How Public Pensions Turn Cities into Unlivable Hellholes - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

"It's the economy, stupid!"

Moderator: PoFo Economics & Capitalism Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15237266
Potemkin wrote:
The relative income of the working class and lower middle class only started declining after the Oil Shock of 1973, which is when the post-War boom ended. The monetarist policies imposed from 1980 onwards accelerated this process, and led us to where we are today. I repeat: the Boomers were lazy, because they could afford to be. Their laziness would have no serious consequences for them in an economy being run at full employment. It’s their children and grandchildren who cannot afford to be lazy, because the consequences for them personally and for their families would be severe. As I said, labour discipline was reimposed on the working class using supply-side monetarist policies.



You said Boomers were lazy, that is simply wrong. As a group, they kept working more hours, until the big crash, after which they couldn't.

There were no supply side policies, that is just BS.

Seriously, read Price of Inequality, your library can get you a copy, piece of cake.
#15237268
late wrote:You said Boomers were lazy, that is simply wrong. As a group, they kept working more hours, until the big crash, after which they couldn't.

There were no supply side policies, that is just BS.

Seriously, read Price of Inequality, your library can get you a copy, piece of cake.

I wanted a highschool job. I got screamed out of that idea by my parents. they screamed i go to college and changed to any major that ever worked. they screamed about a single person that ever noticed me ever there. they screamed me into a job and got fired freewill employment, thats us free will employment because I'm not noting a single reason in 3-4 warnings. I got screamed back to college. I only got a 2nd job pound the pavement homeless. Oh and the government is torturing everybody with electronic shock therapy since they're 18 for any and every reason. at will shock therapy. no one ever had a reason on that. 10 years electronic pulses twice in 5 seconds every day of your life for 10 years, its not neurological , from some government overseer program crap. 6 years of work is probably trash for government to talk at itself for nothing. To never have a home or job security or connection to anybody anywhere of any relation and desire Less of it unless they think they're interesting in a government surveillance junk. I go dark and homeless to meet nobody months at a time. on what. oh and itd be reasonable if anyone had all the unspent money of 6 years for any project the first time. no one's ever thought a guilty thought of anything anywhere ever.
What these dead professor F8#$( want to say is they group students , tell students that stick out in sociology they need to group more . grabbed by the wrist to explain whatever I think to whatever to anybody, then they want to group everybody and they group everybody and they ungroup everybody and they're responsible for it , these dead professors. There actually isn't a student responsible for meeting any student in any altercations or interactions under their care whatsoever. Talking to people attacking me lik St. John and Wren at UAHUNTSVILLE with BIG MACHETES STICKING OUT OF THEIR BACKS! Anytime i WANT! FOR FREE! For the upgrade from the DOWNTOWN RESCUE MISSION CELL to the FEDERAL BUNK! The DEAD bleeding dead professor fucks at UAHUNTSVILLE! Who FIND and HUNT students they never had a class with and anyone pleaing on their knees its some sort of spin, its harassment to write too many emails.
#15237273
pugsville wrote:No it;s a fact.

No it isn't.
A Free Market will lead pretty much directly to Monopolies.

Only in natural monopoly sectors like transport and utility infrastructure. Anywhere else, the prospect of profit attracts competition.
Capital will seek higher profits and MOni9olplie have higher profits.

Capital will seek higher profits, and will thus go into competition with a high-profit monopoly.
In A free Market there are so many ways for a large corporation to use it;s greater finical resources to influence the market.

And likewise many ways for large competitors to take away its market share.
There is only one Free Market principle. Profit.

Wrong. The free market principle is consent.
Capital HATES competition. It increases risk and lowers profit. Comapies persue there own intersts, they are not interests in soe abasrct "free Narket pinriples" they are seeking profit. And Monopolies/Catels, are higghly profitable,

That's all well and good, but monopoly profits also attract competition seeking a share of them.
The "Free Market" has never and wil never exists. It's a myth.

