Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Errol

Peter Schiff's Consumer Island

Recommended Posts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIm8yU5q69U

I love Peter Schiff's simple way of using analogies to demonstrate some of the ridiculous ideas put forward by economists

“Some people that got stranded on an island, and I think it was 6 or 7 were Asians and there was one American and as soon as they were on the island they had to divide up the jobs. And one Asian was given the job of fishing, the other one was hunting, one of them got the job of gathering fire wood. So they all had jobs, and the American was assigned the job of eating. And so at the end of the day, they would all gather around and prepare this feast and the American would sit there and eat it. But he would´nt eat it all, he´d just leave enough crumbs so he could give to the 6 Asians so they could go on and repeat it again tomorrow, spend all day preparing a meal for the American to eat. Now, the way modern economists would look at it, they would say “Well, this American is vital to the whole island economy. Without him nobody would have to fish, nobody would have to hunt, nobody would have to gather fire wood. He is creating all this employment on the islandâ€. But the reality is, every Asian on that island, his lot in life would be dramatically improved if they kicked the American off the island because now they would have a lot more to eat or maybe they wouldn´t have to spend all day hunting and fishing and they can lay on the beach a little bitâ€.

Edited by Errol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Daddy Bear
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIm8yU5q69U

I love Peter Schiff's simple way of using analogies to demonstrate some of the ridiculous ideas put forward by economists

“Some people that got stranded on an island, and I think it was 6 or 7 were Asians and there was one American and as soon as they were on the island they had to divide up the jobs. And one Asian was given the job of fishing, the other one was hunting, one of them got the job of gathering fire wood. So they all had jobs, and the American was assigned the job of eating. And so at the end of the day, they would all gather around and prepare this feast and the American would sit there and eat it. But he would´nt eat it all, he´d just leave enough crumbs so he could give to the 6 Asians so they could go on and repeat it again tomorrow, spend all day preparing a meal for the American to eat. Now, the way modern economists would look at it, they would say “Well, this American is vital to the whole island economy. Without him nobody would have to fish, nobody would have to hunt, nobody would have to gather fire wood. He is creating all this employment on the islandâ€. But the reality is, every Asian on that island, his lot in life would be dramatically improved if they kicked the American off the island because now they would have a lot more to eat or maybe they wouldn´t have to spend all day hunting and fishing and they can lay on the beach a little bitâ€.

thiese views are becoming more and more widespread

global conciousness is reaching a tipping point

beware

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thiese views are becoming more and more widespread

global conciousness is reaching a tipping point

beware

so America is finished...where does that leave the UK....an excellent reserve currency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Daddy Bear
so America is finished...where does that leave the UK....an excellent reserve currency.

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could just as easily replace the American with "the city" or "wall street" or "goldman sachs" and "asians" as the wider economy and the analogy would still work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could just as easily replace the American with "the city" or "wall street" or "goldman sachs" and "asians" as the wider economy and the analogy would still work.

indeed, you could replace the fat guy with just about anyone who relies on others to provide their wages...shareholders, bankers, government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us think also about a banker setting up shop on the island.

He supplies and manages a universal means of exchange which everyone appreciates for its convenience etc.

But (as in my signature) he insists that he alone issues the money and charges interest to everyone else. He lends at interest to the islanders their means of exchange and gradually accumulates debt obligations and real wealth though he does no productive work.

Over time he gains complete control over the island economy and eventually its whole society.

To my mind this is equally as absurd as the professional eater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It leaves us with a lower standard of living and hidden inflation. End of. Printy printy! (with due deference to Injin...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIm8yU5q69U

I love Peter Schiff's simple way of using analogies to demonstrate some of the ridiculous ideas put forward by economists

“Some people that got stranded on an island, and I think it was 6 or 7 were Asians and there was one American and as soon as they were on the island they had to divide up the jobs. And one Asian was given the job of fishing, the other one was hunting, one of them got the job of gathering fire wood. So they all had jobs, and the American was assigned the job of eating. And so at the end of the day, they would all gather around and prepare this feast and the American would sit there and eat it. But he would´nt eat it all, he´d just leave enough crumbs so he could give to the 6 Asians so they could go on and repeat it again tomorrow, spend all day preparing a meal for the American to eat. Now, the way modern economists would look at it, they would say “Well, this American is vital to the whole island economy. Without him nobody would have to fish, nobody would have to hunt, nobody would have to gather fire wood. He is creating all this employment on the islandâ€. But the reality is, every Asian on that island, his lot in life would be dramatically improved if they kicked the American off the island because now they would have a lot more to eat or maybe they wouldn´t have to spend all day hunting and fishing and they can lay on the beach a little bitâ€.

Thats a great analogy of Capitalism. A small privileged elite living off the backs of the workers.

The ironic thing is Schiff is a free market capitalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats a great analogy of Capitalism. A small privileged elite living off the backs of the workers.

