Comments by "romanmir01" (@romanmir01) on "The Unemployment Disaster Continues" video.

@KnightofGascogne Free Money: Bush/Obama bail outs, sure, but it started much earlier than that. 'Free money' is the creation of the Fed, Fed buying US bonds, setting interest rates at nothing. Clinton 'paying out debt' - this is a fantasy that many believe. He REFINANCED US debt at lower rate, that is true, he never never paid anything out, but his buddy - the anti free market (yes anti-free market) Greenspan set interest rates around 1% - that was a stimulus. etc.etc.
1
@romanmir01 Especially WHY ever work if you actually in many cases can get BETTER health care NOT working at all?! That's right, if you have no money you can get pretty much free health care as opposed to people who actually do work. It's not a surprise the unemployment is 9.8% and real unemployment is probably twice as high.
1
Also there is a way to PREVENT THE COLLAPSE OF US ECONOMY. There is only one way: restart production. To do this: 1. Stop gov't spending by 99.99% 2. Explicitly forbid the gov't from messing with the economy again, ever. 3. Abolish: IRS, FED, FDIC, Freddie/Fannie, ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES except for MINIMUM military and Justice department (plus cops to keep Justice system with teeth). 4. The credit will return to private sector, the regulations will all go away. 5. Capital will return.
1
@Metalmeltdown1000 the interests of the industry as well as to speak on its behalf as experts in the field. Thus members of the transportation syndicate, who would include workers from railroads, airlines and the shipping industry, would be responsible for crafting the legislation that the executive committee, and ultimately the dictator, would be responsible for signing off on. This avoids the problem of having lawyers with no concept of how things work continued
1
@underbjorn YES, I KNOW that if an economist is working for the gov't he or she is WORTHLESS. Do you know who was the LAST economist in US gov't who was an ACTUAL economist? Charles G. Dawes Hats OFF to this guy, he was the Secretary of Treasury of United States of America who proposed to the then President: Hardin to CUT gov't spending to stop recession. They cut gov't spending by 70% and recession of 1920 was over in 1 year.
1
@Metalmeltdown1000 Lobbyists who do not represent vertical trade unions at all. Those people are not part of the syndicate, they are not experts in the business, they are completely outside force, specializing in greasing up the gov't officials to get better deal, sweet deals for the TOP people in corporations. The gov't and the top corporate leaders,who are also most often NOT specialists in their own business, didn't climb the corporate ladder but were descended upon the business from outside
1
@underbjorn What are you smoking? ANY gov't protection creates monopolies. Gov't protection includes patents and copyrights, it includes subsidies to businesses they prefer, it includes free money out of the Fed discount window, it includes direct bail outs, it includes favorable tax rules for companies, it includes regulations that KILL competition, etc.etc.etc.
1
@Aethgeir Obviously ppl won't accept it. But the very funny thing is.... they have no choice. They can do what they can without regulations and income taxes and restart production OR they can wait. At the end, when credit stops, Chinese products stop entering the country the quality of life will go through the floor. It's just going to be more painful because the US gov't will also cause a hyper-inflationary depression by buying back all those US bonds. No jobs AND no money :) Quality
1
@Metalmeltdown1000 The way the current corporations that are NOT STARTUPS 'choose' their CEOs, CFOs, etc. is by connections and not by merit at all, it's probably also by MONEY. It's the same way the current politicians are 'elected' into their positions of power. ---- US today is WORSE THAN FASCISM if you understand what fascism actually is. US today is basically an oligarchy of a few connected clans, that help each other to stay in gov't and corporate (monopoly) power. Learn a bit.
1
@underbjorn The point is that US gov't got away from the Constitution around 1913, it found a way to use the money of US citizens against them, to undermine the economy, to monetize debt, to print money and set stupidly low interest rates and to start various gov't programs that never should have existed. Anyway, I am done with this conversation, I actually have to do some work here, it's not going to do itself and since I run my own business it's only me who cares for real. Bye.
1
Also saying that giving money to the unemployed has a 'MULTIPLIER'? :))))) Stupid dumb ass gov't bullshit propaganda, idiotic from every point of view. -- If you think that giving FREE money, UNEARNED money to anybody has a fucking multiplier, as in $1 that goes to a jobless person makes $2 worth of economic movement, then FIRE EVERYBODY! Why not? You can DOUBLE your ECONOMY WITH EVERY DOLLAR, it's a PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE you just invented. Do you not see how fucking idiotically STUPID
1
@romanmir01 How stupid it is? IMAGINE: 1. You have 1 dollar and 1 unemployed person. You give this unemployed person $1 and it adds $2 to your economy somehow! Well, SHIT! AMAZING! Now give this person $2. He'll turn it into $4. Give him $4. You have $8 now, amazing. Give him $1000,000. You get $2000,000 return. FUCK IT. FIRE EVERYBODY AND GIVE THEM ALL HALF A BILLION EACH. You'll have half a billion dollars created per person right there. So fucking stupid, only gov't can be so stupid
1
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. "Make it more expensive to manufacture abroad and ship it into US". HA HA HA HA HA. Funny. You have NO internal competition, every SINGLE import tax will be paid by the end consumer, so all you'll do with that is raise prices. Well, whatever, but don't be the one telling your US pals that you'll be raising the prices on their Chinese junk. They'll burn your house down
1
@underbjorn I am not an American. I am not a conservative, I am a minarchist. Monopoly is not anti-free market if this monopoly is in its space by providing the most optimal solution, it's the RESULT of the free market at work. There is no 'ripping off' the free market by a monopoly if the monopoly is optimal. If monopoly is not optimal, then competition arises. Did you notice I didn't stoop down to your level of ad-hominem? Enjoy.
