Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Poverty

[Mach]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Moving from one economic group to another is not everyone's dream, it's not everyone's desire, frankly it's a pain in the ass and most people prefer to have a 9-5 where they don't take work home with them.

.
This is just nonsense.

The rest of the responses are the usual opinionated tedium that we can agree to disagree on, but this one appears to be demonstrably false. Also common sense false, I cannot believe that you would claim that it's nonsense that not everyone dreams, and let's be clear by dream I mean aspires to through their actual behavior, to move up in economic class. I can assure you that with certainty I am content where I am, and I know the work/path involved in raising my economic status, and it's simply not worth it to me. I do not want to pursue it, and I do not regret pursuing it. Everyone knows numerous individuals who do not want to bust ass beyond bare minimum. How many people have you tried to promote to a more lucrative management position only to be told my them they prefer their part-time, individual contributor job and don't want the headache of management? It's as though you're commenting from a bubble that has never had you interact with other adults with regards to their career and life goals. I know two modern-hippies who travel around going to concerts (use to be greatful dead back in the day if that gives you any indication) and eating rice and beans. They ARE living their dream, and I can assure you that they look on the rat-race folks who bust ass at corporate trying to get ahead with pity. The idea that *everyone* wants to move up an economic class is absurd. I can only imagine you're young with thinking like that. You can only do so much before you die in this life, and MOST people do not commit to wanting to pursue that with all their life energy. Life's far too short for most people to want to spend all their time pursuing another buck, they have many other dreams to fulfill. If you mean that everyone would love to be wealthy if it just fell in their lap...lol, then you're not really engaging the issue. Economic opportunity is there, but it most certainly does, and should, necessarily, require significant work to achieve it.

 

[pdog]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Your problem here is that you somehow believe it is the role of the state to "invest" money it has forcibly confiscated from individuals on ideals and goals that you desire.

There is a great deal of irony here. How much wealth has been created on the ideals and goals of our society? How much wealth has been created by the seeds planted by others?

So it's not that simple - the ability of one to extract wealth is the result of a complex, if not chaotic set of circumstances. Put another way, "confiscated" implies that it was entirely theirs to begin with, when the reality is that extraction of wealth by a minority can be looked at as confiscation on it's own.

 

[jmotivator]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Pssst: increase money supply can generate credit, and credit is leveraged into production, and production produces wealth. Indeed, the growth of advanced wealthy modern capitalist economies is almost completely dependent on the rise of financing and the wealth it creates. It's no coincident that the less credit is available in an economy, the poorer the economy is. The two data points track almost perfectly, both synchronically and diachronically.

Credit isn't driven by printing money. All that printing money does is cause inflation. We are watching the US and Japan and many others try this dislocated cash approach to recovery and it simply does not work. All you get is inflation resulting in MORE credit being needed to buy the same goods and services which offsets the cash that was added to the system.

While the two data points track together you have the cause and effect exactly backwards.

 

[head of joaquin]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Credit isn't driven by printing money. All that printing money does is cause inflation. We are watching the US and Japan and many others try this dislocated cash approach to recovery and it simply does not work. All you get is inflation resulting in MORE credit being needed to buy the same goods and services which offsets the cash that was added to the system.

While the two data points track together you have the cause and effect exactly backwards.

If you don't see the relationship between money supply and credit, I can't help you.

Inflation is a different topic. Try to focus. You asked about the relationship between money supply and wealth, the relationship correlates closely via access to credit.

 

[Fletch]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

It's morning and I feel like taking a second crack at this tired mantra....

I guess you'd be really upset to find out that when you "deposit" money in a bank, what you're really doing is lending that money to the bank (this is why you get paid interest on some accounts), which in effect makes your money, their money. All you get is a promise that they will return it when you ask for it, which they will, if they have it.

As far as forcing you. I'm going to disagree. First, you have a choice. I'm sure their are other countries that would accept you should you choose to patriate, so in this sense you have a choice, thus if you resented the "forcing" enough, you'd vote with your feet. If you want the freedom to do whatever you like, total freedom from centralized government, I recommend Somalia.

You and Libertarians like you try to use like "forcibly confiscate" in an attempt to turn the anonymous bureaucracy that is government into some personal agent that is out you and steal your money without justification.

You should have quit last night because your morning response is fairly content free. I don't really no how to reply to a person who doesn't believe that taxation or wealth confiscation and redistribution is accomplished through force. Its like trying to respond to someone who doesn't believe the sun rises in the east.

