_w_ Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 There fixed it for you. I don't have the data but yes, I suspect most of the world went through the same shenanigans then as now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erranta Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 This is all academic ********. I disagree with his assessment that growth = prosperity and that the only way we can prosper is for the middle classes to consume (borrow) more. These ivory tower economists fail to consider the reality which is one of scarcity and reducing resources. The entire paradigm of growth and traditional prosperity is fundamentally flawed. To me this is like the bandmaster of the Titanic explaining why it would be more fair to move the cheap seats nearer to the stage.... well intentioned but ultimately meaningless. Winner takes all = growth death spiral + ultimately collapse of the system and resets (plus violent retaliation against rich & those responsible. It's only cos the elites continually drug populations that it all hasn't already kicked off) Greater wealth distribution means more wealth is spent directly back into society = sustainable but hardly any eco-growth (which industrialists can't handle always seeking more profits) cos it would only go up if population got larger/Nation got richer. We also don't waste Billions on extra policing plus other huge psychological beneficial knock-on effects like happier persons don't go to doctor so often, less divorce thru financial pressures, motivation etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravity always wins Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 I don't have the data but yes, I suspect most of the world went through the same shenanigans then as now. There is nothing new in the world its the same things happening to different people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyOne Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 Sorry Lucky, but I just can't watch Robert Reich. I hate the fecking b@stard even more than I hate Ed Balls and Gordon Brown. Reich is an extremely dangerous ideologue, with completely mistaken and misleading economics. Usually his imbecilic, pre-Ricardo's faith leads people to defend protectionist positions with racist and genocidal consequences. The other thing that he has missed is that per capita government spending (at all levels ie federal, state and local)has a bit more than doubled since 1985 in real terms. If increased government spending were the solution, we wouldn't have the problem. A pretty interesting site to play around with .... http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/downchart_gs.php?year=1980_2021&view=1&expand=&units=k&log=linear&fy=fy12&chart=F0-total&bar=1&stack=1&size=m&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 When I talk of equality, I don't mean that everyone should have the same. I just mean that all people should be free to work as best they can depending on their talents, energy and enthusiasm and should be taxed for what they take from society (land and natural resources) and not the contribution they make to it with their labour. Disagree. Land and natural resources are not a measure of who takes the most, and taxing use of natural resources more than other things will put primary industries out of business (which admittedly ignores the fact that most of them have gone). It would tax a mine far more heavily than a bank and the mine is much more useful. Not taxing labour would make sense if reward was directly linked to the usefulness and effort of labour. It isn't. In theory it would make sense to balance that with taxation but it would be completely unworkabe (a lot of it being down to personal opinion for starters). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravity always wins Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Disagree. Land and natural resources are not a measure of who takes the most, and taxing use of natural resources more than other things will put primary industries out of business (which admittedly ignores the fact that most of them have gone). It would tax a mine far more heavily than a bank and the mine is much more useful. Not taxing labour would make sense if reward was directly linked to the usefulness and effort of labour. It isn't. In theory it would make sense to balance that with taxation but it would be completely unworkabe (a lot of it being down to personal opinion for starters). The idea of taxing land is it would force the owners to stop hoarding it and start using it productively or else sell it to somebody who would use it more productively. It should stop the hoarding of land and reduce the cost base for all. Fred Harrison is a proponent it was used sucessfuly in Australia I believe but the banksters didn't like it so it went the way of all things the banksters don't like. Why tax hard working people for their labour and ingenuity and fail to tax the hoarders of natural resources who in many cases only own the land through an accident of birth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R K Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 The idea of taxing land is it would force the owners to stop hoarding it and start using it productively or else sell it to somebody who would use it more productively. It should stop the hoarding of land and reduce the cost base for all. Fred Harrison is a proponent it was used sucessfuly in Australia I believe but the banksters didn't like it so it went the way of all things the banksters don't like. Why tax hard working people for their labour and ingenuity and fail to tax the hoarders of natural resources who in many cases only own the land through an accident of birth? So you'd argue strongly for a tax on gold hoarding then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravity always wins Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 So you'd argue strongly for a tax on gold hoarding then? Why? Is it of any use to you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.