1
@underbjorn iPhones are produced by Apple, and the GOVERNMENT grants Apple the monopoly power over production and sale of iPhones! I am against all gov't regulations, I am also completely against patents and even copyrights (not moral rights to you creation, but license restrictions on distribution granted by gov't, such as FBI does with everything) The point is exactly that without gov't intervention the monopolies would be a rare occurrence, but where they are, it's because they are optimal
1
@rbrtchng It's possible for US to have manufacturing again. Too bad the gov't is not letting that happen by regulations, diversion of credit to its programs, non-existing interest rates, which kill any savings and investment. The income and payroll taxes... NO. Until US gets its gov't OUT of its gov't this can't be fixed.
1
@Metalmeltdown1000 He was a racist psycho, thus 'nacism'. But fascism? Fascism was actually a system that was BETTER than what US has today. Want to know more? Fascism is at its core a merging of Nationalism and Syndicalism. The corporation is a syndicate, which is a vertical trade union in which binds management and labor together. Its more like a guild. Each "corporation"/syndicate/guild elects deputies to the Chamber of Deputies, who are there to represent continued
1
@KnightofGascogne Also, WTF? You are dissing Switzerland? :) yeah, we have no income tax, so what's your problem?
1
@Metalmeltdown1000 writing laws with regards to agriculture, communications, etc. Under Fascism there would have been no Ted "series of tubes" Stevens. The election for telecommunications representatives to the chamber of deputies would have been democratic through all levels of membership, from cable monkey to executive. The best people would be chosen to represent the interests of the guild and people with no clue get no say. Is THIS what USA HAS? NO. US has lobbyists that DO NOT represent
1
@KnightofGascogne Tycoons and slavery - that's what you have now. Gov't created the Tycoons, look up JPMC directors. Gov't created slavery: look up FDIC + Fannie/Freddie and 0% interest, which turned people into slaves to the banks. Gov't created slavery: look up $200,000 'education' loans that students get just to get a sociology degree. That's gov't - gave loans without collateral to KIDS. $200,000 - a gov't guaranteed mortgage to a kid! Only gov't turns you to slave.
1
@rbrtchng AS IF. The problem with USA is that it HATES investment and SAVINGS. It's a country of run away deficit and borrowing, it's not a place to save and invest. US gov't wants to destroy its currency, the way Zimbabwe did, Germany did before war. It's because US gov't is the biggest debtor. Savings an capital? That's passe. Too bad you actually NEED savings and capital to have manufacturing. But with gov't THIS BIG and all the spending and regulations, forget about even trying.
1
@n3rdm4n Cut gov't spending and reduce gov't size, this also means that gov't regulations/rules must be abolished or at least suspended because entire departments must go away. To cut gov't spending to the level of 1920 it means to cut gov't by %99.9 today! It'll give gov't 35 Billion dollars only. That's more than what gov't had in 1920. With no regulations and high savings rate and no subsidies to monopolies and no income taxes (cut spending, stop taxes) business will boom in US in a year.
1
The reason why the distribution of wealth is so uneven and why there are so many very poor people and so many very rich is because the GOVERNMENT makes poor people poorer and richer people richer. The problem is the gov't doing ANYTHING in economy, so until you get this main point through your stupid thick skulls, you'll never understand the problem - lack of competition and subsidies to monopolies, regulations and income taxes, wage/price controls and spending by gov't, no incentives to save.
1
@n3rdm4n WHAT? The US dollar is already CHEAP. The correct way to return manufacturing is to let the currency RISE. which means the interest rates MUST go up, which would create incentives to SAVE money rather than consume foreign products and to INVEST into production capacity. You guys are all crazy.
1
@underbjorn Standard Oil had 6 competitors before it was dissolved. That's just a fact, so what are you arguing, a fact? Monopolies never sell their product at most optimal price if they are GOVERNMENT created/subsidized/protected monopolies, as all of them are Gov't KILLS competition and helps monopolies, BECAUSE gov't gets the most money out of monopolies You think, if competition was REAL and companies were really providing the low prices/high quality they'd have money for politicians?
1
@underbjorn You should continue reading this thread, I already answered all of your concerns, mate. Monopolies are fine as long as they are the ones providing the product at the cheapest/most acceptable quality/quantity the market wishes to consume at. if a company provides you with the cheapest iPhone EVER and this company became a monopoly and then some other company forms and sells iPhones MORE EXPENSIVE then what exactly do you want gov't to do? To protect the new business? Nonsense.
