Government controls corporations, small businesses, and citizens. That's where to begin.
I wonder at the outcome of these so -called revolutions. Remember Marie Antoinette! :-) And Louis XVI! Those poor creatures funded the American Revolution- went broke- and that was that! Maybe the bar is so low, we feel blessed just to avoid the ruptures and rabble. On Jun 28, 6:42 pm, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > You've riled my ire Archy, now what can we do about it I wonder. My > knowledge of things isn't up to the complexities of economics but the > principles of simple exchange keep making me think we should have a dual > economy: let corporations exist (remove personhood), and establish a > social system (independent of government) to allow people the option to > serve the commonwealth of society. With all the things that need to be > done there is such a high unemployment, people cannot afford property > taxes and various costs, why not let people live and prosper? Perhaps > there isn't enough to go around (sarcasm), or maybe we just need some > balance. > > On 6/28/2011 4:13 PM, archytas wrote: > > > > > What the isn't is any public dialogue on whether the stuff about law, > > freedom, entrepreneurialism, innovation and the motivation of wealth > > is the problem. > > > On Jun 28, 8:32 pm, archytas<[email protected]> wrote: > >> When you look at GDP figures (not that many do) in the US you see real > >> wage decline over 30 years yet an increase in consumption (and hence > >> GDP). Questions obviously arise here on how - the answer is debt > >> spending - but how did the borrowing arise - wouldn't we expect > >> lending to fall with less money coming in to pay of debt contracted? > >> Part of the answer lies in greed and a property bubble created by > >> this. Loans appeared to be secured against property, but the banks > >> were fueling speculation to inflate property prices to 'earn' > >> bonuses. I see little difference in what they did and Deng ordering > >> 'homes' that no one will live in. In a sense we all went into a > >> command economy. As with the famous Sino-Soviet experiments this was > >> and still is based on 'elite madness' and false accounting. > > >> I mention habros because a poisoning feature of luxury seems > >> involved. It's surely all over - just switch on TV. The way we > >> normally think about running a household just don't apply, though > >> politicians mug us with this kind of false analogy. The promise in > >> the last election in the UK was that frontline services would not be > >> affected by cuts in waste and all the other lies of this kind - the > >> usual 5 cents in the dollar stuff pace Bob Dole. This never works and > >> we know it doesn't. > > >> I would guess most people have a notion that GDP is a reflection of > >> effort and this is the problem. GDP goes up when we buy plastic > >> Chinese crap or TVs we didn't make on money borrowed against what was > >> supposed to be the ever rising value of our assets like housing. So > >> GDP goes up when we simply bubble property prices - usually good for > >> people owning property. What the banks did in this needs long > >> investigation and description - but in short they began to make money > >> make money - something that clearly can't be 'real'. The accounting > >> here involves governments creating electronic money (now QE) and > >> lending this at low rates to favoured banks (a surplus of capital > >> never built on effort) who appeared to be making money hand over > >> fist. This was really the Ponzi scheme and no more than anything > >> Madoff was doing. Ponzi schemes pay out not on earnings but with the > >> new money their lies on performance bring in. The lies are supported > >> by elaborate maths. I teach the maths and they don't work as claimed, > >> only reducing risk in margins. The key metaphor is to imagine playing > >> Monopoly against a banker with a couple of spare sets of money in her > >> back pocket. > > >> The idea in this is to use capital ore and more effectively (fine) but > >> it all goes mad when the capital becomes earnings ten years off > >> treated as though you've made it now. The maths is complicated but > >> the schemes are not - it's almost like placing bets on all horses and > >> living it up on the winnings whilst ignoring the losses or inflating > >> the currency you use to 'account' for them. > > >> What people can't grab is that economics and accounting is like this > >> anyway - though supposedly under strict rules. Businesses need to > >> stay alive until the good times when most profit is made. This is > >> fine until the madness or crooks get in and the idea ceases to be > >> about the viable business and becomes just profit. > > >> I can build the case in figures but the issue is corruption - a > >> corruption as endemic as that in Soviet performance management. What > >> they are telling us is stark. We can't have the public services (who > >> cares who runs them if they do it properly) to educate kids, look > >> after old and disabled people and the rest even though we have plenty > >> of labour to do this - labour in some senses earned through massive > >> productivity rises in agriculture and manufacturing. Looming over us > >> is a massive and generally parasitic financial services sector that > >> matches these productivity