Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Really

World Peace

Recommended Posts

The solution is simple. Full employment. The goal of all trading is to make a profit. That is good because it is a challenge. The bad thing is that nobody gives a thought to what happens after you succeed enormously. Much the same as when their is a war and the good guys win. There is no plan on how to do with the aftermath. In the case of trading and profits the only modification is to add one more step to the process. Taxes. Taxes must be used both in the form of tax free areas for job producing production enterprises and increase taxes on profits made from a simple transaction where the transaction is the only work supplied. The winners will still win and own everything except with full employment peace and tranquility will supercede hate, discontent and restlessness. Amother step is to slow business down. Put a waiting period on all trades and financial transaction. Criminalize electronic signatures except in the case of life saving emergencies. ( I am sure that futures will somehow try to be guised as life saving emergencies ).

 

A simple expalanation can be analogized to the public by comparing the world economic system to the NFL. The NFL has regiorous restrictions to make sure that all teams have a chance to win and therefore continue the game. Without restrictions in the NFL there soon would be a couple of super teams and then winning would be guaranteed and there would soon be no interest in the game.

 

Slow down and aim towards full employment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will stopping dreaming be an advancement in solving problems. There is already a facade of interest in curbing high speed and high frequency trading. Showing how the results of trades effects daily lives and the future can stir the beginnings of support for action. Unregulated non entrepreneurial profit taking will continue to lower the standard of living. Educate people about lazy money and money velocity. Rush Limbaugh says you should work to get money. Put money to work. Money is in retirement as security for the monstrous unregulated futures trading. Go back to Glas-Steagal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for full employment provided it yields adequate compensation. Reinstating Glass-Steagall and other regulation to curb financial/trading abuses would be positive steps for the Nation. Your proposals, from the specific to the sweeping, are mostly constructive and would be beneficial if enacted. But as to their ending wars over resources, religion, ideology, ethnicity or the urge to conquer.... I don't think so.

 

NOTE: All wars are seen to be won by the "good guys" when the victors write the history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

world peace can only be achieved when greed and hatred have been removed from all mens hearts,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

world peace can only be achieved when greed and hatred have been removed from all mens hearts,

If at some point in time a way to alter mankind's (kind...ha-ha) genetic predisposition toward greed and hatred which emerged from the primordial soup, that peace might have a chance of being realized. Unless human DNA is artificially altered, or takes a Darwinian turn, we will always face the same shameful treatment of one another until our last flicker is extinguished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The solution is simple. Full employment. The goal of all trading is to make a profit. That is good because it is a challenge. The bad thing is that nobody gives a thought to what happens after you succeed enormously. Much the same as when their is a war and the good guys win. There is no plan on how to do with the aftermath. In the case of trading and profits the only modification is to add one more step to the process. Taxes. Taxes must be used both in the form of tax free areas for job producing production enterprises and increase taxes on profits made from a simple transaction where the transaction is the only work supplied. The winners will still win and own everything except with full employment peace and tranquility will supercede hate, discontent and restlessness. Amother step is to slow business down. Put a waiting period on all trades and financial transaction. Criminalize electronic signatures except in the case of life saving emergencies. ( I am sure that futures will somehow try to be guised as life saving emergencies ).

 

A simple expalanation can be analogized to the public by comparing the world economic system to the NFL. The NFL has regiorous restrictions to make sure that all teams have a chance to win and therefore continue the game. Without restrictions in the NFL there soon would be a couple of super teams and then winning would be guaranteed and there would soon be no interest in the game.

 

Slow down and aim towards full employment.

 

Have you taken an economics course before?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full employment comes with benefits literally. That's where the notion of employers offering health care started. Full employment would tackle the problem of federal and state deficits quite resoundingly. It would bring back the sound practice of doing the hard work regarding sound research on investment with regards to the stock markets. What is full employment? Hard to say, some say 5% unemployment, some say even less. Full employment truly creates wage inflation, and this is a good thing for any worker. It's also a good way to create the so called incubator of best policy that each of the fifty states can create on their own instead of giving up on workers and tax revenue they need, they can instead concentrate on effective policies that bring the best returns towards prosperity for those who live in them.

