V07768198309
Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 1
- Location
- Tel Aviv, Israel
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
There is also a natural market for hard drugs, crime, violent death. Being civilized means getting rid of some of our animal behaviors. Don't you agree sir?
You didn't answer about violent crimes. We might discuss about the way we prevent or punish these crimes but if you pretend we must just live like beats, It is your choice. Using our system is the result of a free choice, you made yours and I am not even going to try to make you think otherwise.
Do you mean that "I had someone present to me an idea of perpetual employment and continual infrastructure maintenance and repair via a non-representative union which is independent of the government." is more plausible?
It is hence the duty of society to make sure that by pursueing his best interest each of the economic agents help the society to reach its goals: income distribution in order to maximize demand and transactions, reach a zero involuntary unemployment rate, and insure that all of its members can at least survive.
First off, what is wrong with credit? Credit allows people to spread the cost of innovation over time, in particular into the period that the investment will begin paying dividends so that the person receiving the benefit of the investment (your future self) is contributing to that which benefited them. In addition, credit allows money to be transfered from those with established wealth to entrepeneurs who drive new growth beyond that which buying shares does.
Second, how free of a market are we talking? No regulations whatsoever? Some regulations but not others? What about taxation? What about national industries like the Post Office? What is the scope and role of government? What about free trade and immigration (the allowing of both is an important aspect of the free market)? Your sketch hasn't really answered those questions.
Finally, what would replace credit? Credit is vitally important in starting new investment and encouraging spending. What system do you propose to replace that? Savings are good and all, but without the option to turn savings into loans their use as sources of investment funds is distinctly limited. Without loans, any new business requiring a large amount of capital to start up is probably screwed before it gets off the ground unless someone already rich starts it (thereby weakening social mobility).
I can't support such a bare bones idea without a lot more fleshing out. At first glance it looks like a reactionary anti-bank stance which has looked at the downsides of the financial system without considering any of the positives it provides, thereby falling into the trap of throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Credit is bad because it discriminate: if you are poor you don't get any if you are richer you get some with high interest rate if you are even richer you get a lot without interest rate at all.
Most of the questions you are asking I deal with at Innovative Credit Free, Free Market, Economic Ideology
Of course I stand ready to discuss each point and improve the model if possible.
First there is that common mistake that analysis the economic failure as the result of bad moral behavior and create guilt. That is wrong. The problem is not that you got into too much debt it is that you got into it without knowing that your income in the future will not be sufficient to reimburse that debt.
You make it feel like credit is given to the good people and not given to the bad people. Credit is given to the rich and not given to the poor. To equate rich and good and poor and bad is your choice not mine. At one point you won't be able to pay back your credit, may be it will change your point of view about what is good or bad,
Credit does not discriminate.
It is not given based on how much money you *earn*
Trust me - I've been dirt poor and still was able to sign up for credit cards, buy a truck, and buy a house.
What goes UP is your INTEREST that you pay *because* of your *credit history* - it has nothing to do with how much money you actually earn.
Now - it *should* - a bank *should* watch out for it's bottom line. IF they had done so then we wouldn't be IN this housing market and otherwise economic crunches (not all of it - but some areas are purely in shambles because of credit *not* being very discriminatory) . . . so our problems is caused by the exact opposite of how you believe the credit-industry works.
So here you're actually contradicting your theory that you're presenting.
In your theory it's supported that credit is overall purely a bad thing and must be done away with.
But in this quote you're saying that your debt (from taking credit) isn't *bad* - it's that people's future pay was lost that made their *too much debt* bad.
Which is it - credit, overall, is bad?
Or that debt - overall - is bad because people ended up losing their jobs?
And they lost their jobs because?
What is your theory going to do to give them other jobs and fix this hole in the job-market? Absolutely nothing.
Credit is given to everyone.
Interest is calculated based on risk - which comes from credit *history*
The only people who are fortunate enough to miss out are the people who *have no credit* and that has nothing to do with *income* - You can be filthy rich and still have NO or horribly LOW credit.
Why do you think that all rich people have good credit?
Why do you think that all poor people have bad credit?
I'm a living example of the opposite:
I was poor - had *no* credit - and when I did get a loan for my truck and house I still had *really bad credit* and I was still officially *poor* - so my loan came with a whopping 13% interest rate.
But - I started to *care* and *manage my money* and I was then paying bills *on time* for quite some time.
Then my credit score improved *because* was in more control of my money - in fact, it was quite stellar for some time (well over 730) - but I was still officially *poor*
See- my improved credit was based on my credit-history and *not* my income.
When my credit improved - because I was paying my bills on time - I was then able to re-finance my truck for a much lower interest rate.
Now we're far better off - money wise (we're not officially rich but we're definitely not classified as poor anymore) - but our credit is back in the doghouse *because* we got back into horrible spending/bill paying habits (paying bills late - or not at all - because over-spending on crap we didn't need to have took all of our money)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?