• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Paying for Lunch -- MMT Style

Are any two ways of using a limited resource equally beneficial to society?

I'm not sure what you mean, but I wouldn't think so.

So what limited resource are we talking about? Labor? Oil? Gold? Hot ladies with big boobs?

And how many of our resources are really that limited? Generally we can make more of just about anything if we desire to put forth the effort.

You can't be talking about money, because it's not a limited resource.
 
So...can I have your money?

He said that "money is not scarce", he didn't say that it is valueless. I am sure that he may be willing to trade his money for something else of value.
 
He said that "money is not scarce", he didn't say that it is valueless. I am sure that he may be willing to trade his money for something else of value.
I would gladly pay for xerographica to take an econ 101 class
 
And now we get to the crux of the biscuit...."0the power of the state is necessary to control the people. Hmm......

You advocate no control at all? Like when the "robber barons" ran the country? No thanks.
 
I'm not sure what you mean, but I wouldn't think so.

So what limited resource are we talking about? Labor? Oil? Gold? Hot ladies with big boobs?

Sure. Here's another one...are any two ways of using your time equally beneficial to society? If you agree that no two ways of using a limited resource are equally beneficial to society...then wouldn't this fact explain why wealth is unequally distributed?

And how many of our resources are really that limited? Generally we can make more of just about anything if we desire to put forth the effort.

But if you use all the copper to make pennies...then this wouldn't leave any copper for all its other possible uses. Is it intuitive that only using copper for pennies wouldn't maximize its benefit to society?

You can't be talking about money, because it's not a limited resource.

So...can I have your money?
 
So stop with the ideology crap, I don't care about ideology I care about results only.

Show me results or consider yourself ignored, it aint worth the effort anymore.

Let me see if I can get this straight. If I don't use my limited resources for your benefit then you'll stop trading with me? Do you not understand that this is exactly how and why markets work?

Why should taxpayers be given the freedom to shop for themselves in the public sector? Because if a government organization doesn't use its limited resources to benefit them...then they'll stop trading with it. We really don't want government organizations...or any organizations...to use society's limited resources in ways that do not provide the maximum benefit for society.

So yeah...feel free to boycott me! That would really disprove my point that taxpayers should have the freedom to boycott government organizations which aren't giving them their money's worth of public goods. LOL
 
Let me see if I can get this straight. If I don't use my limited resources for your benefit then you'll stop trading with me? Do you not understand that this is exactly how and why markets work?

Why should taxpayers be given the freedom to shop for themselves in the public sector? Because if a government organization doesn't use its limited resources to benefit them...then they'll stop trading with it. We really don't want government organizations...or any organizations...to use society's limited resources in ways that do not provide the maximum benefit for society.

So yeah...feel free to boycott me! That would really disprove my point that taxpayers should have the freedom to boycott government organizations which aren't giving them their money's worth of public goods. LOL

You could type less and get the same point across. You could have just said this: "I have nothing to prove my points, but I am still going to believe them.". For someone who talks about efficiency so much you somehow forgot how to use it.
 
You could type less and get the same point across. You could have just said this: "I have nothing to prove my points, but I am still going to believe them.". For someone who talks about efficiency so much you somehow forgot how to use it.

Your own behavior proves my points. You threatened to boycott me...yet here you are still trading with me. Maybe one day you'll understand the meaning of actions speaking louder than words.
 
Back
Top Bottom