 

It's true, it's true... to consider full employment these days you almost have to be a dream weaver. It's foolish to use the NFL or any professional sport as an example. These really are not free markets at all. Yes, athletes get paid well,

but it's the owners who control the purse strings. That's the way those systems were designed.

 

How is the US designed in regards to full employment? Currently it's designed to reward the top 1%, The federal reserve board which controls monetary policy currently has a governance structure that is in private not public hands. Trade deficits are overlooked, inflationary policy is the chief concern, and why not since a strong dollar truly rewards those who hold the most dollars.

 

Yes, things are out of whack concerning the rest of us. The democracy is really a plutocracy.

 

Government expenditures protect the multinational corporations. We subsidies huge corporations who are already extremely rich, yet they aren't creating jobs somehow, instead they go where labor is cheap. Tech firms are not responsible for too many jobs, you don't need that big a work force to develop software let alone hardware that's made somewhere else. The Twitters and all the rest, are you really worth billions?

 

We are the consumers, you know, the demand stems from us. But demand is low these days, while the supply of workers is high. There lies the crux.

 

We are thwarted, we the people. When they tell you, hell yes, let's build a pipeline for tar sands because it will create jobs, how many should be the question. And are those jobs long or short-term, and what will truly be the environmental

constraints? These answers aren't addressed, because we're being lied to again and again.

 

You have to create sound economics with effective monetary and fiscal policy --- that's the answer. You want an educated workforce, well then you need to create a pipeline of educational programs to get the job done.

 

The fact of the matter is, Finland has it right. Equality in education = excellence in educational policy. You get that much right then the sky is the limit. The sky being, full employment, and then, literally everything else will follow.

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the argument is... if more people had jobs, then those people would have better things? The connection between "full employment" and world peace hasn't been made here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full employment and world peace sound like a happy ending. Where is there any connection that would make, as Spock would say, a logical beginning from which to start considering all the constraints.

Full employment where, here in the US, like model or a mirror. What can be learned from others. What can be shared... is there a logical conclusion that it's better to be number one all the time?

Is it all just a game, like monopoly the game by Parker Brothers that was actually first conceived by Elizabeth Magie which she illustrated as, "The Landlords Game". depicting the Giorgist economic view on rent or

a tax on land value.

 

World peace first and foremost isn't something that is taught in school. Maybe it should be. Perhaps consequence could be studied from the past better that way for all people to see. Tolstoy who wrote War and Peace was writing about the

infinitesimals of war after all. You know the people who live in villages that have no names, the millions who are rattled by wars consequences who seem to have little voice.

 

You could easily surmise that there have been and maybe are collectives or cultures that existed peacefully that did indeed contain an economical way to survive, that's what sociology is meant to do.

 

So here you have two different and coherent questions both asked at the same time if you are talking about the US or the US and the world or world peace.

 

Is it possible that humankind could be free of war? And would full employment the world around make it so?

 

Although it's most improbable to accept these days I would say the answer is yes. I would also echo your hypothesis that the two go hand in hand as an obvious conclusion.

 

Yet, we seem very much to be in this constant circular repeating motion, I mean it's been going on now for thousands of years.

 

After Greek mythology came those who tried very much to capture the concepts of logic for the good of all. This is where democracy at first had a bad name.

 

Then, democracy took all shape and form.

 

Here's really what I think. Full employment to me is a form of ecology in that it represents not just you or me but all who live in any society. I do think we could and should be more advanced than we are by a long shot, but even if we were where we should be we'd still have a long long way to go.

 

Like I said before - Were there to be demand for goods and services..., as a surety I must contend all people need food clothing shelter even love. But demand can be minimized by cost. People don't wind up on the streets homeless unless they have some real deep troubles. The vast majority of folks are pretty intelligent when it comes to basic comfort, and yes, they can also be oversold - caveat emptor as they say.

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" It's foolish to use the NFL or any professional sport as an example. These really are not free markets at all. Yes, athletes get paid well, "

I used that example to show that rules are needed for a system to work. If there were no rules in the NFL there would soon be a few super teams and interest would evaporate and the NFL would fail.

