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.
We're expressing value in units of exchange.
So value is relative.
(Just like 'rich' and 'poor' in America.)
If this house can be exchanged for more of other goods, then it takes more of other goods to buy the house.
The relative value of other goods has fallen..
Really? Have you seen the price of gas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheaties
Similarly, whoever sold the house at a higher price gained.
Whoever sells at a lower price loses.
Buy low, sell high.
And that is also the real problem.
Not 'income inequality' or any of that nonsense.
No, the real problem is we have so many americans who dont understand the difference between good debt, and bad.
Can't wait to hear what, the truth? No employer wants to pay someone that isn't worth the time. It isn't a charity it is a business. You may not like it, but it is true.
What does that have to do with monopoly pricing power?
That's not true. You are forgetting that these 99 people will hold different positions, all of which will pay different wages. There will be people with higher positions and people with the lowest. There will be a rich and a poor. This fits my theory, because even if the factory owner isn't getting rich off of the poor, those who benefit from the less educated will. Considering that, the factory owner gained from the poor too, because he was able to avoid competition.
So according to your argument, we should just hand everyone money to ensure they are equal, because lord knows we dont want some to have more than others right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nocontengencies
Good argument, but from what I understand, Ford paid more as an incentive, but also expected more from the people he hired. In other words, to work there you had to be worth what he was paying. If you weren't there was no shortage on people that wanted your job.
Actually the real reason why Ford paid his employees more is because the turnover at his factory was so high, that the training costs were killing him. The average employee lasted 3 - 4 months. In order to qualify for the higher wage, one needed to be an employee for 6 months, so by time you got the higher wage, Ford was already saving himself money by actually paying more.
It was not so they can buy cars, it was to cut his employee costs down. It allowed the employees a chance at obtaining wealth, while at the same time Ford became fabulously wealthy, proving that one doesnt need to take from person A, to make person B rich.
Skills and education take money and time something many poor people do not have. Go on blaming the poor though it is easier to sit on your high throne looking down on others and assuming if they are not doing as well as you it is their fault! You can be the hardest worker in the world does not mean that you will necessarily get any where.
Some folks are poor because they get stuck in a self-imposed rut, where they either don't think they can do any better, or they are too afraid or too lazy to try. I know this from first hand experience with friends and relatives.
...and the flip side of that is another ideological belief by liberals, that there is a class system in the US, where people are born into poverty and their is no way to move up in life, and no way for them to achieve success on their own, and will need government to care and feed them for the rest of their lives.
...and the flip side of that is another ideological belief by liberals, that there is a class system in the US, where people are born into poverty and their is no way to move up in life, and no way for them to achieve success on their own, and will need government to care and feed them for the rest of their lives.
The false dichotomy side you mean. Just because I don't want to bailout Wall Street doesn't mean that someone can't make the best of it. If you ever wind up in Lurigancho prison in Peru, try to get into block seven.
Oh yeah, the bailout made some people rich and the rest of us poorer.
Conservatives dont understand the basic laws of economics. There is finite amount of resources and infinite amount of people. Money is the currency we use to measure the economic utilization of said resources. There will always be people who are more talented, or have better luck than others.
Example look at North Dakota there is shale oil boom. People are moving there
for high paying jobs. The results is the price of rent is going up, so if you were paying
1000.00 a month for rent and rent goes up 60%. you just became 60% poorer,because
your income does not get you as far as you did six months prior to the oil boom.
lets take a look at china, plant owner closest american plant opens up in china
american workers loose income, lets 4 million dollars worth. plant owners pass those
savings onto share holders. Those chinese workers buy cars and gasoline, driving up the price
of gasoline, now the american worker is poorer because he saw his income decline and also the price
of commoditys rise as a result of new workers overseas.
...and the flip side of that is another ideological belief by liberals, that there is a class system in the US, where people are born into poverty and their is no way to move up in life, and no way for them to achieve success on their own, and will need government to care and feed them for the rest of their lives.
Conservatives dont understand the basic laws of economics. There is finite amount of resources and infinite amount of people. Money is the currency we use to measure the economic utilization of said resources. There will always be people who are more talented, or have better luck than others.
Example look at North Dakota there is shale oil boom. People are moving there
for high paying jobs. The results is the price of rent is going up, so if you were paying
1000.00 a month for rent and rent goes up 60%. you just became 60% poorer,because
your income does not get you as far as you did six months prior to the oil boom.
Liberals aren't much better but the conservatives think they know.
That is right out of Progress and Poverty. All wealth goes to rent which these days is accelerated by credit and funneled as interest payments to the finance industry. This property propped up by oil demand will be bought and sold and at capital gains tax rates in profit. What did they do again? What pure market forces are involved in fiat credit creation and tax laws that favor this over an oil worker? The oil worker will eventually gravitate to subsistence as they each engage in a bidding war sending all the profits to the financiers. Its all one big oil worker access charge. You just have to connect a few dots, way over the head of the conservative simpleton or the bleeding heart liberals.
As usual, wealth created by humans is confounded with wealth that already existed. The difference between the two is one expands by pure human effort while the other does not, which is why of course it becomes a store of value like gold. If the alchemists were successful, the increase in technology would actually devalue the commodity. It is this concept that turns the mind of the typical conservative into goo which is evident on the glazed over faces of a of a self righteous simpleton .
Last edited by gwynedd1; 02-02-2012 at 10:53 AM..
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.