 

[Fletch]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

There is a great deal of irony here. How much wealth has been created on the ideals and goals of our society? How much wealth has been created by the seeds planted by others?

So it's not that simple - the ability of one to extract wealth is the result of a complex, if not chaotic set of circumstances. Put another way, "confiscated" implies that it was entirely theirs to begin with, when the reality is that extraction of wealth by a minority can be looked at as confiscation on it's own.

And your error is a failure to recognize the difference between that which is created or acquired through consensual, voluntary activity, and that which is acquitted through force.

 

[head of joaquin]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

And your error is a failure to recognize the difference between that which is created or acquired through consensual, voluntary activity, and that which is acquitted through force.

Because everybody knows that people without capital really want to work for people with capital. Nobody's forcing them to work in order to eat.

 

[Fisher]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Because everybody knows that people without capital really want to work for people with capital. Nobody's forcing them to work in order to eat.

People who want to own things work for people who own things. People who just want the government to feed them, burp them, and accept whatever crap comes out the other end, really have no reason to work, except for democratic campaigns at least.

 

[jmotivator]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

If you don't see the relationship between money supply and credit, I can't help you.

Inflation is a different topic. Try to focus. You asked about the relationship between money supply and wealth, the relationship correlates closely via access to credit.

You again have it backwards. Credit doesn't exist because the government prints money. Credit exists because banks stockpile money (the practice that the left vilifies). Printing money does nothing to the amount of real wealth in a system, Zimbawe learned that the hard way. They printed the crap out of their money and all they got was inflation and a declining standard of living. The poorest of the poor in Zimbabwe is a billionaire in Zimbabwe money... that doesn't make them rich.

 

[ChezC3]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

I would think the lazy buggards would be more inclined to theft than work...

 

[imagep]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

I would think the lazy buggards would be more inclined to theft than work...

I have a friend who thinks that we have a need for welfare in order to reduce crime. I don't agree with that though.

A lot of times crime is harder than working a job. Last year, one of my customers air conditioners was down for a while because someone broke in and stole the copper out of their heatpump. There had been an outbreak of copper theft on that side of town for several weeks. The next week, someone broke into some sort of power station and electrocuted himself (as in dead) trying to steal copper. I have no idea if he was the guy who was stealing copper from heatpumps, but the streak of copper thefts stopped immediately.

When we were building our commercial building I had the same thing happen. The thieves did hundreds of dollars of damage to my building just to get what had to have been no more than $10 worth of copper, and I am guessing that it probably took them a right good while to do all the damage that they did (prying open walls, busting out studs, having to hacksaw through the tubing, and then finding a buyer). It would have been a heck of a lot easier just to work for that $10.

If we could replace welfare with jobs, I really don't think that the crime rate would go up. Ya, there are always going to be criminal types, or people who steal out of desperation or necessity, but sometimes a paying job can be easier than theft.

 

[csbrown28]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

You again have it backwards. Credit doesn't exist because the government prints money. Credit exists because banks stockpile money (the practice that the left vilifies). Printing money does nothing to the amount of real wealth in a system, Zimbawe learned that the hard way. They printed the crap out of their money and all they got was inflation and a declining standard of living. The poorest of the poor in Zimbabwe is a billionaire in Zimbabwe money... that doesn't make them rich.

You really don't understand. You're attempting to reduce a system you just can't wrap your head around into a set of simple ideas that just don't represent reality.

Creating currency does not automatically produce inflation, any more than turning on a heater in your house automatically makes it hot. It depends on several conditions, all of which you have to understand in order to predict the outcome of currency creation or how hot your house will get if you turn the heat on.

The situation in Zimbabwe is simple to explain, they printed currency when their was already enough currency in the economy to get business done. This was obvious and the population lost confidence in the currency. You can argue that QE has flooded the economy with credit, but the reality is that inflation has stayed relatively low, in part because money is being held by banks and much of the money is falling into the hands of relatively few people. One of the objectives of QE is to inject more currency into the system so that banks will have an incentive to lend it at lower rates pushing more money into the day-to-day or "real economy".

Now don't misunderstand, before you declare my support of QE, I'll say that I think that the risk is high given that there are other, less risky ways to accomplish the objectives the Fed is trying to accomplish.

