« First « Previous Comments 113 - 127 of 127 Search these comments
Dan if everyone will make double, prices will simply double.
No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor. If that doesn't happen, it's because parasites wearing stupid elephant pins have redirected the wealth from those hard working Americans producing it to the lazy asses who produce nothing.
The entry of women into the workforce should have made the middle class family wealthier and more financial stable. It had the opposite effect because scumbag conservatives used the doubling of the work force to destroy the bargaining power of labor and to exploit that labor.
So, yes, the reason why most women don't have a choice about whether or not to work is because of scumbags like your hero Reagan.
No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor
Nope Dan, it would be inflation. You don't even got the basics man.
inflation
Inflation, if you mean currency debasement, is an independent effect.
Inflation, if you mean cost of living increases, is caused by a real drop in working wages, again, thanks to Reagan.
Here we witness the libby in the wild notice:
He cannot define inflation.
He has no concept that government causes inflation.
He has no idea that his primary disability is his inbility to disciminate, which includes critical thinking.
He cannot define inflation.
Honeybuns, inflation used to mean currency debasement for centuries. In the past few decades, it's been redefined to cost of living increases in order to prevent people from talking about currency debasement. Most people misuse the term.
I'll put my intellect up against your puny one any day. It won't be a contest.
I'm sorry snocums but that is not exactly right.
We will have do the dick measuring contest some other time, when you're not wearing a dress.
We will have do the dick measuring contest some other time, when you're not wearing a dress.
Not necessary. Your wife can vouch that my dick is much larger than yours.
No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor
Nope Dan, it would be inflation. You don't even got the basics man.
If productivity increases then prices decrease. Apparently someone else has trouble with basics as well.
No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor
Nope Dan, it would be inflation. You don't even got the basics man.
If productivity increases then prices decrease. Apparently someone else has trouble with basics as well.
If everyone makes double the money, prices double too. Did you learn nothing from history?
No, that's not how economics works. If every household's wealth production doubles, then goods should cost half as much as a function of an hour of labor
Nope Dan, it would be inflation. You don't even got the basics man.
If productivity increases then prices decrease. Apparently someone else has trouble with basics as well.
If everyone makes double the money, prices double too. Did you learn nothing from history?
Did you learn nothing from economics? Obviously not. Increasing productivity means producing more product for the SAME cost therefore increasing profits or cutting prices or both. It has zero to do with inflation. Inflation is increasing the money supply in relation to goods and services.
Did you learn nothing from economics? Obviously not. Increasing productivity means producing more product for the SAME cost therefore increasing profits or cutting prices or both. It has zero to do with inflation. Inflation is increasing the money supply in relation to goods and services.
You beat me to it. Fort Wayne evidently has some fundamental misunderstandings of economics and finance if he thinks that productivity is a function of the number of monetary units paid to laborers.
The productivity of workers has increased by a factor of four over the past half century. This has nothing to do with the money supply. But it is the reason why we are materially better off, as a whole, than we were in the 1950s. Unfortunately, as my reference shows, since the 1980s all increases in productivity have been siphoned from the wealth creators (workers) and given to the parasites (executives and owners).
You beat me to it. Fort Wayne evidently has some fundamental misunderstandings of economics and finance if he thinks that productivity is a function of the number of monetary units paid to laborers.
In this post Dan's name is "the pot".
If you're going to try to insult someone either
a. Do it creatively
b. Do it seriously and then support the insult with a good reason
You fail consistently at both.
Did you learn nothing from economics? Obviously not. Increasing productivity means producing more product for the SAME cost therefore increasing profits or cutting prices or both. It has zero to do with inflation. Inflation is increasing the money supply in relation to goods and services.
What do you think will happen when there is double the money?
Houses went from single income to dual income requirement these days in places where both adults work. It ain't much of a secret. You boys read something in textbook and completely fail to understand it in life, especially when it doesn't fit the liberal ideology.
liberal ideology.
You don't know what the liberal ideology is, even though I've told you point blank dozens of time. Conservatives are just too stupid to learn.
« First « Previous Comments 113 - 127 of 127 Search these comments
The speaker, Evan Sayet a liberal Jew who had and epiphany is talking about Allan Bloom's book "The closing of the American mind"
It is about 1/2 hour long followed by questions.
In a nutshell, he is saying that the main fallacy of the modern liberal is that there main goal is to not discriminate.
The problem with this is the loss of critical thinking, because to have an opinion would be discrimination. According to Sayet Bloom stated noticing this in the 80s.
Dan comes to mind as an example of this type of non-thinking, and I'm guessing about the right age.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/EIboXTpF6t4