You are a gigantic liar, which became clear as day over the course of this thread. Good luck to you in all your endeavors, liar. A liar lies even as his lies are clearly pointed out.

'Corporations are not and have never created jobs' + 'corporations create jobs because they buy labour'. This is on you, I have nothing to do with it. Production allows consumption, never the other way around. Without production there is no consumption. Production creates the markets. You don't understand that part, fine. That is just economic ignorance and stupidity and likely class warfare, but making opposing statements and denying them outright in the same thread is a clear sign of a liar and I do not waste time on liars.

Inflation is in double digits and nowhere near 0. Of course you can choose to believe government propaganda or you can choose to see reality of 0% interest rates for 6 years but that is your choice.
Inflation is not just bad in a conventional sense, it is absolutely destructive to the economy and thus society. It is what destroyed savings and productivity in the USA and some other countries, it is the actual reason behind the demolition of quality of life of people in the USaa since 1917 ( when the Fed was authorised to monetize government debt).

Inflation is what caused the Great Depression, stagflation of the seventies, collapse in the late nineties, collapse in late 2008, and the current state of destruction of the economy and the impending collapse of the USA bonds and the dollar.

USA is Greece but with a printing press and with what is considered 'the reserve currency'. This allowed the USA to run the scam for much longer than anybody else. This is why the collapse will be so much more spectacular.

The rich should not be forced to do anything by the mob and the state for anybody, they should be left alone to make profits. Profit is what creates the economy. Without profit motive there is no economy. Of course the world lost that understanding, but not everybody. Those who get it are the economy of the world and the funny thing is they are the biggest capitalists and they give communism good name... The USA is a collectivist semi socialist semi fascist state, but it gives capitalism bad name. USA is not a free market society, which is what it should be, why people used to go there. China used to be communist or whatever sollectivism they had and yet they are now the biggest free market there is. Funny how things go and funnier still how blind people like you are.

My problem is oppression by the mob and or state of the individual. Personal charity is personal matter. Nobody should be forced under any circumstances for any reason and for anybody to give up their time and or savings. Anybody can make a case for private charity and people are often generous. Nobody should think they have entitlement for institutional theft and redistribution.

That is a private charity case. Only an idiot like you would fail so bad by appealing tovemotion with me. Policy built on edge case scenario and being forced down everybody's throats is exactly the wrong 'solution', which as I said leads to long term instability and destruction and it is an immoral policy of violence and oppression of the individual by the mob.

As to your case, the violence of the parents in that case is criminal and justice can easily include financial retribution. But all of that is beside the point.

The point is that all edge cases need somebody willing to be charitable and if absolutely nobody is and nobody would help, then the person will be left to fend for him or herself on their own and correctly so. Nobody should be forced by the violence of the state to give up their savings and or time. If the person dies that means that nobody was willing to help and that is a completely acceptable outcome for all involved. The person couldn't make a charitable case and nobody did on their behalf, too bad for them, I guess nobody liked them and nobody had savings to spare, thus the markets are still protected against destruction in the long term and the resources are put to better use.

'We' shouldn't be doing anything. 'We' means oppression and theft. You, as an individual can spend your savings however you want, run your charity all you want. Children should be raised by their parents or somebody feeling charitable to children. You can start and advertise an orphanage, that is your right. Nobody ever should be forced to participate.

The only one? :) ha! Read my journal and some comments...

Nothing should be done about anything. Failures need to be allowed and nobody should be given any bailout. Not banks, not countries, not businesses and not individuals. All forms of welfare must stop. Economic activity is bring destroyed by inflation (money printing) and by fake centrally planned and controlled interest rates. Free markets are destroyed and this means economies are destroyed. People need to learn within their own means, to spend only what they have and not ge t into debt for consumption and all government debt is consumption debt. Debt for production I'd investment made from real savings of real money, that is not what governments and nations are doing, they are spending other people's money for consumption and there can be no return on any of that, none of it is investment.

Socialism only 'works' as long as the promises of the politicians can be delivered based on stolen (taxed) and borrowed (printed) money. Once that dries up there is no sustainable model for collectivism to survive. It can prolong the suffering with tighter central control and basically slavery and possibly a war for resources but it cannot be sustainable in the long run. Nothing that relies on violence as opposed to voluntary cooperation (free market) has a long term future. So nothing 'should be done', failure must be allowed.

Your words are you think cooperation is better than competition, my answer to it is: OK, but do not even think of forcing cooperation upon me, that will not end well.

Everybody competes. Communism is exactly as evil as fascism since both are collectivism forms that require destruction of the individual freedom, individual choices and individual ownership and operation of property so that the mob is getting the benefits supplied by those who can produce more. The ones producing more are absolutely willing to trade. Trade for the productive output of others and if they want to be charitable it is their choice. But nobody under any circumstances should ever for any reason be forced to support anybody, be forced into any form of collectivism at all, regardless of whatever the intentions may be of the collective. The collective must never be allowed above any individual, that is the point of individual freedom. That is why people ran away from their oppressive governments to the USA. That was what made USA unique.. But today the US is no different and in many cases even worse than many other countries in that respect.

If you want to cooperate with others, you have plenty of ways to do it. Start your own partnership, do whatever you want as a group of like minded individuals.

But that is not your desire. Your desire is not cooperation of like minded individuals. It is oppression of everybody under your favorite form of collectivism. You will never have me join on my own accord, so you want to force me to join so that I can be brought down to your level and oppressed by your violent political structure. The answer is no.

- good.

- good.

- good

- irrelevant.

In fact the syntactic sugar added starting with Java 5 is mostly bad. Generics - bad, horrible code. 'for (blah: type)' - bad, no Iterator access. Autoboxing - horrible, gigantic mistake, etc.

But what do I know, I just end up releasing one working project after another by hiring novices and training them in a month to a level they become to projects.

He couldn't fit a square peg into a cillround hole.

Pffft. I would answer like so: I am standing on a cone located exactly on top of North pole. The cone is 1 mile tall.

The USA economy in 1995 was much more sound than the economy today or what will be in 2020. It was not an economy that lived in permanent state of constant inflation (0% interest rates and money printing out of the government wazoo). The degeneration of the economy over that time period (actually since 1913, when the IRS and Fed were created, 1917, when the Fed was allowed to monetize government debt, 1971, when Nixon defaulted on the dollar and inflation totally took off) caused mass migration of productivity from the USA to other parts of the world. The service sector jobs that we are talking about here (and make no mistake, minimum wage jobs are service sector jobs, jobs that do not directly produce economic output that can be exported to pay for the imported produced goods from other countries) are not paying as much as they paid in 1995 because these service sector jobs cannot afford to pay that.

In USA there should be a REDUCTION of minimum wage, not increase of minimum wage, but more importantly there should be reduction in government spending altogether, reduction in government, reduction of taxes collected from any work done by anybody, reduction of any payouts to anybody on any government promises. Basically USA government needs to let go of its death grip on the economy and let it restructure. This includes abolition of government services, removal of government participation in business and labour altogether and this means no more minimum wage. What USA government is doing is the exact opposite of what the USA economy needs. This is what I mean when I say 'economic illiteracy', it's prevalent, it's all permeating, it's devastating and there is no easy fix.

Aah, no, as a producer I disagree that customer generates the market for a new product. We are building a number of new products here today and some of what we are building does not have a market, we are hoping to create the market for it, just like iPads created a market that did not exist, just like production of kerosene created market for lighting with kerosene that did not exist, just like cars and trucks created market where before the role of the vehicles was carried out by horses and other forms of transport. Somebody steps in with their investment to create the market that did not exist because the item that is being created does not exist.

There is currently no gigantic market for yachts because they are very expensive. IF you can create a yacht and sell it at 10,000USD you will create a gigantic market for yachts that did not exist because the product was not in existence.

If you come up with a way to build a personal space vehicle and make it only as expensive as a car or so you will create a gigantic market that did not exist.

Of-course for all of this there have to be savings taken out of somebody's bank account first, spent to produce thing thing, which means hiring people (creating jobs, not because you want to create jobs, because you want to make money on selling into your new market), buying stuff from suppliers, renting some space, managing everything, marketing, advertising, selling, even going through the regulatory labyrinth and making sure you can actually offer your product to any potential customers, that's what investment is, that's what 'trickle down' economics actually are - using savings to produce and then allowing more economy to be generated around your production.

I run a business (more than one), I woke up one day and said: I have some savings, why don't I build a system and try and sell it. I built my first system all by myself, found a client, didn't sell it but offered it to them for free, getting support money from that still and used that to advertise my services. Found another client and managed to secure a contract for building another system, hired some people, trained them and worked on that system. While I was working on that system I was making enough money to pay off some debts and get some more people, who I then put to work on my own products before I had a single client for those products at all.

I will never do anything 'benevolently', that makes 0 sense to me, I am in this to build my own stuff the way I want to and to make money off of it, if I am not making money off of it it is my problem, since I am spending money on building it, which is mostly salaries, rent, utilities and taxes. I don't need lectures on why people do what they do in business and I know precisely why I hire people.

I would prefer to hire NOBODY at all, that's my preference because I don't need the expense and the drama. However to be more productive I have to add more hands and heads to myself, I see employees as tools that I use to bring my vision to life. I have 0 customers for some of my systems and I must advertise to find those clients, but the money is already spent, the employees already got their salaries, the money came out of my own pocket - my savings.

'Trickle down' has nothing to do with 'giving rich people more money', that's socialist baloney, it has to do precisely with gathering capital and using the capital to invest into more production. Talking about 'trickle down' and 'giving rich money' is the exact economic illiteracy that I was talking about.

Poverty happens due to lack of production. I am not a robot in your replicator dream, I produce the way I do it because I want to get more money than when I was working as a contractor. I spend my time and my savings to produce, I see profits as way to increase production, not as a way to eat more expensive chocolate and drive a bigger car. Poverty happens due to poverty in thinking, which is what leads to overall poverty in society. Poverty in thinking is the way of thinking that includes 'stealing from the rich to give to the poor' - THAT is poverty of thinking.