| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"enki" |
| Date: |
22 Jan 2005 04:59:04 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
Should resources be taken away from me an given to a poor person? Most
people need productive jobs and they have to be educated and have a
culture of work. I know 3rd worlders and say that Americans work too
much and it causes too many family problems. Taking from one group and
giving to another dosn't realy solve problems. There are many efforts
outside of redistribution that realy help people. Like loans so these
people can start businesses, education, and corporations that invest in
poor parts of the world. We also have to look a different systems in
countries that do npt allow people to better themselvs. I have a great
deal of respect for people on poor countries, they come here where they
are free to persue their goals and they do very well. The world
economy is very complicated far byond my comprhension. I do know that
modern technology is getting cheeper and is improving the lives of poor
people around the world.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
22 Jan 2005 09:14:43 PM |
|
|
Should resources be taken away from me an given to a poor person?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The answer to that would depend on whether you want to live, or work,
in the same town as poor people.
Would you prefer to go live, or work, in a town where there are no poor people ?
If this is the case, then you, and others who think like you, should go create your
own town somewhere, which would be completely poor-free.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Most people need productive jobs and they have to be educated and have a
culture of work. I know 3rd worlders and say that Americans work too
much and it causes too many family problems. Taking from one group and
giving to another dosn't realy solve problems. There are many efforts
outside of redistribution that realy help people. Like loans so these
people can start businesses, education, and corporations that invest in
poor parts of the world. We also have to look a different systems in
countries that do npt allow people to better themselvs. I have a great
deal of respect for people on poor countries, they come here where they
are free to persue their goals and they do very well. The world
economy is very complicated far byond my comprhension. I do know that
modern technology is getting cheeper and is improving the lives of poor
people around the world.
.
|
|
|
| User: "enki" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
23 Jan 2005 04:29:31 AM |
|
|
I have no problem with poor people. Those who don't make much mone. I
have a problem with people who have a poverty of values. I will admit
life in the US is very easy, the willingness to work and appling
yourself will pay off. In other parts of the world, that may not be
the case. Most famine and suffering is caused by war. I respect any
person who can hold a job. In this country anyone can get a job, it
may not be great but it is somthing. Another root of poverty is having
kids before somone is financially ready. You don't have to have sex.
I was prevented from it growing up, it sucked at the time but it payed
off in the long run.
To end poverty, people need to have the opertunity to make their life
better for themselvs. We create civil societies so that people can be
secure to devote their time to productive endevors.
Still why are people poor? In this country, it is a result of poor
life choices. We have value systems to promote porductive behavior and
discourage distructive behavior. I am not saying that as humans just
naturally fall into a productive society. We start as a blank slate
and we are taught things growing up. A poor envoirnment or good
envorinemt does not guarinee that kind of person. It is important to
have public education give people the opertunity to obtain knowlege.
There is certian behavior that will greatly increase the chances that a
person will not be poor. I don't want to be rich, I don't want to have
to work that hard.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
22 Jan 2005 05:08:58 PM |
|
|
enki wrote:
Should resources be taken away from me an given to a poor person?
Most
people need productive jobs and they have to be educated and have a
culture of work. I know 3rd worlders and say that Americans work too
much and it causes too many family problems. Taking from one group
and
giving to another dosn't realy solve problems. There are many
efforts
outside of redistribution that realy help people. Like loans so
these
people can start businesses, education, and corporations that invest
in
poor parts of the world. We also have to look a different systems in
countries that do npt allow people to better themselvs. I have a
great
deal of respect for people on poor countries, they come here where
they
are free to persue their goals and they do very well. The world
economy is very complicated far byond my comprhension. I do know
that
modern technology is getting cheeper and is improving the lives of
poor
people around the world.
Yes, but you assume that the means to wealth comes naturally, and not
by agreements and traditions. so it is not a case of 'giving' to the
poor, for the poor have already supplied you with the means to give.
JJ
.
|
|
|
| User: "enki" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
23 Jan 2005 04:01:17 AM |
|
|
How is it that I am taking from the poor, they don't have enough to
matter to me. I know poor people, I couldn't take anything from them.
