quote:

Originally posted by ******** Interest isn't only given on money you borrow but also money you give them,

well duh.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** likewise it effects monetary value,

as do a million other things.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** and the safety of a currency based on how well you can maintain that currencies value.

in the last 50 years, can you identify any advanced democracy who has had a significant problem with their currency losing value overnight? interest rates, and a million other things can affect the value of a currency.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Eg. interest rates get kept low... if inflation is higher then you won't get return on the value of the currency if it outstrips the valuation based on interest rating.

i have no idea what you're saying here.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** More currency in circulation lower currency value - meaning you need more of the new value to keep the old value.

this is simply incorrect. you can increase the money supply without lowering the value of the currency as long as there is demand for that currency. yes, the money supply has a relationship with inflation but it is not a sufficient relationship.

mate, the biggest issue re interest rates for any of the "common people" you seem to care so much about is how much they have to pay their lender, and/or how much their banking instiution pays to them. i really dont see why you're bothering to argue about (relatively) secondary issues, and then getting them wrong anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** It is simple math.

not simple enough i fear.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Say I now take that dollar and try to get some pesos.. it very much does effect me, and all without involving the banks.

the cash rate set by the central bank has only a loose relationship with what someone is willing to pay for a US$ honestly william, a floating exchange rate is the only method to determine relative value between nations' currencies, and this exhange rate would always be out of the control or influence of the average citizen, REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER SYSTEM SYSTEM YOU MIGHT TRY TO FUCK IT UP WITH.

you are bitching about the outcomes of billions of personal choices made by each of us every day. grow the fuck up already. its not cool to be a socialist or anarcho syndicalist if you're out of puberty.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Is there a reasons you don't fly. I understand austrailia is a little secluded but I don't see how flights to indonesia would really be that expensive. I geuss its all a matter of what you'd like to see.

yeah, my evil central bank keeps deliberately destroying the value of my currency by printing too much money and i can never carry enough wheelbarrows of cash home each day in order to afford the flights.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN well duh. as do a million other things. in the last 50 years, can you identify any advanced democracy who has had a significant problem with their currency losing value overnight? interest rates, and a million other things can affect the value of a currency. i have no idea what you're saying here. this is simply incorrect. you can increase the money supply without lowering the value of the currency as long as there is demand for that currency. yes, the money supply has a relationship with inflation but it is not a sufficient relationship. mate, the biggest issue re interest rates for any of the "common people" you seem to care so much about is how much they have to pay their lender, and/or how much their banking instiution pays to them. i really dont see why you're bothering to argue about (relatively) secondary issues, and then getting them wrong anyway. not simple enough i fear. the cash rate set by the central bank has only a loose relationship with what someone is willing to pay for a US$ honestly william, a floating exchange rate is the only method to determine relative value between nations' currencies, and this exhange rate would always be out of the control or influence of the average citizen, REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER SYSTEM SYSTEM YOU MIGHT TRY TO FUCK IT UP WITH. you are bitching about the outcomes of billions of personal choices made by each of us every day. grow the fuck up already. its not cool to be a socialist or anarcho syndicalist if you're out of puberty. yeah, my evil central bank keeps deliberately destroying the value of my currency by printing too much money and i can never carry enough wheelbarrows of cash home each day in order to afford the flights.

This is why I come back to this site........ you are such a realist

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt It is still unskilled labor jerz. $10.68 is a good wage for a grocery bagger even if he's been on the job 20 years. You can't expect Wal-Mart to pay cashiers and stock boys $50k a year when they are so easily replaceable. If someone wants a decent wage, they need to educate themselves and gain other skills to move forward in life. It is not the responsibility of Wal-Mart and Mcdonalds to do this for their workers.

i certainly agree, but walmart, by virtue of its sheer size, has power to put downward pressure on employee wages. This occurs because they can put other businesses out of business by undercutting prices, and the jobs they create tend to be much lower paying.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Since the mid 80's the US dollar has gone from 1$ to 50 cents. while gold has gone from 1$ to $1.15

GDP per capita has risen, meaning wages keep pace with inflation. Your argument is moot.

___________________

********, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about and im not gonna waste any more time sifting through your ignorance. go to school.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ******** the point was that the US dollar has lost half its value while gold has gained 15% since 1980

That's not a point, just an observation. What's your point in making stating this observation?

___________________

Lets see: Thread:
PKC being smart, check
A heartless libertarian agreeing with short sighted neo liberal economics, check
******** on acid... pursuing a slightly anarchist midway perspective but failing to understand more complex economics, check

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt But..but..what if YOU are outsourced?? Fact is, it aint gonna happen to your or to most other people in the world. Wal-mart might be a big employer, but the global economy has a workforce much more diverse than department store employees.

