New Hires in UAW Now Get Just $14 an hour
in [Drive]
|
From: Nate Nagel on 26 Jun 2010 14:47 On 06/26/2010 01:20 PM, Brent wrote: > On 2010-06-26, Nate Nagel<njnagel(a)roosters.net> wrote: >> On 06/25/2010 11:31 PM, Brent wrote: >>> On 2010-06-26, Nate Nagel<njnagel(a)roosters.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Honestly, a significant devaluation of the dollar would go a long way >>>> towards solving a lot of these problems, but it would be painful. >>>> Unfortunately I (NB: I am not an economist) can't think of any likely >>>> unfolding of things that doesn't involve economic pain. >>> >>> That's inflation. We need deflation now. Deflation is bad for bankers >>> and debtors but it will allow the economy to recover for the long term. >>> All lowering the value of the dollar accomplishes is to wipe out savers >>> and add to the problems. >>> >> >> How would deflation help the problem of foreign workers willing to work >> for half or less than that of American workers? Devaluing the dollar >> with respect to foreign currencies will give us less purchasing power >> overseas. > > What exactly will I be buying when my savings can't buy a loaf of bread? > > deflation resets the system from the damage in the boom phase of the > boom-bust cycle. Inflation just papers over the problem but no real > capitial is created. It punishes savings. Without savings, without > restored capitial, the economy goes nowhere. The inflation boosts things > for a short time and then the economy crashes again and crashes harder. > >> The only downside that I can see is that it would make American >> corporations more open to being taken over by foreign interests... but >> then again I haven't worked for a company for which that hadn't already >> happened for 10 years or so? > > Inflation is how this mess was created. It will only make it worse. > > If inflation was good, Zimbabwe's economy would be the best in the > world. > > You're confusing inflation with with devaluation. I'm not talking about changing the price of domestically produced goods; I'm talking about making the dollar less valuable against the yen, the euro, the pound sterling etc. now how to accomplish that... nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel
From: Brent on 26 Jun 2010 15:26 On 2010-06-26, Nate Nagel <njnagel(a)roosters.net> wrote: > On 06/26/2010 01:20 PM, Brent wrote: >> On 2010-06-26, Nate Nagel<njnagel(a)roosters.net> wrote: >>> On 06/25/2010 11:31 PM, Brent wrote: >>>> On 2010-06-26, Nate Nagel<njnagel(a)roosters.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Honestly, a significant devaluation of the dollar would go a long way >>>>> towards solving a lot of these problems, but it would be painful. >>>>> Unfortunately I (NB: I am not an economist) can't think of any likely >>>>> unfolding of things that doesn't involve economic pain. >>>> >>>> That's inflation. We need deflation now. Deflation is bad for bankers >>>> and debtors but it will allow the economy to recover for the long term. >>>> All lowering the value of the dollar accomplishes is to wipe out savers >>>> and add to the problems. >>>> >>> >>> How would deflation help the problem of foreign workers willing to work >>> for half or less than that of American workers? Devaluing the dollar >>> with respect to foreign currencies will give us less purchasing power >>> overseas. >> >> What exactly will I be buying when my savings can't buy a loaf of bread? >> >> deflation resets the system from the damage in the boom phase of the >> boom-bust cycle. Inflation just papers over the problem but no real >> capitial is created. It punishes savings. Without savings, without >> restored capitial, the economy goes nowhere. The inflation boosts things >> for a short time and then the economy crashes again and crashes harder. >> >>> The only downside that I can see is that it would make American >>> corporations more open to being taken over by foreign interests... but >>> then again I haven't worked for a company for which that hadn't already >>> happened for 10 years or so? >> >> Inflation is how this mess was created. It will only make it worse. >> >> If inflation was good, Zimbabwe's economy would be the best in the >> world. >> >> > > You're confusing inflation with with devaluation. I'm not talking about > changing the price of domestically produced goods; I'm talking about > making the dollar less valuable against the yen, the euro, the pound > sterling etc. Inflation is not a rise in prices. Inflation is an increase in the supply of the monetary unit, a reduction in purchasing power of the monetary unit. The increase in prices a symptom of the decrease in the value of the monetary unit. Those who cause inflation, central banks and governments, love to mislead people that inflation is some sort of spontanous rise in prices due to everything from greed to supply and demand. The reality is that they increased the money supply some time prior to the price increases. Gasoline right now is less than 25 cents a gallon in US constitutional money. That is a dollar defined as a weight of silver. A nice man's suit has been aproximately an onuce of gold since roman times. > now how to accomplish that... The only sort of devaluation that can have positive effects on domestic manufacture is if China's currency is openly traded. However that happening can unlock a door of hyper inflation since China is a great big dollar sink that is soaking up increases in the supply of US dollars so long as the exchange rate is fixed. If it becomes better to hold the chinese currency then dollars will be sold.
From: Don Kirkman on 26 Jun 2010 19:20 On 26 Jun 2010 17:31:20 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>No, the federal government did not run on consumption taxes. We don't >>need a national sales tax and haven't had one in the past. We will end >>up with both national sales tax _AND_ income tax should this 'fair tax' >>be passed. Eliminate taxation and get the monkey off people's backs. >Because we don't need a federal government. Then I gather we have a hardly-used Constitution for sale, eh? -- Don Kirkman donsno2(a)charter.net
From: Howard Brazee on 26 Jun 2010 19:39 On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 08:00:43 -0400, Dave Head <rally2xs(a)att.net> wrote: >Well, yeah, but that's another challenge. Why not just get rid of the >tax that is chasing all our jobs overseas as a first step? That would >eventually solve the illegal alien problem because we'd eventually >have so much economic activity that we could employ 'em all... and tax >them too... and after that our economy would just keep growing. We >could throw open the gates to immigration again, and eventuallly we'd >have so many of those - immigrants - that we could employ them too and >tax them too. Do you really believe the illegal alien problem is about jobs? Or even about the illegal immigrants? I don't. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison
From: Nate Nagel on 26 Jun 2010 20:00
On 06/26/2010 07:20 PM, Don Kirkman wrote: > On 26 Jun 2010 17:31:20 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > >> Brent<tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>> No, the federal government did not run on consumption taxes. We don't >>> need a national sales tax and haven't had one in the past. We will end >>> up with both national sales tax _AND_ income tax should this 'fair tax' >>> be passed. Eliminate taxation and get the monkey off people's backs. > >> Because we don't need a federal government. > > Then I gather we have a hardly-used Constitution for sale, eh? We're not using most of it *now,* so... nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel |