Changes to The Constitution.

[Toni]

Self interest is the most powerful motivating factor.

^ why we need to find a way to use it.

I think that a certain sort of person was raised with enough self loathing and an ingrained belief that one deserves any ill treatment that one receives that they are unable to actively pursue what is in their own self interests—unless it is at the expense of some other person/group they’ve been conditioned to believe is less deserving.

It can be hard to recognize that you deserve nice things.

 

[Elixir]

I think that a certain sort of person was raised with enough self loathing and an ingrained belief that one deserves any ill treatment that one receives that they are unable to actively pursue what is in their own self interests—unless it is at the expense of some other person/group they’ve been conditioned to believe is less deserving.

Is that the “sort” that gets elected to the House of Representatives?
Or does the environment inhabited by elected officials simply aggravate that quality, which is fairly evenly shared throughout humanity?

 

[Toni]

I think that a certain sort of person was raised with enough self loathing and an ingrained belief that one deserves any ill treatment that one receives that they are unable to actively pursue what is in their own self interests—unless it is at the expense of some other person/group they’ve been conditioned to believe is less deserving.

Is that the “sort” that gets elected to the House of Representatives?
Or does the environment inhabited by elected officials simply aggravate that quality, which is fairly evenly shared throughout humanity?

It’s the sort who elects a certain kind of person to the House. And Senate.

When one internalizes the belief that having things hard builds character and that is just how things are, it can be hard to recognize that one deserves nice things.

 

[Tigers!]

Self interest is the most powerful motivating factor.

^ why we need to find a way to use it.

Ah yes, self-interest.
There was a NSW premier called Jack Lang, who was usually good from a newspaper quote.
One of his more memorable ones was "In any race always back the horse called Self-Interest. At least you know it's trying"

 

[RVonse]

Changes to The Constitution. (in order of importance)​

1) No more lobbies, bribery, or money given to any politician with SEVERE penalties approaching those for treason acts. The federal government would equally distribute marketing time for the candidate advertisements. All based on popularity and NOT private and/or secret dark money.

2) Total size of the federal government linked to the productivity and size of the private economy. In no circumstance allow the federal government bigger than 50% of the total economy. During a serious downturn, federal employees would be laid off in proportion to the private economy. All federal employees would have a retirement systems identical to the average private wage earner. If the average private earner has no defined pension than neither will the average federal employees.

3) No more insider stock trading for the speaker of the house and/or other members of congress. Anyone caught corrupting themselves with private enrichment would be barred from federal office....forever.

4) Salaries of members of congress would be carefully linked to average compensation for the average private wage earner of the United States. Congress will NOT have the ability (as they do now) to increase their own salary. Other compensation such as social security and medical benefits would be exactly the same systems every other US citizen is compelled to use.

5) Language to specifically undue "citizens united ruling". Large corporations to never have the same rights as private citizens

6) Get rid of the fed and make whatever serves its place accountable to the public.

 

[barbos]

RVonse, pigs will fly if these people let that happen.

 

[Swammerdami]

Changes to The Constitution. (in order of importance)​

1) No more lobbies, bribery, or money given to any politician with SEVERE penalties approaching those for treason acts. The federal government would equally distribute marketing time for the candidate advertisements. All based on popularity and NOT private and/or secret dark money.

2) Total size of the federal government linked to the productivity and size of the private economy. In no circumstance allow the federal government bigger than 50% of the total economy. During a serious downturn, federal employees would be laid off in proportion to the private economy. All federal employees would have a retirement systems identical to the average private wage earner. If the average private earner has no defined pension than neither will the average federal employees.

3) No more insider stock trading for the speaker of the house and/or other members of congress. Anyone caught corrupting themselves with private enrichment would be barred from federal office....forever.

4) Salaries of members of congress would be carefully linked to average compensation for the average private wage earner of the United States. Congress will NOT have the ability (as they do now) to increase their own salary. Other compensation such as social security and medical benefits would be exactly the same systems every other US citizen is compelled to use.

5) Language to specifically undue "citizens united ruling". Large corporations to never have the same rights as private citizens

6) Get rid of the fed and make whatever serves its place accountable to the public.

Jason -- some of your proposals are good. BUT why do "libertarians" hate the FRB so much? We need some sort of money, right? Gold? Wampum? Bitcoin? MMT?

 

[bilby]

During a serious downturn, federal employees would be laid off in proportion to the private economy.

Why? This would be about the stupidest possible response to an economic downturn, and would lead to conditions not seen since the Great Depression.

"Let's scrap the fire department. If my house catches fire, everyone else's houses should be set afire, in proportion to the damage caused at my house". A true stroke of genius, that.

