I think that anyone in America making less than $15 just stop working and refuse to work for less than $20 and hour. How would you like to see this nation just stop in its tracks? I think that business owners and such are worthy of good salaries, but having ridiculous salaries over the workers who produce them that money is ridiculous and they are helping no one but themselves. Offer these rich business owners to work for $8-10 and hour and watch them laugh at the ridiculousness of the offer.
low wages are better than no wages. I made more money when minimum wage was $5.75 and when it was $6.25 than now that it is $7.25 because I don't have a job.
Look outside your own country, most successful countries on Earth run Democratic socialist governments, and they don't have the constant boom and busts like you do. Stability is the key, and you can't get that with pure capitalism.
how can someone so clearly predict real estate crash and talk such nonsense
" we have to take away power from politicians "
how can that be? they make the laws, they can fine you put you in jail, they always had the most power.
" government is the problem that people get paid less in walmart"
obviously if minimum wage did not exist walmart would pay less, and minimum wage and other worker protections are done by government, so how government is the problem for losers who work in Walmert?
@vartart99 "how can that be? they make the laws, they can fine you put you in jail, they always had the most power."
Stop voting for the same idiots (republicans & democrats). That's a good start.
"obviously if minimum wage did not exist walmart would pay less, and minimum wage and other worker protections are done by government, so how government is the problem for losers who work in Walmert?"
You don't know what Walmart would pay, in a truly free market, anything is be possible.
Why rescuing the jews during WW2? They should have known what was going to happen to them. Why didnt they move from eastern europe in time? They had only themself to blame.
Peter is right about 90% of the time. And so is another guy who just published a book on what everyone who is being taken advantage of can do to get back in the game after having their clocks cleaned... "Money Slaves And Cool Aid"... Get - The - Book dot com (solve the riddle and learn what to do). Good luck pounding it through their thick skulls Peter.
in the words of Jesus - "Peter , You are the rock upon witch my church stands "
[ or something like that to that effect ;) ] . This guy never fails to impress me with His totally accurate and direct approach to problems within this "syphilitic" system . Awesome stuff :) .
@artyfarty3 are you saying that the economy has a social disease or just the people of wallstreet , I know about the brokers having sex breaks with prostitutes instead of lunch , are you suggesting that we give the system a shot of 100% pure Constitution instead of paul Enriches 606 seryyyyyyyyrum
@jhunted7667 yes - the so called "capitalists" of wall street have been stricken by a socialist virus - not that there is anything wrong with Socialism , we need Socialism in democracy - it's the only safety net from certain death for the poor and those unfortunate ones who ( maybe with no fault of their own ie: disabled people ) can't "make it" in the system . Peter has been talking about "crownie capitalism" of Wall Street for some time now , and i for one totally agree with Him .
@drsmith963 All you guys complaining of Walmart et al, are realy complaining of capitalism. Capitalism made the USA the wealthiest nation on earth, & will do the same for China. You guys just don't like anyone trying to make the most money for the least expenditure. So you complain about what Walmart does to workers. My ex worked there & no complaints. Anyone overworked at Walmart needs to go somewhere else. No where else? Then re-play the video, above, and see what Schiff says about it.
A. The capital requirements were put there, by the private sector (think insurance) to keep you out to PROTECT ALREADY ESTABLISHED BUSINESSES.
B. The regulation was put there, buy government at the behest of the private sector, to keep you out and TO PROTECT ALREADY ESTABLISHED BUSINESS.
We have this government not by chance, but because under capitalism, everything is for sale, including government. It is literally the best government money can buy.
She is hot ;) but Schiff is wrong in that the original goal of the feed was sound money. The goal from the start was to align themselves with the government so they could confiscate the wealth of America! Peter should know this by now....
Corporations are seeing the threat of the people using the peoples government.
In a real Republic, the government are the peoples strong arm. Corporate infiltrate government & make Gov what it is today.
The corporates Infiltrate, make changes, & when people complain they blame the government. despite the stark corporate finger prints all over our comon problems.
Like corporates are behind prohibition, eg workers smoking weed, Corps incite government to act = Corporations regulate people.
@judutchinski you get paid to be a douchebag? i had this idea a while ago to start a troll business. where i hire trolls and have people pay to use their expertise. is this what you're talking about? did you beat me to it?
I agree with a lot of things Peters says BUT why the hell should any worker thank Walmart? The problem is Peter is jumping the gun with his reasoning. If we had sound money with Gold & Silver the we could say people could develop companies on sound foundations but be cause the fiat money along with off shoring of jobs has destroyed the rights & wages of the Western Worker.Walmarts part of the problem, theyre not to be thanked.People to be thanked are companies who havent sold out their workers
do none of you remember why unions were formed in the first place? this country has already had what he wants and that's why unions were formed in the first place because the people in them were tired of living in fear of either having a shitty paying jobs were they are expendable or no job at all and living in the gutter
Nationalizing the central bank of any country will not solve the problem. It will simply shift control of the monopoly cartel from one group of crooks to their partners in crime. Red herring.
Schiff (rightly) advocates imposing strict regulations on government itself (US constitution) that prevent it from having broad powers over the economy. "Vampires" are attracted to government service as well as to corrupting those who can grant favors because they wield too much power.
Lol Schiff schooling the socialists/communists of RT, brings a smile to my face.
And I find the obvious tactics of RT of picking attractive female newsanchors who can barely read, disgusting. Yes, let the public focus on the pretty face, shut off your mind, and let us fill it with our delightful slave-breeding socialist propaganda.
*Schiff starts defending the Constitution and immediately cutting Schiff off* "So very quickly Peter because we're almost out of time." Sure you are, "babe".
Sound money will need the sharing of scientific & technological inheritance for any future economy to work or be sustainable & prosperous for all.
By sustaining a 40 hour work week, when we have had over 50 years of ever increasing automation in the work force, has led to human labor being DE-valued, along with cheep 3rd world labor. To sustain the 40 hour work week, we build crap, to sustain wasteful high-turnover. Work cheaper than the 3rd world & robots, this is what corporations now offer.
@DigitalShaolin We are not living in the glory days of capitalism.
Businesses no longer rely on the population in which they are based for labour and consumers, it's a global system now, they can hire/sell anywhere. Today the business keeps all the profits, while their sweat shop workforce are paid a pittance.
The prosperity capitalism used to bring, the trickle down effect, no longer exists. Yet, we are expected to keep their profits up by consuming, despite real wages ever diminishing.
@AnnoyedDragon Real wages are diminished because of inflation. The value of the dollar has gone down around 95% since the Fed was established in 1913. That is not capitalism. That is not free markets. Businesses don't export jobs because they can hire foreign workers cheaply. They do it because of the repressive taxes and regulations placed upon them by the government. Those regulations are put in place by the largest corporations in order to crush small businesses. Again, that is not capitalism
@DigitalShaolin I've already been through all this with someone else, check my other comments.
Yes inflation is hurting wages, but it is inflation on top of already diminishing wages because of a race to the bottom created by businesses, hiring the cheapest possible labour they can access. Regulation and taxes play no role with this, as even if all those were resolved; they can still hire several Chinese workers for one American. The only way to get those jobs back is to undercut them.
@AnnoyedDragon The jobs would never have been exported in the first place if it wasn't for repressive regulations and heavy taxation. You need to actually talk to real business owners sometime. Then you will realize what hurts business. We have low paying jobs in America because we are service based now. Wal Mart pays a market wage. Those are low productivity jobs. High productivity jobs no longer exist in America because we use our reserve currency status to export money in return for goods.
@DigitalShaolin Getting rid of taxes and regulations would only put the US/UK economy on equal footing with the likes of China and India. but they would still have an advantage in terms of cheap labour. The only way to attract those jobs home would be if hiring an American/British worker was the same/cheaper than hiring a foreign worker, keeping in mind they are on slave wages and have terrible working conditions.
So I'm afraid I don't believe that, you are free to disagree of course.
You are talking about lower wage job. For high wages job, we need more qualifying candidates here. Unfortunately, this is something we don't have. I am sorry to say that our education system is the engine for creating idiots.
@AnnoyedDragon Not true. If everything else was equal, it's a big advantage to produce things domestically just because the goods don't have to be shipped across the world in ships, planes, etc., and we would be able to use our local resources efficiently. America used to produce the cheapest goods in the world while paying the highest wages. That can happen again, but there is no chance at all of it happening in our corporate fascist environment that exists in America.
@DigitalShaolin Again, as a business, why would I hire Americans when I can hire several Chinese for the same price? Abolishing taxes and regulations just puts America's system on equal footing, but unless American's work for a pittance; China still has the advantage.
I also don't believe those conditions could be recreated, as the environment in which they took place no longer exists. We have globalism now, businesses can hire anywhere, getting the cheapest possible labour.
@AnnoyedDragon You are focusing only on labor costs, which is a mistake. I've already stated reasons why labor costs would be easily offset if changes were made to the system. Businesses don't want to export all their jobs and money overseas, but it has become a necessity, and it's not because of wages. It's due primarily to heavy regulation. That is fact. The total regulatory burden is around $1.75 trillion annually.
