What Capitalism has Done for the Common Man.

[8537]

How did the government, with no central bank, create inflation?

Sorry for jumping in, but during what perioud of American history?

inflation is driven by many factors. Not just a modern construct. Too few beads, too few animals in the herd has affeced economics throughout history. Beads (historical cultural cash) cheap, Food such as cattle, sheep, Gnu (LOL) expensive!

Indeed.

Now we need evidence that (A) there was inflation of consequence in the runup to the enclosure laws and (B) the enclosure laws were a response to them.

 

[8537]

Really? There was inflation cause by Alexander The Great and there was no central bank then either. Really?

That's when armies created their own money, and yes, to a certain extent, inflation was a problem. The penalty asking false currency then was death. prices alway rose where ever the army went as well. But that has more to do with demand and scarcity. Alexander the Great coins are among the easeyer coins to attain. Often troops would bundle their money together and bury it before a battle. The idea was that the living will devide the money of the dead among themselves after. Sometimes none of them survived.

I’m just pointing out to 8537 that inflation can come from government without a central bank. Inflation in the 1500 was caused by King Henry VIII cut the silver content in new coins for two years to subsidize excess spending. This caused inflated prices and labor costs. These forced the nations wealthy to become more efficient and enclosure was a way of doing it.

Enclosure was a way of becoming more efficient?

Then why did they wait so long to enclose? I thought it was related to the lack of demand for certain manor lands and the price of wool - which, if I recall - is what Polanyi believed caused it as well.

 

[there4eyeM]

"Often troops would bundle their money together and bury it before a battle. The idea was that the living will devide the money of the dead among themselves after."

Alexander's army was a bunch of 'progressives' and 'liberals', sharing out money?

 

[there4eyeM]

If Capitalism has benefited the "common man" I can assure you it was unintentional.

Whereas government is the "Intentional" destruction of mankind's advancement.

This is certainly true if we look at the first, original 'governments' of kings and theocratic authoritarian systems.

With the 'social contract', government evolved. Not enough, we could argue, but it was really the evolution of thought that has been the most modest.

 

[techieny]

as long as our government keeps printing money we are in for a long term inflationary period. It's inescapable !

 

[Douger]

"Common man" or them thar useless eaters ?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0w7S65S5Sc]True Cost of Chevron in Ecuador - YouTube[/ame]

OH. I forgot ! Brown People. Fuckem.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4l6ArtUlrk&feature=related]Endless Oil Spills - Nigeria - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Publius1787]

"Common man" or them thar useless eaters ?
True Cost of Chevron in Ecuador - YouTube

OH. I forgot ! Brown People. Fuckem.
Endless Oil Spills - Nigeria - YouTube

Socialist playing chips. Go to a country where individual liberty isn't valued by the government and blame the wreck on capitalism. I see this all the time on Link TV. Not to mention that the president of Ecuador is a socialist, and the one before him was a socialist, and the one before him was a socialist. And that Boko Haram regularly attacks the infrastructure of Nigeria.

 

[Londoner]

OH woe... what will we do???
Then the discover of petroleum and in the Middle East ARAB OIL.. everything great till
the gas lines.. "OH woe... what will we do???

Not an issue folks... Natural gas has DROPPED nearly 75% in cost and supply is almost
infinite!
Now more oil patch discoveries are finding oil.
AND ever hear of Abiotic oil ?
There is an alternative theory about the formation of oil and gas deposits that could change estimates of potential future oil reserves. According to this theory, oil is not a fossil fuel at all, but was formed deep in the Earth's crust .

The population growth associated with petroleum is unsustainable. Nations require 3% growth to provide for population growth and avoid recessions. Problem is: land and resources are finite.

On the theory of endless petroleum, Texas would still be Saudi Arabia.

3% growth on the 1940 economy was easy given how much of the globe was still under-developed, but the exponential rate of 3% growth - once your economy is well into the trillions and all the resource rich parts of the developing world have been tapped - leads to real limits,e.g., eventually the demand for oil outstrips the supply and energy costs explode and the economy stagnates.

The Right thinks that technology and God will save us, but we are already seeing the effects of the $4 gallon. At a certain point the earth says no. It lacks the crop land, fresh water and energy to sustain exponential growth. And that's when you see economic crises. The Right has been taught to view environmental limits the way the Left has been taught to view terrorism, with paranoia over secret agendas. The Right thinks that scare stories about environmental doom are used by the Left to give government more control over the economy and industrial behavior. The Left thinks Terrorism is overblown so that the Right can both grow the Pentagon, and make elections about national security, not the economy (which has been tanking since we started shipping manufacturing jobs to China).

