scarcity does not change. Yet, the price still rises anyways during that time period.
See how dumb it is to create rules that you think apply to EVERY situation, instead of understanding that in any subject that touches on psychology, the rules bend or even break unexpectedly. Hell, the fall of Keynesian economics (or rather, why it fell) should be proof enough for you.
I think it was some little things that they frequently did alongside the big ones that got cut.
For example, during the episode where they tested the masks (which was half of the episose, and itself had I think 4 different experiments) they also had a segment that was cut where they tested if Jamie's dog would go to the real Jamie or go for Adam wearing a mask looking like Jamie's face. The goal was to figure out if the dog went after smell, sound, or eyesight, and indeed, the dog just went for the appearance of Jamie's face. It was all of about 10 seconds of video, but again, it was cut from the aired episode.
Doesn't matter, I gave you a very clear cut case of prices increasing with demand without scarcity. You're just an idiot for stating that as an ironclad rule. For a generalization? Yeah, it works. However when I made generalizations you're trying to push rigid rules on to me as if you're some kind of an expert, which you clearly aren't.
meaning that Tesla's field service techs don't know how to fix that, so it's easier to just remove the entire thing, send it back, and let the factory rebuild the offending part for a new customer.
Or it's just easier to swap out the whole in order to get the car back to the customer quicker.
I think the $64,000 question is whether or not Microsoft will continue to update their SSH implementation as new features are added to the standard, and if they'll support everything that SSH is known for (i.e. SFTP/SCP, tunneling, etc.)
A somewhat nightmare scenario is that they just add initial (and possibly even broken) support for it that is feature incomplete, and as a result, you start seeing new SSH clients come around that are broken and/or only work with the Microsoft implementation. In other words, kind of like what Microsoft did to ruin HTML4.
Though to be fair, a lot of this is also the result of housing bubble 2.0, aka the echo bubble. I sold my house last July at above asking price because people were engaged in a bidding war on it.
Which by the way, I (or rather, my family) did the same thing during the last bubble. If anybody is wondering where the money from the last crash went, it didn't go to the bankers or the 1%, it went to people like me.
Presently holding on to the cash equity for the last house while I wait for the bubble to pop, going to use it to throw cash on a new house and be mortgage free. Just waiting for the bubble to finally pop, and for what it's worth, there's some evidence to suggest that echo bubbles crash harder and further than the bubble they echoed from.
The reason those special clothing lines are increased in price is because there are limited quantities.
No, you're flat out wrong, and ignorant. When they do this, they actually produce more of them because the demand for them increases, and likewise when they decrease the price they see reduced demand. This is a general term called a Veblen good:
Google pays what's considered well more than a living wage in most parts of the country. However San Francisco real estate costs some 18 times what you'll find in most parts of the country. This isn't because somebody decided that one day, rather collectively a lot of people decided that they just wanted to live there, but San Franciscans are about twice as smug as New Yorkers, so they don't let anybody build up, making the housing availability permanently low, making housing costs more than what NY costs.
The median price for a home there is $1.35 million, and the houses you get at that price are crap compared to what you'll get elsewhere for about $200,000.
Or you could do something like claim your new job has some work hours that won't make you available most times, and if they ask you when you can be available, tell them Saturday night.
When that day comes you're going to be highly boozed up and you'll need a taxi. Make sure to be 1 hour late to catch your taxi, and if the taxi driver leaves before you're ready then fuck him they'll have to hire another one. Of course don't mention all of this, just you're making yourself reasonably available in that it's not a time that you normally work, and last I checked there aren't any rules to show up sober to a job that you aren't getting paid for.
Prices increase with demand _ONLY_ when there is scarcity.
I kind of get the feeling that you're arguing just to argue. But anyways, if you're really wanting to get technical, then that's also incorrect. For a real world example, some clothing manufacturers experience increased demand when they raise the price, and scarcity never comes into play.
This is true, but all of my points were generalizations. Another factor that comes into play is elasticity for example. Generally when there's increased demand, there's also increased scarcity.
Yet theory dictates that price goes down when demand increases.
No, you've got that totally backwards. Demand increases in response to prices decreasing, not the other way around. When demand increases, prices usually increase in response.
However, demand also increases in response to an increase in purchasing power. Somebody giving you a loan that's dead simple to qualify definitely qualifies as an increase in purchasing power, albeit a somewhat artificial one. However if you nip away that artificial increase in purchasing power, then you'll also nip away the demand, and that will put downward pressure on tuition prices. (If schools can't keep attendance up, then they'll have to lower their tuition in response to generate more demand.)
