The logic of tax cuts on the rich.

[Cubo de Sangre]

The fact that money is fiat CANNOT fundamentally change the limitations of production in an economy to go past the actual resources and capital stock present to physically build more shit.

Say that's true. What fiat can do compared to the gold standard is get you closer to that capacity. Under which system (gold vs. fiat) is the most credit creation possible? Why do savings accounts pay practically zero interest if deposits are the lifeblood of the economy?

 

[MayhemMonkey]

@MayhemMonkey It eats at @Jack V Savage that I will in short order have an MD. Likely because he tried to get in, but could not.... or worse failed out of general chemistry in undergrad or some sad shit like that.

 

[Greoric]

Say that's true. What fiat can do compared to the gold standard is get you closer to that capacity. Under which system (gold vs. fiat) is the most credit creation possible? Why do savings accounts pay practically zero interest if deposits are the lifeblood of the economy?

That's the reasoning (more credit will be available in a fiat system), but ultimately not likely to be beneficial in the long term, only in the near and mid term. The distortions, and ultimate collapse that result from fiat currency and its management are a more significant expense on growth, than the tethered restraints that result from having a gold standard.

And are you asking why savings accounts pay, effectively zero now, or why they would if we had a system of sound money?

 

[SaiWa]

There's nothing at all wrong with RN's. Its pretty slimy to think you're above that job by the way. They're the back-bone of the medical field.

Wha?

He didn't poo-poo your profession (assuming u get there). He questioned your understanding of economics due to what I am guessing are previous posts that places your proficiency of the subject matter in doubt.

 

[Greoric]

Wha?

He didn't poo-poo your profession (assuming u get there). He questioned your understanding of economics due to what I am guessing are previous posts that places your proficiency of the subject matter in doubt.

1) RN's aren't a profession
2) I'm not in school to be an RN (god bless them).
3) Not an argument

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

That's the reasoning (more credit will be available in a fiat system), but ultimately not likely to be correct (I'm being generous). The distortions, and ultimate collapse that result from fiat currency and its management are a more significant expense on growth, than the tethered restraints that result from having a gold standard.

And are you asking why savings accounts pay, effectively zero now, or why they would if we had a system of sound money?

It must be true, otherwise there wouldn't be these increased distortions that you fear.

Why are they paying zero now if the system is as dependent on those deposits as you seem to be saying?

Back to the thread topic, what government does is spread the wealth. Even if somehow you could show that decreases the aggregate growth by some percentage, society is fundamentally better off when resources are spread around. Not taxing the rich enables the concentration of wealth beyond what is health to society (of which the economy is just one aspect).

 

[44nutman]

Trickle down, ask Kansas how well it is working out.

 

[SaiWa]

1) RN's aren't a profession
2) I'm not in school to be an RN (god bless them).
3) Not an argument

lol. then he wasn't making fun of you being an RN. he was making fun of the fact that you're in the medical field but act as if you have some deep understanding of economics when you do not.

 

[Jack V Savage]

@MayhemMonkey It eats at @Jack V Savage that I will in short order have an MD. Likely because he tried to get in, but could not.... or worse failed out of general chemistry in undergrad or some sad shit like that.

Weird response. Would make more sense if I hung out on medical forums and yapped constantly about chiropractics or homeopathic medicine.

Seriously, guy, it's strange that you're both so interested in finance and economics that you talk constantly about it but that you never bothered to actually take classes or read books about it. And that you have consistently failed to learn from your bad predictions and from the free education that I and others who know a bit about the subject have given you.

 

[SaiWa]

1) RN's aren't a profession
2) I'm not in school to be an RN (god bless them).
3) Not an argument

Also...

Registered Nurse isn't a profession???

pro·fes·sion
prəˈfeSHən/
noun
noun: profession; plural noun: professions

1. 1. a paid occupation, especially one that involves prolonged training and a formal qualification.

How is RN not a profession????

 

[Greoric]

I
Why are they paying zero now if the system is as dependent on those deposits as you seem to be saying?

We're getting close to zero because that's what the fed funds is declared at... Its just another price control. One which is creating the most massive distortions and bubbles that have ever been created in the history of mankind.

Back to the thread topic, what government does is spread the wealth. Even if somehow you could show that decreases the aggregate growth by some percentage, society is fundamentally better off when resources are spread around. Not taxing the rich enables the concentration of wealth beyond what is health to society (of which the economy is just one aspect).

Society is NOT better off when resources are spread around at the expense of more resources being available i.e. less all round scarcity. Your last conclusion is just one of jealousy. It has nothing to do with health. Objectively, a healthier society is one that has the living standard of the average person maximized. That's unavoidably at the cost of recognizing and accepting a pareto distribution in inequality. For a short time we tried the experiment of respecting individual rights and letting people keep what they earned (more or less) and it resulted in the most prosperous societies in the history of mankind, while also growing the living standard for the average person at a maximum.

 

[Greoric]

Weird response. Would make more sense if I hung out on medical forums and yapped constantly about chiropractics or homeopathic medicine.

Seriously, guy, it's strange that you're both so interested in finance and economics that you talk constantly about it but that you never bothered to actually take classes or read books about it. And that you have consistently failed to learn from your bad predictions and from the free education that I and others who know a bit about the subject have given you.

Not an argument.

 

[Kindacrazy]

It's all throughout this thread mate.

I have read this entire thread, and I don't see it. I only see the claim that savings encourage production. What I am asking is how does savings encourage production?

 

[SaiWa]

Society is NOT better off when resources are spread around at the expense of more resources being available i.e. less all round scarcity. Your last conclusion is just one of jealousy. It has nothing to do with health. Objectively, a healthier society is one that has the living standard of the average person maximized. That's unavoidably at the cost of recognizing and accepting a pareto distribution in inequality. For a short time we tried the experiment of respecting individual rights and letting people keep what they earned (more or less) and it resulted in the most prosperous societies in the history of mankind, while also growing the living standard for the average person at a maximum.

And now you're masquerading as a engineer/statistician as well? you abuse the pareto distribution reason way too much to my liking and I am a fuckin' engineer... you sure you know how to use that shit???

 

[Greoric]

I have read this entire thread, and I don't see it. I only see the claim that savings encourage production. What I am asking is how does savings encourage production?

Sorry mate, with respect, not going to baby sit you. Its all over the thread. Maybe @MayhemMonkey can help?

 

[Greoric]

And now you're masquerading as a engineer/statistician as well? you abuse the pareto distribution reason way too much to my liking and I am a fuckin' engineer... you sure you know how to use that shit???

Hey up for correction on the nuance. Elaborate please. How did I misuse the concept of the pareto distribution?

 

[MayhemMonkey]

Hey up for correction on the nuance. Elaborate please.

 

[Greoric]

@Kindacrazy needs your help on why savings increase production. I can only pray I have not wasted my time in here...

 

[djacobox372]

Because rich people are saving their surplus, not consuming everything they earn (necessarily or otherwise) like less wealthy people are. That surplus and savings is what expands the production base and allows for more production, which is the goal of an economy because that allows more consumption in the future, a greater amount of resources available for the average person, and a raised standard of living for everyone.

Savings and underconsumption is the foundation for why economies grow. Wealthy people are a large part of that.

Glad I could address this question early, before the stupid creeps into this thread.

This is literally the opposite of the truth. Bravo... impressive...

 

[Greoric]

Trickle down, ask Kansas how well it is working out.

The opposite of NOT stealing people's money that earned it is not "trickle down" economics.