1
@n3rdm4n If the gov''t removed all barriers to saving, that means US dollar becomes strong. BUT the only way for US gov't to handle a strong dollar is to stop spending. Inflation is the tool of an incompetent gov't to monetize its debt (print money and give back the debt in worthless paper.) So gov't has to not only save, but also to cut spending and this means firing people. In 1920 recession, gov't cut spending by 70% and recession ended in 1 year. Cut gov't spending and you'll see business
1
@KnightofGascogne Corruption is what allowed the US gov't to take over the economy and subvert it. If you want to have a REAL look at what USA will look like soon, look at Zimbabwe, not Somalia. The 100 Trillion dollars in your pocket and NOTHING to buy with it. --- Your argument is RIDICULOUS on its FACE because USA HAD THE SYSTEM I AM TALKING ABOUT. US had exactly what I am saying it should have again, US had it between the Civil War and WWI and it was NO SOMALIA.
1
@underbjorn Think about what you are arguing: You are arguing that the largest monopoly, with the most power: government, is on the side of competition? :)) That's incredibly funny and very sad. Gov't doesn't know anything about actual business, how to balance books, how to produce something of value that people want to buy, etc. Gov't gets ALL OF ITS MONEY BY FORCE and you think they understand competition and want to protect it? jesus, that's sad.
1
@underbjorn Also 'powerful conglomerates' are the ones CREATED by the gov't, not dissolved by them. All trusts and large companies of the past either provided the cheapest/best product or had to face competition and ceased to be 'powerful conglomerates'. Today all monopolies enjoy gov't protection/subsidies/bail outs/free money/competition killing regulations.
1
@Metalmeltdown1000 You are a LITTLE bit off base. There was Hitler and all that jazz. However look at what is going on now. Weimar republic of Germany (USA is also a republic, btw) had inflation that turned into hyper inflation all because gov't was monetizing its debt that it owed the world after the WWI. What is US doing? Monetizing the debt and will cause hyper inflation eventually. In Germany a national democrat ran the place, who was Mussolini type fascist (plus he was a racist psycho)
1
@rbrtchng Also on the point of monopolies: The gov'ts CREATE monopolies, they PROTECT monopolies, they BAIL OUT monopolies, they SUBSIDIZE monopolies, they DESTROY COMPETITION to monopolies, they TAX competition and they create regulations that do not affect monopolies but destroy competition. Economics is very very very simple. The gov't wants you to believe it's complex so that it can steal your wealth and kill your economy and society in the progress.
1
@underbjorn Well you are missing the main point: the conglomerates you are looking at today, are ALL enjoying their monopoly power based on gov't regulations/subsidies/bail outs/free money/killing competition by gov't/taxes etc. None of the large companies today operate without getting their bidding done in gov't, and in many cases in MANY governments.
1
@rbrtchng There is no such thing as 'the right way' to do bailouts or subsidies or stimulus. That makes no sense. You cannot give money to a failing business and expect THAT to improve economy. You cannot set interest rates to 0% and expect THAT to improve economy! That's INSANE! That's the way to drive ALL capital out of the country It's not like there is a fine balance any person can follow to keep everything from falling apart, what are you, a GOD? Economy doesn't need that to be balanced
1
The banks are huge because gov't made them huge. FDIC made them huge. Freddie/Fannie made them huge. Gov't supplied free money and moral hazards made them huge. GP Morgan can collapse, but it won't take out the world economy. Those who HAVE production will restructure quickly and will continue manufacturing and their own people will buy those manufactured goods. It will be GOOD for them if US economy finally dies, so that they can stop supplying US with all these cheap goods.
1
@underbjorn You should learn to think clearer. There is no need to split a monopoly, if the monopoly produces quality product at good price. If it does not and there is space for a better price/quality that market is willing to bear and there is some way still to make a profit competing with the monopoly, the monopoly will lose its status. You are constantly using gov't as an example of force that can prevent monopolies, but in reality the first of all do not, secondly they prefer monopolies
1
@underbjorn No, you are incorrect. PLENTY of monopolies formed over the history and all of them were beat by some competitor and before gov't intervention it only took a little of innovation that was ACTUAL innovation and not legislative 'innovation'. You are also wrong saying that monopolies are always the worst for the market - they are simply not if they provide you with the goods at the lowest possible prices that anybody could with best quality anybody could.
1
And OF-COURSE people CHOOSE to stay on unemployment when the alternative is little different than unemployment. Why get a job? If you get 300/week, OK, that means you are NOT paying taxes, you are NOT driving to work, you don't have expenses related to working. Also you have plenty of FREE time BUT you COULD also work under the table for a little more money. Why search for a work? But with minimum wage AND EI AND SS AND Medicare/aid etc., why EVER work?
1
@rbrtchng Regulations are there to prevent competition, so are subsidies and bail outs and stimulus - to prevent businesses from failing and thus to keep failing businesses afloat with free money rather than allow free market to work and kill those businesses and create competition. Never mind this discussion, It's deep night here, I must go to sleep.
1