The Wall Street Occupation

Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
1,263
Location
Sweden
Ah, a return of the Ayn Rand nonsense. *yawn*

The fallacy of your retort is that there is no demand from people with no money. Jobs must be created or else there is no demand for new products.

In fact, couldn't pass up this little gem:
In fact, paying taxes means you are already making money
This is so completely false that it completely destroys any credibility of your source. Paying taxes on profits means there's a profit, but corporate income tax is only a small portion of total corporate taxation.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
He gets one fact wrong and everything he says is BS?

The fallacy of your retort is that there is no demand from people with no money. Jobs must be created or else there is no demand for new products.

The fallacy in that is that it's based on the idea that the only way to get money is to have a job.

Übereil
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
1,263
Location
Sweden
That's a pretty fundamental and basic fact, Ubereil. That's not some trivial detail. It's not like someone not being able to identify chartreuse--that's someone proudly claiming the color of the sky is plaid.

The only sustainable way to get money is to have a job. Sure, you can go on the government tit, but that's not practical for quantities beyond a sliver of society.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
Right, so what taxes are you talking about that matters in the hiring equation?

And we're talking about demand on a collective level. We've designed it so that the only way for an individual to have money is to have a job. But, if we were to (for instance) remove money alltogether, demand would skyrocket (on the other hand, production would probably plummel).

Übereil
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
1,263
Location
Sweden
Right, so what taxes are you talking about that matters in the hiring equation?
FICA (company match for social security and medicare), workforce development (state unemployment), to start with. There are also various taxes and fees that usually change based on headcount, but those two are 100% directly related.
And we're talking about demand on a collective level. We've designed it so that the only way for an individual to have money is to have a job. But, if we were to (for instance) remove money alltogether, demand would skyrocket (on the other hand, production would probably plummel)
Jeezuz! If (for instance) people shit gold, we'd have no problems at all. Try to keep at least a toe in reality or the conversation is pointless.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
Universal gold shitting isn't obviously possible, but eliminating the monetary system is.

Also, I have a way to make production levels all but meaningless.
 
You might replace fiat value (money) with tangible value (some sort of barter system, perhaps?) but I don't see that you'd ever eliminate some method of tallying value. Each monkey wants more bananas than the monkeys around him, and while you might substitute oranges for bananas, there's still some sort of counter so that "more" can be defined and demonstrated. Even if there's no value to the counter, there will still be one created, just ask the star-bellied sneeches.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
You might replace fiat value (money) with tangible value (some sort of barter system, perhaps?) but I don't see that you'd ever eliminate some method of tallying value. Each monkey wants more bananas than the monkeys around him, and while you might substitute oranges for bananas, there's still some sort of counter so that "more" can be defined and demonstrated. Even if there's no value to the counter, there will still be one created, just ask the star-bellied sneeches.

The only reason we want more than others, is because the fear of not having enough is instilled in us. That fear is also the reason having more than you need is seen as a quality.

Obviously, that fear is what we need to deal with.

Conveniently, that's very much part of my solution ;)
 
I know where you're heading, but it still doesn't work. There's more than mere fear going on, and one of the favorite leftie soapboxes is actually good proof: rich people generally wanting more money. Once you hit a certain level of wealth, there is no practical limit to what you can have, nor how much of it you can get. All without touching the principal, and there's no way to lose that core outside of gross incompetence. Basically, there is no fear nor unfulfilled want at that point. And yet, they try to acquire more money. Why? Because somewhere there's another monkey with MORE. Bigger bank account, bigger house, more cars, bigger yacht, more ski trips in the Alps, better (man)whores, whatever the measure of choice happens to be. It's an instinctive drive that goes beyond a simple fear of "not enough".
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
@Dart C'mon. Fear of being poor is not the cause for everyone. For such a self-heralded study of the human condition, you'd think you'd be familiar with the concept of greed. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
15,679
Location
Studio City, CA
Thrasher, having read what DTE said, I think it's pretty clear he was actually talking about greed, such as when he said ". Basically, there is no fear nor unfulfilled want at that point. And yet, they try to acquire more money. Why? Because somewhere there's another monkey with MORE. Bigger bank account, bigger house, more cars, bigger yacht, more ski trips in the Alps, better (man)whores, whatever the measure of choice happens to be. It's an instinctive drive that goes beyond a simple fear of "not enough"."

Edit: Thrasher was referring to Dart. Disregard this post!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
2,299
Location
VA
It's really just like playing an RPG!! We want more stuff, more gold, more XP, etc; it's how we keep score. Competition is part of our makeup!! :)
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
12,806
Location
Australia
I know where you're heading, but it still doesn't work. There's more than mere fear going on, and one of the favorite leftie soapboxes is actually good proof: rich people generally wanting more money. Once you hit a certain level of wealth, there is no practical limit to what you can have, nor how much of it you can get. All without touching the principal, and there's no way to lose that core outside of gross incompetence. Basically, there is no fear nor unfulfilled want at that point. And yet, they try to acquire more money. Why? Because somewhere there's another monkey with MORE. Bigger bank account, bigger house, more cars, bigger yacht, more ski trips in the Alps, better (man)whores, whatever the measure of choice happens to be. It's an instinctive drive that goes beyond a simple fear of "not enough".

