Six Policies Economists Love and Politicians Hate

[Fragony]

No.

Thomas Paine's statement was in response to attitudes like the one you posted. He showed why he believes it is false. If you want to disprove it, you can't just repeat the original statement, you have to show why Thomas Paine's statement is wrong and yours is correct.

What you did was essentially being a parrot.

Show me where he's right

[gaelic cowboy]

Is the guy who packs the toothpaste such an asset to society, or is he just packing toothpaste. He didn't invent it.

Mr toothpaste packer has a job that is his benefit from society.

He gives back to society in pretty much any number of ways.

If he does not exist in Fragistan then it's local economy is poorer and possibly even less safe.

If the citizens of Fragistan want toothpaste packed by machine then it will require a more complex society capable of building and maintaining such a system.

However even here there is a job for mr toothpaste packer delivering the machine parts needed for repairs in his new job as a postman.

[Fragony]

I don't understand what you are trying to say, sure he is an asset to society. But he's just part of the production proces he just puts it in a box. He was no part in what happened and has no claim to it.

[Centurion1]

Did you all read the same quote as I did or are you drawing from it what you want. Paine is simply saying money, property, goods and services mean nothing without a society behind oneself. Now he uses the desert island or even continent statement where a man is completely alone. Obviously in this situation your money doesn't mean crap and property is an imaginary concept since you don't have to share it with anybody. It's a pretty simple point and has nothing to do with communism.

For example in a "limited" society which doesn't value property as a concept or tries to say that all services are equal. These societies attempt to use currency and capital as an equalizer. However, ignoring the historical flaws of such systems let us look simply upon the fact that it is false. Property is still possessed even if only by the state because property and ownership is a inherent human concept. And services are not equal. The doctor is of greater value than the manual laborer the officer is of greater value than the private, so on and so forth. You can say this is false but at the end of the day certain factors seperate such individuals from their peers regardless of money.

Anyway all Paine is saying is that without society none of these things are relevant or in any way achievable. I do not hear many free marketers and libertarians screaming about getting rid of society and placing each of us on our own "desert islands". Nobody is denying the fact that society is important. Most people aren't arguing that we shouldn't be paying taxes back to the nation. You will notice that he does not say how many taxes an individual should pay.

Regardless I am not sure if you have read agrarian Justice before? Needless to say after this the man essentially says the government should safeguard mens wealth because poor people are stupid and willwaste it.

Personally I think the man was writing to instigate the french.

[Fragony]

Guess I misunderstood

[Beskar]

because poor people are stupid and willwaste it.

I argue the opposite, poor people don't waste it on things like gold-plated golf clubs. They waste it on being able to feed themselves.

[Centurion1]

I argue the opposite, poor people don't waste it on things like gold-plated golf clubs. They waste it on being able to feed themselves.

Okay please direct it towards Mr. Thomas Paine he said it in Agrarian Justice, his working mans manifesto, not I.

[Fragony]

I argue the opposite, poor people don't waste it on things like gold-plated golf clubs. They waste it on being able to feed themselves.

In front of the 1457864844 inch flatscreen they can't realistically afford.

[Lemur]

Paine is simply saying money, property, goods and services mean nothing without a society behind oneself.

Socialist!

[Centurion1]

Socialist!

money and society obviously mean nothing without society i think thats pretty self explanatory, they are social constructs. Services are still necessary.

Also, superb quote cherry picking sir I tip my hat to you.

[Kralizec]

People were arguing against Fragony's idea of a capped tax. That there was a certain limit to what people ought to contribute.

Suppose the cap is 1 million, and person A owns a factory that nets him 1 million of profits, exactly on the treshold. Person B owns a factory that produces the same things in the same way, but is twice as big in every way. B's benefits twice as much from the educated workforce, tax paid infrastructure and whatnot and causes twice as much polution. B also makes twice as much profit, yet is only obligated to pay the same amount of tax as person A?
Granted, the former only applies to business owners and not necessarily to professionals with rare skills, such as neurosurgeons or extremely good lawyers.
But there's a more fundamental reason: the only reason you can earn money at all is because we have a functioning economy and a legal system, and we have that because of the state. If you don't like the terms of this relationship you can move to Somalia.

[Lemur]

Also, superb quote cherry picking sir I tip my hat to you.

Socialist cherry picker!

Why don't you and Comrade Stalin go have a parfait while you're at it? Sheesh.

Give Chairman Mao and the fruit salad song my warm regards, commie.

[truth1337]

i think national banks should be abolished

[Centurion1]

i think national banks should be abolished

Thanks for the contribution tell me again more about how america's growth is negative.

[Centurion1]

People were arguing against Fragony's idea of a capped tax. That there was a certain limit to what people ought to contribute.

Suppose the cap is 1 million, and person A owns a factory that nets him 1 million of profits, exactly on the treshold. Person B owns a factory that produces the same things in the same way, but is twice as big in every way. B's benefits twice as much from the educated workforce, tax paid infrastructure and whatnot and causes twice as much polution. B also makes twice as much profit, yet is only obligated to pay the same amount of tax as person A?
Granted, the former only applies to business owners and not necessarily to professionals with rare skills, such as neurosurgeons or extremely good lawyers.
But there's a more fundamental reason: the only reason you can earn money at all is because we have a functioning economy and a legal system, and we have that because of the state. If you don't like the terms of this relationship you can move to Somalia.