 

[RVonse]

During a serious downturn, federal employees would be laid off in proportion to the private economy.

Why? This would be about the stupidest possible response to an economic downturn, and would lead to conditions not seen since the Great Depression.

"Let's scrap the fire department. If my house catches fire, everyone else's houses should be set afire, in proportion to the damage caused at my house". A true stroke of genius, that.

Since when was (is) the federal government in the business of putting out fires? That is usually done at the city or even the county level. If the federal government has been engaged to put out house fires, it is even bigger and more bloated than I thought.

Furthermore, if you wish to argue Keynesian economics to stimulate the economy in a downturn, there are many other ways to stimulate the local and or national economy with spending "such as infrastructure spending", "hyperloop tunnels", "alternative energy", other than more federal administration and bloated do nothing government jobs that cost a lot of money and never go away.

 

[RVonse]

Changes to The Constitution. (in order of importance)​

1) No more lobbies, bribery, or money given to any politician with SEVERE penalties approaching those for treason acts. The federal government would equally distribute marketing time for the candidate advertisements. All based on popularity and NOT private and/or secret dark money.

2) Total size of the federal government linked to the productivity and size of the private economy. In no circumstance allow the federal government bigger than 50% of the total economy. During a serious downturn, federal employees would be laid off in proportion to the private economy. All federal employees would have a retirement systems identical to the average private wage earner. If the average private earner has no defined pension than neither will the average federal employees.

3) No more insider stock trading for the speaker of the house and/or other members of congress. Anyone caught corrupting themselves with private enrichment would be barred from federal office....forever.

4) Salaries of members of congress would be carefully linked to average compensation for the average private wage earner of the United States. Congress will NOT have the ability (as they do now) to increase their own salary. Other compensation such as social security and medical benefits would be exactly the same systems every other US citizen is compelled to use.

5) Language to specifically undue "citizens united ruling". Large corporations to never have the same rights as private citizens

6) Get rid of the fed and make whatever serves its place accountable to the public.

Jason -- some of your proposals are good. BUT why do "libertarians" hate the FRB so much? We need some sort of money, right? Gold? Wampum? Bitcoin? MMT?

If the federal reserve could just get their most important mandate keeping the dollar constant in terms of buying power I would be off their back. But they never have and never will (perhaps for many reasons). So we have to put up with all kinds of market distortions and price mal investments that ultimately destroy our economy. In a better world, market analysts would not even need or care to hear what the fed has to say...since a select communist committee should have no power to control the market as they do today. Investment decisions would be made based on business metrics rather than what they thought the fed was going to say.

The US doesn't need a King of the dollar to rule the world economy. All that is needed is a dollar that buys the same goods and services today as it would have bought 50 years ago. Whether that means tying the dollar back to gold or bit coin I can not say. But letting an unelected committee of insider bankster bureaucrats control everyone's economic destiny is certainly not the answer.

Worst of all the fed has cheated humanity in general and is stealing everyones incentive to save. How does a young person ever manage to save enough to retire when he puts his(her) savings dollars in a bucket that has big holes in it?

 

[Swammerdami]

If the federal reserve could just get their most important mandate keeping the dollar constant in terms of buying power I would be off their back. But they never have and never will (perhaps for many reasons). So we have to put up with all kinds of market distortions and price mal investments that ultimately destroy our economy. In a better world, market analysts would not even need or care to hear what the fed has to say...since they should have no power to control the market as they do today. Investment decisions would be made based on business metrics rather than what they thought the fed was going to say.

The US doesn't need a King of the dollar to rule the world economy. All that is needed is a dollar that buys the same goods and services today as it would have bought 50 years ago. Whether that means tying the dollar back to gold or bit coin I can not say. But letting an unelected committee of insider bankster bureaucrats control everyone's economic destiny is certainly not the answer.

Worst of all the fed has cheated humanity in general and is stealing everyones incentive to save. How does a young person ever save enough to retire when he puts his(her) savings dollars in a bucket that leaks water?

Sigh. The error in this thinking has been explained to you over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over. (If you think reading all those "overs" is painful, imagine the despondence of those who repeatedly persist in trying to explain this to you ... apparently all to no avail.)

Economists much smarter than you or even me believe that 2% inflation -- a target which has been approximated rather well -- is better than no inflation at all.

As for savings "in a bucket that leaks water" do you still not understand that, all else equal, nominal interest rates can be approximated as the sum of a real interest rate and an inflation rate? Why do you think the rate for risk-free overnight money is now 5.3%?

Or do "libertarians" think that buying bonds or CDs is playing into the hands of Big Bondage and that the only "real money" is paper notes kept under a mattress or buried in backyard?