If they do somthing for me I pay them. They are happy to provide that
service for what I pay them. If they don't like what I pay they won't
do what I ask. Most poor people I know (outside the US) just want an
opertunity to work. It may seem terrible that somone bake $200 a month
but for food we pay a dollar they pay a nickel. Yes, they have trouble
buying imported or manufactured goods. These people can go back to the
farms and grow their food and raise chickens but even the low wage jobs
they get are better that following the ***** of a hores around trying to
grow the food they need.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
23 Jan 2005 12:41:12 PM |
|
|
enki wrote:
How is it that I am taking from the poor, they don't have enough to
matter to me. I know poor people, I couldn't take anything from
them.
If they do somthing for me I pay them. They are happy to provide
that
service for what I pay them. If they don't like what I pay they
won't
do what I ask. Most poor people I know (outside the US) just want an
opertunity to work. It may seem terrible that somone bake $200 a
month
but for food we pay a dollar they pay a nickel. Yes, they have
trouble
buying imported or manufactured goods. These people can go back to
the
farms and grow their food and raise chickens but even the low wage
jobs
they get are better that following the ***** of a hores around trying
to
grow the food they need.
You and everyone are part of a unified culture. Laws are made by that
culture concerning the distribution of wealth. EVERYONE participates in
these laws, so if some get poorer, it is because of the laws. For
example, wealth could be distributed on the principle of realistic
effort, so that everyone who puts in 8 hours a day gets pretty much the
same. The fact that there is uneven distribution of wealth means that
some people are giving others their realistic share.
JJ
.
|
|
|
| User: "enki" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
23 Jan 2005 07:55:02 PM |
|
|
The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't educated
in economics. The problem with the argument is incentive. I have a
government job and it is dificult to make the next pay grade but it is
difficult to get fired. I could probibly make more in a private job or
I migh not. It is a matter of risk I am willing to take. I once had a
sales job. Sales is good because you see what you make and understand
incentive. What bothers me about my job is that there is no way to
measure productivity.
In the free market what you make is based on two factors, how many
people can do your job and what your effort brings into the company.
If you start your own company, your success is based on the desire for
people to pay for what you offer. The economy is too complex to plan.
I know a little about Germany. You take a test in grade school that
will determine your fate for the rest of your life. You could go to
the casheer school. and for your whole life you will be a casheer, or
you can go to the managment school and your will start as a manager.
Because It is next to impossible change professions, saliries are
highly regulated. I knew some engineers and I live better than they
do.
The key to a growing economy is productivity. That is because we try
to pay as little for our products and try to earn as much as possible
in our jobs. If wages are high, then so will the costs of products. I
am not and economist but I have experience in real life. We could have
minimum wage as $100 per hour but the cost of everything would increase
by that much. We would have inflation.
Step outside your box and try to think if the economy and try to use
some basic logic. I hate to think of the economy as distribution. I
see it as bargining. I actually have experience in managing people.
The trick is not being the best at your job that is pretty easy
compared to getting people to be the best at theirs.
Finally how do you put a value on a job. Some are harder than others.
If as a sales man I make the same weter I sell alot or a little what
sence is in that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Hayes" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 03:15:39 AM |
|
|
On 23 Jan 2005 17:55:02 -0800, "enki" <enki034@yahoo.com> wrote:
The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't educated
in economics.
THe comunist argument about what?
--
Keep well,
Steve Hayes
http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/peace.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "formerly known as cat arranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 03:23:10 AM |
|
|
"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41f480a6.86739928@news.saix.net...
: On 23 Jan 2005 17:55:02 -0800, "enki" <enki034@yahoo.com> wrote:
:
: >The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't educated
: >in economics.
:
: THe comunist argument about what?
:
:
:
: --
: Keep well,
:
: Steve Hayes
: http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/peace.htm
Thanks. There was a saying that "You have a grasp of the obvious."
It was kind of a put down but not in this case as you grasped a obvious
obviousness : -) that I didn't.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 06:32:07 AM |
|
|
enki wrote:
The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't educated
in economics. The problem with the argument is incentive. I have a
government job and it is dificult to make the next pay grade but it
is
difficult to get fired. I could probibly make more in a private job
or
I migh not. It is a matter of risk I am willing to take. I once had
a
sales job. Sales is good because you see what you make and
understand
incentive. What bothers me about my job is that there is no way to
measure productivity.
In the free market what you make is based on two factors, how many
people can do your job and what your effort brings into the company.
If you start your own company, your success is based on the desire
for
people to pay for what you offer. The economy is too complex to
plan.
I know a little about Germany. You take a test in grade school that
will determine your fate for the rest of your life. You could go to
the casheer school. and for your whole life you will be a casheer, or
you can go to the managment school and your will start as a manager.
Because It is next to impossible change professions, saliries are
highly regulated. I knew some engineers and I live better than they
do.
The key to a growing economy is productivity.
Nonsense. The key to a growing economy is
(1) increased demand
(2) increased consumption of resources
China's economy is growing.
Lot's of people working for little is not productivity.
Burning lots of coal is not productivity.
-tg
That is because we try
to pay as little for our products and try to earn as much as possible
in our jobs. If wages are high, then so will the costs of products.
I
am not and economist but I have experience in real life. We could
have
minimum wage as $100 per hour but the cost of everything would
increase
by that much. We would have inflation.
Step outside your box and try to think if the economy and try to use
some basic logic. I hate to think of the economy as distribution.
I
see it as bargining. I actually have experience in managing people.
The trick is not being the best at your job that is pretty easy
compared to getting people to be the best at theirs.
Finally how do you put a value on a job. Some are harder than
others.
If as a sales man I make the same weter I sell alot or a little what
sence is in that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "enki" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 12:43:08 PM |
|
|
Nonsense. The key to a growing economy is
(1) increased demand
Have people make more money.
Pay is based on how much a peson produces.
(2) increased consumption of resources
What about services?
China's economy is growing.
Lot's of people working for little is not productivity.
That is a non sequiter. Productivity is getting more done from fewer
people. 100 people can 500 wicker baskets in a day. Costs you $100 to
pay them. There is a machine that can make the same baskets with one
operator. You pay the one operator $5 the $50 to pay the loan on the
machine. You can keep the $45 as profit or you can lower your price.
It depends on the competition. You could be one of the shlums who lost
your job making baskets buy a machine and operate the machine yourself
and sell baskets for $5 less than you old boss.
Burning lots of coal is not productivity.
Duh, You want to burn it as effeciently as possible get as much doen
with using little coal as possible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "formerly known as cat arranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 01:26:36 PM |
|
|
: (1) increased demand
: Have people make more money.
: Pay is based on how much a peson produces.
Pay is based on the least amount that can be paid
for the most production. America's workforce might
be the most productive because so many people have
been replaced by machines. So the production is
divided by fewer people. The people aren't necessarily
being paid more.
: (2) increased consumption of resources
: What about services?
:
: China's economy is growing.
:
: Lot's of people working for little is not productivity.
: That is a non sequiter. Productivity is getting more done from fewer
: people. 100 people can 500 wicker baskets in a day. Costs you $100 to
: pay them. There is a machine that can make the same baskets with one
: operator. You pay the one operator $5 the $50 to pay the loan on the
: machine. You can keep the $45 as profit or you can lower your price.
: It depends on the competition. You could be one of the shlums who lost
: your job making baskets buy a machine and operate the machine yourself
: and sell baskets for $5 less than you old boss.
:
: Burning lots of coal is not productivity.
: Duh, You want to burn it as effeciently as possible get as much doen
: with using little coal as possible.
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "enki" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 02:27:08 PM |
|
|
You are on the right track.
If people are producing more an making the same, the price of goods can
come down. Things get cheeper even though you don't make more. How
many time have you heard, the price will come down?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 01:27:43 PM |
|
|
enki wrote:
Nonsense. The key to a growing economy is
(1) increased demand
Have people make more money.
Pay is based on how much a peson produces.
(2) increased consumption of resources
What about services?
China's economy is growing.
Lot's of people working for little is not productivity.
That is a non sequiter. Productivity is getting more done from fewer
people. 100 people can 500 wicker baskets in a day. Costs you $100
to
pay them. There is a machine that can make the same baskets with one
operator. You pay the one operator $5 the $50 to pay the loan on the
machine. You can keep the $45 as profit or you can lower your price.