@DigitalShaolin Again, removing all this regulation would only put the US/UK on equal footing with the likes of China and India, assuming we want to deregulate to that extreme. If two countries have the same sort of regulations and taxes, but one of them has labour at a fraction of the cost, the choice to a business is obvious.
Businesses are not charities. They are not going to pay more for labour costs than they have to.
@AnnoyedDragon Wrong. There would be additional costs of setting up businesses overseas. It's not economical to move businesses overseas just so that you can pay the very lowest paid workers less money. This also ignores the many jobs that are exported that aren't low paying jobs. Many companies setup foreign branches and they don't pay any less money. That is what you don't understand. You ignore the cost savings of producing things domestically also. You can't see the big picture.
@DigitalShaolin If you think giving businesses free reign is a cure all and guarantee for prosperity for all, I welcome you to move to a country in which they have all this freedom so that you can enjoy it yourself.
@AnnoyedDragon There aren't any truly free market countries in the world. If there were I would definitely move there, but there aren't. Also, you realize that the last people who would EVER want a totally free market are the biggest corporations don't you? They are the ones who lobby for all these regulations, because it doesn't hurt them. It only hurts the smaller businesses, and thereby lets the mega corporations attain virtual monopolies. That is the only effect that regulations have.
@DigitalShaolin Basically nothing exists in the real world that matches your ideal economy, it's a fantasy.
I wonder how much America would have to change to attract that all American company Apple back home? Given they are now making their workers sign agreements to not commit suicide, because the work conditions are so inhumane.
Wouldn't it be great if American's had the opportunity to work just like that?
@AnnoyedDragon Capitalism drives wages up, not down. If we still operated on free market capitalism wages as a whole would have kept going up in the last few decades, but fascism has ruined that. Capitalism provides better working conditions, not worse. The only thing you can see is working conditions of the lowest paid workers in China, so you are unable to see the real problems.
@DigitalShaolin I have yet to see any evidence that capitalism pushes up wages. Maybe the averages, given that executive pay has gone up 40% on average this year alone, but everyone else's wages have stagnated in real terms.
I get the impression you are going to say regulation and taxes is the cause. While I agree there is too much regulation, I don't see the logic in how removing minimum wage and abolishing regulation would make wages go up, particularly in a economic downturn.
@AnnoyedDragon You don't know history then. Ford workers were paid the equivalent of around $2200 per week around 1920, and at that time none of those workers qualified to be in any tax bracket. So they were paid $2200 per week, totally tax free. This was before any minimum wage laws existed. It was pure capitalism that enabled them to make such high wages. Also minimum wage laws don't raise wages, they simply increase unemployment, in America at least.
@DigitalShaolin Again, as I keep finding myself having to explain, the conditions in which those wages were paid no longer exist. Globalism didn't exist back then, instant communication over the Internet didn't exist. Businesses no longer have to rely on the local population for labour and consumers, they can produce and sell anywhere in the world.
Modern capitalism always creates a race to the bottom in wages, because they get to cherry pick labour from anywhere in the world.
@AnnoyedDragon Globalism doesn't change anything. If the whole world adopted free market capitalism then the whole world would benefit. Expanding the population that can contribute only helps capitalism, it doesn't hurt it. Part of the reason that those in China have lower standards of living is because of their government's central bank artificially keeping the US Dollar competitive, thereby hurting the Yuan, and hurting the purchasing power and standard of living of Chinese cititzens.
@DigitalShaolin Sorry, I cannot take a argument that globalism doesn't matter seriously. It has a considerable impact on the way capitalism operates today, making past examples none representative of modern capitalisms affect.
It's very easy to come up with fantasy scenarios in which everything works out, but this is the real world, and in the real world things rarely work as well as they do on paper.
@AnnoyedDragon In a free market, that couldn't happen. It wouldn't be possible, and Chinese citizens would enjoy a much higher standard of living. You really don't know much at all about capitalism.
@DigitalShaolin Why not ask Peter Schiff? In his version of capitalism you should be thankful to have a job in Wall Mart; which has terrible pay, worse than minimum wage if he had his way. And if you don't like the conditions, tough, you get no say in the matter.
This seems to be more a problem with ideological differences than actual factual problems. You treat capitalism as a cure all, without any real examples and ignoring fundamental modern differences from back then.
@AnnoyedDragon The problems you have with capitalism are not caused by capitalism. The economic issues that face us today are completely the result of controlled markets, not free ones. That is simply fact, but most people, you included, are not familiar enough with economics to understand why.
@DigitalShaolin I feel you have a idealistic view of capitalism that doesn't account for the changes to the world economy since its glory days, that assumes the inherently predatory nature of business wouldn't equally apply to their employees.
I'm not anti capitalism, as with most things; it does well when it is implemented reasonably. But handing all that power and unaccountability over to businesses would simply replace the government iron fist with a corporate one.
You focus only on the lowest paying jobs. There are all sorts of jobs that have been exported, including very high paying jobs. All jobs are being exported, not because of wages.
@DigitalShaolin Just because I'm saying regulations are not the primary factor when it comes to attracting back jobs, doesn't mean I don't think over regulation doesn't have its negative impact.
As I have repeatedly said, I am against extremist views. We need a balance between socialism and capitalism, an extreme in either is always bad. If you want to be treated as a disposable resource, then let businesses have absolute freedom.
Peter your an idiot on this matter. Places like walmert that will push wages down are the financial equal to a person standing on the top of a cliff telling a person hanging from the cliff "I will save you, if you give me your labor for pennies for the rest of your life" The person hanging HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO TAKE SOMETHING AND NOT DIE.
conti1 Peter would argue that the person can choose to hang from a different cliff (get a different job) but the simple fact is there is a limitation to the number of jobs, so you cant just get another, no matter your education or other factors. In fact the number of people working right now is all we need working for society to work. We dont have an employement problem we have a cost of living problem.
COnti2 These problems stem from a single reason, speculative pricing, not basing costs of goods and services on actual costs of production, but basing them on the profit maximization which takes more from anyone buying it than should be taken. This is based from greed of all people involved. Only people benefiting, or hoping to benefit from it endorse this sociopathic exploit of fellow people. And anyone who endorses can not possibly be called a christian.
@d3adp001 Free competition takes care of profit maximization. Greed is a constant, and is handled best in a competitive free market. Blaming these problems on greed is like blaming airplane crashes on gravity.
@cowboy1165 Greed is not constant is conditional and a choice. And no free competion does not negate profit maximization, that only occurs in a small number of markets, but once a few corps gain a foothold it is no longer free competition, its limited competition. This arguement is based on an ASSUMPTION that ALL businesses will compete down to the lowest cost to customer. That assumption is false businesses ONLY COMPETE WHEN THEY HAVE TO.
Many corps find that they simply hold their price and others in the industry will hold to a similar price point. Anyone who rocks this boat is quickly pushed out by the existing corps. There is many techniques used for this, maybe you should read up on tucker, and many others who tried to enter into a FREE COMPETITION market. In addition no market will ever be free due to ALL of the many regulations like enviromental, zoning, osha, hiring practices, etc there is no suck thing as free competition
@d3adp001 The "cliff" is where you need to focus your attention. I think you have it backwards, we have a cost of living problem, because of our employment demands.
Peter schiff used to talk tough about the banks bit now he is just parroting newt gingrich. He is trying to take the focus off of the FRAUDULENT criminals, who heisted 750 billion with financial terrorism. The maffia could only dream of such theft.
We all know the Federal Reserve and the governmet is BOUGHT and PAID FOR by the banks. If Lloyd Blankfein and Jamie Dimon goto prison, WHERE THEY BELONG, then that will send shcokwaves of sudden reformation and we'll see the banksters dethroned by true bankers. WHY AREN"T YOU SAYING THIS SCHIFF.....YOU KNOW ITS TRUE.
Peter Schiff, those banksters commited fraud, SAY IT SAY IT SAY IT you asshole!!! I used to love Peter Schiff, but I think Lloyd Blankfein has cut him a check.
@joshtheobjectivist He's said that banks committed fraud in some interview, its on youtube. Yet the supposed regulations people believe we have were supposed to have put a check on it but didn't. Fraud is punishable in a free market and capitalism punishes fraudulent people severely.
If you implement more critical thinking, you'll find Pete tends to spout garbage most of the time... and that is not counting his logical fallacies that are replete in most of his appearances.
Unions and corporations are the same animal in different skin. Workers organizing is fine, but corrupt union leaders that manipulate government and elections are as bad as corporations.
oh god yukkk why would you even go to an interview those disgusting people Mr. Schiff maybe some brainwashed idiots might learn some real knowledge Thank you for the Info as always Mr. Schiff (more like Mr. Genius)
We DON'T want jobs!!! We want a career! We don't want to live pay check to pay check! ... I would love to start a business as i'm sure many people do... to do this we need both the money and the skills!!!
I respect Peter Schiff, but if he had his way; wage disparity would explode.
Without minimum wage or union representation, businesses would have us undercutting 3rd world labour if we want a job. They would create a race to the bottom in which only they would benefit.
Peter Schiff's customers are people with enough money to invest, so a serf class of ultra poor wouldn't really hurt his business. But ultimately, businesses need customers, and they won't get any if they don't pay people enough.