If you're looking for a new career, you might try economics reporter for The Onion.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Changes to The Constitution. (in order of importance)​

1) No more lobbies, bribery, or money given to any politician with SEVERE penalties approaching those for treason acts. The federal government would equally distribute marketing time for the candidate advertisements. All based on popularity and NOT private and/or secret dark money.

2) Total size of the federal government linked to the productivity and size of the private economy. In no circumstance allow the federal government bigger than 50% of the total economy. During a serious downturn, federal employees would be laid off in proportion to the private economy. All federal employees would have a retirement systems identical to the average private wage earner. If the average private earner has no defined pension than neither will the average federal employees.

3) No more insider stock trading for the speaker of the house and/or other members of congress. Anyone caught corrupting themselves with private enrichment would be barred from federal office....forever.

4) Salaries of members of congress would be carefully linked to average compensation for the average private wage earner of the United States. Congress will NOT have the ability (as they do now) to increase their own salary. Other compensation such as social security and medical benefits would be exactly the same systems every other US citizen is compelled to use.

5) Language to specifically undue "citizens united ruling". Large corporations to never have the same rights as private citizens

6) Get rid of the fed and make whatever serves its place accountable to the public.

Jason -- some of your proposals are good. BUT why do "libertarians" hate the FRB so much? We need some sort of money, right? Gold? Wampum? Bitcoin? MMT?

If the federal reserve could just get their most important mandate keeping the dollar constant in terms of buying power I would be off their back. But they never have and never will (perhaps for many reasons). So we have to put up with all kinds of market distortions and price mal investments that ultimately destroy our economy. In a better world, market analysts would not even need or care to hear what the fed has to say...since a select communist committee should have no power to control the market as they do today. Investment decisions would be made based on business metrics rather than what they thought the fed was going to say.

The US doesn't need a King of the dollar to rule the world economy. All that is needed is a dollar that buys the same goods and services today as it would have bought 50 years ago. Whether that means tying the dollar back to gold or bit coin I can not say. But letting an unelected committee of insider bankster bureaucrats control everyone's economic destiny is certainly not the answer.

Well, I wouldn't particularly trust your, we can keep money at zero percent inflation idea much at all.

Worst of all the fed has cheated humanity in general and is stealing everyones incentive to save.

Yeah... that is just wrong... unless I'm the only one that is saving money, both straight up capital and retirement investments.

How does a young person ever manage to save enough to retire when he puts his(her) savings dollars in a bucket that has big holes in it?

Math. The term is compound interest. $1 saved at the age of 25 and annual average gains of 5 percent, make that dollar worth $7 in 40 years. Inflation isn't that bad.

An overly simplistic look at the numbers, if a person saves $5000 a year in their 20s, $7500 a year in their 30s, and $10,000 in their 40s... and averages 5% annual gains over the life of the investment, they'd have $750k saved by the time they are in their 60s. Drop those numbers to $2500, $5000, $7500, that gets you just shy of half a million.

 

[RVonse]

If the federal reserve could just get their most important mandate keeping the dollar constant in terms of buying power I would be off their back. But they never have and never will (perhaps for many reasons). So we have to put up with all kinds of market distortions and price mal investments that ultimately destroy our economy. In a better world, market analysts would not even need or care to hear what the fed has to say...since they should have no power to control the market as they do today. Investment decisions would be made based on business metrics rather than what they thought the fed was going to say.

The US doesn't need a King of the dollar to rule the world economy. All that is needed is a dollar that buys the same goods and services today as it would have bought 50 years ago. Whether that means tying the dollar back to gold or bit coin I can not say. But letting an unelected committee of insider bankster bureaucrats control everyone's economic destiny is certainly not the answer.

Worst of all the fed has cheated humanity in general and is stealing everyones incentive to save. How does a young person ever save enough to retire when he puts his(her) savings dollars in a bucket that leaks water?

Sigh. The error in this thinking has been explained to you over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over. (If you think reading all those "overs" is painful, imagine the despondence of those who repeatedly persist in trying to explain this to you ... apparently all to no avail.)

Economists much smarter than you or even me believe that 2% inflation -- a target which has been approximated rather well -- is better than no inflation at all.

As for savings "in a bucket that leaks water" do you still not understand that, all else equal, nominal interest rates can be approximated as the sum of a real interest rate and an inflation rate? Why do you think the rate for risk-free overnight money is now 5.3%?

Or do "libertarians" think that buying bonds or CDs is playing into the hands of Big Bondage and that the only "real money" is paper notes kept under a mattress or buried in backyard?

If you're looking for a new career, you might try economics reporter for The Onion.