My point is to show that rules are needed in the financail sector so that a few super teams don't take over with an ensuing total failing of the economic system. We suffer minor failings of the system every so often and small chages are promised to instill confidence and get it working again. But it is never better than before and each correction gets worse. The end of the system can always be profit but profit must come at the expense of working for it. Put money to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is to show that rules are needed in the financail sector so that a few super teams don't take over with an ensuing total failing of the economic system.

 

Wrong, rules and regulations have allowed a few monolithic corporations to take over the entire financial system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wrong, rules and regulations have allowed a few monolithic corporations to take over the entire financial system.

 

The demonizing of rules and regulations have let big entities take over. Throwing out rules like Glas-Steagal and then creating self interest rules like the The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 are leading the way to another disastorous collapse. Allowing certain high speed traders early access to trading information is another example of mutating rules for a self interest. The national Interest has mutated into serving the corporations you mention. Allowing trillions of dollars to securitize special futures trading is essentially what caused the housing bubble collapse and that amount of money misuse is growing. Growing inspite of the legisaltion promised to curb the abuse. The Dodd-Frank Bill is an example of feel good legisaltion that has no positive turning effect. But rules are needed. Turning rules into self interst tools is not needed. That is a violation of trust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The demonizing of rules and regulations have let big entities take over. Throwing out rules like Glas-Steagal and then creating self interest rules like the The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 are leading the way to another disastorous collapse. Allowing certain high speed traders early access to trading information is another example of mutating rules for a self interest. The national Interest has mutated into serving the corporations you mention. Allowing trillions of dollars to securitize special futures trading is essentially what caused the housing bubble collapse and that amount of money misuse is growing. Growing inspite of the legisaltion promised to curb the abuse. The Dodd-Frank Bill is an example of feel good legisaltion that has no positive turning effect. But rules are needed. Turning rules into self interst tools is not needed. That is a violation of trust.

 

Rules for businesses are barriers to entry. Any rule will necessarily drive up the cost of doing business, forcing smaller businesses out of a market while consolidating the remaining ones.

 

Regulations grow businesses and allow fewer ones to exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Have you taken an economics course before?

I have taken an economics course but economics is obsolete. Economics deals with prodcuts and services, supply and demand etc. With estimates of 1.2 quadrillion dollars tied up in the derivative market there needs to be a new field of study devoted to derivatives. The problems with derivatives and the stock market in general is they are not a support to the market but are the market itself. The problem is not derivatives. The problem is how we got there. Through the years laws have been changed to make illegal transactions legal so that money could be made without the sacrifice of working for it. It is a felony to buy life insurance on a person with whom you have no insurable interest. The reason is obvious. Too many people would die early if strangers would benefit from their death. But the business world is allowed to buy insurance on companies they have no interest in. Obvioulsy unscrupulos people would try to cash in by influencing the failure of the insured. That is one problem. The other probllem and the worst problem is money is taken out of the working market and used to securitize the insurance. The enticement of easy money has devoted working money to sit idle. The stock market crash of '29 brought on legislation to counter bad practices. They knew then and they know now how to "fix" the market. The derivatives and all futures trading are ways to create income without working. When money doesnt work people don't work. Idle and then suffering people are more susceptible to trash talk. I remember clearly hearing Rush Limbaugh commenting on the UAW pension contracts saying he just can't see people getting paid without working for it. That is what derivative trading has led to. People getting paid because of lazy money. What is the difference between buying stock in a company and benefitting from the success of the company or buying into a hedge fund (which is an exclusive opportunity) and benefitting from it? The company stock puts people to work. The hedge fund contract and the hedge funds take money out of circulation and put people out of work. Putting people to work would require changes making money work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have taken an economics course but economics is obsolete. Economics deals with prodcuts and services, supply and demand etc. With estimates of 1.2 quadrillion dollars tied up in the derivative market there needs to be a new field of study devoted to derivatives.