@AnnoyedDragon I would recommend his book "how an economy grows and why it crashes" to understand where demand comes from. demand dont come from people having enough pay... it comes from production and savings
@JinGwee If you produce a good or service, in order to stay afloat; you need a customer. No customer, your business won't survive. It is really that simple.
If businesses create a race to the bottom in wages, people won't have the expendable income to buy their goods and services. Only if your customers are well off people like yourself, such as Peter Schiff's business, does this not pose a problem. But for the vast majority of businesses, a wage starved general public isn't going to spend.
@AnnoyedDragon Yes but where does demand come from? From production. Anyone can have demand. Even a 1 year old baby can demand for milk. But to satisfy your demand, can you produce something else to trade for the things that you want? Do you have savings to buy those things? The key is production and savings
@AnnoyedDragon False, Min wage was introduced by unions looking to out price 'blacks" from the south undercutting northerners. No union employee makes min wage, yet they insist on it. Not for the poor but for the members. Interesting history of, besides Ford was paying his employees the highest wages of the times, no unions at the time. Min wage prices people out of jobs and puts them on the gov't dole, historically.
@pbfrank13 We live in a global economy now. You can be based in a tax haven, have your call centres in India, produce in China and sell in America.
This wasn't possible only a few decades back, when you were forced to hire locally and shipping goods abroad was a long and expensive process. The trickle down effect often referenced no longer applies. The cheapest labour possible is hired, and if you want that job you have to undercut them, them being slave wage labour.
It doesn't make economic sense to compete with a country that can produce something cheaper. No country can effectively produce everything they need themselves which is why countries voluntarily trade to begin with. despite common beliefs labor isn't the only reason or a main reason to outsource jobs its part of the reason but there is a lot more to it besides "companies wanting to pay people a dollar a day in China" it costs more to produce things here because of litigation, tax, regulation etc
@pbfrank13 I doubt if all the taxes and regulation were removed, these companies would suddenly rush back home. You'd just be putting yourself on equal footing with the likes of China and India, but they would still have an advantage in terms of cheap labour.
The only way to bring those jobs back home would be to make hiring an American/British worker cheaper than hiring over there, and that would require un-liveable wages and working conditions resulting in suicides.
@AnnoyedDragon It would no doubt help companies already here to expand, encourage new research and development and new industries. We were the top in technology, health science, and others. Now we over consume and underdeveloped and under export. China has cheap labor sure, but they can't produce everything, and our standard of living will unfortunately need to diminish whether we like it or not. China loans us money, once they reinvest in themselves there SoL will increase and rightly so.
@pbfrank13 I say I respect Peter Schiff because he does talk a lot of sense. But ultimately when it comes down to it, he argues in favour of people like himself. If he had his way, the vast majority of people would see a vast reduction in their quality of life.
I'm against government over spending to the point that they over tax and even run a deficit, but I am not for minimalistic government, because business is inherently predatory and we need someone looking out for the majority.
We need to get the government out of the way, federal government is not the solution to our problems, it is the problem, as corrupt as reagan was, he has a point.
@jmjfanss It is correct that the problem right now is too much government, I will not deny that. But we cannot get government totally out of the way, as that is just a different sort of extreme that will simply lead to different problems.
It's best to try and find a balance in everything. The vast majority of the public would suffer if businesses were given too much freedom.
@jmjfanss Corporate freedom to exploit and plunder a society through any means necessary is not the sort of freedom we want. Banks get away with a lot of what they do because of lack of regulation and the governments unwillingness to enforce the rules. You want the corporate version of that, running rampant across your country like we see them do in 3rd world countries; were the people are abused and discarded?
We need a balance, extremes any direction only lead to suffering for the majority.
Corporations can only survive with your dollars and have to work within the law. You are free to support or not support a particular company, etc. Government, on the other hand, forces you to pay them through taxation and they ARE the law. Based on this fact, which one should we really be more wary of?
This idea that market freedom would end in a "plunder" of society is just uninformed socialist propaganda. Capitalism today is not free market, it's actually fascism.
@myhipsi Basically every country we look at in which regulations and taxes are enough to attract these businesses, we see abuse of labour and resource exploitation. This includes all American companies like Apple.
You talk about them needing to be within the law, but what laws get to stay? What's a law and what's red tape? Saying government needs to get out the way is as vague as the people demanding the rich pay more taxes, it needs to be clarified.
@AnnoyedDragon You are missing the fact that inflated fiat destroys the "value" of money, also prices of consumer goods will fall to accommodate falling wages. The abuse of labor is a "red herring." If you are not happy with the job, and pay you agreed to, you are free to find another. Other-wise you are abusing yourself. Now, if you go back and re-read all of the posts, keep that in mind.
@cowboy1165 A red herring is defined as diverting attention, which I believe your fiat currency comment qualifies under. I am fully aware of our debt backed currency system, it is just not relevant to this particular discussion.
it is true that the price and quality of goods will drop to accommodate the spending power of the available consumer base. My question is, what spending power? The slave wages we are expected to compete with have no disposable income, it is only enough to stay alive.
@cowboy1165 Lastly, I see you are referencing Peter Schiff's comments in this video. His comments seem to suggest he believes the lack of better paying/treating jobs is evidence that your current job pays and treats you well. This is nonsense. Because they cannot find better pay than Wall Mart, is not evidence that Wall Mart pays their employees well, it just means the job market is so bad that Wall Mart looks good.
His arguments empower employers at everyone else's expense, you're disposable.
What laws get to stay? The laws that protect your right to life, liberty, and property. That's about it. Regulations, at best, have unintended consequences, at worst, are designed to sustain monopolies and make it more difficult for small start-ups to compete while making every product/service more expensive. Once you give government the power to regulate essentially everything, the person (or corporation) with the most influence (aka. money) gets to write the regulations.
@myhipsi If corporations are writing the regulations, they are doing a terrible job. America and the United Kingdom both have bloated states that make business difficult.
I'm against any extreme, it only results in pain for the majority. Most of the people in here arguing for minimalist government are not in a position to benefit from it.
Peter Schiff is in a position to benefit regardless of what happens to the majority of people, so his recommendations are to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Yes, the regulations make business difficult (ie. Small businesses, corporations without political clout, small start-ups, etc.). IOW, regulations kill competition and allow the politically connected multi-national corporations to stay on top by way of government hand-outs, and by means of economies of scale they are able to afford to employ tax lawyers, etc. to work through the regulations.
If Peter Schiff benefits regardless, then what would he have to gain by lying?
@myhipsi Peter Schiff's customers are well off individuals wishing to invest their existing fortune, he is not hurt by the majority being reverted into low paying serfs, they are not his customers to begin with. He'd actually benefit from significant inequality, as the rich would become richer; and have more money to invest with him.
As for regulations, as I've said earlier, there needs to be clarification. It's very vague to say all regulations are simply a barrier that needs to be scrapped.
Still, that doesn't explain why he would want to do business in a country full of low paid serfs. I would argue that the more wealthy people their are, the more people that are able to invest their money into his brokerage firm. Wealth benefits everyone. To put it in perspective, Walmart would go bankrupt if everybody were serfs. Walmart needs a middle class to continue doing business.
Like I said before, regulations benefit government and some corporations, not individuals.
@myhipsi Wallmart doesn't need a middle class, as their target customer is at the very bottom of the economic ladder, at least in the western world. They're in a position to benefit from a growing class of poor.
Peter Schiff accepts customers from around the world, so to say he is based in a country full of growing serfs isn't accurate. As with globalism, he operates his business on a global scale.
Walmart most certainly does need a middle class. No company that sells products and services benefits from a growing class of poor.
Peter schiff cannot accept money from international clients because of U.S. law. That's why he had to set up Europac Canada because people in Canada wanted to invest with him but couldn't.
It is counter to logic to assume that any company wants to see their potential customers become poor. You seem to have an awful cynical view of the world.
@myhipsi I did not say that Wall Mart didn't benefit from a middle class, I said their market is the lowest cost goods. People who previously bought from higher quality suppliers may be forced to shop at Wall Mart because of diminishing wages.
Businesses don't want their customers to become poor, because they need people with disposable income. But they want to keep their human resource costs as low as possible, and in this; they indirectly make their customers poor.
And why do you think they would want their human resource cost to be as low as possible? Because their customers demand it by wanting the biggest bang for their buck. It's consumers that drive market prices, not businesses. Businesses would love to jack up prices and pay higher wages, because higher paid workers are generally more productive, so it's a win-win. You're directing the blame for a lower standard of living on corporations when you should be looking at government.
@myhipsi I have to question how customers force companies to not pass on profits to the workers. Maybe in bottom of the line goods, but when you buy quality; the workers still don't see any of it. I've seen £50 T-shirts here in the UK, you cannot tell me that company couldn't afford to pay their workers more than the pittance they get for their sweat shop labour.
Businesses would not love to pay their workers more, they show that when they are given the opportunity to; but they still don't.
@AnnoyedDragon Do you not see labor as a voluntary deal? People are OFFERED a wage to work. Accept the offer or don't work? Why don't you start your own business? Why not plant your own garden and build your own house? It is understandable that people take a developed economy for granted. The same people take MONEY for granted. That ignorance is what has allowed fractional reserve banking and fiat currency to deprive the middle and lower class of their wealth. Ron Paul 2012 if you understand.
