Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 741 results by The Script
Re: What if the minimum wage was set to 1 Bitcoin per hour?
Oh Atlas, you will appreciate minimum wage when you can't get a real job due to that mean case of pompous-ass-syndrome.
Do you deny that minimum wage causes unemployment?
That's not strictly true, either. You have to have capital (wealth) to start a business. But without demand you will not survive long. Like I said earlier it's a double-sided coin.
If there's demand, not just a will but also means to buy something, there is capital. Demand is key. Wealth is optional.
So you are saying that if the average person has enough money he will invest it himself?
So you propose taxing the rich and what? Giving the money to the poorer people to spend? Using it on infrastructure? Government creating jobs?
Or pay down the debt, or lower taxes on the other 99%. Its not up to me to say how US taxpayers money should be spent, whether its on a functional healthcare system, infrastructure, education or something else, but from an economic POV its madness to have an upper 1% who own nearly 40% of the wealth and effectively tax them at lower rates than the bottom 99%. Wealth doesnt create jobs, demand does.
That's not strictly true, either. You have to have capital (wealth) to start a business. But without demand you will not survive long. Like I said earlier it's a double-sided coin. I would like to see taxes lowered on everyone and I'd rather see spending lowered then taxes raised. The US government survived just fine without an income tax all the way up until 1913 and since then it's just been one excuse or another to keep raising taxes. Taking a third of a working person's income seems much much too high in my perspective, especially with the sorts of things I see it spent on (undeclared wars overseas, corporate subsidies, fat wasteful defense contracts, inefficient welfare programs, etc.).
Chomsky is a highly intelligent individual, there's no doubt about that, and I have great respect for him. But I don't understand the fear of capitalism and the desire to "get past it". Perhaps when we speak of capitalism we are not meaning the same thing. I guess what I would want to know is in Chomksy's or your socialist anarchy would you use force against me to take away my property?
Sorry to be the one to break it to you all, but Satoshi Nakamoto died on December 20th. Here's an article with proof.
People have been maintaining living standard despite falling (relative) wages by increasingly getting in to debt for almost a generation.
But why? Are they simply unaware that their relative wages are falling? Are loans to easy to get,
All of the above I suppose. There used to be a time were people bought their cars and often even houses with money they had saved. Today thats impossible for the majority of people. There used to be a time when you didnt get 29 credit cards in your mailbox without even asking. When you didnt need loans to get through college. Where households got around nicely with just one income. Ask your parents or grand parents, they might remember.
Quote
should they be harder to get? Is it a matter of educating a culture of savings?
Perhaps, but the real solution can only be to increase wages. The current wealth inequality is back to the levels from just before the great depression:
Fixing that by at least taxing the rich IMO is not a matter of fairness, its a matter of economic common sense.
So you propose taxing the rich and what? Giving the money to the poorer people to spend? Using it on infrastructure? Government creating jobs?
Re: 37yr old woman has 15 kids and is angry the government isn't paying for them all
Where is(are) the father(s) in all of this? If anyone should be paying shouldn't it be the fathers? Socially pressure the fathers to help pay for things and get private charities involved in helping the family pay the bills until the mother can get a job, including helping her learn new skills that will give her a higher wages. Government welfare isn't going to solve this problem or provide the incentives to prevent similar ones from happening.
People have been maintaining living standard despite falling (relative) wages by increasingly getting in to debt for almost a generation.
But why? Are they simply unaware that their relative wages are falling? Are loans to easy to get, should they be harder to get? Is it a matter of educating a culture of savings?
So I've been thinking about this. It makes sense that you need demand for products as well as companies to actually produce those products. Also, I understand that the disparity in income is increasing, but I'm not so sure that poor people are buying less stuff. Most of my friends have higher standards of living then I do regardless of whether or not they earn more than I do. For example, my brother earns far less than I do but has an x-box, play station, lots of games for those consoles, movies, tv shows, x-box live, bigger flat screen tv than I do, etc. I have an x-box which was given to me by someone and have only bought one game for it. My wife and I bought a flat screen TV for just over $100 because we used gift cards from out wedding. We buy cheap food as much as possible and don't eat out very often. I'm in school and so funds are pretty tight most of the time.
Perhaps part of the problem is people who live outside of their means? I know plenty of people who make fairly low wages (like I do) but who have gotten new vehicles because they magically got approved for loans with little or no down payments. This then saddles them with debt for years keeping them from developing savings that can be used to improve themselves (schooling, start up business, whatever) and increase their wages. I'm not trying to blame poor people entirely for their own poverty, but certainly wise financial decisions have to play a part. So, anecdotally, at least, it seems to me that "poor" people are still spending lots of money.
Anyone have thoughts on this? Are people living outside of their means and how does that affect the economy?
P.S. I'm referring mostly to Americans, not because I'm trying to be ethnocentric but it's where I live and what I have experience and context for. My apologies to JA37 and anyone else who is from a different country. Perhaps the situation in Europe or Australia is different. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on the situation in your respective countries.
