Let's Debate Inequality

[muhammad_isa]

Of course the amount of wealth that currently exists is limited, but the amount that can be created is unlimited..

Of course it isn't .. that's an illusion.
We are all controlled by govts. .. currency is controlled .. including precious metals.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Free market advocates claim that the free market is malleable and flexible, spontaneously and naturally changing with the ever changing nature of the economy due to the subjective nature of value.

It's a lie .. they merely wish to keep the wealth in their corner by 'sleight of hand'.
They exploit people's fear of inflation, by insisting that controlling it through usury is the
only way. This results in oppression of the poorest, while the 'free-market' advocates increase
their wealth at their expense.

 

[Heyo]

Of course the amount of wealth that currently exists is limited, but the amount that can be created is unlimited. The person I was debating claimed wealth was not created, but was gathered, and the more some gathers the less left for others.

That's what I'm saying since post #204. I have always stressed that the amount of existing wealth, at a given time, is measurable and not unlimited. Glad we've come to an agreement.

Now to the potential to create wealth - which is also not unlimited, but less limited and not easily measurable. But let's treat it as practically limitless.
Now, how to create wealth? You can have a good business idea, work hard and exploit some resources and/or people. That will create a modicum of wealth. Or you can inherit a business or several (in stocks), and it will be nearly inevitable that your wealth will multiply. And you wouldn't have to lift a finger.

 

[Kfox]

I didn't mention anything about 'crazy'.

I think the word you used was "psychopath". Replace crazy with psychopath, and my point remains the same.

Ah. So you are in favor of wealth redistribution to some extent, correct?

Only to an extent

If the employee is responsible for that, in the sense that their work generated less value, sure.

What are you talking about? I said nothing about employees responsible; I'm talking about the typical ups and downs of business profit. Do you believe employees should see a reduction in pay when profits are down?

 

[PureX]

That's what I'm saying since post #204. I have always stressed that the amount of existing wealth, at a given time, is measurable and not unlimited. Glad we've come to an agreement.

Now to the potential to create wealth - which is also not unlimited, but less limited and not easily measurable. But let's treat it as practically limitless.
Now, how to create wealth? You can have a good business idea, work hard and exploit some resources and/or people. That will create a modicum of wealth. Or you can inherit a business or several (in stocks), and it will be nearly inevitable that your wealth will multiply. And you wouldn't have to lift a finger.

But you didn't actually create anything. All you did was capture money by shifting around resources to add value to things that had less value before the resources were rearranged. The resources were and are still finite. And relatively speaking, so is their value.

 

[an anarchist]

But you didn't actually create anything. All you did was capture money by shifting around resources to add value to things that had less value before they were rearranged.

You immediately contradict yourself.

Adding value to things is creating wealth.

 

[Kfox]

I had a friend years ago that had been a heroin addict for some years. He told me that whenever he entered a room, regardless of who's, he would automatically scan the room it for any small valuables that he could fit in his pockets. And he always wore baggy clothes with lots of pockets. Because as a heroin addict he had to come up with a small pile of money every day to get high with. And doing this was his life's purpose, from the time he awoke to when he went to sleep ... for years.

When I knew him he was newly clean and trying to stay that way. But that mental habit of scanning everywhere he went for something of value to steal had become ingrained. Automatic. And it saddened him greatly now that he had long forgotten all the people and things he had stolen from over the years. As an addict it was just part of the way of life. The immorality of it never even entered his mind. Until he finally got sober and began to care about something more than just getting his next high.

I see capitalists as being similar to my friend the heroin addict. Looking at every trade engaged in as an opportunity to take as much as they can get for themselves, while giving as little as possible in exchange. Because that's just the capitalist's way of life. Greed is good. Profit is king. More for me is more for me. And never a thought is given to the immorality of it all. They live in the blindness of greed like my friend lived in the blindness of his heroin addiction. Leaving chaos and loss in his wake without ever looking back.

Do you personally know people who are this way?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Adding value to things is creating wealth..

Either you are fooled by the 'illusion', or you are guilty of trying to create it .. IMO.

 

[Kfox]

Of course it isn't .. that's an illusion.

So at what point do we get that no more wealth is able to be created?

 

[an anarchist]

I see capitalists as being similar to my friend the heroin addict.

This is insane.

Even I have learned not to view statists in such a negative light. I view them as naive and misguided.

Even if I think some terrible comparison is apt, such as statists=murderers, it is degrading to the statists to say aloud.

In the same light, I advise you to view capitalists differently. Even if you disagree with them, you don’t need to compare them in your mind to heroin addicts. That is just derisive, and will give your mind negative energy.

 

[an anarchist]

Either you are fooled by the 'illusion', or you are guilty of trying to create it .. IMO.

Care to explain why you disagree with what you quoted?

 

[Kfox]

That's what I'm saying since post #204. I have always stressed that the amount of existing wealth, at a given time, is measurable and not unlimited. Glad we've come to an agreement.

If I recall, the person I was debating with was making the claim that when rich people “capture” wealth, they were taking away from everybody else to keep for themselves; that wealth is not created and unlimited, but captured and limited. When you entered the conversation it appeared you were defending his position; not mine.

Now to the potential to create wealth - which is also not unlimited,

Where is the limit?

Now, how to create wealth? You can have a good business idea, work hard and exploit some resources and/or people. That will create a modicum of wealth. Or you can inherit a business or several (in stocks), and it will be nearly inevitable that your wealth will multiply. And you wouldn't have to lift a finger.

Wealth is created when you get someone (like a customer) to spend more on a product than it cost you to obtain that product. That difference is created wealth.

 

[Heyo]

Where is the limit?

