Jobless at 6.7%

[PLATO]

From you, this is a compliment, thank you.

Welcome.

[Sava]

and you are left of OBAMA too

[snoopy369]

You do understand that interest is not a capitalist concept, right? It's a basic economic concept. Money now is worth more than money later, just as having a TV today is worth more to me than not having a TV today but getting the same TV in a few years. Hence, interest - I give up some money now and let you have it, and in exchange you pay me more money later, because my money now/money later ratio is more skewed towards later than yours. That's called a win-win proposition. Removing interest is silly, since then far less lending would occur, and it would never be a win-win - you would literally be making the country worse off by ANY standard. Suggesting the government should do it is simply forcing EVERYONE to loan interest free (everyone who pays taxes, anyway).

[DinoDoc]

You do understand that interest is not a capitalist concept, right?

Have you ever read his posts?

[Kidlicious]

In short, the government should manipulate what we understand to be currency in order to further sustainable growth. That's all. Every thought you have about money is not applicable to what I am proposing. Private markets will still exist. They are a natural function of human society. People want things and will trade for them. These proposals are a more efficient means to achieving the goal of expanding trade.

Imagine it like you would the impact agriculture had on the development of society. Less people were needed to make food. They could do other things. This is an extension of that. Less people have to work than ever before. High unemployment with automated productivity systems is the preferable result. You want the vast majority of society being completely independent of our ability to produce and distribute resources, goods, and services.

All of this in addition to killing off people who work. **** dude, smoking weed everyday has made you really smart!

[snoopy369]

Imagine a valuation system of points, where the utility you gain from something is measured in points. One point is one 'today' dollar. I am rich and have millions of excess today dollars, so I would rather have tomorrow dollars - say I value tomorrow dollars at 0.9 points each. You are not rich, and want to buy a house. You value tomorrow dollars relatively low - 0.7 points each. So any interest rate between 1/0.9 and 1/0.7 would be fair, and make us _both_ better off - you are exchanging, say, 1/0.8 tomorrow dollars for a today dollar, which means you're gaining 0.1 points per dollar borrowed; and I'm getting 0.1 points per dollar borrowed. Congratulations, we just created 0.2 points of value for the economy!

If the government forced everyone to lend at cost (either through making interest illegal or through taking over the lending market and thus taking taxpayer's money and forcing them to lend it at zero interest) then you would not have this gain - odds are you wouldn't find enough money to be lent, and I wouldn't get any benefit from my money. The economy would shrink as a result.

[Sava]

You do understand that interest is not a capitalist concept, right? It's a basic economic concept. Money now is worth more than money later, just as having a TV today is worth more to me than not having a TV today but getting the same TV in a few years. Hence, interest - I give up some money now and let you have it, and in exchange you pay me more money later, because my money now/money later ratio is more skewed towards later than yours. That's called a win-win proposition. Removing interest is silly, since then far less lending would occur, and it would never be a win-win - you would literally be making the country worse off by ANY standard. Suggesting the government should do it is simply forcing EVERYONE to loan interest free (everyone who pays taxes, anyway).

Nothing you said is relevant to this discussion. The function of intermediary exchange mechanisms (money) are being made unnecessary with respect to the system that produces goods, services, and resources.

Try to at least understand the basic concepts before offering irrelevant remarks.

[Sava]

The economy would shrink as a result.

The "economy" is just a word that describes economic activity. The more resources, goods, and services provided to the consumer without their need to devote their time to it's acquisition, the more human intelligence can be allocated elsewhere. Decreasing the amount of human intelligence activities (labor) necessary to production, the more discretionary economic activity can occur.

[Kidlicious]

The "economy" is just a word that describes economic activity. The more resources, goods, and services provided to the consumer without their need to devote their time to it's acquisition, the more human intelligence can be allocated elsewhere. Decreasing the amount of human intelligence activities (labor) necessary to production, the more discretionary economic activity can occur.

Sounds like what liberals like Pelosi and Biden say with regards to Obamacare; that we'll be better off now because people don't have to work.

[Kidlicious]

Someone ask him who gets paid to borrow money, or does everyone get paid for it.

[100% Wolf]

Nothing you said is relevant to this discussion. The function of intermediary exchange mechanisms (money) are being made unnecessary with respect to the system that produces goods, services, and resources.

Try to at least understand the basic concepts before offering irrelevant remarks.

What will replace intermediate exchange mechanisms?

[100% Wolf]

The "economy" is just a word that describes economic activity. The more resources, goods, and services provided to the consumer without their need to devote their time to it's acquisition, the more human intelligence can be allocated elsewhere. Decreasing the amount of human intelligence activities (labor) necessary to production, the more discretionary economic activity can occur.

People have the option of working less either through less hours per week, or more vacation time, or barring that, earlier retirement. They have a tradeoff between leisure time and money. When they choose to work less they can devote more time to freely creating whatever they want. This makes sense, but what does it have to do with destroying private banks?

[Sava]

What will replace intermediate exchange mechanisms?

Whatever people want to use. Under this system, taxation is also obsolete. These types of markets will more closely resemble actual capitalism than anything. The state would have virtually no presence, aside from enforcing basic standards... disallowing harmful behavior, etc.

[Sava]

but what does it have to do with destroying private banks?

DONT LOOK BEHIND THE CURTAIN

[100% Wolf]

Whatever people want to use. Under this system, taxation is also obsolete. These types of markets will more closely resemble actual capitalism than anything. The state would have virtually no presence, aside from enforcing basic standards... disallowing harmful behavior, etc.

Okay so let's say I'm growing pot in my backyard and I'm hungry. How do I get food?