Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Monkeyleg on March 15, 2010, 12:36:42 AM
-
Below is a letter from today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial section. If this guy isn't attempting satire, he's certifiably insane:
***********
Issue citizens a dividend
What is missing from all the justified angst about joblessness is a basic truth: There is not enough work for wages to go around anymore. Jeremy Rifkin's 1995 book, "The End of Work" rings true today.
The good news is that there is phenomenal productivity.
Much is accomplished by automatic systems. Goods roar off the lines with hardly a person present.
All this value creation with less and less labor needs to be expressed as purchasing power. (Automatic systems don't buy food, houses, vacations or cars.) Hence, the government needs to issue money to every citizen, "out of thin air," not from taxation. Because the corresponding value is already there, this is not inflationary and it's not charity or a dole. It is a dividend due to all of us, who do buy things.
The path downward is not pretty: Think gangs, militias, warlords taking over. We have a choice: Grasp the necessary concepts, overcome the psychological, social, ideological and technical issues and put this in place, or continue to watch helplessly, baffled, as our civilization painfully corrodes away.
David Lagerman
Plymouth
-
Sorry, I don't know if he's serious. But I do know this:
gangs, militias, warlords
One of these things is not like the other...
-
We used to refer to ramblings such as that as "stoned revelations."
As in, the person got stoned and believed they had an epiphany that explained something hitherto unrealized by the more sober crowd. I think a lot of progressive crap is spawned suchly...
DD
-
the friuts of increased productivity have not gone to the society as a whole, but to the same greedy characters who have always been there to slurp up all they can since they never seem to have enough. real wages haven't gone up. costs haven't gone down. quality of most stuff doesn't appear to have improved and the achievement of a resonably comfortable life appears to be less available to more people. a fantasy life via the various media(w/continual improvements in delivery and realism in content) looks to me like the biggest result of all our 'progress' since the start of the industrial age which once promised to liberate us all. so, where did it go?
-
I feel pretty liberated. =D
-
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over.
This guy is a loon. No satire here. Just someone who's bread ain't quite done.
-
the friuts of increased productivity have not gone to the society as a whole, but to the same greedy characters who have always been there to slurp up all they can since they never seem to have enough. real wages haven't gone up. costs haven't gone down. quality of most stuff doesn't appear to have improved and the achievement of a resonably comfortable life appears to be less available to more people. a fantasy life via the various media(w/continual improvements in delivery and realism in content) looks to me like the biggest result of all our 'progress' since the start of the industrial age which once promised to liberate us all. so, where did it go?
Yeah, I mean, the elites have these AMAZING things called personal computers that FIT IN THEIR POCKET while all we plebs have are the massive room-sized computer!
And their cars! They get to ride around in vehicles with crumple-zones and airbags while we are still stuck with seatbelts!
Don't even get me started on the way they can walk around with phones; PHONES!!! All the rest of us are still stuck with freaking land lines.
Oh, OH! And how they use devices called "GPS" so that they don't even have to read a freaking map!
We're getting SCREWED, I tell you!!!!
-
Yeah, I mean, the elites have these AMAZING things called personal computers that FIT IN THEIR POCKET while all we plebs have are the massive room-sized computer!
And their cars! They get to ride around in vehicles with crumple-zones and airbags while we are still stuck with seatbelts!
Don't even get me started on the way they can walk around with phones; PHONES!!! All the rest of us are still stuck with freaking land lines.
Oh, OH! And how they use devices called "GPS" so that they don't even have to read a freaking map!
We're getting SCREWED, I tell you!!!!
Your sarcasm made my monitor explode and blew my off my chair, good sir! :lol:
-
the government needs to issue money to every citizen, "out of thin air," not from taxation. Because the corresponding value is already there, this is not inflationary and it's not charity or a dole. It is a dividend due to all of us, who do buy things.
Well then, can't the government just print up more money to pay itself? The we could do away with taxation entirely, but we'd still have perfect roads, free health care, a huge military, wonderful schools . . . and they could even send us money "out of thin air" every month to buy a 60" plama TV, a new Rolls-Royce, restaurant tickets, a holiday cruise . . . and again, we wouldn't even have to pay taxes!
We could all live a lifestyle that would be the envy of Bill Gates!
Wheeee!