It's an ideal, not a myth. You can also say that justice has never existed. That doesn't mean it isn't a worthwhile goal, or would not be beneficial if achieved.
Teh Free MArket is not a stable state. Monopolies aere more so.

No. Monopoly is only stable in a natural monopoly sector. Anywhere else, its profits attract competition.
#15237276
late wrote:You said Boomers were lazy, that is simply wrong. As a group, they kept working more hours, until the big crash, after which they couldn't.

There were no supply side policies, that is just BS.

Seriously, read Price of Inequality, your library can get you a copy, piece of cake.

Baby Boomers ate their own society for free. Baby boomers eat their young. Baby boomers are the only hypocrites around and their kind. baby boomers say a segregation isnt one when it is. baby boomers BROUGHT internationals to tell me i'm guilty for their ways and sins of the fathers. they're all hear to yell we all get along when I never chose that at any interval. and theres systems of segregation when there aren't. they're the hypocrites in every asian and international person in 4 years of a campus they'd be ever so lucky.
#15237277
late wrote:You said Boomers were lazy, that is simply wrong. As a group, they kept working more hours, until the big crash, after which they couldn't.

Their children and their grandchildren have had to work longer and longer hours. And instead of a job for life with all the fringe bennies, which the Boomers expected as their birthright, they have zero-hour contracts.

There were no supply side policies, that is just BS.

What do you think Reagan and Thatcher were doing in the 1980s? :eh:

Seriously, read Price of Inequality, your library can get you a copy, piece of cake.

You’re talking to a commie here. I don’t need convincing that capitalism is an unjust system. Lol.
#15237279
Potemkin wrote:Their children and their grandchildren have had to work longer and longer hours. And instead of a job for life with all the fringe bennies, which the Boomers expected as their birthright, they have zero-hour contracts.


What do you think Reagan and Thatcher were doing in the 1980s? :eh:


You’re talking to a commie here. I don’t need convincing that capitalism is an unjust system. Lol.

I NEVER had a Facebook no one in my family had an irreputable street-book. Now someone viewing an Assault through a facebook is an accessory of crime. If i plead 2 3 times verbally 'don't assault people' and the assault ends within my property with owning a facebook account of humiliation, continuing accessories of assault through facebook accounts. I regularly break knuckles on the lot of them...

They hired Hitler Obama to make the People's Car, and they hired Zuckerberg for the People's crap, and they hired any stranger to tell their kids what to do, Capitalism died before they were born already, Rockefeller got broken on the back of National Socializing government in the year... 1920...

Whats the Crown Court Church of Scotland in London England, its segregate. Its a segregate of the Presbyterian Church if it were in England nad when its England, and a Presbyterian Church chapel in Edinburgh Scotland. That Crown Court Church of Scotland and others in London with a heritage of Robert Burns and Robert Bruce and scottish figures of the Presbyterian Church. There isn't anything Grander in Freedom than a segregate expenditure. Our LACK of FREEDOMS will be VISIBLE SHORTLY! THey ARE visible. When they shut down every afircan presbyterian, scottish presbyterian and dutch reformed for the PC(USA) check it country wide. and said no government will work on it.
#15237288
Potemkin wrote:
Their children and their grandchildren have had to work longer and longer hours. And instead of a job for life with all the fringe bennies, which the Boomers expected as their birthright, they have zero-hour contracts.


What do you think Reagan and Thatcher were doing in the 1980s? :eh:


You’re talking to a commie here. I don’t need convincing that capitalism is an unjust system. Lol.



Now that the labor market is tight, employers are going to have to be nicer to their employees.

The idea that Reagan was supply side is funny. The idea is that govt spending takes money out of the economy. Reagan added a lot of govt spending. He also added a lot of debt. Carters 4 years of debt is not much larger than one year of averaged Reagan debt.

You may think you're Left, but as long as your economic ideas are that far to the Right, everything else isn't going to amount to much.
#15237297
late wrote:Now that the labor market is tight, employers are going to have to be nicer to their employees.

