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.
the 2008/2009 bailout was almost* entirely paid back though.
*we claim it was paid back, but a small amount remains where we still own some GM stock valued above what it can be sold for.
What's the plan for paying back the $1,200/person, the PPP loans, the $600/week unemployment juice, etc?
There is none.
You have a legitimate point here, but you are also overlooking something. Take GM for example, GM has gotten billions in special tax breaks from multiple governments since their 2009 bankruptcy. Cash for clunkers was also aimed at them (and others) as well.
That's BS, because conversely if you don't give people any assistance and they have nothing, rents and prices won't just drop to $0. Think these things through
The repeatedly observed and well-known mechanics of inflation are BS? I don't think so.
However, they have been ignored by nations like Zimbabwe.
Its previous, thoroughly embarrassed leaders with whom you seem to share false logic.
Their money printers are still synonymous with nation-destroying incompetence.
Think things through?
My writing is 10x as thoughtful, fact filled, and detailed as your throw away, foundation-free sentiments. You may want to re-check what I state about the targets of universal welfare rhetoric and look at yourself in the figurative mirror.
Rents dropping to "zero" is not an relevant issue. its a false target based on embarrassingly flawed logic on your part and it is ridiculous rhetoric.
Is everyone on welfare now and have rents fallen through the floor if not? No and no.
Your poorly crafted analogy does not approach disproving the repeatedly observed mechanics of money printing and the resulting inflation.
Let me help you clean up your thinking so that you can make a cogent argument, which although better than your own thought processes and writing on this topic - will still lose this argument.
The price of something valuable can never drop to 0, by definition.
Only things that lose their value can drop to 0, or close enough to it.
You would only be able to see effective "0" apartment prices if there were thousands of extra (and equivalent) apartments on the market and with zero homelessness.
Let's say that all money income stopped. If no-one had any money to bid for apartments, is that a state wherein apartment value goes to 0? Don't be ridiculous.
Money is not value. Its only a convenient vehicle for it and plenty of other things hold value.
If all of a sudden there was a cash shortage, other things of value do not lose their value. They are literally repositories of value and much better than money in doing so. Money is merely a vehicle for value. Paper with green ink is not, in itself, valuable. But apartment space is.
If there was a cash (value vehicle) shortage, landlords would merely demand other repositories of value like: anything really.
Some examples can and have included: food, weapons, work, sex, political favors, metals, petroleum, vehicles, and, as I stated, anything else that is a repository of value.
However, create and give people more of anything that is a vehicle / repository of value and the value of that thing drops.
The prices of valuable things that are priced in that value vehicle (money) will rise because there more of the money is in the hands of people who can now bid up the price of the valuable things (like apartments) that they wish to exchange for money.
The market for literally everything is an auction. Its a bid/ask process until an agreement is reached on price.
Universal welfare = more money in more hands = higher item bidding and resulting price raises (inflation), which will eventually welcome a new, higher price floor that will lower the value of the new money in circulation to make its holder's new wealth to be equivalent to what it was before the free money.
Right now we have welfare that people can get, if they cannot work and do not receive other payments. That is our "universal income". Anything else is merely vote grabbing for no benefit due to the inevitable inflation that will neutralize it.
If the value of money drops too low as a result on run-away inflation, you will see landlords demanding other repositories of value besides money for apartment space.
Have any the women in your family ever had a request for sex to allow them to stay in an apartment for a month?
If the value of money becomes too low and the inflation becomes a gallop, then that is something that they could experience.
Low inflation is your friend and something that you want to guard.
Universal welfare = more money in more hands = higher item bidding and resulting price raises (inflation), which will eventually welcome a new, higher price floor that will lower the value of the new money in circulation to make its holder's new wealth to be equivalent to what it was before the free money.
Right now we have welfare that people can get, if they cannot work and do not receive other payments. That is our "universal income". Anything else is merely vote grabbing for no benefit due to the inevitable inflation that will neutralize it.
We also have less people producing goods with the shutdowns globally.
We also may have people choose to stay home if a couple can get a free $4,000 a month for doing nothing as part of a vote buying scheme. This means producing goods and services may falter more.
More and more dollars chasing less goods and services? Not a good outcome.