I don't either, but considering the demographic of certain parts of Texas that have been around for...quite some time since before the law was repealed...
I personally think student loans are the single biggest cause of high tuition. This is simple supply and demand. What happens when people are given money to throw at tuition costs? Demand for higher priced courses goes up, which places upward pressure on tuition costs.
Therefore a wonderful place to start would be to have the government stop issuing student loans, and make all private student loans henceforth be possible to chapter 7.
And by the way, I have zero sympathy for people who took out massive student loans. I had to pay for my first few years of college on my own (nope, parents didn't spend a cent,) and after that got grants. In state community college followed by in state university is the correct thing to do; not hopping directly on the "expensive out of state university" bandwagon. In fact the grants made education so cheap that I was profiting from the scholarships, and came out of college with more money than I came into it with. I'm not a special snowflake either, this is easy shit that just anybody can apply for.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on what kind of capitalism we're talking about. If you mean free market capitalism (which itself just means that prices are governed by the forces of supply and demand) then we already have the "capitalist" ideal.
And no, the US is not in any way, shape, or form, definable as socialist (socialism is defined as the state owning the means of production, employing the workers, and setting prices.) Not even a little bit. We're actually pure free market capitalist. Europe is mostly the same way with the exception of their health care industries, which are in fact socialized.
Also do not confuse welfare programs with socialism; it's not the same thing. Furthermore, regulation and free markets are not incompatible so long as regulation doesn't establish price controls (which includes things like price ceilings and price floors.) To the best of my knowledge, the US doesn't currently have any direct price controls (except of course for products that the government itself offers.)
Actually they were in fact socialist. Socialist means that the government owns the means of production (i.e. they own the factories and employ the workers.)
Well Canada is a strange place. I went there once, the Queen queefed on me, and a mounted police says it's considered a great honor for that to happen. The whole place reminded me of an 8-bit video gone, and they only have one road.
That theory works well until you realize that most people end up foreclosing when they're upside down on a house. In fact, the people who bought the house we sold after the first bubble popped had it foreclosed. Now some rental company owns it, and from what I understand they're getting sued right now as some time after we moved out, somebody removed the gate around the pool we had and the first renters had a kid drown to death.
Paid what tax? My uncle is a tax accountant and he said that you don't have to pay any kind of capital gains tax on money earned from selling a house so long as you use it to buy another house within so many years (I think it was 5, but it doesn't matter because I intend on buying within the next two.)
In fact, in addition to what I posted, here's another example that breaks the ironclad rule you stated:
During this Halloween season, the demand and the price BOTH increase for candy, and the supply also rises to match the demand, meaning the scarcity does not change. Yet, the price still rises anyways during that time period.
See how dumb it is to create rules that you think apply to EVERY situation, instead of understanding that in any subject that touches on psychology, the rules bend or even break unexpectedly. Hell, the fall of Keynesian economics (or rather, why it fell) should be proof enough for you.
I think it was some little things that they frequently did alongside the big ones that got cut.
For example, during the episode where they tested the masks (which was half of the episose, and itself had I think 4 different experiments) they also had a segment that was cut where they tested if Jamie's dog would go to the real Jamie or go for Adam wearing a mask looking like Jamie's face. The goal was to figure out if the dog went after smell, sound, or eyesight, and indeed, the dog just went for the appearance of Jamie's face. It was all of about 10 seconds of video, but again, it was cut from the aired episode.
Doesn't matter, I gave you a very clear cut case of prices increasing with demand without scarcity. You're just an idiot for stating that as an ironclad rule. For a generalization? Yeah, it works. However when I made generalizations you're trying to push rigid rules on to me as if you're some kind of an expert, which you clearly aren't.
meaning that Tesla's field service techs don't know how to fix that, so it's easier to just remove the entire thing, send it back, and let the factory rebuild the offending part for a new customer.
Or it's just easier to swap out the whole in order to get the car back to the customer quicker.
I think the $64,000 question is whether or not Microsoft will continue to update their SSH implementation as new features are added to the standard, and if they'll support everything that SSH is known for (i.e. SFTP/SCP, tunneling, etc.)
A somewhat nightmare scenario is that they just add initial (and possibly even broken) support for it that is feature incomplete, and as a result, you start seeing new SSH clients come around that are broken and/or only work with the Microsoft implementation. In other words, kind of like what Microsoft did to ruin HTML4.