What happens when all those businesses leave.... go visit the american rustbelt and tell me how it looks bro. It is a symbiotic relationship that requires both businessmen and the state. And whenever state decides to take over more and more and demand more and more the businessman simply moves on to other eager less clingy governments.

[truth1337]

Thanks for the contribution tell me again more about how america's growth is negative.

sorry i'm not sure i understand your question ???

[Beskar]

In front of the 1457864844 inch flatscreen they can't realistically afford.

I have one of those said flatscreens (50 inch), you can get them for 300 euro. They're not that expensive.

[Centurion1]

I have one of those said flatscreens (50 inch), you can get them for 300 euro. They're not that expensive.

Completely unaware of what it is like to not have money apparently. 300 euros is a lot of money when you bring home 17k a year. So are 300 dollar Jordan Galaxies but poor people love and provde the main purchasing power for jordan.

[Beskar]

Completely unaware of what it is like to not have money apparently. 300 euros is a lot of money when you bring home 17k a year. So are 300 dollar Jordan Galaxies but poor people love and provde the main purchasing power for jordan.

Considering smokers spend 1825 per year on average and a TV will last you a few years minimum, 300 isn't -that much-. It is all about priorities, cash on hand, savings and the like. As you said, you are talking about these "Jordan Galaxies", simply don't buy those and there is that TV money there?

I know all about "what it is like not to have money", I am however, 'money intelligent' so I know what I will be able to afford and the impact of certain lifestyle choices.

[Centurion1]

Considering smokers spend 1825 per year on average and a TV will last you a few years minimum, 300 isn't -that much-. It is all about priorities, cash on hand, savings and the like. As you said, you are talking about these "Jordan Galaxies", simply don't buy those and there is that TV money there?

I know all about "what it is like not to have money", I am however, 'money intelligent' so I know what I will be able to afford and the impact of certain lifestyle choices.

It is too bad that poor are overwhelmingly
NOT intelligent which is why they are poor so they buy 300 dollar tvs and sneakers. "what if they just don't buy the sneakers and use the money for a tv" is maybe the most misguided thing I've ever read

Also news flash poor people are the most likely smokers

[Centurion1]

Are you serious Cent? There's plenty of stupid middle class people and stupid rich people too.

I swear.. its like you're saying poor people aren't allowed to have fun. That they'd better suck it the hell up and devote every waking moment to fixing their poorness, god forbid they smoke!

But hey, its not like society isn't geared to take advantage of the poor or anything, right? Surely there wouldn't be targetted advertisements based on income demographics, or banks who go out of their way to steer poor people towards unfair loans, or anything like that...

Of course there are. But are you going to put money on if you lined up 10 rich poor and middle class people the smartest would be the poor? I'm not talking some questionably poor (ie poor people but not minimum wage) i am referring to bottom of the barrel 17kers.

That they'd better suck it the hell up and devote every waking moment to fixing their poorness, god forbid they smoke!

Yeah I am saying that. My family didnt have too much money for awhile after my dad retired from the navy. And it wasn't the happiest of times in the centurion household. But we made sacrifices and it was hard but my father managed to get a good job and now it's more than comfortable. But that time was very hard and isnt something I forget. My father quit smoking, they didn't drink etc etc. These aren't big consumers to begin with but for that period they cut out any frivolous spending whatsoever (or it certainly seemed so in my young mind) and thus stayed out of debt.

People who don't know what they can afford shouldnt be swayed by a bank telling them they can afford it. If a bank official told me I could afford a 250000 dollar house on my current income I would laugh in their faces.

[a completely inoffensive name]

sorry i'm not sure i understand your question ???

He is saying that your mind is weak and your opinion is vapid.

Btw, welcome to the backroom.

[Fragony]

It is too bad that poor are overwhelmingly
NOT intelligent which is why they are poor so they buy 300 dollar tvs and sneakers. "what if they just don't buy the sneakers and use the money for a tv" is maybe the most misguided thing I've ever read

Also news flash poor people are the most likely smokers

In a poor area here you will see more people wearing prada's and gold juwelry then in the rich parts.

[Ironside]

Of course there are. But are you going to put money on if you lined up 10 rich poor and middle class people the smartest would be the poor? I'm not talking some questionably poor (ie poor people but not minimum wage) i am referring to bottom of the barrel 17kers.

Economically, that's actually a good question. Some poor people might moan and bitch about it, but at least they get some economic sense beaten into them (that they soon forget as soon as they'll get more money). Same type in the middle class has no real savings and any economical disruption will cause a crash and burn.

Some people are always "poor", no matter their income, since they lack any economic sense.

In a poor area here you will see more people wearing prada's and gold juwelry then in the rich parts.

That has to do with that social status amongst poor are often related to clothing. If they can squeeze it in by having a very low rent for example, it's not really a problem.