Do you not see slavery as a voluntary deal? The slaves were offered food, clothes, and shelter in exchange for work. They could have chosen to simply not work!
Seriously, this is NO DIFFERENT than telling people under this capitalist system where resources (LIKE FOOD) are distributed based on wages paid by their employer that they don't have to take what work is offered, they can find a ditch and starve to death.
To pretend that labor and management are on equal footing is...
@margoliesmedia What's being advocated here is the vast concentration of wealth within a tiny few hands, and the vast majority expected to be thankful for the crumbs thrown their way; in exchange for a lifetime of labour.
I get the impression people have been brain washed into thinking empowering the rich is going to result in prosperity for all. Every country we look at where this has happened, the so called emerging economies, that is never the case. Poverty for all, prosperity for a few.
You have to understand that corporations like walmart not only have to keep their customers happy via low prices, but they also have to net a good return to their shareholders who will sell their stock if they don't get a decent return. If you really want to support and encourage higher paid workers then try to stick to domestic items only. Buy at small shops, etc. But I can promise you will be paying more for the same basic products/services.
@myhipsi Is it such a surprise that there are so many economic imbalances, when entire countries can be turned into slave wage producers for the sole benefit of their employers; while elsewhere the population is only expected to keep consuming to keep profits flowing?
I don't see how empowering international corporations will make our situation better, I just see it concentrating wealth further, getting paid a pittance and told be be grateful for what little quality of life we can maintain.
You should rephrase that: "...turned into slave wage producers for the benefit of their employers AND consumers that demand low prices."
It's not about empowering multi-national corporations, it's about empowering you and I to have the freedom to start a successful business without the hurdle of countless taxes and regulations, so that one day we may out-compete one of those giants.
By empowering government, we are ensuring monopoly and futher concentration of wealth.
@myhipsi Financial enslavement is empowering? How exactly do you intend to start a business in the first place, if your wages barely cover living costs? The vast majority of people would be poor serfs with no social mobility, which it has been pointed out is why unions were formed in the first place, to protect workers from abuse by employers.
Abusing producers to benefit consumers is a contradiction, because consumers need a decent paying job to have disposable income in the first place.
No, financial freedom is empowering, government enslavement is disenfranchisement. How did all those immigrants, who came to America with next to nothing, eventually make it and prosper? Because they enjoyed a free market with next to no regulation or taxes.
Nobody is abusing anyone. Like I said, to work for a specified wage is VOLUNTARY. Consumers would have much more disposible income if they weren't taxed so heavily. Big government doesn't produce, it just leeches.
@myhipsi I've repeatedly stated that globalism has changed the trickle down effect, it's gone.
Today Apple can have their Foxconn workers producing their gadgets for the equivalent of $300 a month, with 80-100hrs overtime and no lunch breaks. Of course that wage is double what it used to be, the suicides prompted an increase. Who needs union representation, right?
You interested in undercutting those conditions to bring the jobs back home?
Yet if Apple manufactured their products in the U.S., it would cost closer to $1000 for an ipad2 instead of $650 and U.S. consumers would be no better off. There's no benefit to making more money if everything you buy is more expensive.
The government should provide a business friendly environment so that these companies could competitively manufacture in the U.S.
@myhipsi Apple's products are expensive because they rip off their customers, not because of quality. Foxconn is a budget hardware manufacturer. Apple's profit margins are huge and clearly they are not trickling them down.
What I don't understand about your arguments is why you think these companies clearly mistreating and abusing human beings are suddenly going to get a conscience when they come home to the US/UK. You sound like you condone their treatment if it cuts costs for consumers.
Apple clearly doesn't rip off their customers or else they wouldn't be selling their products faster than they can manufacture them. People value Apple's products for the price Apple is charging.
These companies are NOT mistreating these employees. Nobody is being forced to work for any of these companies. They are free to go back to subsistance farming as they were before these factories showed up. Why don't they go back to farming? because their factory jobs provide more.
@myhipsi That's PR. When people buy Apple they not only buy into a false impression of quality, they buy into the mindset, the manufactured culture. I wonder what hardcore Apple fans would think to spent one day in their factories?
The rest of your comment makes me wonder if it is worth maintaining this discussion with you. Your arguments are not only inconsistent, but you appear to lack basic human empathy. Claiming prosperity in one sentence, while condoning inhuman treatment in another.
It's not PR. I have several Apple products that I'm completely satisfied with, and I know many others who feel the same way. I value my Apple products more than the money I paid for them, that's capitalism.
I'm not lacking empathy, you are without even knowing it. You are suggesting that it would be better if none of these companies ever set up factories in China. If that were the case, these Chinese peasants would be working 12 hours a day on the farm, and for very little.
You have cognitive dissonance, you know that? You are perfectly happy for these people to be treated like serfs, that they should feel lucky to be exploited and pushed suicidal, but think if these same companies got free reign here; it would be prosperity for all.
I honestly think it is more a matter of you believing you'd be on the beneficiaries side of this arrangement, rather than the exploited. Odds aren't in your favour frankly, more serfs than rich.
Cognitive dissonance? Apparently you lack the understanding fo the definition. Anyway, you obviously aren't listening to what I'm saying. It would be great if everybody could have everything they wanted but it isn't that simple or easy. These people are better off with the $300/month they get from factory working compared with farming. That's all I'm saying.
I'm not on anyone's side, and if you think I'm being classist, you're clearly not undertstanding my points.
@myhipsi I feel I'm done here. I don't enjoy talking to someone that thinks like you, it's becoming rather unpleasant. You sound like a sociopath with the way you defend human exploitation.
I think that anyone in America making less than $15 just stop working and refuse to work for less than $20 and hour. How would you like to see this nation just stop in its tracks? I think that business owners and such are worthy of good salaries, but having ridiculous salaries over the workers who produce them that money is ridiculous and they are helping no one but themselves. Offer these rich business owners to work for $8-10 and hour and watch them laugh at the ridiculousness of the offer.
TheTruthHurtsYup 2 months ago
This woman will have my babies, she just doesn't know it yet.
aegisgfx 3 months ago
low wages are better than no wages. I made more money when minimum wage was $5.75 and when it was $6.25 than now that it is $7.25 because I don't have a job.
upyr1 3 months ago
Socialism is the reason why were in this mess, how could it be the answer?
pseudoprodigy 3 months ago
@pseudoprodigy
Look outside your own country, most successful countries on Earth run Democratic socialist governments, and they don't have the constant boom and busts like you do. Stability is the key, and you can't get that with pure capitalism.
aegisgfx 3 months ago
I don't think the Founding Fathers would look kindly on our Federal Gov today.
tayronachan 3 months ago
THE ONLY THINGS WE NEED TO DO ARE:
ELIMINATE FEDERAL RESERVE.BRING PRINTING IN HOUSE.
REFORM GOVERNMENT SPENDING.
PROBLEM SOLVED.
nh2600 3 months ago
how can someone so clearly predict real estate crash and talk such nonsense
" we have to take away power from politicians "
how can that be? they make the laws, they can fine you put you in jail, they always had the most power.
" government is the problem that people get paid less in walmart"
obviously if minimum wage did not exist walmart would pay less, and minimum wage and other worker protections are done by government, so how government is the problem for losers who work in Walmert?
vartart99 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vartart99 "how can that be? they make the laws, they can fine you put you in jail, they always had the most power."
Stop voting for the same idiots (republicans & democrats). That's a good start.
"obviously if minimum wage did not exist walmart would pay less, and minimum wage and other worker protections are done by government, so how government is the problem for losers who work in Walmert?"
You don't know what Walmart would pay, in a truly free market, anything is be possible.
TWSceptic 3 months ago
The posting below is my agument againt forceing people to work for slave wages and I have nothing against jews in general.
Gassebol 3 months ago
Lets turn the argument around Peter.
Why rescuing the jews during WW2? They should have known what was going to happen to them. Why didnt they move from eastern europe in time? They had only themself to blame.
Do you agree Peter?
Gassebol 3 months ago
@Gassebol Godwin fail, you lose.
TWSceptic 3 months ago
awesome!
TaxTheRich4FewerJobs 3 months ago
@Templeton777 she is really hot.
DaveC86 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Peter is right about 90% of the time. And so is another guy who just published a book on what everyone who is being taken advantage of can do to get back in the game after having their clocks cleaned... "Money Slaves And Cool Aid"... Get - The - Book dot com (solve the riddle and learn what to do). Good luck pounding it through their thick skulls Peter.
TMIAmerica 4 months ago
I have an issue with Walmart. They subsidize their labor costs by handing out welfare applications to their employees.