The idea that Reagan was supply side is funny. The idea is that govt spending takes money out of the economy. Reagan added a lot of govt spending. He also added a lot of debt. Carters 4 years of debt is not much larger than one year of averaged Reagan debt.

You may think you're Left, but as long as your economic ideas are that far to the Right, everything else isn't going to amount to much.

Before you can transcend capitalism, you must first understand capitalism. There is an inner logic to the capitalist system, and any attempt to distort that inner logic - to have ‘capitalism without capitalism’ - will have unintended consequences, usually very unpleasant consequences. Running the economy at full employment, for example, had the effect of distorting the market in labour-power, which removed labour discipline and ruined productivity. Capitalism needs its reserve army of unemployed. You cannot simply reform it away.

Oh, and as for supply-side policies being imposed during the 1980s, I thought it was too obviously true to require evidence.

Supply-side economics
#15237306
Truth To Power wrote:By giving profits to those who compete with a monopoly or cartel.


That does nothing to stop the formation of monopoly or cartel but provides incentives to do so.

Investors would rather invest in a more profitable company, ie the monopoly,

Capitalism inherently favours cartels and monopolies, higher profits less risk. Capital will natural flow to those rather than competitors.
#15237308
Truth To Power wrote:By giving profits to those who compete with a monopoly or cartel.

But how can they compete effectively? As Marx put it, “The battle of competition is fought by cheapening of commodities. The cheapness of commodities depends, ceteris paribus, on the productiveness of labour, and this again on the scale of production. Therefore the larger capitals beat the smaller.” This is why corner shops cannot compete with supermarkets, why iron foundries cannot be built in people’s backyards, and why governments often prevent mergers between companies which would lead to monopolies. Competition works by squeezing out inefficiencies, and the biggest inefficiency is lack of scale. The big fishes gobble up the little fishes, until there’s only one big fish left….
#15237314
Potemkin wrote:
Before you can transcend capitalism, you must first understand capitalism. There is an inner logic to the capitalist system, and any attempt to distort that inner logic - to have ‘capitalism without capitalism’ - will have unintended consequences, usually very unpleasant consequences. Running the economy at full employment, for example, had the effect of distorting the market in labour-power, which removed labour discipline and ruined productivity. Capitalism needs its reserve army of unemployed. You cannot simply reform it away.

Oh, and as for supply-side policies being imposed during the 1980s, I thought it was too obviously true to require evidence.

Supply-side economics



The Fed usually worried about inflation a lot more than unemployment. Like now, for example.

The Boomers were the biggest cohort ever, they distorted the crap out of everything, just by being there. Before or after, you're looking at a somewhat different picture.
#15237327
late wrote:The Fed usually worried about inflation a lot more than unemployment. Like now, for example.

The Fed always worry about inflation a lot more than unemployment, @late.

The Boomers were the biggest cohort ever, they distorted the crap out of everything, just by being there. Before or after, you're looking at a somewhat different picture.

Granted. But the Keynesian policy of running the economy at full employment was a result of historical factors - the fact that the generation of politicians who established the post-War dispensation had grown up witnessing the effects of the Great Depression of the 1930s, the memory of which still scarred them. Not to mention the heroism and sacrifices endured by the working class during the Second World War. Lots of factors came together to induce the ruling elite of the West to want to pamper the Baby Boomer generation. Most of the ‘distortions’ caused during the Boomers’ tenure on this Earth were caused by other factors than their mere existence.
#15237331
1 percenters? This whole thread? They get good at this argument and do that 1 percenter march. occupy wall street. 2000s... The actual "Capitalist" is the people/class allowed to own the very production of our society I assume these communists were noticing. Rockefeller had an accountant basically followed his charitable tendency in south korea Louis Severence and "Severence Hospital".
#15237348
Potemkin wrote:Granted. But the Keynesian policy of running the economy at full employment was a result of historical factors - the fact that the generation of politicians who established the post-War dispensation had grown up witnessing the effects of the Great Depression of the 1930s, the memory of which still scarred them. Not to mention the heroism and sacrifices endured by the working class during the Second World War. Lots of factors came together to induce the ruling elite of the West to want to pamper the Baby Boomer generation. Most of the ‘distortions’ caused during the Boomers’ tenure on this Earth were caused by other factors than their mere existence.