[gaelic cowboy]

i think national banks should be abolished

Why??

Without central banks who prints the money and who makes sure banks dont loose your deposits.

[rory_20_uk]

In a poor area here you will see more people wearing prada's and gold juwelry then in the rich parts.

I'm not rich, but my idea / value of "self" is related to my job and qualifications. Thus I value and put a lot of effort into my job, looking towards promotion and to new qualifications.

Those devoid of anything else will collect trinkets, be they the poor or rich cattle.

[truth1337]

He is saying that your mind is weak and your opinion is vapid.

Btw, welcome to the backroom.

Thank you for clarifying ;)

[truth1337]

Why??

Without central banks who prints the money and who makes sure banks dont loose your deposits.

Maybe you're right, that we need guys creating money out of thin air (i.e. causing inflation = hidden tax), then ledning it to the government and demanding it back with interest, i.e. lending something they didn't have but demanding money back for it. Also it is very good that these bank gangsters steal our gold reserves. Did you know, the European gold reserves have been halved because traitors such as Gordon Brown sold out the gold reserve to Bilderberg group gangsters for buddy prices? The founders of America created America for one reason and one reason only - to create a country free of the Rothschild national bank cartels. The Federal Reserve tried to force itself upon America several times, but was driven back, thanks to heroic sacrifices from many brave presidents who lost their lives in the struggle. In 1913, that dream was crushed, as the Federal Reserve established itself permanently, and it has now existed for 99 years - 99 years filled of engineered crises, and debt slavery for almost everyone in the world including American citizens, to the House of Rothschild, as well as Warburg, Rockefeller, Schiff, Kuhn&Loeb (sponsors of the mass murder of 60 million white Christian brothers in Russia through communism).

And of course - war - the favorite method of Rothschilds to make money, indeed the way that little clan begun making its fortune, by forcing young men of Hesse to be conscripted and sold as warrior slaves, where they among other things were forced to murder Americans, to ensure Rothschild made money out of selling them.

National banks are communist by nature, and belong in the trash can along with liberalism, feminism and zionism.

Or is there any compelling "advantage" of national banks I have foreseen?

[Centurion1]

Maybe you're right, that we need guys creating money out of thin air (i.e. causing inflation = hidden tax), then ledning it to the government and demanding it back with interest, i.e. lending something they didn't have but demanding money back for it. Also it is very good that these bank gangsters steal our gold reserves. Did you know, the European gold reserves have been halved because traitors such as Gordon Brown sold out the gold reserve to Bilderberg group gangsters for buddy prices? The founders of America created America for one reason and one reason only - to create a country free of the Rothschild national bank cartels. The Federal Reserve tried to force itself upon America several times, but was driven back, thanks to heroic sacrifices from many brave presidents who lost their lives in the struggle. In 1913, that dream was crushed, as the Federal Reserve established itself permanently, and it has now existed for 99 years - 99 years filled of engineered crises, and debt slavery for almost everyone in the world including American citizens, to the House of Rothschild, as well as Warburg, Rockefeller, Schiff, Kuhn&Loeb (sponsors of the mass murder of 60 million white Christian brothers in Russia through communism).

And of course - war - the favorite method of Rothschilds to make money, indeed the way that little clan begun making its fortune, by forcing young men of Hesse to be conscripted and sold as warrior slaves, where they among other things were forced to murder Americans, to ensure Rothschild made money out of selling them.

National banks are communist by nature, and belong in the trash can along with liberalism, feminism and zionism.

Or is there any compelling "advantage" of national banks I have foreseen?

What do you smoke?

And gold standard and gold in general is outdated and for backwoods resident to long for with no real idea of how real world economics function on a global scale.

[rory_20_uk]

Maybe you're right, that we need guys creating money out of thin air (i.e. causing inflation = hidden tax), then ledning it to the government and demanding it back with interest, i.e. lending something they didn't have but demanding money back for it. Also it is very good that these bank gangsters steal our gold reserves. Did you know, the European gold reserves have been halved because traitors such as Gordon Brown sold out the gold reserve to Bilderberg group gangsters for buddy prices? The founders of America created America for one reason and one reason only - to create a country free of the Rothschild national bank cartels. The Federal Reserve tried to force itself upon America several times, but was driven back, thanks to heroic sacrifices from many brave presidents who lost their lives in the struggle. In 1913, that dream was crushed, as the Federal Reserve established itself permanently, and it has now existed for 99 years - 99 years filled of engineered crises, and debt slavery for almost everyone in the world including American citizens, to the House of Rothschild, as well as Warburg, Rockefeller, Schiff, Kuhn&Loeb (sponsors of the mass murder of 60 million white Christian brothers in Russia through communism).

And of course - war - the favorite method of Rothschilds to make money, indeed the way that little clan begun making its fortune, by forcing young men of Hesse to be conscripted and sold as warrior slaves, where they among other things were forced to murder Americans, to ensure Rothschild made money out of selling them.

National banks are communist by nature, and belong in the trash can along with liberalism, feminism and zionism.

Or is there any compelling "advantage" of national banks I have foreseen?

You're going to fit in well around here...