The free market, if it existed, would eat Walmart alive.
caltrop69 4 months ago
@caltrop69 my advise is to buy the canned food while it's still cheap at walmart
jhunted7667 4 months ago
oh btw, i "thumbs up" because of the chick
ricodelta1 4 months ago 2
i bet she doesnt wear panties when she reads the news....
because that shit gets her hot
ricodelta1 4 months ago
Shes hot ass
kcozgrove 4 months ago 2
@kcozgrove so hot
EV1LDC4Teggy 4 months ago
in the words of Jesus - "Peter , You are the rock upon witch my church stands "
[ or something like that to that effect ;) ] . This guy never fails to impress me with His totally accurate and direct approach to problems within this "syphilitic" system . Awesome stuff :) .
artyfarty3 4 months ago
@artyfarty3 are you saying that the economy has a social disease or just the people of wallstreet , I know about the brokers having sex breaks with prostitutes instead of lunch , are you suggesting that we give the system a shot of 100% pure Constitution instead of paul Enriches 606 seryyyyyyyyrum
jhunted7667 4 months ago
@jhunted7667 yes - the so called "capitalists" of wall street have been stricken by a socialist virus - not that there is anything wrong with Socialism , we need Socialism in democracy - it's the only safety net from certain death for the poor and those unfortunate ones who ( maybe with no fault of their own ie: disabled people ) can't "make it" in the system . Peter has been talking about "crownie capitalism" of Wall Street for some time now , and i for one totally agree with Him .
artyfarty3 4 months ago
I would love to sleep with that woman Hot class.
jezza1789 4 months ago
I'd like to suck her puss !
polarbeach 4 months ago
Watch Peter Schiff's others videos. They're incredible if you understand basic economics.
bocanutz 4 months ago
Soon wallmart will monopolize the food industry , and run all the chain markets out of business as well...
The future of man will be down to 3 Hubs , Wallmart - Homedepot -and Mortage companies...
drsmith963 4 months ago
I went into wallmart today and was blown away by the low prices , at the same time their worked had circles under their eyes and looked like zombies.
When the money stops trickeling down then the blood will flow in the streets.
drsmith963 4 months ago
@drsmith963 All you guys complaining of Walmart et al, are realy complaining of capitalism. Capitalism made the USA the wealthiest nation on earth, & will do the same for China. You guys just don't like anyone trying to make the most money for the least expenditure. So you complain about what Walmart does to workers. My ex worked there & no complaints. Anyone overworked at Walmart needs to go somewhere else. No where else? Then re-play the video, above, and see what Schiff says about it.
Icriedtoday 4 months ago
Peters right, again.
treysparker 4 months ago
Just start a business!
Two problems:
A. The capital requirements were put there, by the private sector (think insurance) to keep you out to PROTECT ALREADY ESTABLISHED BUSINESSES.
B. The regulation was put there, buy government at the behest of the private sector, to keep you out and TO PROTECT ALREADY ESTABLISHED BUSINESS.
We have this government not by chance, but because under capitalism, everything is for sale, including government. It is literally the best government money can buy.
sbacon92 4 months ago
yeah sure - "walmart is doing them a favour"???? by paying shit wages???
the recession and high unemployment forces people to accept low wages!!!
i used to respect this guy - he has now gone right down in my estimation
supplementcouponcode 4 months ago
She is hot ;) but Schiff is wrong in that the original goal of the feed was sound money. The goal from the start was to align themselves with the government so they could confiscate the wealth of America! Peter should know this by now....
agrassel49 4 months ago
I could watch her all day
sljs1010 4 months ago
Corporations are seeing the threat of the people using the peoples government.
In a real Republic, the government are the peoples strong arm. Corporate infiltrate government & make Gov what it is today.
The corporates Infiltrate, make changes, & when people complain they blame the government. despite the stark corporate finger prints all over our comon problems.
Like corporates are behind prohibition, eg workers smoking weed, Corps incite government to act = Corporations regulate people.
Rand0mManic 4 months ago
Comment removed
Rand0mManic 4 months ago
The more of a douchebag I become the more money I make. I love it.
judutchinski 4 months ago
@judutchinski you get paid to be a douchebag? i had this idea a while ago to start a troll business. where i hire trolls and have people pay to use their expertise. is this what you're talking about? did you beat me to it?
margoliesmedia 4 months ago
I agree with a lot of things Peters says BUT why the hell should any worker thank Walmart? The problem is Peter is jumping the gun with his reasoning. If we had sound money with Gold & Silver the we could say people could develop companies on sound foundations but be cause the fiat money along with off shoring of jobs has destroyed the rights & wages of the Western Worker.Walmarts part of the problem, theyre not to be thanked.People to be thanked are companies who havent sold out their workers
TheMystic2100 4 months ago
@TheMystic2100
good job
supplementcouponcode 4 months ago
do none of you remember why unions were formed in the first place? this country has already had what he wants and that's why unions were formed in the first place because the people in them were tired of living in fear of either having a shitty paying jobs were they are expendable or no job at all and living in the gutter
ingzut 4 months ago
This is, unfortunately, another interview where the interviewee is lead to the answer the interviewer wants.
"There you go, Peter Schiff says 'Abolish the Fed'."
He did not say that, you simpleton.
Interview people better and include more context in your 'there you go' tag lines, or you're not much better than those channels we rage against.
theloganrocks 4 months ago
Peter for president!
ForbiddenStallion 4 months ago
I thank God for Peter Schiff. He speaks truth to power.
lewisstretch 4 months ago
Peter Schiff sounds about a hundred times smarter than this socialist whore.
Bergertim 4 months ago
Reforming Washington is a pipe dream. As far as I can tell your solution is to elect the right people. I have a better idea, let people secede.
Spideynw 4 months ago
Peter explains is perfectly. Look what happened to the USSR. The same the happened to them. No private sector due too many public sector jobs.
The people in the USA will never wake up to this.
smasila 4 months ago
This woman is clueless.
TimeScapesMovie 4 months ago
All girls are to be liked, now lets get to the real issues 'the economy'.
Ctemple2012 4 months ago
Nationalize the fed and bank of england. Take the power from the vampires
nobodymuch 4 months ago
@nobodymuch,
Nationalizing the central bank of any country will not solve the problem. It will simply shift control of the monopoly cartel from one group of crooks to their partners in crime. Red herring.
Schiff (rightly) advocates imposing strict regulations on government itself (US constitution) that prevent it from having broad powers over the economy. "Vampires" are attracted to government service as well as to corrupting those who can grant favors because they wield too much power.
jokertim777 4 months ago
I love this girl
ajvhan 4 months ago
Sigh, I would just hammer my dick in her mouth.
martinbelmont 4 months ago
@martinbelmont
lol. A little ott.
dmt257 4 months ago
@dmt257 LOL I know thats the point. I was horny.
martinbelmont 4 months ago
She used something from Mother Jones as proof lol, Roll Schiff Roll!
pinegrove33 4 months ago
Lol Schiff schooling the socialists/communists of RT, brings a smile to my face.
And I find the obvious tactics of RT of picking attractive female newsanchors who can barely read, disgusting. Yes, let the public focus on the pretty face, shut off your mind, and let us fill it with our delightful slave-breeding socialist propaganda.
*Schiff starts defending the Constitution and immediately cutting Schiff off* "So very quickly Peter because we're almost out of time." Sure you are, "babe".
darkmannin 4 months ago
Sound money will need the sharing of scientific & technological inheritance for any future economy to work or be sustainable & prosperous for all.
By sustaining a 40 hour work week, when we have had over 50 years of ever increasing automation in the work force, has led to human labor being DE-valued, along with cheep 3rd world labor. To sustain the 40 hour work week, we build crap, to sustain wasteful high-turnover. Work cheaper than the 3rd world & robots, this is what corporations now offer.
SilverLadyBug999 4 months ago
Name on country where Schiff's form of capitalism has ever worked. I can name heaps where democratic socialism works. Schiff is a rich prick.
movieklump 4 months ago
@movieklump Capitalism is what works. All socialistic elements harm the prosperity that capitalism brings. History has proven this.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago 2
@DigitalShaolin We are not living in the glory days of capitalism.
Businesses no longer rely on the population in which they are based for labour and consumers, it's a global system now, they can hire/sell anywhere. Today the business keeps all the profits, while their sweat shop workforce are paid a pittance.
The prosperity capitalism used to bring, the trickle down effect, no longer exists. Yet, we are expected to keep their profits up by consuming, despite real wages ever diminishing.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon Real wages are diminished because of inflation. The value of the dollar has gone down around 95% since the Fed was established in 1913. That is not capitalism. That is not free markets. Businesses don't export jobs because they can hire foreign workers cheaply. They do it because of the repressive taxes and regulations placed upon them by the government. Those regulations are put in place by the largest corporations in order to crush small businesses. Again, that is not capitalism
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin I've already been through all this with someone else, check my other comments.
Yes inflation is hurting wages, but it is inflation on top of already diminishing wages because of a race to the bottom created by businesses, hiring the cheapest possible labour they can access. Regulation and taxes play no role with this, as even if all those were resolved; they can still hire several Chinese workers for one American. The only way to get those jobs back is to undercut them.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon The jobs would never have been exported in the first place if it wasn't for repressive regulations and heavy taxation. You need to actually talk to real business owners sometime. Then you will realize what hurts business. We have low paying jobs in America because we are service based now. Wal Mart pays a market wage. Those are low productivity jobs. High productivity jobs no longer exist in America because we use our reserve currency status to export money in return for goods.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin Getting rid of taxes and regulations would only put the US/UK economy on equal footing with the likes of China and India. but they would still have an advantage in terms of cheap labour. The only way to attract those jobs home would be if hiring an American/British worker was the same/cheaper than hiring a foreign worker, keeping in mind they are on slave wages and have terrible working conditions.