Why should the average factory worker need to care about 2% or risk free overnight money at 5.3%?

You are making this too complicated, money is (or at least should be) nothing more than a medium of exchange representing the value of labor and capital to produce goods. And if you change that value over time, you are stealing from someone. For example: if I sweep your floor and you pay me $10 today I should be able to put that $10 in a retirement bucket. And in 50 years when I retire, I should then be able to take that same $10 and buy exactly what the same goods and services I produced. The average wage earner should not need to be a speculative stock broker investment banker money changing lawyer simply to set aside a retirement.

Anyway, this is more about morality than technical financial competence. 2000 years ago a person by the name of Jesus destroyed the money changers tables and then got crucified for it. History may not repeat itself but it sure does rhyme a lot.

 

[RVonse]

​

Math. The term is compound interest. $1 saved at the age of 25 and annual average gains of 5 percent, make that dollar worth $7 in 40 years. Inflation isn't that bad.

An overly simplistic look at the numbers, if a person saves $5000 a year in their 20s, $7500 a year in their 30s, and $10,000 in their 40s... and averages 5% annual gains over the life of the investment, they'd have $750k saved by the time they are in their 60s. Drop those numbers to $2500, $5000, $7500, that gets you just shy of half a million.

Wow look at all those fancy numbers and calculations......yet the average American can not even come up with $400 in an emergency for some reason......

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

​

Math. The term is compound interest. $1 saved at the age of 25 and annual average gains of 5 percent, make that dollar worth $7 in 40 years. Inflation isn't that bad.

An overly simplistic look at the numbers, if a person saves $5000 a year in their 20s, $7500 a year in their 30s, and $10,000 in their 40s... and averages 5% annual gains over the life of the investment, they'd have $750k saved by the time they are in their 60s. Drop those numbers to $2500, $5000, $7500, that gets you just shy of half a million.

Wow look at all those fancy numbers and calculations......yet the average American can not even come up with $400 in an emergency for some reason......

You were complaining about inflation making saving impossible. I corrected that.

Now you are complaining about something else. Yes, lots of people struggle. People have been struggling in the US for over a century. And thanks to the Reagan Administration and Neocons, people have been happily voting for austerity, and then getting upset about reduction of services. We've successfully sprawled away from the cities (which were left abandoned by corporations and banks) and can't afford to fill the car anymore to get back to the city to work. Automation made life easier for many, yet made life harder for others.

These are economic realities that need to be dealt with and you are whining about inflation and Fed policy, when computers, AI, automation have been responsible for the loss of so many jobs and livelihoods.

 

[RVonse]

​

Math. The term is compound interest. $1 saved at the age of 25 and annual average gains of 5 percent, make that dollar worth $7 in 40 years. Inflation isn't that bad.

An overly simplistic look at the numbers, if a person saves $5000 a year in their 20s, $7500 a year in their 30s, and $10,000 in their 40s... and averages 5% annual gains over the life of the investment, they'd have $750k saved by the time they are in their 60s. Drop those numbers to $2500, $5000, $7500, that gets you just shy of half a million.

Wow look at all those fancy numbers and calculations......yet the average American can not even come up with $400 in an emergency for some reason......

You were complaining about inflation making saving impossible. I corrected that.

No you didn't. You do not even need to be Warren Buffet to see how wrong you are.

Homes, art, and collectible cars are bubbled up to inflated values they are not really worth because those people who actually do have savings feel compelled to spend that money on something real. Those (relative richer) people should have been leaving their savings in the bank but that bucket is filled with holes. So they buy something.....anything at all that is real.

Poorer people have the same incentive. Why put a dollar in the bank if it won't buy anything in the future? Instead spend it for today and go out to a fancy restaurant. Never mind having more than $400 for an emergency.

Why would any rational person put their money (labor) in a place that is guaranteed to lose value (a normal savings account)?

Thanks to the fed we have had negative real interest rates for a long long time. Guaranteed to cause price distortions and mal investments in the economy. Which it has. Which is why bit coin was developed and why it is still extremely popular.

 

[laughing dog]

The US has not had “negative real interest rates” for a very long time.

Bit coin was developed as a speculative asset.

Before the establishment of the Fed, the US was on the gold standard. During that time, there were extended periods ( years) of inflation followed by deflation ( or vice versa) which caused much disruption for different groups or classes of people.

I agree with RVonse that a stable currency over time is a desirable goal, but eliminating the Fed would not accomplish that goal and would permit more frequent economic cycles with larger amplitudes.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

​

Math. The term is compound interest. $1 saved at the age of 25 and annual average gains of 5 percent, make that dollar worth $7 in 40 years. Inflation isn't that bad.