Though to be fair, a lot of this is also the result of housing bubble 2.0, aka the echo bubble. I sold my house last July at above asking price because people were engaged in a bidding war on it.
Which by the way, I (or rather, my family) did the same thing during the last bubble. If anybody is wondering where the money from the last crash went, it didn't go to the bankers or the 1%, it went to people like me.
Presently holding on to the cash equity for the last house while I wait for the bubble to pop, going to use it to throw cash on a new house and be mortgage free. Just waiting for the bubble to finally pop, and for what it's worth, there's some evidence to suggest that echo bubbles crash harder and further than the bubble they echoed from.
Well the $200,000 was handwaving, as I mentioned it would make a $1.35 million house there look like crap.
Another poster mentioned a 900 square foot apartment being 1 million. 900 square foot would be about $60,000 here, so not far from the mark.
Really? Japan has worse earthquakes (higher magnitude, more frequent) and MASSIVE skyscrapers. It's all about engineering.
The reason those special clothing lines are increased in price is because there are limited quantities.
No, you're flat out wrong, and ignorant. When they do this, they actually produce more of them because the demand for them increases, and likewise when they decrease the price they see reduced demand. This is a general term called a Veblen good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Plenty of sources there as well, so again, you're dead wrong here, and your understanding of economics is likewise lacking.
Google pays what's considered well more than a living wage in most parts of the country. However San Francisco real estate costs some 18 times what you'll find in most parts of the country. This isn't because somebody decided that one day, rather collectively a lot of people decided that they just wanted to live there, but San Franciscans are about twice as smug as New Yorkers, so they don't let anybody build up, making the housing availability permanently low, making housing costs more than what NY costs.
The median price for a home there is $1.35 million, and the houses you get at that price are crap compared to what you'll get elsewhere for about $200,000.
Or you could do something like claim your new job has some work hours that won't make you available most times, and if they ask you when you can be available, tell them Saturday night.
When that day comes you're going to be highly boozed up and you'll need a taxi. Make sure to be 1 hour late to catch your taxi, and if the taxi driver leaves before you're ready then fuck him they'll have to hire another one. Of course don't mention all of this, just you're making yourself reasonably available in that it's not a time that you normally work, and last I checked there aren't any rules to show up sober to a job that you aren't getting paid for.
Prices increase with demand _ONLY_ when there is scarcity.
I kind of get the feeling that you're arguing just to argue. But anyways, if you're really wanting to get technical, then that's also incorrect. For a real world example, some clothing manufacturers experience increased demand when they raise the price, and scarcity never comes into play.
This is true, but all of my points were generalizations. Another factor that comes into play is elasticity for example. Generally when there's increased demand, there's also increased scarcity.
Yet theory dictates that price goes down when demand increases.
No, you've got that totally backwards. Demand increases in response to prices decreasing, not the other way around. When demand increases, prices usually increase in response.
However, demand also increases in response to an increase in purchasing power. Somebody giving you a loan that's dead simple to qualify definitely qualifies as an increase in purchasing power, albeit a somewhat artificial one. However if you nip away that artificial increase in purchasing power, then you'll also nip away the demand, and that will put downward pressure on tuition prices. (If schools can't keep attendance up, then they'll have to lower their tuition in response to generate more demand.)
In fact, have you seen Full Metal Jacket? Remember what the drill sergeant said about people from Texas?
I don't either, but considering the demographic of certain parts of Texas that have been around for...quite some time since before the law was repealed...
I never said anything about homosexuality. Insecure about your own much?
I personally think student loans are the single biggest cause of high tuition. This is simple supply and demand. What happens when people are given money to throw at tuition costs? Demand for higher priced courses goes up, which places upward pressure on tuition costs.
Therefore a wonderful place to start would be to have the government stop issuing student loans, and make all private student loans henceforth be possible to chapter 7.
And by the way, I have zero sympathy for people who took out massive student loans. I had to pay for my first few years of college on my own (nope, parents didn't spend a cent,) and after that got grants. In state community college followed by in state university is the correct thing to do; not hopping directly on the "expensive out of state university" bandwagon. In fact the grants made education so cheap that I was profiting from the scholarships, and came out of college with more money than I came into it with. I'm not a special snowflake either, this is easy shit that just anybody can apply for.
If the laws are unjust then they're fine to abuse.
How long were people committing sodomy in Texas before it was repealed?
Like 99% of the rest of the people with good jobs, hot boyfriends, nice cars and big houses, I'm buying an iPhone.
Fixed that for you.