 

See, that's why I'm not sure you have, since derivatives are subject to the laws of and can be explained by economics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree that when large numbers of people are able to accumulate wealth without labor or production of any goods or services, but merely by manipulating markets..... It's an unhealthy economic situation. Too much wealth is now lying untaxed and fallow in Swiss and Caribbean banks. The case of Mitt Romney went far to raise public awareness of the problem.

 

Questioning another's credentials is often counterproductive to good debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Establishing credentials is essential to forming/proposing/maintaining an informed opinion.

 

In asking for that, I'm trying to understand if the OP wanted to strengthen an already sound opinion or is just making stuff up. Most of the original post is nonsensical, and I didn't know if I should spend time trying to decipher it or just let it be.

 

I have taken an economics course but economics is obsolete.

 

Thankfully I have my answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Establishing credentials is essential to forming/proposing/maintaining an informed opinion.

 

In asking for that, I'm trying to understand if the OP wanted to strengthen an already sound opinion or is just making stuff up. Most of the original post is nonsensical, and I didn't know if I should spend time trying to decipher it or just let it be.

 

 

Thankfully I have my answer.

 

What is nonsensical. The system is doing to a much greater extent same activities that caused the depression of 29. Income is being created instead of earned. Gambling is requiring huge amounts of secured reserves. Buffett and other sources:

"May 2, 2010 ... Warren Buffett, who has warned about the dangers of unregulated derivatives,

said a Senate plan to add oversight of the contracts probably"

 

And yes I am making stuff up but it is based on intuition and observation.

 

Here is something that is so far out that it seems to be made up: Certain high speed traders have incredible investments in fiber optic cables and algorithms. The algorithms enable them to see a trade that has been placed and place their own trade before the original trade can be executed. Then the algorithm sells at a profit.

 

I would like to see a link to anything in an econmics course that addresses the cause and effect of the modern trading.

According to the American Economic Association:

"Economics is the study of how people choose to use resources

Resources include the time and talent people have available, the land, buildings, equipment, and other tools on hand, and the knowledge of how to combine them to create useful products and services".

 

The Commodities Futures Modernization Act allowed the definition of futures to be expanded allowing more trading to be unregulated. Everything is leading to trouble. Putting an emphasis on employment will require mondy to take an active part in the financial system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is nonsensical.

Well...

 

The goal of all trading is to make a profit.

The statement that had me asking if you'd ever taken an economics course before, given that this just isn't true. Trade happens for a lot of reasons, the biggest ones being excess capacity and comparative advantage.

 

The bad thing is that nobody gives a thought to what happens after you succeed enormously.

This is just something you made up that in no way reflects reality.

 

Much the same as when their is a war and the good guys win. There is no plan on how to do with the aftermath.

See above. Now from here, since the assumptions you make as the basis of your opinion are either made up or wrong, we can assume your conclusion will be wrong. But let's continue.

 

In the case of trading and profits the only modification is to add one more step to the process. Taxes.

Which isn't true, because the earner of those profits could just reinvest them.

 

Taxes must be used both in the form of tax free areas for job producing production enterprises and increase taxes on profits made from a simple transaction where the transaction is the only work supplied.

A few things wrong with this statement. For one, jobs are not goods. There is no jobs factory. Also, and more importantly, you're suggesting that taxes are bad for jobs (by saying we should have tax free zones for job producers), while calling for more taxes. Now if this was your conclusion, I'd have just left well enough alone, but then you go on to promote some dangerous ideas.

 

The winners will still win and own everything

Everything means everything.

 

except with full employment peace and tranquility will supercede hate, discontent and restlessness.

This conclusion cannot be reached by reading the rest of your post.

 

 

Amother step is to slow business down. Put a waiting period on all trades and financial transaction.

Here you're suggesting that slowing business down is good for jobs.

 

Criminalize electronic signatures except in the case of life saving emergencies. ( I am sure that futures will somehow try to be guised as life saving emergencies ).

Nonsense.

 

A simple expalanation can be analogized to the public by comparing the world economic system to the NFL. The NFL has regiorous restrictions to make sure that all teams have a chance to win and therefore continue the game. Without restrictions in the NFL there soon would be a couple of super teams and then winning would be guaranteed and there would soon be no interest in the game.