Simply put, while there is a lot of US credit available globally if you simply count the dollars in existence, I'd ague that much of that money is tied up in banks, foreign holdings, hedge funds and other investments that benefit a tiny fraction of the people in the US. So we see systemic inflation when looking at the numbers on paper, but in reality there is less money in the day to day economy that most of us participate in.

One only has to look at how money has shifted from the bottom to the top over the last 40 years. Then stop and think about what the top 1% does with their money. Many invest in the financial economy to make more money with their money, much of which never finds it's way down to Main St. where you and I can earn it.

 

[csbrown28]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

People who want to own things work for people who own things. People who just want the government to feed them, burp them, and accept whatever crap comes out the other end, really have no reason to work, except for democratic campaigns at least.

Yet another person who has demonstrated they cannot understand the chaotic nature of the system, so they dumb it down to a few simple rhetorical talking points. Then proceed to generalize the poor into a group of lazy bums who don't want to work and are perfectly comfortable living of the scraps that is public assistance all to assuage their consciences as they promote ideas that would make the situation untenable for the least fortunate among us.

 

[jmotivator]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

You really don't understand. You're attempting to reduce a system you just can't wrap your head around into a set of simple ideas that just don't represent reality.

Creating currency does not automatically produce inflation, any more than turning on a heater in your house automatically makes it hot. It depends on several conditions, all of which you have to understand in order to predict the outcome of currency creation or how hot your house will get if you turn the heat on.

If there is not increase in physical wealth to accompany the printed money it is, by definition, inflation.

The situation in Zimbabwe is simple to explain, they printed currency when their was already enough currency in the economy to get business done. This was obvious and the population lost confidence in the currency. You can argue that QE has flooded the economy with credit, but the reality is that inflation has stayed relatively low, in part because money is being held by banks and much of the money is falling into the hands of relatively few people. One of the objectives of QE is to inject more currency into the system so that banks will have an incentive to lend it at lower rates pushing more money into the day-to-day or "real economy".

I wasn't arguing a direct response of inflation., it is simply the inevitable outcome. The people of Zimbabwe lost confidence in the currency because they needed a wheelbarrow of it to buy a loaf of bread. The currency collapsed because the world lost all confidence in it. Zimbabwe was fast tracked to hyper inflation because the people lived hand to mouth, and the newly printed cash was going directly to their hands, and therefore flooding right into the economy.

QE will cause inflation eventually. The banks won't hold that money forever, there is no alternative. The only thing keeping inflation at bay at the moment is that the prime rate is near 0%, giving the banks no real incentive to start spreading that money around. What options do we have? If we weren't in huge debt the government could implement a buy and burn policy to reclaim that QE money, but since we are in a huge debt we can't really collect money that we then destroy. We don't have the luxury.

Now don't misunderstand, before you declare my support of QE, I'll say that I think that the risk is high given that there are other, less risky ways to accomplish the objectives the Fed is trying to accomplish.

Simply put, while there is a lot of US credit available globally if you simply count the dollars in existence, I'd ague that much of that money is tied up in banks, foreign holdings, hedge funds and other investments that benefit a tiny fraction of the people in the US. So we see systemic inflation when looking at the numbers on paper, but in reality there is less money in the day to day economy that most of us participate in.

I am arguing a long position on the currency given the flood of cash from the various QE programs. The only way that money doesn't cause inflation is if it isn't spent, or held by the various banks until their is sufficient underlying wealth to accommodate the cash on hand. But what are the chances of this? When the banks can again make a descent profit on a loan that money will start moving back into circulation. $2+ trillion in cash has been fed into the system at this point. That will flood into the system when the economy finally looks friendly to banking again.

One only has to look at how money has shifted from the bottom to the top over the last 40 years. Then stop and think about what the top 1% does with their money. Many invest in the financial economy to make more money with their money, much of which never finds it's way down to Main St. where you and I can earn it.

If the money is being invested then it is in the economy, and there is fairly good evidence that a lot of the recovery of the stock market has been QE inflation. This is why the market dropped 4% when Bernanke was waffling on a continuation of QE dollars. But the bulk of that money is just essentially sitting and waiting for the market to pick back up. The rates are so low that everything other than rock solid investment is avoided like the plague.

