- 28 Jun 2021 20:21
#15178899
If you have read anything I have written in the last year, you would know I have been against lockdowns from the beginning given many of the economic problems we face now was foreseeable and shouldn't even have been a problem at all had we acted rationally. But we didn't. So to answer what you say about people who were made unemployed and their rent, my answer is as the government made them unemployed, they have a duty to pay their rent and get them back to work. I also support a fair minimum wage I might add.
As for the housing bubble, sure, it is a high demand and low supply product. I don't support private property and I support home building. Those two things alone would solve that problem and legislation doesn't really need to apply at all given that. Just a social housing program very much like the 60s will do.
It helps. Although really it is consumer attitudes that will really make the difference. We have to buy green in order for it to be profitable and as such change the course of the invisible hand. However legislation controls the damage that can be done.
OK. But I don't see labor just disappearing given AI needs programming. So we disagree here. Only time will tell who will be right.
ckaihatsu wrote:I've heard that there's a new bubble developing in *commercial* real estate, this time around.
Do you still think that market dynamics can be adequately corralled and controlled through legislation?
For example, what should be done about *rent* for those who are still unemployed due to the economy recovering from the coronavirus? Shouldn't wages offered be *raised* as an incentive towards employment?
If you have read anything I have written in the last year, you would know I have been against lockdowns from the beginning given many of the economic problems we face now was foreseeable and shouldn't even have been a problem at all had we acted rationally. But we didn't. So to answer what you say about people who were made unemployed and their rent, my answer is as the government made them unemployed, they have a duty to pay their rent and get them back to work. I also support a fair minimum wage I might add.
As for the housing bubble, sure, it is a high demand and low supply product. I don't support private property and I support home building. Those two things alone would solve that problem and legislation doesn't really need to apply at all given that. Just a social housing program very much like the 60s will do.
Do you think that 'regulations' will be sufficient for addressing global warming and reducing the carbon footprint in time to avert environmental catastrophe?
It helps. Although really it is consumer attitudes that will really make the difference. We have to buy green in order for it to be profitable and as such change the course of the invisible hand. However legislation controls the damage that can be done.
Well, it's a caricature / dramatization of its own, of course, but fully automated humane distribution is arguably just-around-the-corner, first for those who can afford it, of course.
I don't think that the *class* issue will necessarily be resolved in the process, but I think that the two dynamics of increasing-automation and working-class-empowerment would be mutually constructive.
Also, btw:
Film Theory: Wall-E's Unseen CANNIBALISM! - YouTube
OK. But I don't see labor just disappearing given AI needs programming. So we disagree here. Only time will tell who will be right.