Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham
|
paul, it does not make sense to post statistics without the background of those.
first of all you have to know HOW consumer prices are defined.
the price index you shoed here is basicly influenced by the oil price (what have NOTHING to do with wages, jobs or whatever - it just have to do with the world market and speculations on oil).
if you take the oilprices out of that index you will see that interest rates in the years before 2008 have been higher than inflation rate (not good at all because there is no productivity performance what goes along with the money supply).
with other words: people who have saved money in the bank before 2008 made more money with NOT SPENDING money - mean: NOT to bring money in the cyclus and increase the money supply with not existing money.
example: if we both have 100 euro each and i lend you my 100 and you pay me 10% interest you have to give me 110 back and i have done NOTHING for it.
if you pay me back after 20 years you have to give me 611,59 ? back. HOW ?
we had only 200 together !!!!!
so at the end of the 20 years there are 611,59 ? here and this 611,59 ? are reprensenting the productivity of both of us.
means: when your productivity are 10 apple trees - and my productivity are 10 pear trees ALL the apples and pears together will have the value of 611,59
but 20 years before - BEFORE i was lending you my money the same fruits from all this trees had a value of 200 euro.
so inflation is a MUST be in a society what allows to make money with money.
(btw. that was forbidden in MOST cultures and it is still forbidden in islam)
in opposite to what you show here on this statistic the real prices of products (except oil)
went DOWN.
now you will say: see the muslims are robbing our money.
BUT - UK and also the US is an oil exporting country.
so when the pil prices are dropping it just makes the price index look better but in reality this drop of oil prices will cost jobs in this countries and lower the wages.
this is the devils circle we have to break out. and this is what you have to investigate before you throw numbers in a discussion what proves that you are wrong.
economy is a very very complex topic. in fact it is same complex as the laws of mother nature. a small stone you throw can cause an avalanche what you can not forsee because of this comlexity.
money is just an equivalent to our productions and services we are able to do and wherever and to whoever we spend the money is not the question - the question is how to bring it back to circle.
this is also the bis thinking mistake of govermenst when they talk about taxes.
high taxes are good for people who do not spend their money - no matter how much they make. taxes are here to MAKE this spendings what this people donīt make to bring the money back in the circle.
with other words: the prosperity of a country and itīs citizens AND the prosperity of the world and itīs citizens depends on HOW FAST money goes from one hand to the next.
the states are always making money when money goes from one hand to the other. so if you do not spend money there are no taxes. if states are increasing their taxes it effects that spendings will go down and the speed from hand to hand will decrease - that leads to even higher taxes and again less spendings.
but what means this speed from hand to hand also?
it means PROSPERITY !!! people who spend fast will spend a lot - it means that they live in prosperity. as more people can afford to buy as better life they will have.
this is something VERY IMPORTANT to understand when you want to understand economy.
i agree with you that there are TONNS of failures in the system but these failures are done because of people who do not understand how this system works.
thatīs why my first change in this world would be, that children get teached these rules right after they can read and write.
your and many other peopleīs problem is that you try to run against the stream what is not only unlogic ist is also uneconomic. you have to learn to see advantages instead of chaos.
i give you an example:
you are critisizing that low qualified people will take the work from high qualified - that CAN NOT HAPPEN. you are complaining that goods are produced in low wages countries but you do not see the prosperity for the people who are buying this goods at the end.
in the same sentence you accept, that this works will be done more and more by robots in the future (what will happen for sure) but you do not see the advantage in that and you do not even think about a solution how a world can survive when human workers are not needet anymore. from WHOM shall they get the money?
but if you would be a bit vioneer and look for the advantages you would ask the following question:
why do we pay in pension systems?
why do we not pay into crowd funding or whatever and invest the money in this robots?
why do we later not rent this robots to the companies what replaced us for robots?
imagine: if you have just 1 million people spending 1 euro every day in such a fund how much money would be there within a year.
imagine HOW MANY companies do not have the capital to robotize their companies.
imagine HOW FUNNY would that be if you are part of a company what is made to replace you in your job with renting robots to your ex-boss
it will not be THE robot making your job it would be YOUR ROBOT !!!!
THIS is visioneering !!!!