So I'm afraid I don't believe that, you are free to disagree of course.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
You are talking about lower wage job. For high wages job, we need more qualifying candidates here. Unfortunately, this is something we don't have. I am sorry to say that our education system is the engine for creating idiots.
chriswu5 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon Not true. If everything else was equal, it's a big advantage to produce things domestically just because the goods don't have to be shipped across the world in ships, planes, etc., and we would be able to use our local resources efficiently. America used to produce the cheapest goods in the world while paying the highest wages. That can happen again, but there is no chance at all of it happening in our corporate fascist environment that exists in America.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin Again, as a business, why would I hire Americans when I can hire several Chinese for the same price? Abolishing taxes and regulations just puts America's system on equal footing, but unless American's work for a pittance; China still has the advantage.
I also don't believe those conditions could be recreated, as the environment in which they took place no longer exists. We have globalism now, businesses can hire anywhere, getting the cheapest possible labour.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon You are focusing only on labor costs, which is a mistake. I've already stated reasons why labor costs would be easily offset if changes were made to the system. Businesses don't want to export all their jobs and money overseas, but it has become a necessity, and it's not because of wages. It's due primarily to heavy regulation. That is fact. The total regulatory burden is around $1.75 trillion annually.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin Again, removing all this regulation would only put the US/UK on equal footing with the likes of China and India, assuming we want to deregulate to that extreme. If two countries have the same sort of regulations and taxes, but one of them has labour at a fraction of the cost, the choice to a business is obvious.
Businesses are not charities. They are not going to pay more for labour costs than they have to.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon Wrong. There would be additional costs of setting up businesses overseas. It's not economical to move businesses overseas just so that you can pay the very lowest paid workers less money. This also ignores the many jobs that are exported that aren't low paying jobs. Many companies setup foreign branches and they don't pay any less money. That is what you don't understand. You ignore the cost savings of producing things domestically also. You can't see the big picture.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin If you think giving businesses free reign is a cure all and guarantee for prosperity for all, I welcome you to move to a country in which they have all this freedom so that you can enjoy it yourself.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon There aren't any truly free market countries in the world. If there were I would definitely move there, but there aren't. Also, you realize that the last people who would EVER want a totally free market are the biggest corporations don't you? They are the ones who lobby for all these regulations, because it doesn't hurt them. It only hurts the smaller businesses, and thereby lets the mega corporations attain virtual monopolies. That is the only effect that regulations have.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin Basically nothing exists in the real world that matches your ideal economy, it's a fantasy.
I wonder how much America would have to change to attract that all American company Apple back home? Given they are now making their workers sign agreements to not commit suicide, because the work conditions are so inhumane.
Wouldn't it be great if American's had the opportunity to work just like that?
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon Capitalism drives wages up, not down. If we still operated on free market capitalism wages as a whole would have kept going up in the last few decades, but fascism has ruined that. Capitalism provides better working conditions, not worse. The only thing you can see is working conditions of the lowest paid workers in China, so you are unable to see the real problems.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin I have yet to see any evidence that capitalism pushes up wages. Maybe the averages, given that executive pay has gone up 40% on average this year alone, but everyone else's wages have stagnated in real terms.
I get the impression you are going to say regulation and taxes is the cause. While I agree there is too much regulation, I don't see the logic in how removing minimum wage and abolishing regulation would make wages go up, particularly in a economic downturn.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon You don't know history then. Ford workers were paid the equivalent of around $2200 per week around 1920, and at that time none of those workers qualified to be in any tax bracket. So they were paid $2200 per week, totally tax free. This was before any minimum wage laws existed. It was pure capitalism that enabled them to make such high wages. Also minimum wage laws don't raise wages, they simply increase unemployment, in America at least.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin Again, as I keep finding myself having to explain, the conditions in which those wages were paid no longer exist. Globalism didn't exist back then, instant communication over the Internet didn't exist. Businesses no longer have to rely on the local population for labour and consumers, they can produce and sell anywhere in the world.
Modern capitalism always creates a race to the bottom in wages, because they get to cherry pick labour from anywhere in the world.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon Globalism doesn't change anything. If the whole world adopted free market capitalism then the whole world would benefit. Expanding the population that can contribute only helps capitalism, it doesn't hurt it. Part of the reason that those in China have lower standards of living is because of their government's central bank artificially keeping the US Dollar competitive, thereby hurting the Yuan, and hurting the purchasing power and standard of living of Chinese cititzens.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin Sorry, I cannot take a argument that globalism doesn't matter seriously. It has a considerable impact on the way capitalism operates today, making past examples none representative of modern capitalisms affect.
It's very easy to come up with fantasy scenarios in which everything works out, but this is the real world, and in the real world things rarely work as well as they do on paper.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon In a free market, that couldn't happen. It wouldn't be possible, and Chinese citizens would enjoy a much higher standard of living. You really don't know much at all about capitalism.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin Why not ask Peter Schiff? In his version of capitalism you should be thankful to have a job in Wall Mart; which has terrible pay, worse than minimum wage if he had his way. And if you don't like the conditions, tough, you get no say in the matter.
This seems to be more a problem with ideological differences than actual factual problems. You treat capitalism as a cure all, without any real examples and ignoring fundamental modern differences from back then.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon The problems you have with capitalism are not caused by capitalism. The economic issues that face us today are completely the result of controlled markets, not free ones. That is simply fact, but most people, you included, are not familiar enough with economics to understand why.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin I feel you have a idealistic view of capitalism that doesn't account for the changes to the world economy since its glory days, that assumes the inherently predatory nature of business wouldn't equally apply to their employees.
I'm not anti capitalism, as with most things; it does well when it is implemented reasonably. But handing all that power and unaccountability over to businesses would simply replace the government iron fist with a corporate one.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
You focus only on the lowest paying jobs. There are all sorts of jobs that have been exported, including very high paying jobs. All jobs are being exported, not because of wages.
DigitalShaolin 4 months ago
@DigitalShaolin Just because I'm saying regulations are not the primary factor when it comes to attracting back jobs, doesn't mean I don't think over regulation doesn't have its negative impact.
As I have repeatedly said, I am against extremist views. We need a balance between socialism and capitalism, an extreme in either is always bad. If you want to be treated as a disposable resource, then let businesses have absolute freedom.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@movieklump The United States? Schiff's capitalism worked pretty well here.
Devious2323 4 months ago
The host is sooo into Peter :D !!! Peter! Peter! Peter!
TobiasAKL 4 months ago 4
Peter your an idiot on this matter. Places like walmert that will push wages down are the financial equal to a person standing on the top of a cliff telling a person hanging from the cliff "I will save you, if you give me your labor for pennies for the rest of your life" The person hanging HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO TAKE SOMETHING AND NOT DIE.
d3adp001 4 months ago
conti1 Peter would argue that the person can choose to hang from a different cliff (get a different job) but the simple fact is there is a limitation to the number of jobs, so you cant just get another, no matter your education or other factors. In fact the number of people working right now is all we need working for society to work. We dont have an employement problem we have a cost of living problem.
d3adp001 4 months ago
COnti2 These problems stem from a single reason, speculative pricing, not basing costs of goods and services on actual costs of production, but basing them on the profit maximization which takes more from anyone buying it than should be taken. This is based from greed of all people involved. Only people benefiting, or hoping to benefit from it endorse this sociopathic exploit of fellow people. And anyone who endorses can not possibly be called a christian.
d3adp001 4 months ago
@d3adp001 Free competition takes care of profit maximization. Greed is a constant, and is handled best in a competitive free market. Blaming these problems on greed is like blaming airplane crashes on gravity.
cowboy1165 4 months ago 7
@cowboy1165 Greed is not constant is conditional and a choice. And no free competion does not negate profit maximization, that only occurs in a small number of markets, but once a few corps gain a foothold it is no longer free competition, its limited competition. This arguement is based on an ASSUMPTION that ALL businesses will compete down to the lowest cost to customer. That assumption is false businesses ONLY COMPETE WHEN THEY HAVE TO.
d3adp001 4 months ago
Many corps find that they simply hold their price and others in the industry will hold to a similar price point. Anyone who rocks this boat is quickly pushed out by the existing corps. There is many techniques used for this, maybe you should read up on tucker, and many others who tried to enter into a FREE COMPETITION market. In addition no market will ever be free due to ALL of the many regulations like enviromental, zoning, osha, hiring practices, etc there is no suck thing as free competition
d3adp001 4 months ago
@d3adp001 The "cliff" is where you need to focus your attention. I think you have it backwards, we have a cost of living problem, because of our employment demands.
cowboy1165 4 months ago
@d3adp001
thank you well said - i no longer like this guy
supplementcouponcode 4 months ago
Nice glass table, nice camera movements. Waiting for a stand up interview.
