A price for a product includes cost plus a reason for production. The price is presented and accepted as fair. Consider during the course of production costs savings occur as a result of efficiency, robots or whatever. Who should benefit? Remember that the initial price was presented as a fair representation of costs and profit. If there are savings it seems ethically they should be passed on to the consumer by adjusting the price. Traditionally any realization of extra profit is a windfall to the producer. But there are circumstances that can expand profits beyond imagination.
Sanders and Trump have a commonality. They are different. Different from each other but significantly they are different from professional politicians. People want a change. I think people are fed up with government for and by the lobbyist. And beyond that fed up with the ultra conservative policy of President Bill Clinton starving people off welfare and giving the savings to Wall Street. A case can be made for blaming Clinton for 2008. It might not be that the general citizen is wise to the ways of a bought government but people know something is wrong.
First is my questioning of things that don't make sense. Why is the term politically correct applied to almost everything under the sun except politics. Because people would find it to hard to say "etiquettely correct". That out of the way so why is Trump immune to negative fallings of popularity when he says apparently offensive remarks. Because he comes across as real and people think that is how real people talk. It doesn't mean he is a bad person he just says what is on his mind like he is talking to or about a real person of equal value. Look at the "F" bomb on TV.
For sure robots create new jobs. Do they create more jobs? They have removed from the economy the spendable income that a human worker would have made. An income that would have been spent on goods and services. More people are earning less. Blame robots? Blame the system? Solutions anectdotally follow disasters.
Taxes aren't a form of punishment. Taxes are a source of funding to operate our country. Hire a robot and quit paying taxes. Who benefits from all the money diverted from the economy by the auto worker robots. The lost income of the robot displaced human auto workers is crippling. It cripples families, cities, our country and SSI. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are being automated out of existence. Robots should be taxed just like the worker they replaced would have been.taxed except robot income should be taxed 100%.
According to Money.CNN there are almost four thousand fewer companies listed in the stock market now than in 1998. Stocks doing good. Fewer companies but activity high. Stock prices relatively stable with poor earnings. Almost no human trading firms, robots are trading. This gives the appearance that something is going on that doesn't benefit companies or stock holders but favors trading. High trading with no appreciable increase in value looks like an ulterior motive or goal is driving the market. Can higher trading with no corresponding value increase mean anything other than a bubble?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with that agenda. Gratification for performance gets the job done. Jobs can very easily also come from profits. Reward jobs producing investing. Net gain in jobs is very unlikely because there is no reward for creating jobs. There is a reward for profits. Profit through people would create jobs. Laws keep getting changed to make profitting without working easier. Money has to work in order for jobs to be created. The positive side of profits through people is building of value and equity.
Almost everything I read reduces to taking somebody else's job. Bringing back jobs from overseas and more training takes somebody else's job. And it is excepted with enthusiasm because it is the way we have been trained all our lives. New jobs are the function of more money. Forget about all the benefits to existing companies having everybody on their team cheering for better trained workers and taking back over seas jobs. The world needs more jobs and that has to come from more money. The emphasis should be on making money work. Nobody contradicts more workers more tax revenue.
So far any explanation of a solution had to be finnessed, diluted, apologized , clouded, worded so the reader would think it was their idea or otherwise manipulated to get under the conservative radar. The simple explanation is that human rights has to displace profit as the goal of capitalism. Greece is not a warning shot. Greece needs to be the model for the solution. Money has to serve man. You don't have to rob the rich (although that is what it will be called) to give to the poor. Simply make money work.
Jubilee. The birthplace of civilization is collapsing. Shouldn't the protection afforded to threatened animals be extended to human beings. A sustaining wage full employment should be the focus of government. When a lot of people are working money is moving and economies are functioning. In the view of all laws regarding preservation of animals and the environment validating (validate) the meaning of "progress". Progress is essentially cheaper and faster. Not cheaper, faster and thriving economy. It all points to the function of money.
Recent comments