Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, universities would still exist, and people will still barter and trade with personal property and services.
It is just excellent production, or goods that are not in use that are free. Also land use will be regulated by the people who live on it or use it.
So I'm supposed to pay my history professor with a basket of eggs, or by washing his car?
And HOW MUCH land can I occupy? Just enough for a double wide? Or can I control 5 acres? How about 100 acres? Can I live on and use 3,000 acres, if I can find a tractor to farm it that no one is watching at the moment and occupy that, thereby becoming the "owner" of it, until someone else sees it on "my" land and decides to occupy it for themselves??? Or is that I can only be an "owner" of my 3000 acres if I can somehow fend off the people who keep moving onto the part that I can't see at any given moment? Yep, that would pretty much be the definition of anarchy, just take whatever you want that no one's watching....in other words...theft.
Higher rent is directly correlated with increased land value, mostly due to the location.
Not always. Supply & Demand is the primary driver. Also, increases in property taxes, increases in water rates and increases in garbage and sewage rates can drive up prices, too.
In your barter and trade dream world, if you only offer me 4 chickens, and someone else is willing to give me 6 chickens, why shouldn't I take the 6 chickens?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
No, universities would still exist, and people will still barter and trade with personal property and services.
Societies abandoned barter and trade in favor of monetary transactions, because barter and trade throttles economies to a crawl and decreases Standard of Living.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
No. But I am wondering, why haven't you or anyone else responded to my posts with any sense of factual desires.
They have, you're just incapable of grasping even the most rudimentary concepts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
Or anything else for that matter? Like when I state why I think people shouldn't profit off of owning capital multiple times, yet the argument is always made against some other arbitrary straw-man I never mentioned?
Your premise was quashed by me earlier in the thread.
Again, you're incapable of grasping rudimentary concepts, like Opportunity Costs.
If I have $250,000 in cash, and I want to make it available as Capital, then I cannot use that $250,000 if I issue a promissory note to a business to use it.
Get it?
It's not quantum physics. Either I can use that $250,000 or the business I loan it to can use that $250,000, but we both can't use it at the same time.
If I loan out that $250,000 in cash Capital, then I am at a disadvantage, because I can't use it, and my compensation for not being able to use it comes in the form of interest on the Capital.
A small company, like a partnership, limited liability company or S-Corp may have to pay 10%-12% interest on a loan from a bank, but I might be willing to issue a promissory note at 6.5%-8% interest.
That is advantageous to both me and the company, because I get compensated for not being able to use my cash, and the company saves money with a lower interest rate.
So I'm supposed to pay my history professor with a basket of eggs, or by washing his car?
And HOW MUCH land can I occupy? Just enough for a double wide? Or can I control 5 acres? How about 100 acres? Can I live on and use 3,000 acres, if I can find a tractor to farm it that no one is watching at the moment and occupy that, thereby becoming the "owner" of it, until someone else sees it on "my" land and decides to occupy it for themselves??? Or is that I can only be an "owner" of my 3000 acres if I can somehow fend off the people who keep moving onto the part that I can't see at any given moment? Yep, that would pretty much be the definition of anarchy, just take whatever you want that no one's watching....in other words...theft.
1. This is nonsense, no one said we have to go back to trading like in the ancient era, trade can consist of many things.
2. People can work cooperatively to own more land, but individually people can only own the amount of land they operate by.
Not always. Supply & Demand is the primary driver. Also, increases in property taxes, increases in water rates and increases in garbage and sewage rates can drive up prices, too.
In your barter and trade dream world, if you only offer me 4 chickens, and someone else is willing to give me 6 chickens, why shouldn't I take the 6 chickens?
Societies abandoned barter and trade in favor of monetary transactions, because barter and trade throttles economies to a crawl and decreases Standard of Living.
They have, you're just incapable of grasping even the most rudimentary concepts.
Your premise was quashed by me earlier in the thread.
Again, you're incapable of grasping rudimentary concepts, like Opportunity Costs.
If I have $250,000 in cash, and I want to make it available as Capital, then I cannot use that $250,000 if I issue a promissory note to a business to use it.
Get it?
It's not quantum physics. Either I can use that $250,000 or the business I loan it to can use that $250,000, but we both can't use it at the same time.
If I loan out that $250,000 in cash Capital, then I am at a disadvantage, because I can't use it, and my compensation for not being able to use it comes in the form of interest on the Capital.
A small company, like a partnership, limited liability company or S-Corp may have to pay 10%-12% interest on a loan from a bank, but I might be willing to issue a promissory note at 6.5%-8% interest.
That is advantageous to both me and the company, because I get compensated for not being able to use my cash, and the company saves money with a lower interest rate.
1. Demand increases with new investment, the market just uses this to predict higher prices.
2. This is not wholly true, the Sumerians had currency, but they used it to represent trade. Today currency is used as a tool to store value in capital and allow for investments into capital along with increases in value. Either way people wouldn’t have a competitive market for trade because people are limited to their personal property.
Most of the production and trade will be handled by cooperatives, not individuals. Cooperatives would produce for their workers, while excess production made in trade with other cooperatives would be freely distributed to consumers.
3. I’ve already addressed this point. Submitting capital for usage does not equate to an increase in wealth or purchasing power for the owner.
Again just because there is a consequence to an action does not make it correlate with reward. If you let people make more wealth with their money that precedes them you concentrate power into the hands of a few people as it is easier for the rich to make money than vice versa.
Again money in this world acts as an allowance, it offers freedom to the people who have it. Submitting your money to allow others to act in certain ways does not give yourself more purchasing power.
Capital gains taxes raised to 90% will move us along the way.
As investment from the private (and public) sector becomes realized due to the 90% tax communities will build cooperatives to create wealth for everyone rather than everyone fighting each-other to make a buck.
Why are you so lazy that you won't build your own wealth and need to steal from other people? Is there something wrong with you? Are you a charity case?
Build your own commune...preferably in Siberia...don't wreck the finest government ever assembled in mankind's history.
Why are you so lazy that you won't build your own wealth and need to steal from other people? Is there something wrong with you? Are you a charity case?
Build your own commune...preferably in Siberia...don't wreck the finest government ever assembled in mankind's history.
Corporations make money off of consumer spending, how exactly are they creating wealth again?
Corporations make money off of consumer spending, how exactly are they creating wealth again?
Also I don’t want to start a commune.
You serious, Clark?
Profit is value creation. The wealth is created when the value of the inputs (labor, materials) can be sold to a willing buyer for more. It’s literally what creating value is. It’s why it’s called value added.
They don’t simply just make money off consumer spending. They need to do something well enough that they win the consumers dollars.
The NFL just announced ticket prices for Super Bowl LIV are going up from 120 chickens and 5 pigs to 140 chickens and 10 pigs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