:facepalm:
-
Below is a letter from today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial section. If this guy isn't attempting satire, he's certifiably insane:
***********
Issue citizens a dividend
What is missing from all the justified angst about joblessness is a basic truth: There is not enough work for wages to go around anymore. Jeremy Rifkin's 1995 book, "The End of Work" rings true today.
The good news is that there is phenomenal productivity.
Much is accomplished by automatic systems. Goods roar off the lines with hardly a person present.
All this value creation with less and less labor needs to be expressed as purchasing power. (Automatic systems don't buy food, houses, vacations or cars.) Hence, the government needs to issue money to every citizen, "out of thin air," not from taxation. Because the corresponding value is already there, this is not inflationary and it's not charity or a dole. It is a dividend due to all of us, who do buy things.
The path downward is not pretty: Think gangs, militias, warlords taking over. We have a choice: Grasp the necessary concepts, overcome the psychological, social, ideological and technical issues and put this in place, or continue to watch helplessly, baffled, as our civilization painfully corrodes away.
David Lagerman
Plymouth
Lol. I agree, stoner.
-
It is a dividend due to all of us, who do buy things.
I love that line. We're all due something because we buy things. Makes 100% sense. If I spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, am I due even more?
-
I love that line. We're all due something because we buy things. Makes 100% sense. If I spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, am I due even more?
That actually would be the logical conclusion to his line of reasoning.
O just pass Go (Jan 1 ?) and collect X dollars :lol:
-
Two minutes with google, and I found out he's involved with a few organizations:
http://www.smartcommunities.ncat.org/success/plymoth.shtml
http://www.usbig.net/index.html
http://www.thistlefieldbooks.com/index.html
Let's just say he's not trying to attempt satire.
-
Basic Income Guarantee Network. Nice, fancy name for socialism.
I'm a little to old to be picking beans at a community farm, so thank you, no.
-
Basic Income Guarantee Network. Nice, fancy name for socialism.
I'm a little to old to be picking beans at a community farm, so thank you, no.
I'm pretty sure socialism does not mandate payment simply for being a consumer.
This guy doesn't have an 'ism' you can attach to what he is saying, he's just deluded.
Hmm...Lagermanism?
-
I am pretty sure this is the same thing Robert Heinlein supported in the novel For Us, the Living.
My understanding of Heinlein's discussions in the book...
It is not socialism, in that private property and freedom to contract is maintained. But it does have interesting parts of distribution of printed wealth.
Whereas, in the current system most of our money is imagined into existence by fractional reserve banking. This policy would replace it with gov't equal distribution of invented money. Banks would still be free to operate and provide loans, but the fractional reserve would be 100% (rather than our current ~10%).
Since fractional reserve inflates money by design, the proposal would only replace one inflation mechanism with a different one. Of course, the point is that this different mechanism is proposed to be "more fair". There are interesting arguments in the book on why it is more "reasonable" system.
I've never studied this idea (and criticisms) in depth; but here's the wiki link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit)
-
Well then, can't the government just print up more money to pay itself? The we could do away with taxation entirely, but we'd still have perfect roads, free health care, a huge military, wonderful schools . . . and they could even send us money "out of thin air" every month to buy a 60" plama TV, a new Rolls-Royce, restaurant tickets, a holiday cruise . . . and again, we wouldn't even have to pay taxes!
We could all live a lifestyle that would be the envy of Bill Gates!
Wheeee!
:facepalm:
In fact, that's exactly what Heinlein argued could happen to a certain limit. See my above post on why he seemed to think that inflation/deflation could be controlled just as well or better than current fractional reserve.
-
Isn't printing money exactly what the Obama administration is attempting now? Print money to stimulate the economy?
-
the friuts of increased productivity have not gone to the society as a whole, but to the same greedy characters who have always been there to slurp up all they can since they never seem to have enough. real wages haven't gone up. costs haven't gone down. quality of most stuff doesn't appear to have improved and the achievement of a resonably comfortable life appears to be less available to more people. a fantasy life via the various media(w/continual improvements in delivery and realism in content) looks to me like the biggest result of all our 'progress' since the start of the industrial age which once promised to liberate us all. so, where did it go?
As pointed out probably better than me, the fact that you are using a computer to access the internet to type your opinion sort of answers your last statement. Now get back out there and tend those crops and livestock or you won't have enough food stored up for winter.
