- Dec 18, 2011
- 12,919
- 4,823
- 350
For those who dislike reading and assume that 18 very brief paragraphs feels like the equivalent of reading War and Peace, move along. And please don't comment if you can't read first. I suspect some just copy and paste talking points on every non-liberal thread. And any posts picking on typos, length or using any other diversion tactic will be ignored. Many plan to vote for Bernie and I bet that few heard anything past the word, "free." It explains why any attempt to show Bernie is clueless won't get read. No one wants to hear that Santa isn't real. So, don't strain your little brain trying to grasp economics, how wealth is created or why so many people innately reject socialism. Just go take a nap and dream about the free shit you think is coming.
"When we get to do socialism, we’ll do it right! (said every dictator and slacker in history)
But there’s a more fundamental misunderstanding about economics where many of these younger voters are concerned, and it explains a lot about why they’re attracted to Bernie Sanders and his socialist ideas. That is the notion, very popular on the left, that the entire economy is "rigged" in favor of the super-rich, such that it leaves everyone else on the outside looking in, with no access to opportunity.
That is simply not how free-market capitalism works, although there are time in which people rig certain situations – but only if they can harness the power of government to do it. The case of Martin Shkreli is a perfect example. Everyone heard about how Shkreli and his company cornered the market on a crucial drug, and jacked its price up to $750 a dose. Many on the left saw Shkreli as the poster-boy for capitalism run amok. But here’s what they didn’t know: Shkreli and his company, Turing Pharmaceuticals, were only able to corner the market because they knew all competitors would have to go through a protracted FDA approval process – likely as long as four years – before they could introduce market competition.
In other words, Shkreli was only able to do what he did because of the regulatory state. And any time something is "rigged" in economics, it’s going to require some force of government. Dodd-Frank, for example, is advertised as protecting consumers from evil, reckless banks. In fact, it protects big banks by making it next to impossible for smaller community banks to compete with them.
Sanders supporters have no idea how much of what they think is runaway capitalism is actually caused by government policy championed by Democrats.
And that takes us to an even more fundamental misunderstanding – the notion embraced by left-leaning young people that rich people are their enemies. They’re not. No one gets rich by causing another person to be poor. You get rich by producing goods and services people want at prices they’re willing to pay. You get rich when you offer people a proposition they find agreeable.
And if you’re a young person who wants to ascend the economic ladder, I’ll tell you exactly what you should do: Identify a rich person who might get even richer as a result of something you could do for him or her, and then propose to do it. And if that person says no, go to another one. And then another. And then another.
You become rich by working well with other rich people, and helping them to offer quality goods and services to the public at reasonable prices. Now, of course, this will require a lot of you. You’ll need to work very hard, show up on time consistently, perform at a very high level and probably get more out of yourself than you ever thought you were capable of.
But I’m telling you right now, this is how those who get rich do it. And those who have already done it represent opportunity for you.
Or you could get behind Bernie Sanders, who wants to tear rich people down and take away what they’ve earned, then apportion to you – well, whatever he decides to give you, I guess. That doesn’t sound like a pathway to prosperity if you ask me, but then again, if you have no concept of what prosperity means or how to achieve it, maybe you too will be taken in by such notions and the people who espouse them."
http://www.caintv.com/socialism-and-the-delusion-of
Bernie and the left talk as if there is an limited amount of wealth and if one person has more it must mean than another ends up with less. No understanding of wealth creation, only wealth confiscation. When the programs over the years have trained too damn many people to wait for what government gives them, it's no wonder so many don't have the faintest clue that they could have generated their own income and even created a certain amount of wealth. Just because some people are living in mansions, it doesn't mean it's their fault you're living in a crappy apartment. That would be on you.
Bernie is promising a lot of things and counting on the wealth creators to keep working just as hard and carrying on as usual, despite the fact that they will give up a bigger chunk. And Bernie can't imagine that they would stop doing that. A gross lack of understanding of both human nature and the economy is why Bernie's plan will fail miserably and cause more hardships for everyone. Socialism works that way. Every. Time. It's. Tried. This will not be the magical time it finally does work.
"In fact, his plan will actually lose money – possibly two to three times the amount of money it aims to raise to pay for free college – due to a somewhat complex system of tax revenue streams that have escaped the attention of the average voter.
But that’s to be expected with tax policy: It’s often misunderstood. So for those who don’t wish to dive into the thick stacks of Bernie’s tax policy proposals, his plan essentially boils down like this:
Bernie wants to put a .5% tax on all stocks traded and .1% on all bonds traded, which seems logical at face value. Look at it this way: Every time a stock is traded, the government shaves off a tiny .5% of its total value and stores it away to be used to pay for free college. This small tax seems negligible, but in the modern stock market, it would be catastrophic.
Here’s why: Stocks are often traded now through programs that make continuous trades in milliseconds, on the fly, in accordance with the market. By taxing each trade, it would basically raise the cost to invest in the American economy. This is a problem, because it would therefore slow the amount of trades occurring at a rate that becomes troubling from a broad viewpoint. In this global market, with such a large number of trades occurring regularly, any decrease in this stream of trades would make it more difficult for companies to find the money to expand, which would shrink the American economy and shrink the amount of tax revenue brought in.