Peter could had plugged in Ron Paul's "competing currencies" proposal, though...
dromeiro 4 months ago
Peter schiff used to talk tough about the banks bit now he is just parroting newt gingrich. He is trying to take the focus off of the FRAUDULENT criminals, who heisted 750 billion with financial terrorism. The maffia could only dream of such theft.
joshtheobjectivist 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Follow the Constitution; Problem Solved.
captaindiesalot 4 months ago
the federal reserve isn't just a central bank .... because of it being the resurve currency it has to account for actions and results globaly
curtly99 4 months ago
I couldn't agree with Peter Schiff more......
Shocksink 4 months ago
Lauren Lyster is so fucking HOT!!!!!!!!!!
rudemood2011 4 months ago 6
Sad more people can't see through this clown.
jonvssocrates 4 months ago
@jonvssocrates
Do you have any significant knowledge of economics and/or monetary policy to back up your assertion?
myhipsi 4 months ago
Nice job Mr. Schiff.
truefictions 4 months ago
We all know the Federal Reserve and the governmet is BOUGHT and PAID FOR by the banks. If Lloyd Blankfein and Jamie Dimon goto prison, WHERE THEY BELONG, then that will send shcokwaves of sudden reformation and we'll see the banksters dethroned by true bankers. WHY AREN"T YOU SAYING THIS SCHIFF.....YOU KNOW ITS TRUE.
joshtheobjectivist 4 months ago
Peter Schiff, those banksters commited fraud, SAY IT SAY IT SAY IT you asshole!!! I used to love Peter Schiff, but I think Lloyd Blankfein has cut him a check.
joshtheobjectivist 4 months ago
@joshtheobjectivist He's said that banks committed fraud in some interview, its on youtube. Yet the supposed regulations people believe we have were supposed to have put a check on it but didn't. Fraud is punishable in a free market and capitalism punishes fraudulent people severely.
pbfrank13 4 months ago
Peter is an ass for saying what he did.. I'm a fan of his but what he says here NO GOOD.
brikabrack 4 months ago
@brikabrack
If you implement more critical thinking, you'll find Pete tends to spout garbage most of the time... and that is not counting his logical fallacies that are replete in most of his appearances.
heckler73 4 months ago
Lauren Lyster's hot and smart.
mauibrad 4 months ago
Unions and corporations are the same animal in different skin. Workers organizing is fine, but corrupt union leaders that manipulate government and elections are as bad as corporations.
mersk100 4 months ago
oh god yukkk why would you even go to an interview those disgusting people Mr. Schiff maybe some brainwashed idiots might learn some real knowledge Thank you for the Info as always Mr. Schiff (more like Mr. Genius)
xHippieHunter 4 months ago
We DON'T want jobs!!! We want a career! We don't want to live pay check to pay check! ... I would love to start a business as i'm sure many people do... to do this we need both the money and the skills!!!
mystico09 4 months ago 2
I respect Peter Schiff, but if he had his way; wage disparity would explode.
Without minimum wage or union representation, businesses would have us undercutting 3rd world labour if we want a job. They would create a race to the bottom in which only they would benefit.
Peter Schiff's customers are people with enough money to invest, so a serf class of ultra poor wouldn't really hurt his business. But ultimately, businesses need customers, and they won't get any if they don't pay people enough.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon I would recommend his book "how an economy grows and why it crashes" to understand where demand comes from. demand dont come from people having enough pay... it comes from production and savings
JinGwee 4 months ago
@JinGwee If you produce a good or service, in order to stay afloat; you need a customer. No customer, your business won't survive. It is really that simple.
If businesses create a race to the bottom in wages, people won't have the expendable income to buy their goods and services. Only if your customers are well off people like yourself, such as Peter Schiff's business, does this not pose a problem. But for the vast majority of businesses, a wage starved general public isn't going to spend.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon Yes but where does demand come from? From production. Anyone can have demand. Even a 1 year old baby can demand for milk. But to satisfy your demand, can you produce something else to trade for the things that you want? Do you have savings to buy those things? The key is production and savings
JinGwee 3 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon False, Min wage was introduced by unions looking to out price 'blacks" from the south undercutting northerners. No union employee makes min wage, yet they insist on it. Not for the poor but for the members. Interesting history of, besides Ford was paying his employees the highest wages of the times, no unions at the time. Min wage prices people out of jobs and puts them on the gov't dole, historically.
pbfrank13 4 months ago 2
@pbfrank13 We live in a global economy now. You can be based in a tax haven, have your call centres in India, produce in China and sell in America.
This wasn't possible only a few decades back, when you were forced to hire locally and shipping goods abroad was a long and expensive process. The trickle down effect often referenced no longer applies. The cheapest labour possible is hired, and if you want that job you have to undercut them, them being slave wage labour.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
It doesn't make economic sense to compete with a country that can produce something cheaper. No country can effectively produce everything they need themselves which is why countries voluntarily trade to begin with. despite common beliefs labor isn't the only reason or a main reason to outsource jobs its part of the reason but there is a lot more to it besides "companies wanting to pay people a dollar a day in China" it costs more to produce things here because of litigation, tax, regulation etc
pbfrank13 4 months ago
@pbfrank13 I doubt if all the taxes and regulation were removed, these companies would suddenly rush back home. You'd just be putting yourself on equal footing with the likes of China and India, but they would still have an advantage in terms of cheap labour.
The only way to bring those jobs back home would be to make hiring an American/British worker cheaper than hiring over there, and that would require un-liveable wages and working conditions resulting in suicides.
Who would want that?
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon It would no doubt help companies already here to expand, encourage new research and development and new industries. We were the top in technology, health science, and others. Now we over consume and underdeveloped and under export. China has cheap labor sure, but they can't produce everything, and our standard of living will unfortunately need to diminish whether we like it or not. China loans us money, once they reinvest in themselves there SoL will increase and rightly so.
pbfrank13 4 months ago
@pbfrank13 I say I respect Peter Schiff because he does talk a lot of sense. But ultimately when it comes down to it, he argues in favour of people like himself. If he had his way, the vast majority of people would see a vast reduction in their quality of life.
I'm against government over spending to the point that they over tax and even run a deficit, but I am not for minimalistic government, because business is inherently predatory and we need someone looking out for the majority.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
We need to get the government out of the way, federal government is not the solution to our problems, it is the problem, as corrupt as reagan was, he has a point.
jmjfanss 4 months ago
@jmjfanss It is correct that the problem right now is too much government, I will not deny that. But we cannot get government totally out of the way, as that is just a different sort of extreme that will simply lead to different problems.
It's best to try and find a balance in everything. The vast majority of the public would suffer if businesses were given too much freedom.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
We need freedom, we are losing it everyday, if we don't get the government out of the business of our lives or it's all over.
jmjfanss 4 months ago
@jmjfanss Corporate freedom to exploit and plunder a society through any means necessary is not the sort of freedom we want. Banks get away with a lot of what they do because of lack of regulation and the governments unwillingness to enforce the rules. You want the corporate version of that, running rampant across your country like we see them do in 3rd world countries; were the people are abused and discarded?
We need a balance, extremes any direction only lead to suffering for the majority.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
Corporations can only survive with your dollars and have to work within the law. You are free to support or not support a particular company, etc. Government, on the other hand, forces you to pay them through taxation and they ARE the law. Based on this fact, which one should we really be more wary of?
This idea that market freedom would end in a "plunder" of society is just uninformed socialist propaganda. Capitalism today is not free market, it's actually fascism.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi Basically every country we look at in which regulations and taxes are enough to attract these businesses, we see abuse of labour and resource exploitation. This includes all American companies like Apple.
You talk about them needing to be within the law, but what laws get to stay? What's a law and what's red tape? Saying government needs to get out the way is as vague as the people demanding the rich pay more taxes, it needs to be clarified.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon You are missing the fact that inflated fiat destroys the "value" of money, also prices of consumer goods will fall to accommodate falling wages. The abuse of labor is a "red herring." If you are not happy with the job, and pay you agreed to, you are free to find another. Other-wise you are abusing yourself. Now, if you go back and re-read all of the posts, keep that in mind.
cowboy1165 4 months ago
@cowboy1165 A red herring is defined as diverting attention, which I believe your fiat currency comment qualifies under. I am fully aware of our debt backed currency system, it is just not relevant to this particular discussion.
it is true that the price and quality of goods will drop to accommodate the spending power of the available consumer base. My question is, what spending power? The slave wages we are expected to compete with have no disposable income, it is only enough to stay alive.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@cowboy1165 Lastly, I see you are referencing Peter Schiff's comments in this video. His comments seem to suggest he believes the lack of better paying/treating jobs is evidence that your current job pays and treats you well. This is nonsense. Because they cannot find better pay than Wall Mart, is not evidence that Wall Mart pays their employees well, it just means the job market is so bad that Wall Mart looks good.
His arguments empower employers at everyone else's expense, you're disposable.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
What laws get to stay? The laws that protect your right to life, liberty, and property. That's about it. Regulations, at best, have unintended consequences, at worst, are designed to sustain monopolies and make it more difficult for small start-ups to compete while making every product/service more expensive. Once you give government the power to regulate essentially everything, the person (or corporation) with the most influence (aka. money) gets to write the regulations.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi If corporations are writing the regulations, they are doing a terrible job. America and the United Kingdom both have bloated states that make business difficult.