-
the friuts of increased productivity have not gone to the society as a whole, but to the same greedy characters who have always been there to slurp up all they can since they never seem to have enough. real wages haven't gone up. costs haven't gone down. quality of most stuff doesn't appear to have improved and the achievement of a resonably comfortable life appears to be less available to more people. a fantasy life via the various media(w/continual improvements in delivery and realism in content) looks to me like the biggest result of all our 'progress' since the start of the industrial age which once promised to liberate us all. so, where did it go?
Are you serious? Like seriously serious?
I would argue that the cost of living has been falling steadily since the Industrial Revolution, *if* you compare apples to apples, which you are not doing. Take the life your parents lived when they were your age, and add up all associated costs. I'd bet that they paid more, as a percentage of total income, than you do - for NECESSITIES. Necessities would include housing(i.e. rent), a car, decent food, insurance, health-care and the like. That would not include a sweet mobile phone with unlimited texts and data plan, a computer with a 26" plasma, and at least one car per adult, etc., however that is a reflection of what the average person these days expects to have, or - to put it a different way - feels entitled to.
Now, if you want to start talking about increasing individual tax burdens and tax liabilities, then we'll talk about the increased cost of living. Or, you might consider the impact of two-income households being the norm rather than single-income(women's liberation, my butt; we are all now equally enslaved to the government). To say that you do not enjoy the fruits of industry, however, would be to make a false statement.
Just imagine if innovation was not rewarded, as the author suggests. Do you think you would have HD television, or tiny cellphones, or a reliable vehicle? "Atlas Shrugged" is happening already... no need to speed things along.
You do have a point, I'd say, on product quality. Things are produced with such emphasis on cost control today that it's almost laughable to go into a store and ask for a computer that will last ten years(not one that will not become obsolete, but one that will still run well). I possess a working Atari 2600, Compaq Portable II, TRS-80 model 100... all still work, all are 20ish years old. My present desktop computer, six years old, is on its third video card, fourth power supply, third set of speakers... you get the idea. I do agree on your point, but I think we'd have different opinions on the root cause. You suggest that corporate and individual greed are the cause of increased costs, decreased quality and all that, where I'd say it's probably the result of - again - more regulation and higher taxation. Producers still charge what the market will bear, but so much more is taken out that there's less and less room for actual product. More is spent complying with regulations, paying taxes, etc.
To comment on the article itself: What a brain-dead pile of crap. Fine, machines can produce almost anything these days, as well as or better than human hands. I challenge the author to explain how goods would be transported, or services rendered, or ideas created, purely of goodwill. Hogwash.
-
Are you serious? Like seriously serious?
I would argue that the cost of living has been falling steadily since the Industrial Revolution, *if* you compare apples to apples, which you are not doing. Take the life your parents lived when they were your age, and add up all associated costs. I'd bet that they paid more, as a percentage of total income, than you do - for NECESSITIES. Necessities would include housing(i.e. rent), a car, decent food, insurance, health-care and the like. That would not include a sweet mobile phone with unlimited texts and data plan, a computer with a 26" plasma, and at least one car per adult, etc., however that is a reflection of what the average person these days expects to have, or - to put it a different way - feels entitled to.
Now, if you want to start talking about increasing individual tax burdens and tax liabilities, then we'll talk about the increased cost of living. Or, you might consider the impact of two-income households being the norm rather than single-income(women's liberation, my butt; we are all now equally enslaved to the government). To say that you do not enjoy the fruits of industry, however, would be to make a false statement.
Just imagine if innovation was not rewarded, as the author suggests. Do you think you would have HD television, or tiny cellphones, or a reliable vehicle? "Atlas Shrugged" is happening already... no need to speed things along....
well, yes, very much so. first i would point out that my question is merely occasioned by the article quoted above-i don't really care what the guy wants or is saying, nor do i necessarily agree w/him on any point. that said, i would offer that i don't believe you need look far to find statistics indicating that real wages have fallen over as much as the last 30 yrs. and i find it hard to believe that you would have found prices to have fallen over that period-sticking to neccessities as you suggest. 'decent food', you say-what do you think it would cost you to eat truly 'decent' food-trust me,unless you are well fixed or grow your own, you don't even see a 'decent' cut of 'decent' meat at any meat counter available to most people. you most likely won't encounter a 'decent' and wholesome piece of fruit unless you grow it or pay a premium for it-so don't forget to add that premium into your calculations of 'decent food'. healthcare? a doctor i knew as a kid charged $5 per office visit. he served our neighborhood for his career and died respected and a millionaire. i have the hospital bill from my birth-my mother there 5 days; everything $147. now , you can do the % of income chicanery if you like, but let me just say that even if you spend 90% of your income on necessities, it is what that 10% left will buy you that matters. the(for sake of discussion) 50% you have left today won't get you the quantity or quality the 10% got me as a kid or my parents. the numbers partisans of various schemes throw at you are not your friends-experience will lead to the truth. i lived it and can give numerous examples-we are not better off. so, my question is, with all the increased productivity, why is it harder to get by, where did the benefits of that increase go, not to society as a whole as i see it.