The limit is the resources we can exploit here on Earth, in the near future, the resources we can exploit in the solar system, in the mid-future and the galaxy in the far future - so not really unlimited, but close enough for practical purposes.

Wealth is created when you get someone (like a customer) to spend more on a product than it cost you to obtain that product. That difference is created wealth.

Nope, that is just money. Money has no intrinsic value, it is a construct. Wealth is something that lasts, like real estate. And real estate is a very limited resource on Earth, and it is expensive to create. For practical purposes, we can say that it can't be created.
A shop with machines in it is wealth, and that's a kind of wealth that can be created and it can potentially create more wealth.

 

[PureX]

You immediately contradict yourself.

Adding value to things is creating wealth.

Not if it's done by subtracting the cumulative value of other things. Which it always is. Time, energy, expertise, source materials, and effort all have value of their own. What you are calling "created value" is simply adding the value of these things to an amalgamated 'consumer product'. Just like my turning a dead tree into a table and chairs.

But I predict you will now fight to remain ignorant of this fact. ... But by all means, please surprise me!

 

[PureX]

Do you personally know people who are this way?

Why do I need to know them "personally"? Why do you keep asking these stupid questions?

Let me give you an example.

All across the U.S. there have formed "investment groups" (greedy capitalists) that have pooled their excess money, and they've been using it to buy up single family homes in specific areas, all across the country. This, of course, causes the price of SF homes in that area to increase dramatically, as the available stock diminishes dramatically. And the result is that home buyers in that area can no longer find or afford to buy a home. Which means they now have to rent one.

And guess who has a whole bunch of homes available to rent! Yep, the greedy investment groups that bought them all up. And guess what they do next ... they raise the prices of the rents dramatically because they now own most of the available rental homes. And because all those potential home buyers are being forced to rent, they will have to pay those excessive rent prices.

What's going on is that by combining their excess wealth, these investment groups were able to deliberately create a housing monopoly in a whole bunch of areas of the country, and of course they are using that monopoly to price gouge the people living there for housing. And this is all perfectly legal because the government is always years behind when it comes to responding to these sorts of greedy price-gouging schemes. Ignorance, corruption, incompetence, and not having the ready funds to counteract these schemes make sure of it.

And this is just one small example of MANY, MANY, MANY similar examples where capital investors have deliberately created monopolies and used them to price gouge everyone else on everything from housing, transportation, communication, home energy, gasoline, health care, insurance of all kinds, education, and pretty much anything else that people NEED in a modern society to survive. And the fact that you are not seeing this tells me that you have your eyes and your mind intentionally and deliberately tightly closed to it. Because it's a GLARING problem in this country and in many other capitalist countries, too. But in this one it's becoming dangerous in that most U.S. citizens have no savings and are buried in debt to the point that one life setback will drive them into poverty. And now, even into homelessness.

What you're not understanding is that the ideal goal of the capital investor is to invest in a monopoly, and then squeeze everyone involved in it for everything they have.

But you aren't seeing ANY of this, are you. And you are going to continue not seeing it, I suspect. In fact, you will FIGHT to deny it if anyone like me tries to point it out to you.

Why? I have no idea.

 

[Kfox]

The limit is the resources we can exploit here on Earth,

I disagree! There is a company that for a small fee will allow you to name an actual star after your name, or in honor of someone you know. The ability to create wealth is not limited by what is here on Earth.

Nope, that is just money.

When money goes from your pocket to my pocket, money has not increased. The wealth has increased because though you have less money, you have an asset that is worth the amount of money you paid for it, thus your wealth remains the same, but mine has increased due to the money you gave me.

 

[Watchmen]

Then why is it that being a capitalist country is not indicative of it's economical development but having a history of being either a capitalist/imperialist nation or being massively supported by one is?

Capitalism is indicative of pulling people out of poverty and giving them more.

 

[Watchmen]

You can't hold them accountable when the oligarch's bribery means more to them than you do.

Of course it does. And in every instance they go hand in hand.

No, it was technical advancement. All the capitalists did was exploit it for their own gain.

Greed, and the fear it generates in everyone pushes people to rush into enterprises without considering the consequences. And we have been paying the price for all this folly ever since. Technology was opening doors to possibilities that our greed and fear made us rush headlong into without thinking it through. And now we are suffering the consequences.

The technical advances were fine, it was the greed and the blind stupidity that greed engenders that were not. The capitalists turned new technology into a kind of toxic social, environmental, and economic/political poison ... that may well end up killing us all.

A lot of words, but doesn’t change the fact that capitalism has done more than any other system to lift people out of poverty.

 

[muhammad_isa]

So at what point do we get that no more wealth is able to be created?

That is decided by the state (central bank).
If they decide that there is 'too much wealth' in the system (inflationary), they use
monetary policy (usually raise interest rates) to control it.

As I've already pointed out, that main feature of capitalism causes inequality .. BY DESIGN.

 

[Heyo]

I disagree! There is a company that for a small fee will allow you to name an actual star after your name, or in honor of someone you know. The ability to create wealth is not limited by what is here on Earth.

That is actually destruction of wealth. OK, it is only money, but I could have bought something valuable with it. When I give it to a scam company which has no contact to the IAU, it has lost all its value.
(Not really, the money is still there, but all the resources and energy that went into the scam are now lost for a bit of hot air.)

When money goes from your pocket to my pocket, money has not increased. The wealth has increased because though you have less money, you have an asset that is worth the amount of money you paid for it, thus your wealth remains the same, but mine has increased due to the money you gave me.

Creatio ex nihilo? You think the wealth gets created through the transaction? That thing I bought from you had no value when you had it?