It depends on the competition. You could be one of the shlums who
lost
your job making baskets buy a machine and operate the machine
yourself
and sell baskets for $5 less than you old boss.
Burning lots of coal is not productivity.
Duh, You want to burn it as effeciently as possible get as much doen
with using little coal as possible.
I see you are one of those people who snips to avoid showing your
ignorance.
You said "The key to a growing economy is productivity."
Obviously, if population increases, the economy will grow without
increase in productivity (even by your definition.)
Likewise, resource use will increase simply with volume. You can dig
twice as much coal by having twice as many people inefficiently dig
coal.
Why don't you learn how to think instead of repeating propaganda?
-tg
.
|
|
|
| User: "enki" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 02:31:24 PM |
|
|
Obviously, if population increases, the economy will grow without
increase in productivity (even by your definition.)
Likewise, resource use will increase simply with volume. You can dig
twice as much coal by having twice as many people inefficiently dig
coal.
I think that was reported in the journal huh. (to reply with sarcasim.)
What? I argued the opposite. This is the argument I made.
Productivity is getting more done from fewer
people. 100 people can 500 wicker baskets in a day. Costs you $100 to
pay them. There is a machine that can make the same baskets with one
operator. You pay the one operator $5 the $50 to pay the loan on the
machine. You can keep the $45 as profit or you can lower your price.
It depends on the competition. You could be one of the shlums who lost
your job making baskets buy a machine and operate the machine yourself
and sell baskets for $5 less than you old boss.
Yes this is a simple example.
.
|
|
|
| User: "danti" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
25 Jan 2005 07:11:51 AM |
|
|
"enki" <enki034@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106598684.273273.173500@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Obviously, if population increases, the economy will grow without
increase in productivity (even by your definition.)
Likewise, resource use will increase simply with volume. You can dig
twice as much coal by having twice as many people inefficiently dig
coal.
I think that was reported in the journal huh. (to reply with
sarcasim.)
What? I argued the opposite. This is the argument I made.
Productivity is getting more done from fewer
people. 100 people can 500 wicker baskets in a day. Costs you $100
to
pay them. There is a machine that can make the same baskets with one
operator. You pay the one operator $5 the $50 to pay the loan on the
machine. You can keep the $45 as profit or you can lower your price.
It depends on the competition. You could be one of the shlums who
lost
your job making baskets buy a machine and operate the machine
yourself
and sell baskets for $5 less than you old boss.
Yes this is a simple example.
and what of the other 99 people who are now unemployed, will they too
purchase this machine, hire one operator (perhaps hire each
other?)...for $5 less each time......something doesn't add up
here......it may be a simple example but unfortunately complicates the
issue....which goes unresolved.....
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
25 Jan 2005 08:09:09 AM |
|
|
Of course.
This is an example of fundamentalist thinking. People are taught some
talking points and fables and they are repeated without understanding.
A better scenario is:
I have a factory in the USA where I pay 100 people $15/hr and have the
expense of avoiding pollution.
I move my equipment to China where I pay 300 people $2/hr and dump crap
into the river.
My profits increase.
People like enki think this is "increased productivity", even though it
doesn't even meet (his) own definition.
-tg
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 05:35:26 PM |
|
|
enki wrote:
Obviously, if population increases, the economy will grow without
increase in productivity (even by your definition.)
Likewise, resource use will increase simply with volume. You can dig
twice as much coal by having twice as many people inefficiently dig
coal.
I think that was reported in the journal huh. (to reply with
sarcasim.)
What? I argued the opposite. This is the argument I made.
I see you are one of those people who snips to avoid showing your
ignorance.
You said "The key to a growing economy is productivity."
Obviously, if population increases, the economy will grow without
increase in productivity (even by your definition.)
Likewise, resource use will increase simply with volume. You can dig
twice as much coal by having twice as many people inefficiently dig
coal.
Why don't you learn how to think instead of repeating propaganda?
-tg
Productivity is getting more done from fewer
people. 100 people can 500 wicker baskets in a day. Costs you $100 to
pay them. There is a machine that can make the same baskets with one
operator. You pay the one operator $5 the $50 to pay the loan on the
machine. You can keep the $45 as profit or you can lower your price.