now, the overall situation we face moving on as a society is both complex and simple. it is a confluence of sociological. economic, psychlogical, physical, mental and spiritual factors, each affecting the other and creating a total habitat for the human race. a cancer in any of the elements can spell death to the whole. greed is a most virulent malignancy, pride is another. the most complex of creations is vulnerable to a simple unraveling. inattention to, and misdirection of, the purpose and goal of a society prevent and destroy a successful weave. that's why i want to know what are we doing with what we get for our efforts.
-
well, yes, very much so. first i would point out that my question is merely occasioned by the article quoted above-i don't really care what the guy wants or is saying, nor do i necessarily agree w/him on any point. that said, i would offer that i don't believe you need look far to find statistics indicating that real wages have fallen over as much as the last 30 yrs. and i find it hard to believe that you would have found prices to have fallen over that period-sticking to neccessities as you suggest. 'decent food', you say-what do you think it would cost you to eat truly 'decent' food-trust me,unless you are well fixed or grow your own, you don't even see a 'decent' cut of 'decent' meat at any meat counter available to most people. you most likely won't encounter a 'decent' and wholesome piece of fruit unless you grow it or pay a premium for it-so don't forget to add that premium into your calculations of 'decent food'. healthcare? a doctor i knew as a kid charged $5 per office visit. he served our neighborhood for his career and died respected and a millionaire. i have the hospital bill from my birth-my mother there 5 days; everything $147. now , you can do the % of income chicanery if you like, but let me just say that even if you spend 90% of your income on necessities, it is what that 10% left will buy you that matters. the(for sake of discussion) 50% you have left today won't get you the quantity or quality the 10% got me as a kid or my parents. the numbers partisans of various schemes throw at you are not your friends-experience will lead to the truth. i lived it and can give numerous examples-we are not better off. so, my question is, with all the increased productivity, why is it harder to get by, where did the benefits of that increase go, not to society as a whole as i see it.
now, the overall situation we face moving on as a society is both complex and simple. it is a confluence of sociological. economic, psychlogical, physical, mental and spiritual factors, each affecting the other and creating a total habitat for the human race. a cancer in any of the elements can spell death to the whole. greed is a most virulent malignancy, pride is another. the most complex of creations is vulnerable to a simple unraveling. inattention to, and misdirection of, the purpose and goal of a society prevent and destroy a successful weave. that's why i want to know what are we doing with what we get for our efforts.
>.<
I weep for the economic education in this country. :'(
-
What would a car of today--with CD player, A/C, power everything, air bags, collision-resistant--have cost decades ago? As a percentage of income it would have been much higher.
...healthcare? a doctor i knew as a kid charged $5 per office visit.
We had a doctor like that, too. Made house calls. Back then, though, a case of pneumonia was a serious thing. A couple of years ago I got pneumonia and two pills knocked it out.
Apples to apples, please. I realize that wages have been stagnant or have declined in real dollars, but how much do those wages buy today? Is the price of a TV the same? A computer? (Assuming you could have found a 4 ghz desktop computer with 4 GB's of RAM).
-
Even at $3 per gallon, I can - and so can all of my siblings - purchase more gasoline per hour of labor than my father or grandfather could.
And yes, my home cost 20 times what my parents' home did. I still own it, free and clear today. They paid there's off in 20 years.
jb
-
Back in the 90's, I bought a 32" Toshiba TV with picture-in-picture that was around $900. I probably overpaid, but I can get a bigger HD TV for that price now. My 50" HD TV was only a little more.
An engineering professor way back at school used to point out that a lot of those "old classic" American cars that everyone raves about were often back in the shop the week after they were bought and required a lot more maintenance than today's vehicles. My truck is over 130,000 miles and I've done very little work on it. The brake pads on the front tires are still original.