gains in size - all of which could be > >> routinised to a fraction. > > >> When we talk about making an industry efficient we have little problem > >> with allowing wages to come under international competition and all > >> the rest, Yet to match this in, say, policing by importing droves of > >> keen Chinese and sacking our expensive finest - and the very idea of > >> doing this at the top of banking seems impossible - though all the > >> skills are comparable. > > >> I suspect the real issues cannot be addressed because most people > >> adjust to a view of just being cogs in the wheel and feel their sanity > >> threatened by thoughts of the criminality that has been going on > >> around them. They look for homely answers like 'blaming profligate > >> Greeks' (a hospital doctor in Greece gets under half what a lecturer > >> gets in the UK) and imagining austerity measures will let us save our > >> way out of the problems. This is not what history tells us - though, > >> of course, most people know no real history. > > >> What is happening now is history. - it may as well be a re-write of > >> much imperialist history. I hope war is less on the cards, but I'm > >> not at all sure. Our ignorance is the real issue - and I suspect this > >> is ignorance about just how unfair the world is and how massively > >> irrational our systems are.. It's worse than we are thinking and our > >> public dialogue allows us to say. > > >> The questions we aren't asking are about what would be left if there > >> was no more 'international trade' and we got round to making stuff > >> locally and allowing more global exchange of expertise through virtual > >> exchange. We aren't broke in such a system and have capital. > > >> My guess is that most of what we call 'work' in the current system is > >> no such thing - it's neurosis. > > >> On Jun 28, 12:58 pm, Ash<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> So, bullets=100pts, futures=-100TNpts. ;-) > >>> On 6/28/2011 12:07 AM, archytas wrote: > >>>> The truth on bullets is you get to eat if you have them and the food > >>>> holders don't! > >>>> On Jun 28, 3:52 am, rigsy03<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> I wonder the number of vacant, distressed properties in the West? > >>>>> Well, China was humiliated by the tactics of the West in our forcing > >>>>> her to open to trade via opium and dynasty overthrow plus the theft of > >>>>> her national arts and treasures- keeping them "safe" in western > >>>>> museums, like the rest of our lootings. > >>>>> Americans accumulated their own debt with abuse of credit when it was > >>>>> easy street. The banks/financial institutions were irresponsible and > >>>>> so were our governments. You can't eat bullets. > >>>>> On Jun 27, 4:49 pm, archytas<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> I don't believe the modern arguments (post 1950) concern communism > >>>>>> other than as a futile ideal. We seem to have forgotten about habros > >>>>>> - the polluting quality of luxury. The term arises in a Greek play > >>>>>> celebrating the victory of the Athenian Democracy over the Persians. > >>>>>> The warning to the Greeks was that they must never become sissies > >>>>>> wallowing in emotions and luxury like the defeated Persians. Most of > >>>>>> us are barely aware of history and have no real clue what the Soviets > >>>>>> and Chinese were up to. Even in relation to what's going on in China > >>>>>> now, I find few who know they have built ghost cities and are fueling > >>>>>> GDP growth with a property bubble. > >>>>>> The broad brush of western economics is that the ignorant rabble have > >>>>>> no place in real decision-making and that they must both know this (in > >>>>>> order not to forget their place) and to deny it in fantasies to > >>>>>> encourage virtual self-aggrandizement. Thus we are to live in virtual > >>>>>> meritocracy whilst actually just part of a pack that will not > >>>>>> challenge the alphas. In a very real way, we do not argue with facts, > >>>>>> but the stories of literature which bounds our expectations. Video > >>>>>> games are a warning of what we are, even if we don't play them. > >>>>>> The debts that are everywhere like a nightmare are not to do with > >>>>>> money as a means of simple exchange, taken on to be worked off in some > >>>>>> equation of labour value. They have been manipulated as surely as any > >>>>>> in past empires. Just as Chinese GDP is floating on 64 million empty > >>>>>> buildings no one can afford to live in (terms are often half up front, > >>>>>> the balance over 3 years), our currencies float on deals between > >>>>>> governments and favoured banks. We have suppressed wages and banks > >>>>>> hardly even provide working capital for business, instead engaging in > >>>>>> speculation in giant Ponzi schemes hedged in ever increasing prices > >>>>>> for assets that no one would eventually be able to buy from a wage, > >>>>>> and securitised to the tax payer. Wages were collapsed over 30 years > >>>>>> by exporting manufacturing - but GDP kept rising as we borrowed > >>>>>> against the asset pile to buy more and more crap and pay welfare to > >>>>>> those deprived of jobs. > >>>>>> The rich grew vastly richer in this period. If there are 64 million > >>>>>> Chinese > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