I'm against any extreme, it only results in pain for the majority. Most of the people in here arguing for minimalist government are not in a position to benefit from it.
Peter Schiff is in a position to benefit regardless of what happens to the majority of people, so his recommendations are to be taken with a pinch of salt.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
Yes, the regulations make business difficult (ie. Small businesses, corporations without political clout, small start-ups, etc.). IOW, regulations kill competition and allow the politically connected multi-national corporations to stay on top by way of government hand-outs, and by means of economies of scale they are able to afford to employ tax lawyers, etc. to work through the regulations.
If Peter Schiff benefits regardless, then what would he have to gain by lying?
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi Peter Schiff's customers are well off individuals wishing to invest their existing fortune, he is not hurt by the majority being reverted into low paying serfs, they are not his customers to begin with. He'd actually benefit from significant inequality, as the rich would become richer; and have more money to invest with him.
As for regulations, as I've said earlier, there needs to be clarification. It's very vague to say all regulations are simply a barrier that needs to be scrapped.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
Still, that doesn't explain why he would want to do business in a country full of low paid serfs. I would argue that the more wealthy people their are, the more people that are able to invest their money into his brokerage firm. Wealth benefits everyone. To put it in perspective, Walmart would go bankrupt if everybody were serfs. Walmart needs a middle class to continue doing business.
Like I said before, regulations benefit government and some corporations, not individuals.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi Wallmart doesn't need a middle class, as their target customer is at the very bottom of the economic ladder, at least in the western world. They're in a position to benefit from a growing class of poor.
Peter Schiff accepts customers from around the world, so to say he is based in a country full of growing serfs isn't accurate. As with globalism, he operates his business on a global scale.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
Walmart most certainly does need a middle class. No company that sells products and services benefits from a growing class of poor.
Peter schiff cannot accept money from international clients because of U.S. law. That's why he had to set up Europac Canada because people in Canada wanted to invest with him but couldn't.
It is counter to logic to assume that any company wants to see their potential customers become poor. You seem to have an awful cynical view of the world.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi I did not say that Wall Mart didn't benefit from a middle class, I said their market is the lowest cost goods. People who previously bought from higher quality suppliers may be forced to shop at Wall Mart because of diminishing wages.
Businesses don't want their customers to become poor, because they need people with disposable income. But they want to keep their human resource costs as low as possible, and in this; they indirectly make their customers poor.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
And why do you think they would want their human resource cost to be as low as possible? Because their customers demand it by wanting the biggest bang for their buck. It's consumers that drive market prices, not businesses. Businesses would love to jack up prices and pay higher wages, because higher paid workers are generally more productive, so it's a win-win. You're directing the blame for a lower standard of living on corporations when you should be looking at government.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi I have to question how customers force companies to not pass on profits to the workers. Maybe in bottom of the line goods, but when you buy quality; the workers still don't see any of it. I've seen £50 T-shirts here in the UK, you cannot tell me that company couldn't afford to pay their workers more than the pittance they get for their sweat shop labour.
Businesses would not love to pay their workers more, they show that when they are given the opportunity to; but they still don't.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon Do you not see labor as a voluntary deal? People are OFFERED a wage to work. Accept the offer or don't work? Why don't you start your own business? Why not plant your own garden and build your own house? It is understandable that people take a developed economy for granted. The same people take MONEY for granted. That ignorance is what has allowed fractional reserve banking and fiat currency to deprive the middle and lower class of their wealth. Ron Paul 2012 if you understand.
margoliesmedia 4 months ago
@margoliesmedia
Do you not see slavery as a voluntary deal? The slaves were offered food, clothes, and shelter in exchange for work. They could have chosen to simply not work!
Seriously, this is NO DIFFERENT than telling people under this capitalist system where resources (LIKE FOOD) are distributed based on wages paid by their employer that they don't have to take what work is offered, they can find a ditch and starve to death.
To pretend that labor and management are on equal footing is...
sbacon92 4 months ago
@margoliesmedia What's being advocated here is the vast concentration of wealth within a tiny few hands, and the vast majority expected to be thankful for the crumbs thrown their way; in exchange for a lifetime of labour.
I get the impression people have been brain washed into thinking empowering the rich is going to result in prosperity for all. Every country we look at where this has happened, the so called emerging economies, that is never the case. Poverty for all, prosperity for a few.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
You have to understand that corporations like walmart not only have to keep their customers happy via low prices, but they also have to net a good return to their shareholders who will sell their stock if they don't get a decent return. If you really want to support and encourage higher paid workers then try to stick to domestic items only. Buy at small shops, etc. But I can promise you will be paying more for the same basic products/services.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi Is it such a surprise that there are so many economic imbalances, when entire countries can be turned into slave wage producers for the sole benefit of their employers; while elsewhere the population is only expected to keep consuming to keep profits flowing?
I don't see how empowering international corporations will make our situation better, I just see it concentrating wealth further, getting paid a pittance and told be be grateful for what little quality of life we can maintain.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
You should rephrase that: "...turned into slave wage producers for the benefit of their employers AND consumers that demand low prices."
It's not about empowering multi-national corporations, it's about empowering you and I to have the freedom to start a successful business without the hurdle of countless taxes and regulations, so that one day we may out-compete one of those giants.
By empowering government, we are ensuring monopoly and futher concentration of wealth.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi Financial enslavement is empowering? How exactly do you intend to start a business in the first place, if your wages barely cover living costs? The vast majority of people would be poor serfs with no social mobility, which it has been pointed out is why unions were formed in the first place, to protect workers from abuse by employers.
Abusing producers to benefit consumers is a contradiction, because consumers need a decent paying job to have disposable income in the first place.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
No, financial freedom is empowering, government enslavement is disenfranchisement. How did all those immigrants, who came to America with next to nothing, eventually make it and prosper? Because they enjoyed a free market with next to no regulation or taxes.
Nobody is abusing anyone. Like I said, to work for a specified wage is VOLUNTARY. Consumers would have much more disposible income if they weren't taxed so heavily. Big government doesn't produce, it just leeches.
myhipsi 4 months ago
Comment removed
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@myhipsi I've repeatedly stated that globalism has changed the trickle down effect, it's gone.
Today Apple can have their Foxconn workers producing their gadgets for the equivalent of $300 a month, with 80-100hrs overtime and no lunch breaks. Of course that wage is double what it used to be, the suicides prompted an increase. Who needs union representation, right?
You interested in undercutting those conditions to bring the jobs back home?
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
Yet if Apple manufactured their products in the U.S., it would cost closer to $1000 for an ipad2 instead of $650 and U.S. consumers would be no better off. There's no benefit to making more money if everything you buy is more expensive.
The government should provide a business friendly environment so that these companies could competitively manufacture in the U.S.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi Apple's products are expensive because they rip off their customers, not because of quality. Foxconn is a budget hardware manufacturer. Apple's profit margins are huge and clearly they are not trickling them down.
What I don't understand about your arguments is why you think these companies clearly mistreating and abusing human beings are suddenly going to get a conscience when they come home to the US/UK. You sound like you condone their treatment if it cuts costs for consumers.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
Apple clearly doesn't rip off their customers or else they wouldn't be selling their products faster than they can manufacture them. People value Apple's products for the price Apple is charging.
These companies are NOT mistreating these employees. Nobody is being forced to work for any of these companies. They are free to go back to subsistance farming as they were before these factories showed up. Why don't they go back to farming? because their factory jobs provide more.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi That's PR. When people buy Apple they not only buy into a false impression of quality, they buy into the mindset, the manufactured culture. I wonder what hardcore Apple fans would think to spent one day in their factories?
The rest of your comment makes me wonder if it is worth maintaining this discussion with you. Your arguments are not only inconsistent, but you appear to lack basic human empathy. Claiming prosperity in one sentence, while condoning inhuman treatment in another.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
It's not PR. I have several Apple products that I'm completely satisfied with, and I know many others who feel the same way. I value my Apple products more than the money I paid for them, that's capitalism.
I'm not lacking empathy, you are without even knowing it. You are suggesting that it would be better if none of these companies ever set up factories in China. If that were the case, these Chinese peasants would be working 12 hours a day on the farm, and for very little.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi Peasants? Not very nice.
You have cognitive dissonance, you know that? You are perfectly happy for these people to be treated like serfs, that they should feel lucky to be exploited and pushed suicidal, but think if these same companies got free reign here; it would be prosperity for all.
I honestly think it is more a matter of you believing you'd be on the beneficiaries side of this arrangement, rather than the exploited. Odds aren't in your favour frankly, more serfs than rich.
AnnoyedDragon 4 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon
Cognitive dissonance? Apparently you lack the understanding fo the definition. Anyway, you obviously aren't listening to what I'm saying. It would be great if everybody could have everything they wanted but it isn't that simple or easy. These people are better off with the $300/month they get from factory working compared with farming. That's all I'm saying.
I'm not on anyone's side, and if you think I'm being classist, you're clearly not undertstanding my points.
myhipsi 4 months ago
@myhipsi I feel I'm done here. I don't enjoy talking to someone that thinks like you, it's becoming rather unpleasant. You sound like a sociopath with the way you defend human exploitation.