My mother talks a lot about how her grandparents lived. They stored meat at an ice house in town because all they had was an ice box. Getting a roast to cook was a treat. They ate a lot of home grown vegetables because they didn't have the cash to buy a lot of that stuff. No A/C either. Fruit was available in season. You didn't have so much of this fruit shipped in from all over the world. They lived without a lot of the luxuries we have today and probably put in more day to day work to maintain what they had.
IMO, we have it pretty easy these days. I think it could be better, but I still think we live in the greatest country on the planet.
-
the friuts of increased productivity have not gone to the society as a whole, but to the same greedy characters who have always been there to slurp up all they can since they never seem to have enough. real wages haven't gone up. costs haven't gone down. quality of most stuff doesn't appear to have improved and the achievement of a resonably comfortable life appears to be less available to more people. a fantasy life via the various media(w/continual improvements in delivery and realism in content) looks to me like the biggest result of all our 'progress' since the start of the industrial age which once promised to liberate us all. so, where did it go?
I watch the Modern Marvels episodes once in a while on the History Channel, and it is amazing to see food processing operations where the cans and such are flying along at speed thru a system of conveyors. Perhaps the profits do inure to the wealthy owners but without such marvels we peons could not afford to purchase hand packed food items.
I am a small investor and I own a few manufacturing stocks, in fact most of my stuff is manufacturing.
Judging from the sluggish prices of the food stocks I would say they are not making a killing.
-
I feel pretty liberated. =D
I think that government regulation and the incessant demands of labor has really messed up our business community when it comes to hiring more people. More than once I have contemplated opening a small retai shop but did not do so because with a low volume of sales I would be working
for the government and for the employees. What is in it for me but headaches?
-
Even at $3 per gallon, I can - and so can all of my siblings - purchase more gasoline per hour of labor than my father or grandfather could.
And yes, my home cost 20 times what my parents' home did. I still own it, free and clear today. They paid there's off in 20 years.
jb
Going back to ~1972, gas was about $0.35/gallon and min wage was $1.60/hr IIRC.
At that ratio, min wage should now be over $12/hr (not that I think mandated min wage is a good idea).
-
Going back to ~1972, gas was about $0.35/gallon and min wage was $1.60/hr IIRC.
At that ratio, min wage should now be over $12/hr (not that I think mandated min wage is a good idea).
I think the key thing in getting a bargain in the energy market is more competition from more sources, something we have too little of.
As to fuel efficiency in cars, we cannot expect to have 30mpg from ethanol as long as the engines
are designed to accommodate multi fuels and gasoline. It has been said that an engine can be designed to get 30mpg from ethanol, and the trick seems to be a higher compression ratio.
There is a better way to gain leverage on energy prices and that is to learn how to do the same thing or get the same results while using less energy input. However, such ideas do not sell because they cannot be copyrighted or patented. They are simply common sense ideas that do not sell because no one gets rich off of using them, or so people think
-
I found his sister. ;/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5oVzbwYWpg
-
Seen that before, but it's still hilarious.
The food is free because it comes from the land, but why should we have to pay for the land?
Also, where are those vegetable trees? And I didn't realize that the eastern states still had slavery.
-
I think that government regulation and the incessant demands of labor has really messed up our business community when it comes to hiring more people. More than once I have contemplated opening a small retai shop but did not do so because with a low volume of sales I would be working
for the government and for the employees. What is in it for me but headaches?
My father runs a small business. He got rid of his employees, dropped his worker's comp coverage, and refuses to hire any more help. That's a result of having to deal with BS and running the risk of hiring people.
-
My father runs a small business. He got rid of his employees, dropped his worker's comp coverage, and refuses to hire any more help. That's a result of having to deal with BS and running the risk of hiring people.
Why can't the people in WDC see that? If new stimulus jobs are to be government jobs then who will pay the taxes to support those jobs? I guess we borrow from the Chinese?
-
Why can't the people in WDC see that?
They see it all right.
The people in DC hate private businesses. They want private business destroyed or taken over by the government. If they can't have that, then they want private business to be taken over by their loyal sidekicks, the unions.
It's much easier to understand the actions of the leftist politicians when you realize that deep down, they are communists, although they claim not to be. Getting rid of capitalism is their #1 goal.
How they expect people to pay the ever increasing taxes, I don't know.
-
How they expect people to pay the ever increasing taxes, I don't know.
Even 90% of nuthin is still nuthin