Re: Aggregate debt
From: The Trucker (mikcob_at_verizon.net)
Date: 06/30/04
- Next message: smithaa02: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- Previous message: smithaa02: "Re: Rolling bubbles"
- In reply to: Johnny Marcos: "Re: Aggregate debt"
- Next in thread: The Trucker: "Re: Aggregate debt"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 18:35:01 -0700
Johnny Marcos wrote:
> The Trucker <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote in
> news:cbo1sk01mrj@news3.newsguy.com:
>
>> Nonesense. Each generation invests in the future WHILE supporting the
>> elderly. The people paying FICA tax right now are paying the benefits
>> of current recipients and when they retire the next generation will
>> pay to support them.
>
> Ok, so 47 young farmers are picking crops to feed themselves and one
> elderly, all these 47 have only 2 kids - and 1 of them - Her name is
> brittney - doesn't want to farm - so in the future you have 1 young
> farmer feeding 1 freeloader and 47 previous producers - something has to
> give. If the robots had been built in time - they all could sit back
> and eat - but the robots were not built in time - lots of people
> probably gonna starve - the land is there to grow the food - but not the
> labor - the old can't get out in that sun and pick those crops - look at
> population figures around the america and around the world - we have a
> LARGE percentage of people about to enter non producing years - and
> without isaac asimovs robots - that is going to be a bad thing.
Well, at least you are now looking at the reality instead of the numbers.
And you are correct in your assessment that we are not advancing fast
enough technologically. We seem to have all sorts of military stuff, but
no really good robots. That is, or course, the conservative approach.
Just wipe out a few million here and a few million there and we can keep
everything the same as it was.
> The circumstances of their retirement will
>> depend, not on how much gold they managed to bury in their back yard,
>> but how good a job they did in educating the young, providing proper
>> support to innovation and development of real capital, and the
>> appreciation of the younger people in a civilized society.
>
> HAHA - you are gonna base your future on Ja Rule and Brittney Spears
> being thankful? HAHAHAHA! BWAHAHAHAHA! I agree, I would rather
> preserve my wealth in candy bars and cigarettes and soap - but they
> decay faster than gold - but I would choose gold over hyperinflationary
> paper.
You gonna hit those young musclemen on the head with that gold, are you?
> There is
>> no way that a bunch of old coots are going to "strongarm" the younger,
>> stronger people.
>
> Right - Brittney Spears would not piss on you to put out the fire. In
> fact she will probably throw more gas on you to watch the pretty flames
> and then wonder why she is out of gas and can't drive home.
I think you may be getting the picture.
>> Prior to 1990, under Republican control, the GDP yardstick and the
>> asset value yardstick would show economic advance as the middle class
>> was placed nearer and nearer to the poor and further and further away
>> from the rich. This separation of the top 5% from the rest continued
>> during the 90's but the decline of the middle class was moderated and
>> was showing some signs of recovery as the tax code was made slightly
>> more progressive. Japan seems to be doing quite well when you actually
>> look at the life style of the vast middle class in that country. Only
>> when you use neocon measuring sticks designed to show anything other
>> than neocon economics as a failure will you see a failure in Japan.
>
> I don't know about Japan, I don't live there, I do know my father worked
> 30 hours a week in a low stress job and had a big house and big steaks
> and new cars every year, and I work 40 hours in a high stress job and I
> have to take the bus and can barely afford a veggie sandwich - to me it
> doesn't seem I live as high on the hawg as my pop did.
That is because you don't and neither does any of the middle class of
this nation. But it is not because of the boomers (unless they are
Republicans, of course).
http://greatervoice.org/econ/glossary/Modern_Republicanism.php
> So Japans
> increased standard of living and our decreased standard here is at who's
> benefit and cost? The slave plantation owners had HUGE houses and for
> all our technological improvements I think many of them had low stress
> high luxury lifestyles without a lot of suffering - but they had to take
> away from the standard of living of thier slaves to have that.
And it is unnecessary. We have MACHINES to do that.
You really need to read more about Henry George.
http://www.progress.org/books/george.htm
-- http://GreaterVoice.org (a work in progress)
- Next message: smithaa02: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- Previous message: smithaa02: "Re: Rolling bubbles"
- In reply to: Johnny Marcos: "Re: Aggregate debt"
- Next in thread: The Trucker: "Re: Aggregate debt"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