If this vote grabbing scheme ends up winning the election, the Republicans may as well just double down on our economic collapse and promise $8,000 a month to all couples for free....or perhaps to show the absurdity of it all, we need a politician to campaign in 2020 promising $100,000 a month to all people every month - including illegals, newborns, and recently deceased.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,601,062 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel976
So you think giving $120,000 a year to a family of five indefinitely is "helping the working man"? With that type of money coming in for doing nothing, businesses that are allowed to open will not be able to find staff. As I said, Dems are dead set on making sure that people will not work, and turn this country in a bunch of lazy good-for-nothings. The businesses that will struggle to get back on their feet will discover that nobody wants to work for them because the Dems having made being unemployed so attractive.
Lord save us if the leftists ever regain total power.
They will when the benefits get cut off, which will happen when Covid is over. You keep acting like this will be permanent. It's right wing paranoia at it's finest
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,601,062 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by golgi1
The repeatedly observed and well-known mechanics of inflation are BS? I don't think so.
However, they have been ignored by nations like Zimbabwe.
Its previous, thoroughly embarrassed leaders with whom you seem to share false logic.
Their money printers are still synonymous with nation-destroying incompetence.
Think things through?
My writing is 10x as thoughtful, fact filled, and detailed as your throw away, foundation-free sentiments. You may want to re-check what I state about the targets of universal welfare rhetoric and look at yourself in the figurative mirror.
Rents dropping to "zero" is not an relevant issue. its a false target based on embarrassingly flawed logic on your part and it is ridiculous rhetoric.
Is everyone on welfare now and have rents fallen through the floor if not? No and no.
Your poorly crafted analogy does not approach disproving the repeatedly observed mechanics of money printing and the resulting inflation.
Let me help you clean up your thinking so that you can make a cogent argument, which although better than your own thought processes and writing on this topic - will still lose this argument.
The price of something valuable can never drop to 0, by definition.
Only things that lose their value can drop to 0, or close enough to it.
You would only be able to see effective "0" apartment prices if there were thousands of extra (and equivalent) apartments on the market and with zero homelessness.
Let's say that all money income stopped. If no-one had any money to bid for apartments, is that a state wherein apartment value goes to 0? Don't be ridiculous.
Money is not value. Its only a convenient vehicle for it and plenty of other things hold value.
If all of a sudden there was a cash shortage, other things of value do not lose their value. They are literally repositories of value and much better than money in doing so. Money is merely a vehicle for value. Paper with green ink is not, in itself, valuable. But apartment space is.
If there was a cash (value vehicle) shortage, landlords would merely demand other repositories of value like: anything really.
Some examples can and have included: food, weapons, work, sex, political favors, metals, petroleum, vehicles, and, as I stated, anything else that is a repository of value.
However, create and give people more of anything that is a vehicle / repository of value and the value of that thing drops.
The prices of valuable things that are priced in that value vehicle (money) will rise because there more of the money is in the hands of people who can now bid up the price of the valuable things (like apartments) that they wish to exchange for money.
The market for literally everything is an auction. Its a bid/ask process until an agreement is reached on price.
Universal welfare = more money in more hands = higher item bidding and resulting price raises (inflation), which will eventually welcome a new, higher price floor that will lower the value of the new money in circulation to make its holder's new wealth to be equivalent to what it was before the free money.
Right now we have welfare that people can get, if they cannot work and do not receive other payments. That is our "universal income". Anything else is merely vote grabbing for no benefit due to the inevitable inflation that will neutralize it.
If the value of money drops too low as a result on run-away inflation, you will see landlords demanding other repositories of value besides money for apartment space.
Have any the women in your family ever had a request for sex to allow them to stay in an apartment for a month?
If the value of money becomes too low and the inflation becomes a gallop, then that is something that they could experience.
Low inflation is your friend and something that you want to guard.
You're missing one thing in your diatribe. And that is that we aren't some third world African Republic. We are the most powerful country in the world, and oil is exclusively bought and sold in our sovereign currency
What's the right wing alternative? Letting people go homeless since landlords still want their rent, and banks still want their mortgage payments?
Without the government interference, those people would still be able to make their rent and mortgage payments. The government caused the problem, they aren't the solution.
People are whining about this but dont bat an eye for the BILLIONS in bail out money for corporations with record cash reserves on hand?
can you provide some info on these bailouts?
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.