The ironic thing is Schiff is a free market capitalist.

Thats a great analogy of Communism. A small privileged elite living off the backs of the workers.

The ironic thing is Schiff is a free market capitalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It leaves us with a lower standard of living and hidden inflation. End of. Printy printy! (with due deference to Injin...)

yeah, but, look daddy bear...the end result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats a great analogy of Capitalism. A small privileged elite living off the backs of the workers.

The ironic thing is Schiff is a free market capitalist.

Its not capitalism. Crony capitalism and good old fashioned "robber baronism" is what we have now. Under true capitalism the gambling casino's would have been sunk, busted and under water by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats a great analogy of Communism. A small privileged elite living off the backs of the workers.

The ironic thing is Schiff is a free market capitalist.

Thats a great analogy of humanity. A small privileged elite living off the backs of the workers.

The ironic thing is Schiff is human.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the comment under that Peter Schiff video:

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.

- Abraham Lincoln, Letter to (Col.) William F. Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats a great analogy of Communism. A small privileged elite living off the backs of the workers.

The ironic thing is Schiff is a free market capitalist.

No. The American is the boss. The asians are the workers. Capital v Labor.

The workers realise they dont need the boss, he is a liability and they are doing all the work.

The workers decide to revolt against the boss and manage themselves in their own interests.

Thats what Communism is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. The American is the boss. The asians are the workers. Capital v Labor.

The workers realise they dont need the boss, he is a liability and they are doing all the work.

The workers decide to revolt against the boss and manage themselves in their own interests.

Thats what Communism is.

of course it is. stalin was a perfect communist and comrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Parry aka GOD
No. The American is the boss. The asians are the workers. Capital v Labor.

The workers realise they dont need the boss, he is a liability and they are doing all the work.

The workers decide to revolt against the boss and manage themselves in their own interests.

Thats what Communism is.

Both.

The extremes of Capitalism (as the few gather the majority of resources and power, takes time). Also Communism (as the few gather the majority of resources and power, happens much faster). Both are in fact plutocracies.

How are you anyway, Fudge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIm8yU5q69U

I love Peter Schiff's simple way of using analogies to demonstrate some of the ridiculous ideas put forward by economists

“Some people that got stranded on an island, and I think it was 6 or 7 were Asians and there was one American and as soon as they were on the island they had to divide up the jobs. And one Asian was given the job of fishing, the other one was hunting, one of them got the job of gathering fire wood. So they all had jobs, and the American was assigned the job of eating. And so at the end of the day, they would all gather around and prepare this feast and the American would sit there and eat it. But he would´nt eat it all, he´d just leave enough crumbs so he could give to the 6 Asians so they could go on and repeat it again tomorrow, spend all day preparing a meal for the American to eat. Now, the way modern economists would look at it, they would say “Well, this American is vital to the whole island economy. Without him nobody would have to fish, nobody would have to hunt, nobody would have to gather fire wood. He is creating all this employment on the islandâ€. But the reality is, every Asian on that island, his lot in life would be dramatically improved if they kicked the American off the island because now they would have a lot more to eat or maybe they wouldn´t have to spend all day hunting and fishing and they can lay on the beach a little bitâ€.

What he neglects to add is that the American has the biggest stick on the island and will never give up his privileges without a fight.

He'd rather see the island and it's inhabitants destroyed rather then relinquish his position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What he neglects to add is that the American has the biggest stick on the island and will never give up his privileges without a fight.

He'd rather see the island and it's inhabitants destroyed rather then relinquish his position.

nah, if the asians decide not to send food, the americans die. Its not a stick so much a carrot....dollars. no more dollars, no more food.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
of course it is. stalin was a perfect communist and comrade.

I would not describe Stalins Russia as Communism.

But Schiffs analogy is ironic. As a Capitalist he thinks it perfectly acceptable for American capital to exploit

and live off the backs of American workers. At the end of the film the American boss actually eats the workers themselves,

and thats effectively what they are doing, the bosses and employers have consumed the human capital of american workers well into the future.

The American middle classes have been abandoned as workers and consumers as they are finished and turned

their attention to the Chinese and Indian workers and consumers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Parry aka GOD
What he neglects to add is that the American has the biggest stick on the island and will never give up his privileges without a fight.

He'd rather see the island and it's inhabitants destroyed rather then relinquish his position.

Really?

The 'Asians' refers to China, no?

Unless their 'sticks' have suddenly become candyfloss, Mutually Assured Destruction prevents the American from using his 'sticks'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both.

The extremes of Capitalism (as the few gather the majority of resources and power, takes time). Also Communism (as the few gather the majority of resources and power, happens much faster). Both are in fact plutocracies.

How are you anyway, Fudge?

I am Ok. Nursing a bit of a hangover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   287 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.