Investors can get really rich, but a lot take a beating, thus wealth tends to concentrate. But remember, the name of the game is to get the rich to overproduce. They do, because, they are greedy and want more, and so they invest, and boom. We get the jobs and the benefit of overproduction.
By what logical leap do you conclude the wealthy will gift us with jobs using that extra money?
If any jobs are created under such policies, they're created off shore, or moved off shore at our expense.
Additionally, the "dynamic market" you are referring to is large scale corprate fraud and malfeasance.
Krugman's a liberal but staunch free trader. He's into the free flow of goods and capital and in a way that would be even more deregulated than is today. All he is saying is that he wants to have this huge safety net so that he can open trade completely.
he's not under the illusions reaganites are that free trade is somehow messianic on its own.
Its true, in the extreme long run it won't matter. The increase in relative prosperity in other nations will give rise to the same labor movements which happened as the US economy geared up industrially.
In the short to medium term though, it will result in tremendous economic pain to wealthier nations.
In 1970 even food was hard to get, but now, the world is increasingly getting fat. In 1970, we were lucky to have a small house, and a car, and maybe a set of clothes for the year. Now, home ownership, even after this so-called crisis, is at all an time high, people have better cars, more cars, more bikes, more clothes, toys, and a whole new category of things called consumer electronics.
What we also have is increasingly skilled jobs going overseas, wage freezes, people working 60-80 hours per week if they have families to support, and home prices skyrocketing to 400% of people's annual income. We live like we do on increasing debt, and that can't last forever.
As far as the whole consumer electronics thing goes.. we got a whole new category of things called "household appliances" under FDR new deal policies from as they matured into the 40's and 50's.
Yet another nobel winner for a mixed economy which offers the general public a hedge against the risks taken for, say, entrepreneurial endeavors, trade policies which encourage the retention of jobs and the continuation of a healthy middle class, and regulations which will insure at least a basic check on corporate malfeasance and market consolidation.
How many more politicians and faux-news talking heads will continue to push the pseudo-scientific religion that is reaganomics?
Trade files online worth over $1000 within a period of 6 months and you can be hauled off to jail with a minimum sentence similar to cocaine possession.
lessig has purportedly declined in advance, because he'd be forced to enforce the existing, screwed up system, and would not be in a position to reform it.
The intention: Since very little is manufactured in the USA any more, one of the few things we have to sell to the outside world is our IP, so we have to protect it.
The Unintended Consequences: As Lawrence Lessig has pointed out, draconian copyright and patent laws are a strong disincentive to building on the works of others, so there will be less IP to sell.
I guess we're sunk.
Watch doctorow's talk on youtube.
Basically, the US is the final dot-com company.
They adopted this strategy during the "irrational exuberance" in the mid-90's when some morons kept saying the "information age" is about "selling bits".
They went about signing FTA's to push our copyright laws overseas while selling out our industrial/manufacturing sectors and opening us up to massive offshoring.
Now we are hemorrhaging wealth at an alarming rate, and we are depending on our already over-extended military budgets to keep a standing army large and advanced enough to invade most nations who scoff at IP.
Of course, this doesn't deter the larger ones unfriendly to us, and we have yet to go to war over this. I predict our bluff will be called in the near future, and IP value over seas will drop significantly.
could use the new law as a means of seizing computers of individuals suspected of merely trading illicit files over P2P networks. Though it's still conceivable that an administration may still attempt that approach, using the new law as cover, the PRO-IP law as passed actually does not make such an attempt more feasible than it already was.
The new law will create the office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC), a sort of IP czar who reports directly to the President. However, despite the "E" in its title, the office will be explicitly separated from responsibility for or direction of any law enforcement agency that carries out IP law, according to the law's final language. "The IPEC may not control or direct any law enforcement agency, including the Department of Justice, in the exercise of its investigative or prosecutorial authority," the law now reads. That distinction may please the US Justice Dept., which reportedly raised private concerns that the IPEC would interfere with its established law enforcement operations. So what is it that the IPEC will actually do? The PRO-IP law will have this Presidential appointee chair a committee, made up of other leading officials such as the Register of Copyrights and the head of the Patent and Trademark Office, as well as representatives from the State Dept. and the Dept. of Homeland Security. That committee will create a joint policy for refining anti-counterfeiting policies and coordinating with other countries for anti-piracy and anti-IP infringement operations.
he has no access to any government enforcement branches in his "enforcement efforts"
He is only allowed to formulate and suggest policy.
In other words, his department is a redundant second US copyright office.