For these reasons not even the math of why 3% growth is unsustainable works on Republicans. Do you know what 3% is factored out 20 years? More than 20 of the largest Saudi Oil fields. But Glen Beck doesn't talk about this. He uses Reagan's trick of getting us to focus on mythological socialist demons as his oil buddies drive us off a cliff. The Left can't ask "do you know what exponential growth looks like in 50 years? Eventually the resources won't exist and there will be terrible resource wars and deprivation across the advanced world." Meaning: not even math can help the Right see Reagan's expansion of oil use as insane. For Reagan, there will never be a $4 gallon. There will never be oil scarcity. Technology will save us.

Of course, we see how silly that is. And we see how silly it is to deny the current oil scarcity - which is going to worsen because of rising demand from China/India. The $4 gallon is here. But it's more than $4 once you factor in the cost of stabilizing the middle east.

The USA is the most petrol-intensive nation on earth. A large portion of its economic dominance came from its ability to exploit the productive capacity of petrochemicals. It is a nation of cars and suburbs, and it ABSOLUTELY depends on cheap gas. Other countries are more condensed and have highly evolved train systems. Not the USA: we drive long distances. [Do the math on just the Los Angeles basin. Do you know how much oil is used on a daily basis, and what even a slight rise in energy costs would do to the economy?

The US economy requires massive amounts of cheap petrochemicals to stay afloat. BUT... Those chemicals are going away. Worse: the oil industry, by capturing the GOP, has been able to destroy alternative energy and conservation, the two things that would lessen the blow of disappearing petroleum. Do you know who killed the first electric car movement?

Jimmy Carter tried to tell the nation that the real enemy was not the Soviets, but energy. He said that we couldn't spend the next 30 years making terrorist nations richer. He said that as the Reagan team was meeting unofficially with Iran and strengthening the US alliance with terror-states (see IranConta). Carter gave us a choice in the 70s to avoid the $4 gallon and the death of the American economy. Reagan and the Right laughed at him. Reagan removed Hussein's Iraq from the official list of terrorist nations, then he began to pour money into Iraq. He followed by doubling our aid to the freedom hating Saudis.

Reagan, who was funded heavily by big oil, chose oil dependency.

He dug our grave.

 

[antagon]

There is no reason to count oil out of the next 100 years. There's enough for aggressive international growth inasmuch time, and without shortage. I've never seen a projection to the contrary.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If Capitalism has benefited the "common man" I can assure you it was unintentional.

Who cares if it was "intentional?" The question is what is the system that benefits the common man the most. The movie is a clue for you: it ain't socialism.

Furthermore, how does an economic system have "intention?"

Through central planning, of course. Leftists only believe a thing can truly be good if they can congratulate themselves for it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"Communism never works and will always fail."

Odd that it is how the religion of Christianity started off.

The communal living you reference worked for a very short time, then failed.

It is nevertheless interesting that this was their initial response, what seemed natural to them to do as fair and loving followers of their Christ.

No, I'd say it wasn't "what seemed natural", but what they came up with when they tried to overthink it and be Mr. Clever and figure out a better way than what was natural . . . you know, the way sanctimonious liberals do.

 

[there4eyeM]

The communal living you reference worked for a very short time, then failed.

It is nevertheless interesting that this was their initial response, what seemed natural to them to do as fair and loving followers of their Christ.

No, I'd say it wasn't "what seemed natural", but what they came up with when they tried to overthink it and be Mr. Clever and figure out a better way than what was natural . . . you know, the way sanctimonious liberals do.

Content yourself to bowing before your idols of doctrine and fixed ideas. Never become supple and adaptable. Allow your life and future to be locked into one, unique path and ignore any alternatives. Be certain to immediately class anyone who presents other thinking and other ideas as an enemy. That should take you far.

 

[Abishai100]

One argument we hear in various discussions is that capitalism offers incentives for immigration. That is, the 'common' ethnic immigrant may find it profitable to move to a capitalism-hub nation such as the USA and seek 'venture' employment and 'dream' of starting his/her own business.

We have to ask if capitalism creates arenas for dialogue about 'risk philosophy.' How much do people talk about the courage of the immigrant when we talk simply about the vague capitalism-setting American Dream?

 

[initforme]

Capitalism works well as long as the laws are enforced. Today so many break so many laws and receive no punishment and I will stake everything I own on that fact. The corporations control everything now. I would love to be a whistleblower..... dream job to take em down