An overly simplistic look at the numbers, if a person saves $5000 a year in their 20s, $7500 a year in their 30s, and $10,000 in their 40s... and averages 5% annual gains over the life of the investment, they'd have $750k saved by the time they are in their 60s. Drop those numbers to $2500, $5000, $7500, that gets you just shy of half a million.

Wow look at all those fancy numbers and calculations......yet the average American can not even come up with $400 in an emergency for some reason......

You were complaining about inflation making saving impossible. I corrected that.

No you didn't. You do not even need to be Warren Buffet to see how wrong you are.

Homes, art, and collectible cars are bubbled up to inflated values they are not really worth because those people who actually do have savings feel compelled to spend that money on something real. Those (relative richer) people should have been leaving their savings in the bank but that bucket is filled with holes. So they buy something.....anything at all that is real.

Poorer people have the same incentive. Why put a dollar in the bank if it won't buy anything in the future? Instead spend it for today and go out to a fancy restaurant. Never mind having more than $400 for an emergency.

People that can't afford to fix the car aren't able not because of their fears of inflation keeping them from saving money... it is they aren't making much to begin with and can't afford to set aside much, and what they do, is eaten up by the inevitable cost of life surprises, car, appliance, etc...

Why would any rational person put their money (labor) in a place that is guaranteed to lose value (a normal savings account)?

Lots of people, that have money to set aside and can more easily weather unexpected costs.

Thanks to the fed we have had negative real interest rates for a long long time. Guaranteed to cause price distortions and mal investments in the economy. Which it has. Which is why bit coin was developed and why it is still extremely popular.

Almost no one is worried about inflation eating at their money during historically low inflation between the 90s and just before the pandemic. That is your imagination. People that aren't saving, can't afford to save because they are working jobs that aren't paying enough. Your obsession with the Fed is making you miss the target.

 

[RVonse]

I agree with RVonse that a stable currency over time is a desirable goal, but eliminating the Fed would not accomplish that goal and would permit more frequent economic cycles with larger amplitudes.

The fed is also very un-democratic for a supposedly republic democracy. They are run by past private banksters who are not even accountable to congress or the people. Ron Paul was not even allowed to audit what they are doing. Yet they have power over a tremendous influence of the economy in general and livelyhood of the citizens.

It would be one thing to have such an organization if it was doing the perfect job which it isn't. Because failure is much more easy to accept if was reached democratically.

 

[RVonse]

​

Math. The term is compound interest. $1 saved at the age of 25 and annual average gains of 5 percent, make that dollar worth $7 in 40 years. Inflation isn't that bad.

An overly simplistic look at the numbers, if a person saves $5000 a year in their 20s, $7500 a year in their 30s, and $10,000 in their 40s... and averages 5% annual gains over the life of the investment, they'd have $750k saved by the time they are in their 60s. Drop those numbers to $2500, $5000, $7500, that gets you just shy of half a million.

Wow look at all those fancy numbers and calculations......yet the average American can not even come up with $400 in an emergency for some reason......

You were complaining about inflation making saving impossible. I corrected that.

No you didn't. You do not even need to be Warren Buffet to see how wrong you are.

Homes, art, and collectible cars are bubbled up to inflated values they are not really worth because those people who actually do have savings feel compelled to spend that money on something real. Those (relative richer) people should have been leaving their savings in the bank but that bucket is filled with holes. So they buy something.....anything at all that is real.

Poorer people have the same incentive. Why put a dollar in the bank if it won't buy anything in the future? Instead spend it for today and go out to a fancy restaurant. Never mind having more than $400 for an emergency.

People that can't afford to fix the car aren't able not because of their fears of inflation keeping them from saving money... it is they aren't making much to begin with and can't afford to set aside much, and what they do, is eaten up by the inevitable cost of life surprises, car, appliance, etc...

Why would any rational person put their money (labor) in a place that is guaranteed to lose value (a normal savings account)?

Lots of people, that have money to set aside and can more easily weather unexpected costs.

Thanks to the fed we have had negative real interest rates for a long long time. Guaranteed to cause price distortions and mal investments in the economy. Which it has. Which is why bit coin was developed and why it is still extremely popular.

Almost no one is worried about inflation eating at their money during historically low inflation between the 90s and just before the pandemic. That is your imagination. People that aren't saving, can't afford to save because they are working jobs that aren't paying enough. Your obsession with the Fed is making you miss the target.

Why is China's and Republic of Congo savings rate so much higher than the US? https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/022415/top-10-countries-save-most.asp

Is it because those people have the great jobs that are paying so much more than the US?