It depends on the competition. You could be one of the shlums who
lost
your job making baskets buy a machine and operate the machine
yourself
and sell baskets for $5 less than you old boss.
Yes this is a simple example.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 07:07:01 PM |
|
|
enki wrote:
Obviously, if population increases, the economy will grow without
increase in productivity (even by your definition.)
Likewise, resource use will increase simply with volume. You can dig
twice as much coal by having twice as many people inefficiently dig
coal.
I think that was reported in the journal huh. (to reply with
sarcasim.)
What? I argued the opposite. This is the argument I made.
I see you are one of those people who snips to avoid showing your
ignorance.
You said "The key to a growing economy is productivity."
Obviously, if population increases, the economy will grow without
increase in productivity (even by your definition.)
Likewise, resource use will increase simply with volume. You can dig
twice as much coal by having twice as many people inefficiently dig
coal.
Why don't you learn how to think instead of repeating propaganda?
-tg
Productivity is getting more done from fewer
people. 100 people can 500 wicker baskets in a day. Costs you $100 to
pay them. There is a machine that can make the same baskets with one
operator. You pay the one operator $5 the $50 to pay the loan on the
machine. You can keep the $45 as profit or you can lower your price.
It depends on the competition. You could be one of the shlums who
lost
your job making baskets buy a machine and operate the machine
yourself
and sell baskets for $5 less than you old boss.
Yes this is a simple example.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 03:50:49 AM |
|
|
enki wrote:
The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't educated
in economics. The problem with the argument is incentive. I have a
government job and it is dificult to make the next pay grade but it
is
difficult to get fired. I could probibly make more in a private job
or
I migh not. It is a matter of risk I am willing to take. I once had
a
sales job. Sales is good because you see what you make and
understand
incentive. What bothers me about my job is that there is no way to
measure productivity.
In the free market what you make is based on two factors, how many
people can do your job and what your effort brings into the company.
If you start your own company, your success is based on the desire
for
people to pay for what you offer. The economy is too complex to
plan.
I know a little about Germany. You take a test in grade school that
will determine your fate for the rest of your life. You could go to
the casheer school. and for your whole life you will be a casheer, or
you can go to the managment school and your will start as a manager.
Because It is next to impossible change professions, saliries are
highly regulated. I knew some engineers and I live better than they
do.
The key to a growing economy is productivity. That is because we try
to pay as little for our products and try to earn as much as possible
in our jobs. If wages are high, then so will the costs of products.
I
am not and economist but I have experience in real life. We could
have
minimum wage as $100 per hour but the cost of everything would
increase
by that much. We would have inflation.
Step outside your box and try to think if the economy and try to use
some basic logic. I hate to think of the economy as distribution.
I
see it as bargining. I actually have experience in managing people.
The trick is not being the best at your job that is pretty easy
compared to getting people to be the best at theirs.
Finally how do you put a value on a job. Some are harder than
others.
If as a sales man I make the same weter I sell alot or a little what
sence is in that?
All of a nations individuals are responsible for creating the nations
wealth. They are also responsible for the way wealth is distributed. If
you say the wealth is yours because the workforce that creates the
wealth is yours, then that is freeloading on the nation.
JJ
.
|
|
|
| User: "formerly known as cat arranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 01:09:42 PM |
|
|
"John Jones" <jonescardiff@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1106560249.522673.166470@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
:
: enki wrote:
: > The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't educated
: > in economics. The problem with the argument is incentive. I have a
: > government job and it is dificult to make the next pay grade but it
: is
: > difficult to get fired. I could probibly make more in a private job
: or
: > I migh not. It is a matter of risk I am willing to take. I once had
: a
: > sales job. Sales is good because you see what you make and
: understand
: > incentive. What bothers me about my job is that there is no way to
: > measure productivity.
: >
: > In the free market what you make is based on two factors, how many
: > people can do your job and what your effort brings into the company.
: > If you start your own company, your success is based on the desire
: for
: > people to pay for what you offer. The economy is too complex to
: plan.
: > I know a little about Germany. You take a test in grade school that
: > will determine your fate for the rest of your life. You could go to
: > the casheer school. and for your whole life you will be a casheer, or
: > you can go to the managment school and your will start as a manager.
