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.
Do you live in a community that is roughly 25 square feet an dlives off a barter system of shells and bones?
Your concepts in no way reflect any form of economic reality ever shown to exist. Ever...
It's happened in Communist countries and communities, so why not do it again.
We just need a few modifications to avoid the pitfalls of the past - we can learn from the mistakes of the Soviet Union and put humanity back on track!
More the case that we will have a more equitable wage disparity amongst all members of society.
what is so wrong with that?
the competition for the more preferable and interesting jobs will still occur as no-one would really choose to work at MacD's.
so the compensation for effort will come in the form of a more enjoyable job, and a higher salary than the burger flipper - and let's not forget that status and job satisfaction are two of the main factors when determining wealth.
ie: it's often just psychological more than anything else.
Sure it is. He said in the first post that no "unearned" income would be allowed.
"Allowing people to collect unearned income like rent, interest or profit is just as useful and necessary to a market economy as allowing people to get paid for printing their own money."
I have worked like hell to make much more than 4x minimum wage. Why would I want to reward people who were too lazy to do anything but push shopping carts around a parking lot while I busted my a** working night and day to make decent money?
The majority of workers are not lazy. This program pays them fairly. It is not a program that only pays lazy people.
If you make more than $115k or $230k for working 20 hours, I can understand why you want to maintain the status quo. However, most workers, who work just as hard as you, don't make anywhere near that.
Quote:
How hard a person works is meaningless. I couldn't care less if one of my employees works four times harder than another. I care if one of my employees produces four times the results as another.
Paying people based on how hard they work means differences in income will be based only on what is necessary to get workers to do mentally or physically difficult work and to get them to give their maximum effort in performance based jobs.
So performance based jobs pay based on performance.
Quote:
Great, you can read wikipedia. Now please look at the mathematical equation to calculate bargaining power. Bargaining power is a calculated term, not a vague description!
That wiki article explains what I mean by bargaining power. I don't know what formula you are referring to.
Quote:
You don't even understand what the FED does! You want to expand the FED and claim that your plan won't cause inflation? Good lord the stupidity.
I worked as an analyst for the fed while in biz school. So I'm pretty familiar with what they do.
You need to do more to make your case than just saying it.
Quote:
18% choose not to work hard enough to find a job
Gee, did you get that from Rush Limbaugh?
There is just 1 job opening for every 3.5 people unemployed.
Quote:
55% do jobs that are absolutely necessary and add value to the economy
What are YOU doing to solve this? If you feel strongly, don't whine about the government not doing things. Get out there and do something.
I educate people about an alternative economic system.
Quote:
Great, so under your definition, all investors are workers. What is the problem?
An investment banker is a worker and does not get paid interest. They get paid a wage. The owners of the money they are investing who are getting paid interest or dividends are not workers. There is a difference.
So an investment banker will continue to work and get paid, just like they do today. The owners of the investment money will no longer get paid their interest and dividend.
The majority of workers are not lazy. This program pays them fairly. It is not a program that only pays lazy people.
If you make more than $115k or $230k for working 20 hours, I can understand why you want to maintain the status quo. However, most workers, who work just as hard as you, don't make anywhere near that.
Paying people based on how hard they work means differences in income will be based only on what is necessary to get workers to do mentally or physically difficult work and to get them to give their maximum effort in performance based jobs.
So performance based jobs pay based on performance.
That wiki article explains what I mean by bargaining power. I don't know what formula you are referring to.
I worked as an analyst for the fed while in biz school. So I'm pretty familiar with what they do.
You need to do more to make your case than just saying it.
Gee, did you get that from Rush Limbaugh?
There is just 1 job opening for every 3.5 people unemployed.
I educate people about an alternative economic system.
An investment banker is a worker and does not get paid interest. They get paid a wage. The owners of the money they are investing who are getting paid interest or dividends are not workers. There is a difference.
So an investment banker will continue to work and get paid, just like they do today. The owners of the investment money will no longer get paid their interest and dividend.
It's happened in Communist countries and communities, so why not do it again.
We just need a few modifications to avoid the pitfalls of the past - we can learn from the mistakes of the Soviet Union and put humanity back on track!
Excluding for a moment American sensibilities...how did that happening work out? I'm pretty sure just by the ease of your statements that you don't understand Marx.
Who would be hiring someone for $115,000. It certainly would not be me, unless of course I can print my own money. Now if they could generate $500,000 in revenue for the company within that year and be 80% billable at about $115/hr, then maybe. To place that kind of a burden on a company, they must bring in more than they are costing the company. The salary is only the first part of the cost of their employment. The other way of doing it to make the dollar so worthless that even the least skilled can get paid that, but then the most skilled and knowledgeable would want at least $1.5 mil.
Companies need to obviously generate enough revenue to meet their costs.
New companies would be provided with enough capital to pay their employees until they became financially viable on their own.
When a new company is launched, no matter what the system, they are usually unprofitable. It takes time to build the company.
New companies will launch the same way they do in today's system. You will apply for investment funding. That initial round of financing will provide you with enough money to pay all the workers and the rest of the expenses of the business.
I guess you've never heard of "boot strapping" then. This is exactly what we did with our business. We had around $1000 to start up with, the computers we already owned and ourselves. That was it. That was 4 years ago. We have much more than $1000 to our name now, have never borrowed money from a bank or gotten any financing at all. MOST start ups aren't "start ups" as you think they are. Most businesses that get funding in SBA loans and such have been around for 1-3 years before they can actually qualify for these loans. You also have to have good credit, some collatoral, and a business plan. We actually had none of the above, and yet, here we are 4 years later and we're growing.
Under your plan, our business would never get off the ground. And because of your $115k a year minimum wage, we'd NEVER hire anyone! Our prices would have to sky rocket just to meet one employees salary, and there would be almost none left over for us or to actually run the business. Your plan would kill small businesses before they ever started!
Companies need to obviously generate enough revenue to meet their costs.
New companies would be provided with enough capital to pay their employees until they became financially viable on their own.
You keep saying that new companies will be provided with enough capital to pay their employees...but where is that capital coming from? Raising taxes? The government doesn't just have money sitting around.
Oh, I know, we'll print more...that won't cause inflation.
If you were as smart as you think you are, you'd be contributing to society and trying to get this cockamamey plan instituted in more places than on C-D forums!
to put (money) to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering potential profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.
Would you care to explain how your statement above DOESN'T make you look like a complete whackaloon?
Or maybe you have a definition of "work" that you haven't shared with us... OR, maybe you believe that people will invest their money without expecting any gain from that investment... I'll bet that's it.
Or maybe you should just read the actual post and find out how investment works!
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.
