D07.01 DNG Debates: Fair Economics [1]

mp3: http://inmendham.com/dog/eco1.mp3

debate pages:
Debate #1: plant vs animal Awareness: http://inmendham.com/dog/dngd1.html

Debate #2: Put LIFE out of its misery: http://inmendham.com/dog/dngd2.html

Debate #3: Quantum Mechanics: http://inmendham.com/dog/dngd3.html

Debate #4: Contracting a GracefulExit : http://inmendham.com/dog/dngd4.html

Debate #5: Eating Meat is Bad ...mkay : http://inmendham.com/dog/dngd5.html

Debate #6: the Drake equation : http://inmendham.com/dog/dngd6.html

Debate #7: Fair Economics : http://inmendham.com/dog/dngd7.html

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• inmendham
• donotgod

[DonEdwardVoiceovers]

I agree.

Wealth should be earned not inherrited.

[streetmagicstyle]

Consider your idea of a $250,000 cap on salary and what effect that would have on production. Bill Gates does not have all of his money stored in the form of paper bank notes. He invests enormous amounts of money into stocks. Companies consequently have more money for capital goods. Capital goods are instrumental in obtaining the most amount of products from the least amount of labor.

[streetmagicstyle]

You are apparently against charging interest. Interest is a price paid to a saver to defer consumption. You would remove incentive for consumers to save money if you removed interest. Without a myriad of savers, there would be relatively few loans. Loans are very important for businesses being started and affording capital goods. Capital goods increase wage because they increase the output attained from labor.

[streetmagicstyle]

You used Rockefeller as an example of a rich person we do not need to be productive. Rockefeller was the Einstein of efficiency. Before he came into the picture, oil prices were about 10x as expensive. He literally lit up the country with kerosene. Obviously, environmental objections about oil could be raised, but if we are talking solely about production, having random workers democratically match the productive efficiency and innovation of Rockefeller is unrealistic.

[streetmagicstyle]

I am a physicalist, antinatalist, and agree with you on so much that I wouldn't be surprised if you eventually persuaded me on this, but I am left with a lot of questions regarding the anti-capitalist sentiment. Firstly, limiting inheritance entails limiting how much a mother can spend on her child. As I am am sure you are aware: in kin selection, mothers are powerfully hardwired to act in the interests of their children. To at least some extent, the incentive for moms to produce would decline.

[XES101watchclub]

@fuckoverload i meant to say "good luck" because, yeah, there probably wont be any..

[MassacreBlast]

Perhaps we could start by implementing a societal salary cap, kinda like in sports. You can only have 'so much' money. The extra you make will have to go to good causes, etc.

[fuckoverload]

@XES101watchclub There is no legitimate argument against it, because he's absolutely right.

[fuckoverload]

@Cookiefox I think it depends how deep into the solution you want to go. I can see the achievement of near utopia in a resource based economy, but I can't see us getting anywhere near there until the significant majority learn to value life over all other considerations.

[fuckoverload]

This is a superb video. You might be interested in watching this watch?v=TwmM5Nb6hiE I have quite a few videos around this subject favourited too.