Can you point out what's wrong about my desire to balance the trade between First and Thrid World Nations and to stop the mass migration policies of the EU?

As the game is played at the moment I am allowed to move my business to any other country and take all my turnover away from the UK. I'm a small player but now think in bigger terms of Cadbury's moving to Poland, Airbus making parts in Chian and most of the clothes, electrical goods, furniture, etc. Being made in the Third World by people who could never afford to buy what you sell.

I would be less well off staying in the UK. But 1,000 British girls would have earned £200 for a days work. The government would have been better off as well with the extra taxes I paid.

https://i.imgflip.com/13wtay.jpg

And at the moment the game is to make the rich a lot richer and fuck poor people like you.

no but it makes you a gargantuan hypocrite...


for the 100th time paul it is not the 3rd world that does not buy enough 1st world goods, it is the 1st world that buys too much 3rd world goods...you can not make the poor buy more goods that you yourself will not buy this is ridiculous...you can not restrict free trade without harming your own exports and competitiveness...

you are selling political "miracle diet pills- loose weight without working out and only eating bacon" :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

looool - i hope you sold your videos ONLY on chech pornsites - if not you broke your own rule.

better explain that to some stone or a tree - or to some 4 year old kid.
all of them will understand it easier than paul.
he lives in his phantasie world and thinks he have the plan to make all good.

that reminds me on the story of the very bad piano player what touched on day for accident one of the black piano keys and he said "why a fuck nobody found that before me?"

Again you blame the player and not the game you think is doing so great for the West.

Agreed, but does it make my points wrong?


You contradict yourself here. The poor who produce all the goods the West buy will never buy the same value of goods back. Which is the result of free trade so harming the West's harming own exports and competitiveness. I'm arguing that the rich people in the Third World need to be pushed or forced into buying goods from the First to balance trade.

Unlike the miracle pill of free trade which is making most Westerners poorer.

I'm stating facts that are backed up by GDP growth, average incomes of the bottom 80%, etc. You seem to think they are wrong.

Serbia even with its low-wage workers still has a trade deficit of 10%. How much better would it be if Serbia could sell more. Might lower the debt which has doubled in a few years.

Or is best just to blame the player than admit the politicians have rigged the game to make themselves and their friends richer?

but WHO did "the player" damage ?????

do you think it would be better to produce in UK and pay the girl 1000 pound per day ?

how long would she have that job with you then????

paul economy is VERY easy - and the basic idea behind economy is PROSPERITY.
ONLY prosperity LEADS to consumption. people without money can´t buy.

so if you think FOR the people you should think HOW someone is able to buy with his salary a house, a car, a TV and going on holidays.

your concept does not make ALL this things available for him - maybe not even one of it.
so you are talking AGAINST prosperity and not FOR IT because you do not caculate as EVERY SINGLE HOUSEWIFE have to do that every day - she goes to the supermarket and have to find AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE for her money.

if she have 3 kids and can only buy ONE shirt for them because it is produced more expensive as it could be produced - then tell YOU the other 2 kids your concept and tell them why they have to share ONE SHIRT.



what is so hard to understand on that very easy and logic

Anyone who thinks Macron can revive, reform and relaunch the EU is ignoring the fact that he can't do that with France, let alone the EU.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ench-president

Macron's election offers chance for more dynamism in EU: Merkel | Reuters

He even wants Euro bonds which mean the Germans would have to guaranty the repayments. At the rate, the bond promises to repay, not the rate Thommy believes.

Right Paul.

The policies of a person with considerable financial experience Vs Paul Markham.

A guy that is in charge of one of the largest economies in the world at the age of 39 Vs a failed retired pornographer living on benefits.

Macron has been in the job 24hrs and you are saying he has failed to revive the french economy.

Whereas you had a lifetime of achievement and financial gain right Paul ?

Like I said before, you really are wasted here, you should be in a position of power and responsibility.
:2 cents:

paul the COSTS on a credit is the INTEREST RATE !!!
if i give you 100 and you give me 110 back than your costs haven´t been 110 it have been 10.

and what macron wants is not such a bad idea but not possible in the ACTUAL situation of the EU.

what he wants is a central finance ministery with a central budget. that is the same as the household from one country.

at the moment the EU is giving money into the hands of the countries and leave it into their responsability. that is definately WRONG ! because they can spend and spend and spend.

if EU spends this money DIRECTLY it is under control.
no corrupt politician in a country can give a contract to his cousin because he will not be the contractor.

what he wants with the EU is equality and i think this is a good idea even when germany does not like that. but i think if they want the EU they have to see it as a unit - same as EVERYBODY have to see it as a unit.

and it is also not true that germany have to guarantee the repayment. EVERY country in the EU have to guarantee that. this plan is old but UK always blocked it.
no union in the world makes sense when it is only good for the advantages. in good times and in bad time - that must be the first rule.

Time will tell.

I take into account that politicians often make claims they can't achieve and Macron is up against all the other EU countries and Merkel.

Are you suggesting the base rate of a country determines the interest rate on government bonds?

A\greed. but if I give the 100 to someone else as benefits or spend it on something that costs 50 a year. I'm down 110

Absolutely. They should have done that from the start. But that would have meant a lot of countries not adopting the Euro and the stalling of a political dream.

Germany is one of a few countries able to repay Euro bonds. Didn't know the UK controlled how the Euro was controlled. Do you have a link to that?

The problem with Government Bonds is the buyers have to have faith in a country's ability to repay the money at the rate of interest that makes buying them attractive.

https://www.google.cz/webhp?hl=en&gw...greece+receive

https://www.google.cz/webhp?hl=en&gw...greece+bailout

Read up and see how these markets work. This crisis is 100% down to the idiots who thought giving countries with bad economies the Euro was a good idea.