 

[Rod Knox]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Adding currency will undoubtedly decrease the value of currency eventually. For now the added liquidity is inflating the stock markets and giving the appearance of economic prosperity but the current prosperity is as phony as the Bush era Boom. It will bust. And the wealthy insiders will get out early with the big money leaving Main St investors holding a bag full of worthless Worldcom shares and blaming welfare mothers for their predicament. But what the heck. I bought U-Haul for $23 and sold it for $150.

 

[head of joaquin]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

People who want to own things work for people who own things. People who just want the government to feed them, burp them, and accept whatever crap comes out the other end, really have no reason to work, except for democratic campaigns at least.

Yeah, and bank clerks want to put money in the bag of the robber holding a gun to their heads. It's voluntary.

 

[head of joaquin]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

I would think the lazy buggards would be more inclined to theft than work...

We have liftoff! The ugly face of teapartyism on display.

 

[head of joaquin]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

You again have it backwards. Credit doesn't exist because the government prints money. Credit exists because banks stockpile money (the practice that the left vilifies). Printing money does nothing to the amount of real wealth in a system, Zimbawe learned that the hard way. They printed the crap out of their money and all they got was inflation and a declining standard of living. The poorest of the poor in Zimbabwe is a billionaire in Zimbabwe money... that doesn't make them rich.

Credit arises due to a variety of causes depending on the circumstances. In a recession, credit bottlenecks can be eased by increasing the money supply. This isn't rocket science.

 

[Mach]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Because everybody knows that people without capital really want to work for people with capital. Nobody's forcing them to work in order to eat.

You appear to be stuck with an absurd position either way.

You're either arguing that people do NOT want to work for their capital - in which case if they don't have capital it's understandable.
Or you're being sarcastic and you believe people DO want to work for their capital - in which case there is no issue.

 

[ChezC3]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

We have liftoff! The ugly face of teapartyism on display.

Oh Heady, "" was an indicator of sarcasm...

 

[csbrown28]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

If there is not increase in physical wealth to accompany the printed money it is, by definition, inflation.

But that's not what you said. You said, "Creating currency doesn't create wealth, nor does it redistribute it in the long run as it is a purely inflationary act".

Now you've corrected yourself by stating: "If there is not increase in physical wealth to accompany the printed money". Which is correct.

Since 95%+ of money is credit, if we started paying our debt and didn't create any new currency, we would see massive deflation as the money supply shrinks. So the creation of new money can simply be to replace the money that has been destroyed paying off loans.

Shrinking the money supply would only work if you had simultaneous drops in wages and prices. This is a lot more difficult and it's why a little inflation is generally seen as good.

QE will cause inflation eventually. The banks won't hold that money forever, there is no alternative. The only thing keeping inflation at bay at the moment is that the prime rate is near 0%, giving the banks no real incentive to start spreading that money around. What options do we have? If we weren't in huge debt the government could implement a buy and burn policy to reclaim that QE money, but since we are in a huge debt we can't really collect money that we then destroy. We don't have the luxury.

I'll agree that your summation is possible if the money that QE generates fails to be used in a way that generates wealth for the bottom 80%. Since the top 20% control 96% of all the wealth and that wealth is routinely used to manipulate the system to funnel greater percentages of the wealth to the top, then QE will fail because, while there is enough money in the system as a whole, there is little opportunity for the bottom 80% to earn it, thus we get systemic inflation, yet there is still a shortage of currency to earn, but for most there is always money to borrow

All I'm saying is that we have a demand side problem. I think the last 30 years has proven that jobs don't create demand, demand creates jobs. Banks aren't incentivized to lend and employers aren't incentivized to hire if the people don't have the money to buy. Even worse is when the people don't have the money to buy, but do it anyway on credit making the inflation problem worse because, as we know, consumers "create" more money than the government.

 

[ChezC3]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

I have a friend who thinks that we have a need for welfare in order to reduce crime. I don't agree with that though.

A lot of times crime is harder than working a job. Last year, one of my customers air conditioners was down for a while because someone broke in and stole the copper out of their heatpump. There had been an outbreak of copper theft on that side of town for several weeks. The next week, someone broke into some sort of power station and electrocuted himself (as in dead) trying to steal copper. I have no idea if he was the guy who was stealing copper from heatpumps, but the streak of copper thefts stopped immediately.

When we were building our commercial building I had the same thing happen. The thieves did hundreds of dollars of damage to my building just to get what had to have been no more than $10 worth of copper, and I am guessing that it probably took them a right good while to do all the damage that they did (prying open walls, busting out studs, having to hacksaw through the tubing, and then finding a buyer). It would have been a heck of a lot easier just to work for that $10.