: > Because It is next to impossible change professions, saliries are
: > highly regulated. I knew some engineers and I live better than they
: > do.
: >
: > The key to a growing economy is productivity. That is because we try
: > to pay as little for our products and try to earn as much as possible
: > in our jobs. If wages are high, then so will the costs of products.
: I
: > am not and economist but I have experience in real life. We could
: have
: > minimum wage as $100 per hour but the cost of everything would
: increase
: > by that much. We would have inflation.
: >
: > Step outside your box and try to think if the economy and try to use
: > some basic logic. I hate to think of the economy as distribution.
: I
: > see it as bargining. I actually have experience in managing people.
: > The trick is not being the best at your job that is pretty easy
: > compared to getting people to be the best at theirs.
: >
: > Finally how do you put a value on a job. Some are harder than
: others.
: > If as a sales man I make the same weter I sell alot or a little what
: > sence is in that?
:
: All of a nations individuals are responsible for creating the nations
: wealth. They are also responsible for the way wealth is distributed. If
: you say the wealth is yours because the workforce that creates the
: wealth is yours, then that is freeloading on the nation.
: JJ
Where is responsibility and who grants who the authority to
assign responsibility? If we can't find a standard of time how
are we going to find a standard of responsibility? Or maybe
responsibility means that one's parents made you do things.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 02:30:04 PM |
|
|
formerly known as 'cat arranger' wrote:
"John Jones" <jonescardiff@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1106560249.522673.166470@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
:
: enki wrote:
: > The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't
educated
: > in economics. The problem with the argument is incentive. I
have a
: > government job and it is dificult to make the next pay grade but
it
: is
: > difficult to get fired. I could probibly make more in a private
job
: or
: > I migh not. It is a matter of risk I am willing to take. I once
had
: a
: > sales job. Sales is good because you see what you make and
: understand
: > incentive. What bothers me about my job is that there is no way
to
: > measure productivity.
: >
: > In the free market what you make is based on two factors, how
many
: > people can do your job and what your effort brings into the
company.
: > If you start your own company, your success is based on the
desire
: for
: > people to pay for what you offer. The economy is too complex to
: plan.
: > I know a little about Germany. You take a test in grade school
that
: > will determine your fate for the rest of your life. You could go
to
: > the casheer school. and for your whole life you will be a
casheer, or
: > you can go to the managment school and your will start as a
manager.
: > Because It is next to impossible change professions, saliries are
: > highly regulated. I knew some engineers and I live better than
they
: > do.
: >
: > The key to a growing economy is productivity. That is because we
try
: > to pay as little for our products and try to earn as much as
possible
: > in our jobs. If wages are high, then so will the costs of
products.
: I
: > am not and economist but I have experience in real life. We
could
: have
: > minimum wage as $100 per hour but the cost of everything would
: increase
: > by that much. We would have inflation.
: >
: > Step outside your box and try to think if the economy and try to
use
: > some basic logic. I hate to think of the economy as
distribution.
: I
: > see it as bargining. I actually have experience in managing
people.
: > The trick is not being the best at your job that is pretty easy
: > compared to getting people to be the best at theirs.
: >
: > Finally how do you put a value on a job. Some are harder than
: others.
: > If as a sales man I make the same weter I sell alot or a little
what
: > sence is in that?
:
: All of a nations individuals are responsible for creating the
nations
: wealth. They are also responsible for the way wealth is
distributed. If
: you say the wealth is yours because the workforce that creates the
: wealth is yours, then that is freeloading on the nation.
: JJ
Where is responsibility and who grants who the authority to
assign responsibility? If we can't find a standard of time how
are we going to find a standard of responsibility? Or maybe
responsibility means that one's parents made you do things.
The nation is the body that is responsible for its individuals. Where
individuals come together there is the nation.
JJ
.
|
|
|
| User: "formerly known as cat arranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 02:58:45 PM |
|
|
"John Jones" <jonescardiff@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1106598604.572314.236430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
:
: formerly known as 'cat arranger' wrote:
: > "John Jones" <jonescardiff@aol.com> wrote in message
: > news:1106560249.522673.166470@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
: > :
: > : enki wrote:
: > : > The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't
: educated
: > : > in economics. The problem with the argument is incentive. I
: have a
: > : > government job and it is dificult to make the next pay grade but
: it
: > : is
: > : > difficult to get fired. I could probibly make more in a private
: job
: > : or
: > : > I migh not. It is a matter of risk I am willing to take. I once
: had
: > : a
: > : > sales job. Sales is good because you see what you make and
: > : understand
: > : > incentive. What bothers me about my job is that there is no way
: to
: > : > measure productivity.
: > : >
: > : > In the free market what you make is based on two factors, how
: many
: > : > people can do your job and what your effort brings into the
: company.
: > : > If you start your own company, your success is based on the
: desire
: > : for
: > : > people to pay for what you offer. The economy is too complex to
: > : plan.
: > : > I know a little about Germany. You take a test in grade school
: that
: > : > will determine your fate for the rest of your life. You could go
: to
: > : > the casheer school. and for your whole life you will be a
: casheer, or
: > : > you can go to the managment school and your will start as a
: manager.
: > : > Because It is next to impossible change professions, saliries are
: > : > highly regulated. I knew some engineers and I live better than
: they
: > : > do.
: > : >
: > : > The key to a growing economy is productivity. That is because we
: try
: > : > to pay as little for our products and try to earn as much as
: possible
: > : > in our jobs. If wages are high, then so will the costs of
: products.
: > : I
: > : > am not and economist but I have experience in real life. We
: could
: > : have
: > : > minimum wage as $100 per hour but the cost of everything would
: > : increase
: > : > by that much. We would have inflation.
: > : >
: > : > Step outside your box and try to think if the economy and try to
: use
: > : > some basic logic. I hate to think of the economy as
: distribution.
: > : I
: > : > see it as bargining. I actually have experience in managing
: people.
: > : > The trick is not being the best at your job that is pretty easy
: > : > compared to getting people to be the best at theirs.
: > : >
: > : > Finally how do you put a value on a job. Some are harder than
: > : others.
: > : > If as a sales man I make the same weter I sell alot or a little
: what
: > : > sence is in that?
: > :
: > : All of a nations individuals are responsible for creating the
: nations
: > : wealth. They are also responsible for the way wealth is
: distributed. If
: > : you say the wealth is yours because the workforce that creates the
: > : wealth is yours, then that is freeloading on the nation.
: > : JJ
: >
: > Where is responsibility and who grants who the authority to
: > assign responsibility? If we can't find a standard of time how
: > are we going to find a standard of responsibility? Or maybe
: > responsibility means that one's parents made you do things.
:
: The nation is the body that is responsible for its individuals. Where
: individuals come together there is the nation.
: JJ
You deny that sets exist, sort of, but posit a set called 'nation'.
Can you describe its members? Do the members see themselves
as part of the set?
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
25 Jan 2005 07:43:03 AM |
|
|
formerly known as 'cat arranger' wrote:
"John Jones" <jonescardiff@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1106598604.572314.236430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
:
: formerly known as 'cat arranger' wrote:
: > "John Jones" <jonescardiff@aol.com> wrote in message
: > news:1106560249.522673.166470@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
: > :
: > : enki wrote:
: > : > The communist argument seem very logical for those who arn't
: educated
: > : > in economics. The problem with the argument is incentive. I
: have a
: > : > government job and it is dificult to make the next pay grade
but
: it
: > : is
: > : > difficult to get fired. I could probibly make more in a
private
: job
: > : or
: > : > I migh not. It is a matter of risk I am willing to take. I
once
: had
: > : a
: > : > sales job. Sales is good because you see what you make and
: > : understand
: > : > incentive. What bothers me about my job is that there is no
way
: to
: > : > measure productivity.
: > : >
: > : > In the free market what you make is based on two factors, how
: many
: > : > people can do your job and what your effort brings into the
: company.
: > : > If you start your own company, your success is based on the
: desire
: > : for
: > : > people to pay for what you offer. The economy is too complex
to
: > : plan.
: > : > I know a little about Germany. You take a test in grade
school
: that
: > : > will determine your fate for the rest of your life. You
could go
: to
: > : > the casheer school. and for your whole life you will be a
: casheer, or
: > : > you can go to the managment school and your will start as a
: manager.
