| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The Third Depression
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


The Third Depression

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7823
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jul 2010 at 09:55
The wealth is the knowledge and determination of the people.
 
For example, Germany and Japan were completely destroyed in WW2, yet they quickly restored themselves as economic power houses post war. The wealth was not in the infrastructure, the wealth was in the people.
That's why any intelligent nation pursues a policy of skilled migration and good education. In order to grow and attract that wealth.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
eventhorizon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 432
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eventhorizon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jul 2010 at 17:30
Recession, depression, slow growth and no growth is all good, as it reduces consumption. Like many pointed out, there is real transfer of wealth happening as the effect of colonization keeps wearing off. The pie is fixed, natural resources on this planet has limits, as it is we have way too many people, many of whom are wasting valuable resources for nothing.

I have always had this thought - what skills do a truck driver in US, Canada, Australia, EU or Japan have that a truck driver in Africa, India, China or Afghanistan don't have - are the 1st set so much more intelligent than the 2nd set, if not then why there is so much more difference in income, even when adjusted after PPP. And these individuals when they migrate, they seem to do as well in the "1st world countries". So it is the system in place that is responsible for much of someones luck, rather than how intelligent an individual is. So the system in place must be changed, and I believe people of the planet where ever they are, whatever country they were born in, will eventually figure it out, that their luck can be changed, if they know how to change their system into a better one, a more competitive one, to level the playing field. Then change will come from bottom up, no one else need to or will show the way for them.

When income or job vanishes for the 1st set, like in this slow down, the govt. or the rest of the population still have so much wealth that no one will ever starve, but for the 2nd set hunger is just one step away.

When things get a little difficult for the privileged, it must be hard for the rest of the world to feel sympathy, may be they are thinking that it is good that the rich know for a little while how the rest of us live, day in and day out, year after year, and for all our lives.


Edited by eventhorizon - 08 Jul 2010 at 17:32
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jul 2010 at 23:05
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

One is based on speculation, the other on cold hard demand for produce.
What I should have asked is 'how do you distinguish a boom from a bubble while it is still going on?
 
Aferwards is a different matter, but even then it's not that simple. 'Speculation' appears to mean no more than that people guessing about the future. If they guessed right it's a boom, if they guessed wrong it's a bubble.
 
Wll Rogers summed this up nicely in the 'thirties. Paraphrased:
Quote It's easy to make money on the stock market. You buy stocks and when the price goes up you sell them. If the price don't go up you don't buy them.
 
I may have quoted that here before, in which case my apologies.


Edited by gcle2003 - 08 Jul 2010 at 23:11
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jul 2010 at 23:10
Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Why, Parnell, have you forgotten the original premise of liberal thought: The wealth of any nation is its people!Wink


Well yes, I suppose, but thats pretty redundant when the people half starve due to lack of money.
People starve as the result of natural disasters and famines.  Someone might be murdered by starvation, or die as a result of a hunger strike. But nobody starves because there isn't enough money: you can't eat money. An individual may starve because economic policy deprives him of a sufficient share of the 'money' available, but the money spply in general has no limit.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Barcelona
Status: Offline
Points: 3227
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jul 2010 at 23:28
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Why, Parnell, have you forgotten the original premise of liberal thought: The wealth of any nation is its people!Wink


Well yes, I suppose, but thats pretty redundant when the people half starve due to lack of money.
People starve as the result of natural disasters and famines.  Someone might be murdered by starvation, or die as a result of a hunger strike. But nobody starves because there isn't enough money: you can't eat money. An individual may starve because economic policy deprives him of a sufficient share of the 'money' available, but the money spply in general has no limit.


Back to arbitrary distinctions are we??? Of course I realise that money is a means of exchange and within itself is valueless - its value determined by what someone else places on it - but I hope you do understand that when I say money I mean 'lack of resources/and or sufficient means of exchange/and or personal purchasing power with which to enable continued existance etc. etc.' I don't know if I'm accusing anyone of pedantry here. I don't like to make such distinctions with words.
http://xkcd.com/15/



Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. ~George Bernard Shaw
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 08 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2010 at 05:07
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:

The wealth is the knowledge and determination of the people.
 
For example, Germany and Japan were completely destroyed in WW2, yet they quickly restored themselves as economic power houses post war. The wealth was not in the infrastructure, the wealth was in the people.
That's why any intelligent nation pursues a policy of skilled migration and good education. In order to grow and attract that wealth.
You have to be wrong on this point I think. If Germany really had been "completely destroyed" there could have been no transfer to the soviet union from their zone of industries etcetera.
and Germany and Japan would have lost their ability to continue the war at a much earlier stage if their industries and infrastructure had been "completely destroyed".
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2010 at 21:41
Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Why, Parnell, have you forgotten the original premise of liberal thought: The wealth of any nation is its people!Wink


Well yes, I suppose, but thats pretty redundant when the people half starve due to lack of money.
People starve as the result of natural disasters and famines.  Someone might be murdered by starvation, or die as a result of a hunger strike. But nobody starves because there isn't enough money: you can't eat money. An individual may starve because economic policy deprives him of a sufficient share of the 'money' available, but the money spply in general has no limit.


Back to arbitrary distinctions are we??? Of course I realise that money is a means of exchange and within itself is valueless - its value determined by what someone else places on it - but I hope you do understand that when I say money I mean 'lack of resources/and or sufficient means of exchange/and or personal purchasing power with which to enable continued existance etc. etc.' I don't know if I'm accusing anyone of pedantry here. I don't like to make such distinctions with words.
 
Not arbitrary in the least. If you don't mean 'money' then don't say 'money'. It may be just loose terminology here but it fuels and lies behind the great "money illusion" which is one of the main (some would say 'the main') stumbling blocks to economic understanding.
 
Incidentally wikipedia somewhat confuses the money illusion with failing to distinguish between real and nominal prices. The illusion goes deeper than that.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.