If we could replace welfare with jobs, I really don't think that the crime rate would go up. Ya, there are always going to be criminal types, or people who steal out of desperation or necessity, but sometimes a paying job can be easier than theft.

Well, for one, as I told Heady I was being sarcastic, hence the emoticon. Second, you're presuming these people have smarts, you know, like how some people work harder at getting out of doing a task than just doing it. Third and finally I will leave you with a quote from Aristotle -- "Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime.”

Most Americans lack the fortitude necessary for the first but to engage in the second, the people definitely would gird their loins...

 

[jmotivator]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

But that's not what you said. You said, "Creating currency doesn't create wealth, nor does it redistribute it in the long run as it is a purely inflationary act".

Because it IS an inflationary act. That isn't saying that inflation is the immediate result.

Now you've corrected yourself by stating: "If there is not increase in physical wealth to accompany the printed money". Which is correct.

That is what my first statement said.

Since 95%+ of money is credit, if we started paying our debt and didn't create any new currency, we would see massive deflation as the money supply shrinks. So the creation of new money can simply be to replace the money that has been destroyed paying off loans.

Money isn't destroyed by paying off loans.

Shrinking the money supply would only work if you had simultaneous drops in wages and prices. This is a lot more difficult and it's why a little inflation is generally seen as good.

But you miss the point entirely. Money supplies grow and shrink independent of the actual wealth in the system. The wealth in the system is the goods and services that people want to trade, currency is the method of trade in these goods and services.

I'll agree that your summation is possible if the money that QE generates fails to be used in a way that generates wealth for the bottom 80%. Since the top 20% control 96% of all the wealth and that wealth is routinely used to manipulate the system to funnel greater percentages of the wealth to the top, then QE will fail because, while there is enough money in the system as a whole, there is little opportunity for the bottom 80% to earn it, thus we get systemic inflation, yet there is still a shortage of currency to earn, but for most there is always money to borrow

All I'm saying is that we have a demand side problem. I think the last 30 years has proven that jobs don't create demand, demand creates jobs. Banks aren't incentivized to lend and employers aren't incentivized to hire if the people don't have the money to buy. Even worse is when the people don't have the money to buy, but do it anyway on credit making the inflation problem worse because, as we know, consumers "create" more money than the government.[/QUOTE]


Banks are incentivized to lend when there is a profit to be made, and the profit relies of the investment funding something for which there is a demand. But loans require the banks to determine what are and aren't safe investments. When the market is weak the profit potential is low so the risk is high. Lenders are risk averse. They have to be.

But your own argument makes my point. The lower amount of cash in the market deflates the cost of goods and services that target the average person. If you took the money out of the hands of the banks and distributed it you wouldn't get a bunch of wealthier people, all you would do is inflate the cost of every day goods and services. The end result is no benefit to the average person, and the long term benefit to the every day goods and services providers would be nil. In the longer long run the money would STILL migrate to the rarer goods and services markets that are used by the wealthy.

 

[imagep]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Because it IS an inflationary act. That isn't saying that inflation is the immediate result.

It could be inflationary, assuming that the economy didn't grown enough to support the amount created.

Money isn't destroyed by paying off loans.

Which proves the point that I so often make. Neither lending, or our banking system (outside of the Fed) create money. If money isn't destroyed by paying off loans, it isn't created by paying off loans (with the exception of debt to the fed).





But you miss the point entirely. Money supplies grow and shrink independent of the actual wealth in the system. The wealth in the system is the goods and services that people want to trade, currency is the method of trade in these goods and services.

All I'm saying is that we have a demand side problem. I think the last 30 years has proven that jobs don't create demand, demand creates jobs.

I've never heard of a conservative admitting to that before, but since I happen to agree with you, I will consider you an "enlightened" conservative who has economic knowledge far beyond the norm.

 

[Mach]

Re: Hunger Makes Pple Work Harder, and Other Stupid Things We Used to Believe Abt Pov

Third and finally I will leave you with a quote from Aristotle -- "Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime.”
Most Americans lack the fortitude necessary for the first but to engage in the second, the people definitely would gird their loins...

I would rather think that when push comes to shove, they know deep down how good they have it and can't get past faux-revolution and engage in real revolution because they are well aware they are full of ****. Look at OWS, just a big street party.