Additionally, I believe it was wired who looked at the fine print and noted it would be just as much a threat to use the forfeiture clauses on this bill to seize a P2P user's computer as it was under previous law.
All we have here is yet another tax payer funded lobbying firm, which may or may not listen only to the alphabet orgs, just like the US copyright office, or (as a worst case) the USTR.
Having owned a macbook with a much thicker plastic case, and looking at this one, I can't help but comment on how the form factor to case thickness ratio is very similar.
The macbook continues to warp very easily to this day, causing the fan housing to do the same, and the blades of the fan to scrape the housing.
Apple is starting to value form OVER function rather than form AND function. I'm going to be waiting a good long time until apple starts introducing stiffening trusses. I'm pretty sure aluminum won't be as forgiving of that kind of structural distortion.
If you're in an engineering or business subject, your internships really are that important. They're more predictive of success on the job than grades.
Because making predictive models using real-world data while being paid is so radically different than making predictive models using real-world data while paying a professor.
1. You are evaluated for jobs, credit, schools, etc based on arbitrary numbers and papers which don't reflect your full reality.
For instance, your transcript doesn't communicate the circumstances under which it was earned. The person next to you could have had an easy life, while you dealt with chronic illness, the death of your guardians or family, a 40 hour work week to support your housing alone, etc.
2. The amazingly corrupted western consumer markets.
Anything good which touches the western hemisphere quickly contracts terminal mediocre-itis, and dies a slow, painful death.
If you want quality over quantity, good luck finding it here. Durable goods have been dead and gone for a very long time.
If you're on the long tail and expect something more or different from your products, you're shit out of luck. Any company which attempts to offer it will be utterly destroyed by either unfair competition or lobbied alterations to make them illegal.
There is no real consumer choice.
3. the punishment of effort and hard work.
I'm sure you've seen this many times. People who do their job well are manipulated by or covering for incompetents who are then promoted.
In my case I'm in my initial post-collegiate job search, and am noticing everyone wants the guy who partied and paid more attention to his internships than the intended purpose of his time in college: his academics.
Everyone from parents to popular media say you work hard in school and do well in life. I'm not sure when this disconnect happened but it's obviously not the case anymore. Slack off in school and do well in life.
They want canned people. Training your labor is passe'. I wonder what will happen once the current "ready-trained" pool retires or dies off.
4. Rabid anti-intellectualism. Any experts on a given subject are openly derided.
People who avail themselves of the actual facts surrounding a subject and come to legitimate conclusions which conflict with common perceptions are looked upon as con-men, while the dogmatic and perfidious are lionized.
Why should anyone adjust their beliefs when an inconvenient truth rears its ugly head.
5. Human potential means nothing:
For example, We could be doing much more productive and interesting things for our survival than sitting on this rock fighting over extraneous conspicuous consumption, like colonizing other planets.
That would involve actual cooperation and *gasp*, surrendering your mcmansion and happy-meal toys for a greater cause.
================== Mediocrity reigns, and any attempts to achieve something more is met with stiff resistance, social malignment, and potentially imprisonment.
high time we kibosh the current Federal income tax system and come up with a consumption-based income tax system that encourages people to invest and save.
Oh, you mean a policy which favors the rich even more than it does today.
The only thing "fair" about the fair tax is it allows the "fairly" rich to hoard their money and never give back to society (despite conspicuous consumption, they don't spend very much of what they make). I suppose you could actually call it the "unfair" tax.
the Federal government sends a monthly prebate check to cover the 23% consumption tax on basic necessity items up to the Federal-defined poverty level.
So people at poverty level, who are exempt from federal taxes anyway, are also exempt here.. big deal. Social safety net systems are funded by people who make their money on backs of the rest of the public, and who make use of military and police services in which people DIE to protect their wealth. Some of those social safety net programs are worth considerably more than the simple taxes, to which these people are already exempt. (more on that below)
2. Because of #1, the advantages of "offshoring" your liquid assets are gone. That means potentially several trillion US dollars coming back to the USA to be invested in our financial institutions, which would quickly stop the slide in the stock market and provide a new liquidity base for loans and lines of credit.
what exactly is this snake oil? Investment capital gains are already taxed considerably less than normal income tax at the income brackets you are talking about here. What it WOULD do is, again, cause cash to the government to be further limited, and the resulting budget cuts won't be taken from military spending or pork. They'll come from education programs, day care subsidies, and numerous other programs which make the daily lives of people at or below the poverty line "livable".
. With no more taxes on investments, foreigners will send several trillion dollars of investments themselves into the USA, since we will become the world's largest legal tax haven. Again, this provides a huge bolster for the liquidity base in our financial system.