Now you're talking about two different things, though. You're talking about the natural competition instilled in us AND the drive for material wealth. Competition isn't just about material wealth or value. Setting yourself apart can be done in a myriad of ways.

If we reduce or remove the value of material things by making them universally available in whatever quantity is required for a practical purpose - beyond basic needs met - then people will find something else to be competitive about. This does depend on the assumption that we have enough natural resources available to not only meet basic needs for everyone, but also for practical purposes beyond that.

But the drive for material things really does begin at the basic stage of the fear of not having enough - the survival instinct. That's why the opposite sex finds it attractive as well, which we all know. What the opposite sex finds attractive is a pretty strong motivator. But it's a long-term process - and not something we can magically remove over the course of a few years. It will likely take generations to fully eliminate the ambition to have more than you need.

It's about security, really. You fear not having what you need mostly on an instinctual level. It's very much about something primal. Unfortunately, the human brain doesn't quite overrule the sensation of security we feel by having MORE than we need, so that we don't run out. So, essentially, we feel ever more secure the further we go beyond what we actually need.

But that's very far from the only reason people strive to get rich - but it's the origin and the primary cause. Remove that, and the rest will eventually follow.

But I don't believe we can eliminate the competitive drive, or the need for attention or love. That's something entirely dffferent. But by eliminating the pursuit of material wealth - we help ensure the even distribution of it to everyone in the world. Which is the ultimate goal.

Because many of the biggest problems in our world has to do with the differences between us (perceived or real), especially in terms of material wealth and the perception of being less because you have less.

The problem with the monetary system is that human beings are too stupid to handle a symbol of value. They can't separate value from the symbol, so they just accumulate more and more - in case something of value should become attractive, and then you need enough wealth to purchase it. The capitalistic system combined with human weakness and stupidity is a very bad cocktail. Because we're not trading things of tangible value - we're trading things of perceived value. That's why you can get people to pay 1000$ for a meal that costs 10$ to make.

There are other equally large issues to deal with, but they tend to blend together. I'd say the biggest one is general ignorance - based on denial - which is again based on the inability to ignore the instinctual and emotional drive and behave rationally. Rational behavior being, more or less exactly, that which results in the most beneficial long-term outcome for everyone.
 
Last edited:
@Dart C'mon. Fear of being poor is not the cause for everyone. For such a self-heralded study of the human condition, you'd think you'd be familiar with the concept of greed. :rolleyes:

Greed applies universally to everything that's perceived as desirable - not just material wealth. It applies to love, sex, food, passion, and so on.

I can't remove greed - but I have an idea of how to remove one of the biggest problems with greed = that which prevents others from surviving or living comfortably.
 
FICA (company match for social security and medicare), workforce development (state unemployment), to start with. There are also various taxes and fees that usually change based on headcount, but those two are 100% directly related.

I'll grant you that taxes that raises the cost for hiring hurts job creation. However, I think the problem is that you mean different things by "tax". He's talking about how taxing the rich won't destroy jobs. And when talking about taxing the rich you don't refer to payroll taxes. In fact, I'm pretty sure OWS isn't pissed about the payroll tax not being high enough.

So, I think our two links talk about different things, really. I think some (not all, but some) of the disagreement between leftists and righties is that we don't realize this.

Another point is that the right is bad because it doesn't realize redistribution doesn't hurt the economy and the left is bad because it doesn't realize payroll taxes (and the likes) isn't redistribution. Both sides have things to learn from the other side.

Jeezuz! If (for instance) people shit gold, we'd have no problems at all. Try to keep at least a toe in reality or the conversation is pointless.

Apart from the fact that gold would become valueless if it existed in abundance…

The problem is, though, that pepole don't feel like they can afford to buy stuff. Paul Krugman's written a pretty explanatory example where some friends started a baby sitting economy, using coupons. One coupon represented one baby sitting. The problem was that everyone felt they had too few coupons (what if they needed babysitting several days in a row?), so they felt like they had to save up more coupons before they could do things like go out dancing one night. The result was that no one would pay for babysitting until someone else did, which meant the entire baby sitting economy stood still. The solution ended up being introducing more coupons into the system.

…which IIRC lead to inflation. Economy is a complicated field.

(Basic income guarantee might work to ensure the base economy was always up and running, by the way.)

Übereil
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
1,263
Location
Sweden
Back
Top Bottom