In fact, according to a peer-reviewed study conducted by the Adam Smith Institute, Bernie’s plan would actually lower the amount of tax revenue by about 1.75 times the amount it aims to gain. In other words, if Bernie aims to bring in $300 billion a year, tax revenues would simultaneously decrease by about $525 billion, due to a slower stock market. And if free college is to be paid for by tax revenue, and this plan has been assessed to decrease tax revenue overall, it is not feasible."
http://opportunitylives.com/bernies-free-college-plan-sounds-great-if-only-it-made-sense/
"When we get to do socialism, we’ll do it right! (said every dictator and slacker in history)
But there’s a more fundamental misunderstanding about economics where many of these younger voters are concerned, and it explains a lot about why they’re attracted to Bernie Sanders and his socialist ideas. That is the notion, very popular on the left, that the entire economy is "rigged" in favor of the super-rich, such that it leaves everyone else on the outside looking in, with no access to opportunity.
That is simply not how free-market capitalism works, although there are time in which people rig certain situations – but only if they can harness the power of government to do it. The case of Martin Shkreli is a perfect example. Everyone heard about how Shkreli and his company cornered the market on a crucial drug, and jacked its price up to $750 a dose. Many on the left saw Shkreli as the poster-boy for capitalism run amok. But here’s what they didn’t know: Shkreli and his company, Turing Pharmaceuticals, were only able to corner the market because they knew all competitors would have to go through a protracted FDA approval process – likely as long as four years – before they could introduce market competition.
In other words, Shkreli was only able to do what he did because of the regulatory state. And any time something is "rigged" in economics, it’s going to require some force of government. Dodd-Frank, for example, is advertised as protecting consumers from evil, reckless banks. In fact, it protects big banks by making it next to impossible for smaller community banks to compete with them.
Sanders supporters have no idea how much of what they think is runaway capitalism is actually caused by government policy championed by Democrats.
And that takes us to an even more fundamental misunderstanding – the notion embraced by left-leaning young people that rich people are their enemies. They’re not. No one gets rich by causing another person to be poor. You get rich by producing goods and services people want at prices they’re willing to pay. You get rich when you offer people a proposition they find agreeable.
And if you’re a young person who wants to ascend the economic ladder, I’ll tell you exactly what you should do: Identify a rich person who might get even richer as a result of something you could do for him or her, and then propose to do it. And if that person says no, go to another one. And then another. And then another.
You become rich by working well with other rich people, and helping them to offer quality goods and services to the public at reasonable prices. Now, of course, this will require a lot of you. You’ll need to work very hard, show up on time consistently, perform at a very high level and probably get more out of yourself than you ever thought you were capable of.
But I’m telling you right now, this is how those who get rich do it. And those who have already done it represent opportunity for you.
Or you could get behind Bernie Sanders, who wants to tear rich people down and take away what they’ve earned, then apportion to you – well, whatever he decides to give you, I guess. That doesn’t sound like a pathway to prosperity if you ask me, but then again, if you have no concept of what prosperity means or how to achieve it, maybe you too will be taken in by such notions and the people who espouse them."
http://www.caintv.com/socialism-and-the-delusion-of
Bernie and the left talk as if there is an limited amount of wealth and if one person has more it must mean than another ends up with less. No understanding of wealth creation, only wealth confiscation. When the programs over the years have trained too damn many people to wait for what government gives them, it's no wonder so many don't have the faintest clue that they could have generated their own income and even created a certain amount of wealth. Just because some people are living in mansions, it doesn't mean it's their fault you're living in a crappy apartment. That would be on you.
Bernie is promising a lot of things and counting on the wealth creators to keep working just as hard and carrying on as usual, despite the fact that they will give up a bigger chunk. And Bernie can't imagine that they would stop doing that. A gross lack of understanding of both human nature and the economy is why Bernie's plan will fail miserably and cause more hardships for everyone. Socialism works that way. Every. Time. It's. Tried. This will not be the magical time it finally does work.
"In fact, his plan will actually lose money – possibly two to three times the amount of money it aims to raise to pay for free college – due to a somewhat complex system of tax revenue streams that have escaped the attention of the average voter.
But that’s to be expected with tax policy: It’s often misunderstood. So for those who don’t wish to dive into the thick stacks of Bernie’s tax policy proposals, his plan essentially boils down like this:
Bernie wants to put a .5% tax on all stocks traded and .1% on all bonds traded, which seems logical at face value. Look at it this way: Every time a stock is traded, the government shaves off a tiny .5% of its total value and stores it away to be used to pay for free college. This small tax seems negligible, but in the modern stock market, it would be catastrophic.
Here’s why: Stocks are often traded now through programs that make continuous trades in milliseconds, on the fly, in accordance with the market. By taxing each trade, it would basically raise the cost to invest in the American economy. This is a problem, because it would therefore slow the amount of trades occurring at a rate that becomes troubling from a broad viewpoint. In this global market, with such a large number of trades occurring regularly, any decrease in this stream of trades would make it more difficult for companies to find the money to expand, which would shrink the American economy and shrink the amount of tax revenue brought in.
In fact, according to a peer-reviewed study conducted by the Adam Smith Institute, Bernie’s plan would actually lower the amount of tax revenue by about 1.75 times the amount it aims to gain. In other words, if Bernie aims to bring in $300 billion a year, tax revenues would simultaneously decrease by about $525 billion, due to a slower stock market. And if free college is to be paid for by tax revenue, and this plan has been assessed to decrease tax revenue overall, it is not feasible."
http://opportunitylives.com/bernies-free-college-plan-sounds-great-if-only-it-made-sense/