Because we all know giving money to the already wealthy top echelons of business will definitely guarantee "trickle-down", rather than big fat bonuses, golden parachutes, and more funding for programs to offshore increasingly skilled professions for the sake of cheap labor.
4. With no more taxes on payroll, corporate income, dividend income, and capital gains, it encourages American companies to keep as much goods production in the USA.
Once again counting on the wealthy to give a damn about the great unwashed below their feet. Fox, please meet henhouse. hens, do you remember the gilded age?
With no more taxes on corporate income and capital gains, Donald trump could buy his kids platinum ferraris instead of the cheap, solid gold ones their friends make fun of.
Cities like Detriot and Cleveland could experience an economic boom as blue-collar jobs return to the USA under more advantageous tax conditions.
Because the massive corporate welfare system we have now just isn't enough right, surely adding more policies to put money into the pockets of the wealthy will encourage their generosity the same way such previous programs have.
People have grown tired of debunking this same old crap.
It's been done in about a dozen threads where this blatant misrepresentation has been brought up.
Later posts in this thread show it to be false.
Heck, even posts by people supposedly "supporting" this have shown it to be false by quoting materials fed to them by the echo chamber that they didn't even read.
Those posts are modded "overrated" "troll" "flamebait" while this gets to +5 "interesting".
how about simple supply and demand, and the lack of standardized school funding across the board.
Because of the way school districts are funded unequally (tied to local property taxes), the good school districts are hard to come by.
This means single family homes are substantially more in those areas.
My mother took 6 years to find a home in her price range where she did because she wanted good schools for us, and was prepared to rent until she could buy in the right district.
There are PLENTY of homes in bad school districts, and they're 1/3 the cost.
If the government were to impose uniform funding of schools across the board, this wouldn't be a problem.
People would be free to migrate to where housing costs were lower, and the market would correct itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Investors can get really rich, but a lot take a beating, thus wealth tends to concentrate. But remember, the name of the game is to get the rich to overproduce. They do, because, they are greedy and want more, and so they invest, and boom. We get the jobs and the benefit of overproduction.
By what logical leap do you conclude the wealthy will gift us with jobs using that extra money?
If any jobs are created under such policies, they're created off shore, or moved off shore at our expense.
Additionally, the "dynamic market" you are referring to is large scale corprate fraud and malfeasance.
I can't believe you got modded up for this.
Krugman's a liberal but staunch free trader. He's into the free flow of goods and capital and in a way that would be even more deregulated than is today. All he is saying is that he wants to have this huge safety net so that he can open trade completely.
he's not under the illusions reaganites are that free trade is somehow messianic on its own.
Its true, in the extreme long run it won't matter. The increase in relative prosperity in other nations will give rise to the same labor movements which happened as the US economy geared up industrially.
In the short to medium term though, it will result in tremendous economic pain to wealthier nations.
In 1970 even food was hard to get, but now, the world is increasingly getting fat. In 1970, we were lucky to have a small house, and a car, and maybe a set of clothes for the year. Now, home ownership, even after this so-called crisis, is at all an time high, people have better cars, more cars, more bikes, more clothes, toys, and a whole new category of things called consumer electronics.
What we also have is increasingly skilled jobs going overseas, wage freezes, people working 60-80 hours per week if they have families to support, and home prices skyrocketing to 400% of people's annual income.
We live like we do on increasing debt, and that can't last forever.
As far as the whole consumer electronics thing goes.. we got a whole new category of things called "household appliances" under FDR new deal policies from as they matured into the 40's and 50's.
Yet another nobel winner for a mixed economy which offers the general public a hedge against the risks taken for, say, entrepreneurial endeavors, trade policies which encourage the retention of jobs and the continuation of a healthy middle class, and regulations which will insure at least a basic check on corporate malfeasance and market consolidation.
How many more politicians and faux-news talking heads will continue to push the pseudo-scientific religion that is reaganomics?
it's been a felony for some time now.
Trade files online worth over $1000 within a period of 6 months and you can be hauled off to jail with a minimum sentence similar to cocaine possession.
Not that it's enforced in that manner.
Without civil forfeiture, the few lawsuits which do go forward against the obscenely wealthy and corporations will yield no damages.
They will simply place all their assets into (insert whatever possession is easy liquidated later on here).
lessig has purportedly declined in advance, because he'd be forced to enforce the existing, screwed up system, and would not be in a position to reform it.
The intention: Since very little is manufactured in the USA any more, one of the few things we have to sell to the outside world is our IP, so we have to protect it.