Perhaps part of the problem is people who live outside of their means? I know plenty of people who make fairly low wages (like I do) but who have gotten new vehicles because they magically got approved for loans with little or no down payments. This then saddles them with debt for years keeping them from developing savings that can be used to improve themselves (schooling, start up business, whatever) and increase their wages. I'm not trying to blame poor people entirely for their own poverty, but certainly wise financial decisions have to play a part. So, anecdotally, at least, it seems to me that "poor" people are still spending lots of money.
Anyone have thoughts on this? Are people living outside of their means and how does that affect the economy?
P.S. I'm referring mostly to Americans, not because I'm trying to be ethnocentric but it's where I live and what I have experience and context for. My apologies to JA37 and anyone else who is from a different country. Perhaps the situation in Europe or Australia is different. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on the situation in your respective countries.
I don't have any theories about what happened to Iceland at this point. I don't know what happened.
So, when you watch a documentary that explains what happened there, you stop watching after 5 minutes because you dont like what its saying and assume it to be wrong despite not having a clue?
You're only 9 months late criticizing me on this. JeffK and JA37 were only 8, so they have you beat. Did you not read my post?
Here it is again:
Quote
Wow, this was a while ago. You are right, I should have given it a fair hearing. I must have been in a bad mood or something. A friend recently recommended this documentary to me. I will go back and give it a fair watch and evaluate the facts and arguments it makes. I don't have any theories about what happened to Iceland at this point. I don't know what happened.
I was wrong to dismiss the documentary without watching the whole thing. I was in a bad mood when I watched it and didn't like the stereotyped view it seemed to be promoting from the outset. Regardless, I should have given it a full hearing. Also, I should not have posted on the forum about it because I didn't give it a fair viewing. The criticism is justified, but rather late. The last part is me saying that I'm trying to go into watching the film without preconceived notions of what the Icelandic situation was in order to be as unbiased as possible. Mmmmkay?
As for "too much regulation" and "government intervention" mantra's; please, dont confuse them. Government intervention as in bail outs or other market distorting actions are bad. But a free market needs regulation, regulation is not evil its a dire necessity. Its not regulation that caused this crisis, if anything its a lack of good (and enforced) regulation.
I'm coming around to regulation. Especially if its regulation that involves getting people like you to read before jumping on a bash-someone bandwagon.
1. The Quran talks about the Lost city of Iram and the Syrian city of Ebla has records of business done with Iram.
2. No.
3. The dirham weighs 2.975 grams of silver.
4. Galen of Pergamon
5. The University of Al-Qarawiyyin was founded in 859 by some chick named Fatima al-Fihria. I don't think "Universities" back then were the same concept as Universities today, but this is the answer I think you are looking for.
6. The word "yawm" is mentioned 365 times in the Quran. Wow, cool.
7. Jacques Cousteau.
8. Muḥammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī
9. "Who discovered kerosene" seems like it should be "who invented kerosene" and the answer isAbraham Gesner. But Rockefeller saved the whales (bonus points for this answer, right?). Also, you are asking questions about Islam and Gesner wasn't an Arab or even a Muslim as far as I know. More google searching, stand by.
....
Wait a second, now I find that Muhammad ibn Zakariyā Rāzī supposedly was the first to distill kerosene. That means wikipedia LIED to me?!?!
10. The Quran supports equal rights for men and women to be blamed for the Fall of mankind, apparently. Both.
11. Everyone else said "fire". I'm not sure what the question was, but I'll go with that.
12. Wikipedia says Jabir Ibn Hayyan (Geber), but might be lying to me again.
13. Yemen
14. You're not allowed to eat pork in Islam. But there may be exceptions for accidental ingestion.
Check this out: The Quran 2:173 says He hath only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name hath been invoked besides that of Allah. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- then is he guiltless. For Allah is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful.
So if you are starving and that's all there is to eat, sounds like it's ok. Or if you don't eat more than a certain amount ("due limits")?
15. Angels
16. Apparently there's some debate on this. I found some Jews and Christians who dispute the translation and interpretation, blah blah blah Imma say out of that messy argument. I think the answer you are looking for is "the Dead Sea", which apparently is the lowest point on earth. I didn't know that before. The more you know...
That took a lot of work I had to look up almost everything.
Edit: يمكنني الحصول على نقاط المكافأة اذا كنت ترجمة جوجل كل ما عندي من الأجوبة إلى اللغة العربية؟
2. No.
3. The dirham weighs 2.975 grams of silver.
4. Galen of Pergamon
5. The University of Al-Qarawiyyin was founded in 859 by some chick named Fatima al-Fihria. I don't think "Universities" back then were the same concept as Universities today, but this is the answer I think you are looking for.
6. The word "yawm" is mentioned 365 times in the Quran. Wow, cool.
7. Jacques Cousteau.
8. Muḥammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī
9. "Who discovered kerosene" seems like it should be "who invented kerosene" and the answer is
....