More nonsense.

 

Slow down and aim towards full employment.

And in all of this, the logical gap between full employment and world peace has not been bridged.

 

To attempt to make that bridge, I'd need you to at least answer these questions:

What is world peace?

What is full employment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, on 03 Apr 2014 - 2:37 PM, said:snapback.png

Criminalize electronic signatures except in the case of life saving emergencies. ( I am sure that futures will somehow try to be guised as life saving emergencies ).

Nonsense

 

You say nonsense in spite of the fact that speed is the winning edge. Speed in trading is taking money away from entrepreneurial trading.. The purpose of finances has to be directed to employment. Electronic signatures facilitate speed. Speed is short sighted. When there was an economy of overall prosperity there was a lack of foresight. Progress dealt strictly with profits with no thought given to the welfare of the worker. Even the unions sold membership down the drain by accepting robots in exchange for lucrative retirement benefits and high wages. Full employment will change the impersonal nature of finances. The current path of finances is a path of destruction. It is the staus quo of finances. There has been no significant change since 2008. The conditions are worse and there is now more money securing the drerivative market. The situation has become a case of brokers getting investors to bet on every horse in the race. The brokers win no matter what because of fees and some of the investors win. The percentage of profits is small and that requires enormous amounts of money to be under management.

 

World peace is the alleviating of tensions.

 

Full employment is every able body working. Accepting the mantra of if you work hard you will succeed then everybody should work.

 

The market economy is obsolete on a large scale. The amount of people not working can never be put to work by a market economy. There is no demand for a significant part of labor.

 

Money lying fallow in Swiss Banks was mentioned earlier. The money in Swiss Banks is invested in derivatives the same way it is invested in the US. The money in derivatives is lying fallow. Employment would make that money be put to work..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the majority of economist would say full employment is where everybody works. It's more like everybody who wants to work can find a job. There's a level of employment where you get wage inflation. This is the level most economist point to. It's where the workers can be much more selective in the type of jobs they choose to do. What is important to strive for or maintain is a link between productivity gains and wage growth overall.

 

The market economy doesn't work well if it's systematically designed to reward those at the very top. Trade deficits for example directly influence lack of job creation. High health care cost are influenced by not having enough doctors.

 

If you looked to a country like Germany that has what one could consider full employment you see an economic system that is designed to maintain full or close to full employment. Germany does not work against trade unions, the companies in Germany actually work with the unions in a positive way.

 

Regarding world peace, how do you create a world where every countries follow a similar path? This is close to impossible right. I would maintain that it is certainly out of reach in the short term, but if more larger countries acted in rational ways we would be in much better shape. It might be slow but there's an evolution that could take place. A conscious effort to minimize wasting resource and yet still maintain full employment for the good of all. Again, full employment doesn't mean everyone works, some will choose not to work perhaps because they've saved enough to retire.

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant to say Germany doesn't work against workers unions. To clarify, health care cost are influenced by many things, one being a shortage of doctors. There are other reasons as well. Today in the US we have a system of hidden cost for example, one hospital charges much more for the same service, but the insured person doesn't see that. We know that the US consumer pays much more for medicine than other developed countries do. We subsidize certain types of energy companies and that helps make alternative energies less competitive. Demand for essential things people use are always some what constant. When cost is too high for one thing there are substitutes. A country like China has a large work force that works for next to nothing, in this way they can produce a lot of goods to sell to the rest of the world. China then subsidizes all their technology firms and builds an infrastructure that makes it hard for US companies to walk away from.

All the semiconductor parts and all the electronic hardware is then produced in China. China keeps their currency down as well. Meanwhile the US dollar is too strong and US workers lose jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

World peace is the alleviating of tensions.

 

Full employment is every able body working. Accepting the mantra of if you work hard you will succeed then everybody should work.

 

Here's what you're suggesting (as I've gathered so far from this thread): we use impractical or impossible means (slow down business, more and less taxation, moar regulations) to attain an immeasurable goal ("full employment") in order to domesticate the newly enslaved populous into maintaining the all-consuming wealth of the very elite.

 

Aren't we already sort of doing that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...