The Unintended Consequences: As Lawrence Lessig has pointed out, draconian copyright and patent laws are a strong disincentive to building on the works of others, so there will be less IP to sell.
I guess we're sunk.
Watch doctorow's talk on youtube.
Basically, the US is the final dot-com company.
They adopted this strategy during the "irrational exuberance" in the mid-90's when some morons kept saying the "information age" is about "selling bits".
They went about signing FTA's to push our copyright laws overseas while selling out our industrial/manufacturing sectors and opening us up to massive offshoring.
Now we are hemorrhaging wealth at an alarming rate, and we are depending on our already over-extended military budgets to keep a standing army large and advanced enough to invade most nations who scoff at IP.
Of course, this doesn't deter the larger ones unfriendly to us, and we have yet to go to war over this. I predict our bluff will be called in the near future, and IP value over seas will drop significantly.
this article breaks it down..
Because all the bills put forward which softened the DMCA to allow consumer rights again weren't buried in committee to die a horrible death, right?
The bill was quite clear.
he has no access to any government enforcement branches in his "enforcement efforts"
He is only allowed to formulate and suggest policy.
In other words, his department is a redundant second US copyright office.
Additionally, I believe it was wired who looked at the fine print and noted it would be just as much a threat to use the forfeiture clauses on this bill to seize a P2P user's computer as it was under previous law.
All we have here is yet another tax payer funded lobbying firm, which may or may not listen only to the alphabet orgs, just like the US copyright office, or (as a worst case) the USTR.
It doesn't matter when, it will still get zero NEGATIVE media attention.
The media is in direct conflict of interest with the public at large on this issue.
They will never give it fair coverage.
Civil disobedience is the only way forward for any nation without a large, state run media organization.
So long as it doesn't devolve into The OSS socialist union
I mean, stalMin's purges could be much worse.. for malware.
Having owned a macbook with a much thicker plastic case, and looking at this one, I can't help but comment on how the form factor to case thickness ratio is very similar.
The macbook continues to warp very easily to this day, causing the fan housing to do the same, and the blades of the fan to scrape the housing.
Apple is starting to value form OVER function rather than form AND function. I'm going to be waiting a good long time until apple starts introducing stiffening trusses. I'm pretty sure aluminum won't be as forgiving of that kind of structural distortion.
it's not a myth.
I've done the experiments.
I can spend 10 minutes at 2k, or 15 seconds at 3k and the rest at idle.
there is no shortage of coffins.
I've noticed this as well.. in particular i've noticed a plateau effect on my hundai.
Each 1k rpm mark will sustain a 10-20 mph range of speed.
Stick to the top of that range and get the most economy.
If you're in an engineering or business subject, your internships really are that important. They're more predictive of success on the job than grades.
Because making predictive models using real-world data while being paid is so radically different than making predictive models using real-world data while paying a professor.
push the on button, wait for the tutorial lady to tell you why there are 6 pedals when there are only 4 directions.
red button activates auto-fire sequence. Be sure to have some shovels ready.
let me know when joe sixpack can own a joint strike fighter and a few smart missiles.
here are some examples:
1. You are evaluated for jobs, credit, schools, etc based on arbitrary numbers and papers which don't reflect your full reality.
For instance, your transcript doesn't communicate the circumstances under which it was earned. The person next to you could have had an easy life, while you dealt with chronic illness, the death of your guardians or family, a 40 hour work week to support your housing alone, etc.
2.
The amazingly corrupted western consumer markets.
Anything good which touches the western hemisphere quickly contracts terminal mediocre-itis, and dies a slow, painful death.
If you want quality over quantity, good luck finding it here.
Durable goods have been dead and gone for a very long time.
If you're on the long tail and expect something more or different from your products, you're shit out of luck. Any company which attempts to offer it will be utterly destroyed by either unfair competition or lobbied alterations to make them illegal.
There is no real consumer choice.
3.
the punishment of effort and hard work.
I'm sure you've seen this many times. People who do their job well are manipulated by or covering for incompetents who are then promoted.
In my case I'm in my initial post-collegiate job search, and am noticing everyone wants the guy who partied and paid more attention to his internships than the intended purpose of his time in college: his academics.
Everyone from parents to popular media say you work hard in school and do well in life. I'm not sure when this disconnect happened but it's obviously not the case anymore. Slack off in school and do well in life.
They want canned people. Training your labor is passe'. I wonder what will happen once the current "ready-trained" pool retires or dies off.
4. Rabid anti-intellectualism.
Any experts on a given subject are openly derided.