And voters had more faith on unions back at that time than they do now. Again, they had yet to endure the kind of dysfunction that can arise from having excessively strong unions :)
#15237358
wat0n wrote:And voters had more faith on unions back at that time than they do now. Again, they had yet to endure the kind of dysfunction that can arise from having excessively strong unions :)

Strong labour unions can certainly distort the working of free market capitalism. But free market capitalism distorts the lives of countless millions of working people.
#15237367
Potemkin wrote:
The Fed always worry about inflation a lot more than unemployment, @late.


Granted. But the Keynesian policy of running the economy at full employment was a result of historical factors - the fact that the generation of politicians who established the post-War dispensation had grown up witnessing the effects of the Great Depression of the 1930s, the memory of which still scarred them. Not to mention the heroism and sacrifices endured by the working class during the Second World War. Lots of factors came together to induce the ruling elite of the West to want to pamper the Baby Boomer generation. Most of the ‘distortions’ caused during the Boomers’ tenure on this Earth were caused by other factors than their mere existence.



You're still putting the cart in front of the horse..

After WW2, we were the only economy still standing. The only major economy not recovering from the devastation of war.

There's a whole list of things we did that made us richer, by far, than we had been before.

It was also the lowest income inequality we've had since I don't know when. Which is also good for the economy...

If you knew the real thinking behind Supply Side and all that other nonsense, you'd be appalled.
#15237371
late wrote:You're still putting the cart in front of the horse..

After WW2, we were the only economy still standing. The only major economy not recovering from the devastation of war.

There's a whole list of things we did that made us richer, by far, than we had been before.

It was also the lowest income inequality we've had since I don't know when. Which is also good for the economy...

If you knew the real thinking behind Supply Side and all that other nonsense, you'd be appalled.

So what is your suggested alternative? A return to Keynesianism? A return to Bretton-Woods? After the Oil Crisis of 1973, it all started unravelling. Even before Thatcher or Reagan came along, the post-War dispensation which had molly-coddled the Baby Boomer generation so generously was in its death spiral. The centre-right in the 1980s managed to salvage something workable from the wreckage, using monetarist and supply-side policies (liberally sprinkled with some ‘trickle-down’ propaganda bullshit to keep the plebs happy). History has no reverse gear, @late.
#15237378
Potemkin wrote:
So what is your suggested alternative? A return to Keynesianism? A return to Bretton-Woods? After the Oil Crisis of 1973, it all started unravelling. Even before Thatcher or Reagan came along, the post-War dispensation which had molly-coddled the Baby Boomer generation so generously was in its death spiral. The centre-right in the 1980s managed to salvage something workable from the wreckage, using monetarist and supply-side policies (liberally sprinkled with some ‘trickle-down’ propaganda bullshit to keep the plebs happy). History has no reverse gear, @late.



The Reagan crowd was not Center/Right, Supply Side was BS and not at all what they were trying to do.

You keep repeating BS, because you don't know, or understand, what happened.
#15237386
Truth To Power wrote:The interesting thing is that the Boomers, who were so idealistic and keen on social justice in their youth, have become jaded, cynical and selfish seniors eager to consign younger generations to the treadmill that powers their privilege.


Every generation is the same. Mine is probably going hypocritical soon.

I couldn’t agree more. Which is why the reputat[…]

Balkan and Elections

Fucking Husein was a fighter for slavery, he was […]

We have thousands of colleges and universities, an[…]

Absolutely. The best mean would be giving up th[…]