Paul, you work really hard for your Troll of the year award. I give you that.

oh no the point stands...it is just amusing that you expect people to not do as you did but at you say...

oh so because 1st world people eat too much bacon and it is giving them heart attacks, 3rd world people should be forced to exercise to keep the 1st world people from getting fat :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

it does not work like that in real life paul :2 cents:



nobody has rigged anything...it is called freedom of will and trade...you either believe in freedom or you do not...both will cost you in one way or the other...the bill comes due...

that happens when you did not study economy or never played monopoly.

if paul would ever play it he would have learned that any economy is selfregulating because at monopoly can not be a winner - that is what one should learn from this game - if the winner have all the game would be over. if one owns all houes he can´t even rent them to the others because they do not have any income to pay the rent.

paul also is focused on the 1 dollar per hour guy who is working on a machine hard to survive. but he does not ask where the machine comes from.

he also does not understand that a little better standard in this countries leads to a lot of business.
the really poor chinese could not afford to fly - now they fly - and where do the planes come from?

what paul does not understand is that a potatoe farmer can not sell potatoes to another potatoe farmer - if 2 people are doeing the same they do not went into a business to customer situation they went to be competitors.

but i mean, i will not call paul names - at least there is one with the same knowledge than paul who is the president of the USA.
let us be happy that they are not the olympic comitee because than the fast runners have to cut a leg to become that slow as the slow ones.
that would be exiting olypics.

i mean imagine - we are in countries where people use to work 35 - 42 hours, 5 days a week. we have holidays up to 8 weeks and can afford still a lot more as our grandparents could.

paul is complaining countries where people are working 60 hours per week and have 5-7 holidays per year and is convinced that it is unfair that these people have fast growth.
I think I can remember that he wrote somewhere that work must be worthwhile. WHAT A FUCKING COMEDY!!!

if he is against merkel than they both told us something else today:

and he also denied your fake news about eurobonds from the british media what do not want a healthy europe

Where is the freedom for the people who once had a job that paid enough for them to support a family and now live on benefits?

Bringing jobs back to the West will push up the costs of goods. Push down the need for countries to subsidise 10s millions which will grow to 100s of millions.

Because I'm pointing out a trend, this is not the end game. The Thrid World is far from stopping its drive to take jobs from the West. This is what China wants.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-belt-and-road

World leaders sign deal at China's New Silk Road summit | China News | Al Jazeera

Silk Road meet ends: Indian boycott fails to stop China's ambitions | Business Standard News

The Chinese seem opposed to allowing free bids for its building. They want all the work done by themselves.

The Silk Road's purpose is to bring Chines goods to the West at an even cheaper rate. That will put more Westerners out of a job. The West has already passed the point where the working population taxes can support the non-working. That gap will keep increasing. When will the West reach the point where their treasury bonds are no longer worth buying?

Or the point where austerity is so tight some people are living in a similar condition to the slums of Victorian times? The middle classes are living in working class incomes?

You face three threats, I say you as I will be gone by the time it really hits.

Migration. How would Serbia cope if the millions flooding into Europe stopped in Serbia? Already the UK, France, Germany, etc are having problems coping.

Globalisation. The move towards sending jobs to the cheapest country is not slowing down, the Silk Road proves China wants to increase it.

Automation. Machines doing the jobs that once required 10 or more people to do. Automation will put millions out of work, that's what they're designed to do. Will the companies shedding workers pay the same amount of taxes the sacked workers use to do or will they just make more in profits?

All this is happening now and if all you have is pointing out I played the game the way it's rigged. Then you have nothing to offer.

It's good that they want to change the treaties. Will they be the right changes, acceptable to the politicians of the other countries and acceptable by the people of Europe?

As for new money, couldn't find where that was quoted but it's obvious that Europe and the US can't keep declining into further debt. The UK needs a healthy Europe and needs to trade with it as much as Europe needs a healthy UK and needs to trade with it.

Whichis what I said must happen.

The problem is achieving growth in the economy. It can't be done with mass migration increasing the costs of the benefits system or losing more jobs to Globalisation and Automation without the winners of those two processes paying a lot more in taxes.

What reforms can he make to get more people back to work without borrowing more money?

Hey Paul... you have me on ignore(I know it's for your own health... i get that... no problem)...

Now get the fuck out of my thread and show some respect to your ignore-list!!! What is it with you ill-mannered pale English turds... You have no character... You appear like a sell out whore by posting in my thread...

Very true. We shouldn't blame China for taking advantage of our bought and paid for politicians.

........

yes but china is not taking advantage of anything at all...they are doing EXACTLY what we want them to do: produce stuff as cheap as possible...NOBODY can make us buy cheap china stuff, we do this by our own free will...

it is like blaming spoons for making people fat...ban spoons, and people will eat with their hands...

personal responsibility :2 cents::thumbsup

Last time i checked McDonalds everyone still ate with their hands... Indeed.. .can't blame spoons man...

it is not only a responsability of each individual - it is a question of money.
we are living in a world were everyone wants to have everything. no matter if people are rich or poor. even rich people think they do not have enough because they also can´t buy all.

what is wrong when the advantage of cheap labour goes to the society by a cheaper price? a few hunderst years ago prosperity was made with slaves work - i doubt that any citizen of a country with slavery was complaining that the slave took his job.

the funny thing is that prosperity for people is reached EXACTLY with the opposite of what paul thinks. his ideas are directly leading to less prosperity and more poor people. and this is what is not going into his head for some reason.