People who avail themselves of the actual facts surrounding a subject and come to legitimate conclusions which conflict with common perceptions are looked upon as con-men, while the dogmatic and perfidious are lionized.
Why should anyone adjust their beliefs when an inconvenient truth rears its ugly head.
5. Human potential means nothing:
For example, We could be doing much more productive and interesting things for our survival than sitting on this rock fighting over extraneous conspicuous consumption, like colonizing other planets.
That would involve actual cooperation and *gasp*, surrendering your mcmansion and happy-meal toys for a greater cause.
==================
Mediocrity reigns, and any attempts to achieve something more is met with stiff resistance, social malignment, and potentially imprisonment.
high time we kibosh the current Federal income tax system and come up with a consumption-based income tax system that encourages people to invest and save.
Oh, you mean a policy which favors the rich even more than it does today.
The only thing "fair" about the fair tax is it allows the "fairly" rich to hoard their money and never give back to society (despite conspicuous consumption, they don't spend very much of what they make). I suppose you could actually call it the "unfair" tax.
the Federal government sends a monthly prebate check to cover the 23% consumption tax on basic necessity items up to the Federal-defined poverty level.
So people at poverty level, who are exempt from federal taxes anyway, are also exempt here.. big deal.
Social safety net systems are funded by people who make their money on backs of the rest of the public, and who make use of military and police services in which people DIE to protect their wealth.
Some of those social safety net programs are worth considerably more than the simple taxes, to which these people are already exempt. (more on that below)
2. Because of #1, the advantages of "offshoring" your liquid assets are gone. That means potentially several trillion US dollars coming back to the USA to be invested in our financial institutions, which would quickly stop the slide in the stock market and provide a new liquidity base for loans and lines of credit.
what exactly is this snake oil?
Investment capital gains are already taxed considerably less than normal income tax at the income brackets you are talking about here.
What it WOULD do is, again, cause cash to the government to be further limited, and the resulting budget cuts won't be taken from military spending or pork.
They'll come from education programs, day care subsidies, and numerous other programs which make the daily lives of people at or below the poverty line "livable".
. With no more taxes on investments, foreigners will send several trillion dollars of investments themselves into the USA, since we will become the world's largest legal tax haven. Again, this provides a huge bolster for the liquidity base in our financial system.
Because we all know giving money to the already wealthy top echelons of business will definitely guarantee "trickle-down", rather than big fat bonuses, golden parachutes, and more funding for programs to offshore increasingly skilled professions for the sake of cheap labor.
4. With no more taxes on payroll, corporate income, dividend income, and capital gains, it encourages American companies to keep as much goods production in the USA.
Once again counting on the wealthy to give a damn about the great unwashed below their feet. Fox, please meet henhouse. hens, do you remember the gilded age?
With no more taxes on corporate income and capital gains, Donald trump could buy his kids platinum ferraris instead of the cheap, solid gold ones their friends make fun of.
Cities like Detriot and Cleveland could experience an economic boom as blue-collar jobs return to the USA under more advantageous tax conditions.
Because the massive corporate welfare system we have now just isn't enough right, surely adding more policies to put money into the pockets of the wealthy will encourage their generosity the same way such previous programs have.
People have grown tired of debunking this same old crap.
It's been done in about a dozen threads where this blatant misrepresentation has been brought up.
Later posts in this thread show it to be false.
Heck, even posts by people supposedly "supporting" this have shown it to be false by quoting materials fed to them by the echo chamber that they didn't even read.
Those posts are modded "overrated" "troll" "flamebait" while this gets to +5 "interesting".
Slashdot is the new ISO of online news.
how about simple supply and demand, and the lack of standardized school funding across the board.
Because of the way school districts are funded unequally (tied to local property taxes), the good school districts are hard to come by.
This means single family homes are substantially more in those areas.
My mother took 6 years to find a home in her price range where she did because she wanted good schools for us, and was prepared to rent until she could buy in the right district.
There are PLENTY of homes in bad school districts, and they're 1/3 the cost.
If the government were to impose uniform funding of schools across the board, this wouldn't be a problem.
People would be free to migrate to where housing costs were lower, and the market would correct itself.
the CRA did not compel lending to bad credit risks.
what it did do was compel banks to actually assess people based on credit rather than arbitrary geographic area.
And the reference to Stephen Hawking is particularly devastating; who would have thought that a Cambridge Fellow would be on welfare?
the british healthcare system is socialized.
Under your definition, YES HE IS ON WELFARE.
how many more like him are in the US, who will die before they're allowed to show their potential.
You, sir, are an arrogant dickweed.