I'm against outsourcing, it just encourages the whole race to the bottom idea.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt It is still unskilled labor jerz. $10.68 is a good wage for a grocery bagger even if he's been on the job 20 years. You can't expect Wal-Mart to pay cashiers and stock boys $50k a year when they are so easily replaceable. If someone wants a decent wage, they need to educate themselves and gain other skills to move forward in life. It is not the responsibility of Wal-Mart and Mcdonalds to do this for their workers.

To an extent, yes

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Wal-Mart is demanding deep discounts for bulk purchases pk..but it is not in the interest of any company to bankrupt their own suppliers. Both would lose big time if that occurred. In a free market, buyers and sellers agree on a price and they both profit from it. Otherwise no transaction would take place. The same holds true whether you are selling a crappy game like Supcom on ebay for $5, or whether Walmart buys $5 million in pumpkins. The scale involved doesn't change the fact that both parties must voluntarily agree to the exchange for it to occur. The farmers might be scraping by, but they are not taking losses. End of issue.

Monopolies, as well as dirty similar practices can often mean that one side is not given a fair go though. A seller won't necassarily have to profit from it, they might sell at a slight loss just to get rid of stock, which obviously isn't sustainable in the long run but the buyer doesn't care.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt I know this is your pet theory and you've probably had it droned into your head for years..but it is utter bullshit my man. I can't speak for your aussie companies..but in my experience Wal-Mart keeps CUTTING prices on most merchandise. Their ruthless attempt to offer the lowest prices on everything is what has helped them become the largest company (and employer) on planet earth.

Yes and wall mart doesn't have a monopoly generally. However I'm sure in many towns people will have no choice or severely limited choice in terms of their workplace. Having a monopoly on employment isn't good either. Feeling better than grocery workers isn't a good reason to disregard their pay.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Their deep discount business model is probably one of the greatest counterbalances to price inflation in the world today.

Just because they sell stuff cheap doesn't cause deflation. . Or at the very least, when it does, it's absolutely not the right way to go about doing it! The deflation is caused by lower wages. This is not the right way to run society.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt I'm sure Wal-Mart agrees with you on both counts. They DON'T want to destroy their suppliers..and they DO want to give benefits to the consumer..because giving benefits to consumers is the only way for any company to make money.

Not really, there are plenty of companies that do a worse job than others yet still make plenty of money. Let alone if there's a monopoly and consumers don't have a choice.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Our market is not quite free because there are many barriers and regulations that keep entry costs high for new businesses..but to the extent that it is free, I see nothing wrong with market dominance brought about through voluntary transactions between buyers and sellers.

Laissez faire is incredinly short sighted. You even point out one of the problems with it later on. That a corperation being too large and having too much resources will often spill over into the political realm which will mean they can stay that way. This hardly gives power to the consumer.

AS MENTIONED. Let's not forget about the employees either, people have a right to a fair amount of pay whether it is determined by a reasonably good free market or worker council's.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt lol..that wasn't exactly a golden age. I suggest you read more about the railroads and other "monopolies" of the time krypt. State laws were passed that prohibited competition with the 2 major railroads and they were also granted federal subsidies for every mile of track laid. The monopolies had a huge competitive advantage, but it was only achieved with the aid of government favoritism.

I understand part of the reason for doing this. As people not being able to transfer between railroads would be bad, but the whole thing should have just been nationalised or heavily regulated in the first place.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt And krypt, please find me a monopoly with the right to expropriate your property or force you to work against your will..then you can properly call it coercive.

Company lobbies that ban unions and striking basically have the same effect. Forcing people to work for lower wages and in more fascist instances attempting to get them to go back to work or jail when they strike. If fewer companies are around for a particular industry then wages will go down as they can co ordinate and employees suffer.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Until then the worst any company can do is politely PERSUADE customers to buy from them and workers to work for them. The worst they can do to suppliers is to abstain from making a purchase above a desired price. Any way you look at it this does not constitute force, fraud, or violence.

Workers have to work, if they are given no choice but a shitty wage they will basically have to take it.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Personhood was started to limit liability.. I agree with your criticisms and if you can lay the groundwork for an alternate system, I'm all for it..but please don't talk about abolishing personhood with no plan in place. Chaos would ensue.

Never heard of personhood, but the idea of giving a corporation the same "rights" as humans is absolutely ridiculous.
I'm for abolition of private but not personal property(with businesses being run by worker councils), council democracy, anti discrimination, internationalism and active promotion of atheism.

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 i certainly agree, but walmart, by virtue of its sheer size, has power to put downward pressure on employee wages. This occurs because they can put other businesses out of business by undercutting prices, and the jobs they create tend to be much lower paying.

exactly

___________________


Check out my Goa and psy Trance mixes!

Last edited by Darkarbiter on Oct-30-2009 at 05:49