: > : > Because It is next to impossible change professions, saliries
are
: > : > highly regulated. I knew some engineers and I live better
than
: they
: > : > do.
: > : >
: > : > The key to a growing economy is productivity. That is
because we
: try
: > : > to pay as little for our products and try to earn as much as
: possible
: > : > in our jobs. If wages are high, then so will the costs of
: products.
: > : I
: > : > am not and economist but I have experience in real life. We
: could
: > : have
: > : > minimum wage as $100 per hour but the cost of everything
would
: > : increase
: > : > by that much. We would have inflation.
: > : >
: > : > Step outside your box and try to think if the economy and try
to
: use
: > : > some basic logic. I hate to think of the economy as
: distribution.
: > : I
: > : > see it as bargining. I actually have experience in managing
: people.
: > : > The trick is not being the best at your job that is pretty
easy
: > : > compared to getting people to be the best at theirs.
: > : >
: > : > Finally how do you put a value on a job. Some are harder
than
: > : others.
: > : > If as a sales man I make the same weter I sell alot or a
little
: what
: > : > sence is in that?
: > :
: > : All of a nations individuals are responsible for creating the
: nations
: > : wealth. They are also responsible for the way wealth is
: distributed. If
: > : you say the wealth is yours because the workforce that creates
the
: > : wealth is yours, then that is freeloading on the nation.
: > : JJ
: >
: > Where is responsibility and who grants who the authority to
: > assign responsibility? If we can't find a standard of time how
: > are we going to find a standard of responsibility? Or maybe
: > responsibility means that one's parents made you do things.
:
: The nation is the body that is responsible for its individuals.
Where
: individuals come together there is the nation.
: JJ
You deny that sets exist, sort of, but posit a set called 'nation'.
Can you describe its members? Do the members see themselves
as part of the set?
I can't answer that in the way you want. A nation has properties, a set
does not.
JJ
.
|
|
|
| User: "tg" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
25 Jan 2005 09:02:36 AM |
|
|
If it didn't have the properties of a set, it wouldn't be a set. So it
does have properties.
-tg
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
25 Jan 2005 02:01:10 PM |
|
|
A set doesn't have properties. It is a reference.
JJ
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
25 Jan 2005 04:24:45 PM |
|
|
Well, then, it has the properties of a reference. So it has properties.
See, jj, we're nickin' all your good stuff and turning it against you.
-tg
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
25 Jan 2005 04:35:33 PM |
|
|
If a reference is a property what is it a property of?
Shutup.
JJ
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "enki" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 12:32:20 PM |
|
|
Yes the person who creates the wealth sells theri work to the employer.
As soon as an employee or employer no longer want that service their
contract ends. I say how my wealth is ditributed, I give my money to
those who provide me with products and services I wan't for the best
price. As I am free to choose what services I want, my employer is
free to find the best value as I do when buying goods.
.
|
|
|
| User: "formerly known as cat arranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 01:12:51 PM |
|
|
"enki" <enki034@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106591540.041246.293280@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
: Yes the person who creates the wealth sells theri work to the employer.
: As soon as an employee or employer no longer want that service their
: contract ends. I say how my wealth is ditributed, I give my money to
: those who provide me with products and services I wan't for the best
: price. As I am free to choose what services I want, my employer is
: free to find the best value as I do when buying goods.
You can not buy a piece of property that is yours because the
government can take it away if you don't pay property tax.
You have little say over sales tax. Unions dictate in some states
the amount you will pay for labor. Many companies do not offer
their goods, some models, in the US for what reason? not apparent.
.
|
|
|
| User: "enki" |
|
| Title: Re: Time to Make Poverty History! |
24 Jan 2005 02:24:04 PM |
|
|
You can not buy a piece of property that is yours because the
government can take it away if you don't pay property tax.
You have little say over sales tax. Unions dictate in some states
the amount you will pay for labor. Many companies do not offer
their goods, some models, in the US for what reason? not apparent.
What you is say is true. There are a great deal of infringments on our
economic freedom, I don't dispute them. I was making a rather simple
argument to show a point.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