Wait a second, now I find that Muhammad ibn Zakariyā Rāzī supposedly was the first to distill kerosene. That means wikipedia LIED to me?!?!
10. The Quran supports equal rights for men and women to be blamed for the Fall of mankind, apparently. Both.
11. Everyone else said "fire". I'm not sure what the question was, but I'll go with that.
12. Wikipedia says Jabir Ibn Hayyan (Geber), but might be lying to me again.
13. Yemen
14. You're not allowed to eat pork in Islam. But there may be exceptions for accidental ingestion.
Check this out: The Quran 2:173 says He hath only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name hath been invoked besides that of Allah. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- then is he guiltless. For Allah is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful.
So if you are starving and that's all there is to eat, sounds like it's ok. Or if you don't eat more than a certain amount ("due limits")?
15. Angels
16. Apparently there's some debate on this. I found some Jews and Christians who dispute the translation and interpretation, blah blah blah Imma say out of that messy argument. I think the answer you are looking for is "the Dead Sea", which apparently is the lowest point on earth. I didn't know that before. The more you know...
That took a lot of work I had to look up almost everything.
Edit: يمكنني الحصول على نقاط المكافأة اذا كنت ترجمة جوجل كل ما عندي من الأجوبة إلى اللغة العربية؟
Good food for thought. I'm not sure I agree with what I understood to be the ultimate point of the article (that we need to tax the rich more) but it does seem to be true that if there is no demand it doesn't matter how many companies you start up, they won't survive. It seems that one group of people likes to focus all on the supply (rich people create businesses and grow the economy) and the other group of people focus all on the demand (tax the rich and give money to poor people so they can spend it to create jobs). It is true that without capital accumulation we cannot expand businesses, create new ones and grow the economy, but people do need to have money to spend. Supply and demand are two sides to the same coin. I'll have to think about this more and do some more reading of economic texts to see if I can find a solution that satisfies me.
Yeah, I started watching that movie. "Iceland was doing just fine.....UNTIL they decided to deregulate their banking system. Then the dirty capitalists took over and turned everything to shit. Guess they should have had more regulation and government intervention, shouldn't they?"
Then I stopped.
Then I stopped.
So since a conclusion that was reached disagreed with a conclusion you, yourself had come up with, it is suddenly bunk? We're you this obtuse when you found out Santa Claus was not real as well?
I usually take the time to review the facts before making up my mind. I listen to arguments by people with a different opinion than me because they generally have a good understanding of things from their perspective. That's how we learn. That's how you get a nuanced picture. Not by immediately dismissing something that doesn't agree with your philosophy.
How about you?
Since Iceland is worse off today than before, what's the reason for this? The reason given in the film was dismissed in less than 5 minutes, so what's the reason then? If you know that the reason given was bunk, then give another.
Wow, this was a while ago. You are right, I should have given it a fair hearing. I must have been in a bad mood or something. A friend recently recommended this documentary to me. I will go back and give it a fair watch and evaluate the facts and arguments it makes. I don't have any theories about what happened to Iceland at this point. I don't know what happened.
Re: $10,000 Bet that Bitcoins will outperform Gold, Silver by 100X !!!
Quote
With bitcoins, a person in California can send $20,000 USD worth of value to a person in Russia in a matter of seconds, for FREE.
In comparison:
Paypal would cost about $600, and take a few seconds.
Credit card would cost about $600 and take a few days, to a week, or more.
Bank wire would cost about $40, and take one or two days.
In comparison:
Paypal would cost about $600, and take a few seconds.
Credit card would cost about $600 and take a few days, to a week, or more.
Bank wire would cost about $40, and take one or two days.
This is a joke right? The price now is $2.4. Somebody sends $20,000 USD worth to somebody else. That's 8,333.33BTCs. The recipient wants to cash out immediately to pay for something. Remember, we're comparing this to services like Paypal, bank wires, etc, where in the end the recipient has cash that they can spend anywhere. So, the recipient sells their 8,333.33BTCs on MtGox and, uh oh, at the current depth they get $18,800 (not including MtGox fees!).
To get the same result that they would get from PP (i.e. an end result of cash they can spend anywhere) ends up costing at least twice as much! Isn't it wonderful.
This is why i cant take OP seriously. Either hes extremely dumb or he has his own agenda.
At the time I made the original post, there was plenty of depth to accommodate buying or selling $20,000 worth of bitcoins, and hardly move the price at all. Today that is not the case, but give it some time.....
I'm not "extremely dumb" but I do have my own agenda.
It is promoting the free market and the accompanying voluntary society.
Bullshiet, whatever your agenda is, its for your own benefits.
Saying no goverment intervention is also stupid. But i'm sure you know that.
You sound kind of stupid, plastic.elastic, but I'm sure you know that.
Kudos to you MemoryDealers. I don't think bitcoin is going to outperform gold and silver by 100x, but I think this will give it some good publicity and will benefit a charity either way, so that's great.