NB: De soto make an article about Mercantilism... how economic elite obtain help by government to block competition http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-real-enemy-for-trump-is-mercantilism-not-globalism-1480279192
the secret of economic rents, and what make people furious, from Tunisia to rust belt. by the way what he describe as the desire of the poor is Airbnb and Uberpop. no surprise Newyork and paris blocked it, they are mercantilist at least. 2016-11-28 12:03 GMT+01:00 Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com>: > Alain, as usual a great analysis. > The only way in an UBI economy, we would not have a better distribution of > capital is that we let the establishment prevent natural development with > political conservation laws. > > On Nov 27, 2016 18:11, "Alain Sepeda" <alain.sep...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> from exchange it seems that one big problem and neglected point is about >> allocation of the capitale. >> what people name "robots are taking our jobs" is simply the well known >> "replacement of work by capital". >> One psychological problem marxist but mostly old fashioned simply, is >> that people don't consider they are capitalist. >> Hernando De Soto is much more aware of how poor emerging societies works >> and actively try to defend poor-people capitalism, to defend their >> unprotected hidden capital. >> www.huffingtonpost.com/hernando-de-soto/piketty-wrong-third- >> world_b_6751634.html >> Most of rich people capital is very much protected but also mostly wind. >> Most of poor capital is solid, tangible and productive, but unrecognized >> as so. >> >> There is no problem of losing your job for a robot, if you own the >> robot... it is like a farmer who own his tractor (after an acceptable loan >> eventually). >> >> If capital is too unequally allocated it is inefficient, after it is >> unfair. >> Usual way to correct that is that real capital need work to be managed, >> and lasy capital exploiter lose their capital (wrongly managed, stolen by >> insider. >> Another better mechanism is the technology revolution, which create >> inequalities, but new inequalities different from the previous. >> >> What I call beside UBI is a kind of agrarian revolution for capital. >> UBI can be a mechanism to allow people to own an eternal security that >> they can use to acquire capital. >> >> in fact this is what was observed with UBI in India, and as reported here >> in Africa. >> >> another point people don't understand here is that if bots really are >> working for free, this mean they cost nothing, and poor people can buy them. >> if they cost something, this mean they requires work, and poor people can >> build them. >> >> the only and key problem is training. In France it is clearly our >> problem, with the educated workforce nearly fully employed (5% unemployed, >> frictional), with work market tension making enterprise margin going into >> salary rises (when not in taxes). Beside this German Style of workmarket, >> there is a mass of uneducated workers with above than 25% unemployment, >> short contracts, ... >> >> many people moan for globalization, but they refuse to admit it have >> given purchase capacity to the poor. today everybody moan, while >> globalization have stalled, commerce is falling... >> >> My feeling is that we have problem of education and training and on the >> other of lack of innovation. >> >> there is anyway much innovation , but it is deflationist (Uber, e-bay, >> blablacar, heetch, Airbnb...), which is a pain for the indebted actors, >> first the states, then US families. >> Note that sharing economy is ... way to make you a capitalist exploiting >> your assets. >> >> Future is to have UberPop of botcars. >> >> >> 2016-11-27 13:32 GMT+01:00 Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com>: >> >>> Axil, >>> Your scenario is a good example of how the economy really is. >>> It is not a zero sum game. Our resources are built on previous >>> generations innovations and progress. After that we all have 24 hours per >>> day. We can use them productively (in a wide sense) or just misuse them. >>> Computers, houses, robots will be part of what we can do with those 24 >>> hours a day. >>> There are needs all over the globe. There are also resources (everyone's >>> 24 hour a day). >>> >>> This out of the box thinking about economy has its problems. We have >>> built a debt system we inherit with all the good things (not only monetary >>> debt). That needs a solution and I am sure confiscation is not a solution. >>> However, billion dollar assets inherited has no justification either. I do >>> not have that solution but I think those two factors will together with >>> creative thinking build a better world. >>> >>> Pacifistic? Idealistic? Perhaps both but if we can change thhe attitude >>> toward money we can create a lot. Money are just means. Who need to accrue >>> more resources than he/she can utilise.? The real resources are time (which >>> is equally distributed) and creativity (which needs recognition). >>> >>> Best Regards , >>> Lennart Thornros >>> >>> >>> lenn...@thornros.com >>> +1 916 436 1899 >>> >>> Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and >>> enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM) >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> China will lead the way. China has 1.5 billion people to keep happy >>>> with no jobs to offer. It is true that all coastal cities worldwide within >>>> 100 miles of the coastline will be underwater and in need of relocation >>>> inland, That should produce a number of jobs. >>>> >>>> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Why do you think taxation won't be very heavy? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Because it will not cost much more than today's welfare systems, as I >>>>> said. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Money won't appear out of nowhere, minimum wage will only accelerate >>>>>> collapse. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Money always appears out of nowhere when the economy improves. This >>>>> will improve the economy. The minimum wage is supposed to accelerate the >>>>> process. We want a transition to robots doing all the work. A higher >>>>> minimum wage will help produce that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> And there is still no answer about the debts. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We just need to raise taxes back to where they were under Reagan or >>>>> Clinton. The deficit and the debts will gradually go away. There is no >>>>> crisis. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> In any case, there will be a finance disaster way worse than that of >>>>>> 1929. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> There might be, if it is done wrong. If it is done right it might work >>>>> as well as the period from 1945 to 1980, which was the most prosperous in >>>>> U.S. history, with the highest taxes. The two can go together if it is >>>>> done >>>>> right. >>>>> >>>>> - Jed >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
