Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
You made the claim, now you can't show any evidence?
Why the money system is flawed and why the debt cannot be paid off even if they want to?
- Thread starter Parker99
- Start date
You made the claim, now you can't show any evidence?
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
The Sage of Main Street
Gold Member
Just Like "At Least He Served" Saved an Unpatriotic Coward From the Firing Squad
Americans are brainwashed to not realize how much damage is done by setting up people halfway to the finish line. HeirHeads block our way and must be totally set back where they belong.
Red Front
Gold Member
- Jul 7, 2022
- 5,253
- 1,463
- 138
- Banned
- #164
You're claiming that the US Federal Government with its sovereign fiat currency and deficit spending at less than the nation's GDP can create hyperinflation. Provide us with examples of hyperinflation created by the US Federal Government doing this. We can go back and forth like this forever if you want.
The Sage of Main Street
Gold Member
If You've Heard of Somebody, Don't Listen to Him
Just because ewe've never been told what is going on, you figure that no one else can figure it out.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Where do you feel I claimed that? Link?
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Red Front
Gold Member
- Jul 7, 2022
- 5,253
- 1,463
- 138
- Banned
- #168
You're objecting to the fact that macroeconomically the very nature of national deficit spending with a sovereign fiat currency under GDP, doesn't create hyperinflation or too much money (demand) chasing after too few goods and services (production is unable to meet consumer demand, due to too much money in the economy).
Tell me how it can theoretically occur and then provide at least one example of it actually happening. Any nation with a sovereign fiat currency, with all of its debt denominated in its own money, deficit spending itself on its annual budget into hyperinflation despite remaining under 35% of its GDP and allocating its funds into infrastructural development and social services (public goods and services). How can that happen? Explain.
You clearly don't understand the macroeconomic processes involved in deficit spending with a sovereign fiat currency or how hyperinflation could happen under such conditions. If you did you wouldn't be asking me to provide you with evidence because it's obvious from the nature of the process itself that it can't happen under the conditions that I stated.
It's like if I say that human beings can't fly through the sky without technology, and you tell me "Prove it, provide me with evidence that's the case". I respond by telling you that by the very nature or constitution of man, there's no way he can fly without technology. You continue to demand I provide you with evidence. I then say "OK, show me an example of human beings flying through the sky without some sort of technology". You can't, it's impossible. I say the same to you, go ahead and provide me with your example concerning macroeconomic deficit spending under the conditions that I listed above, that created hyperinflation. Good luck.
Last edited:
Couchpotato
Platinum Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 15,125
- 7,336
- 938
The number of dollars in circulation doesn’t represent the total amount of wealth in the country. The GDP of the US is 23 trillion. The GDP of just California is 3 trillion.
The total asset value of the US is somewhere around 270 trillion. Our debt is a problem and we need to get it sorted but what you’re saying is just untrue.
Couchpotato
Platinum Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 15,125
- 7,336
- 938
I didn’t make that claim.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
You're objecting to the fact that macroeconomically the very nature of national deficit spending with a sovereign fiat currency under GDP, doesn't create hyperinflation or too much money (demand) chasing after too few goods and services (production is unable to meet consumer demand, due to too much money in the economy).
I am? Where?
Couchpotato
Platinum Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 15,125
- 7,336
- 938
Having a national debt isn't in and of itself necessarily bad. Not having one is better obviously, but if kept under control and if it's increased only when we need it then it certainly makes sense. That said you cant just continual spend beyond your means. If the debt means nothing and we can just run up as much as we wan with no consequences then why do we pay taxes? Why does the Government do anything to offset spending? Why must we "tax the rich" or "make them pay their fair share"?
Red Front
Gold Member
- Jul 7, 2022
- 5,253
- 1,463
- 138
- Banned
- #175
I write a "so-called" national debt because a nation like ours doesn't have a debt. When you say the word "debt", concerning macroeconomics under the conditions our nation is in economically, you're committing an error. Our "so-called" debt, isn't a debt, it's more like a ledger of how much money the US Federal Government has inserted into the US economy (the private sector), without taxing it back or receiving it in government fees (permits, licenses, tariffs..etc). The US FED GOV has to spend money before we can have money in our pockets (use it to purchase products and services, save or invest it).
Why does the US FED GOV tax us?
- Why federal taxes?: Countries that issue their own currencies, and taxes do not fund spending in a traditional sense. Instead, taxes serve to (a) control inflation by reducing the purchasing power available to the public, (b) redistribute wealth, and (c) incentivize or disincentivize certain economic behaviors. The primary constraint on money creation is inflation, not solvency. The US FED GOV, will never go insolvent.
- Balancing Act: The challenge for policymakers is to balance money creation and spending to support economic growth without causing inflation. This balance involves careful consideration of the economy's output gap (the difference between actual and potential economic output), the velocity of money (the rate at which money circulates in the economy), and the capacity of the economy to absorb additional spending without overheating.
- Sustainable Economic Policies: It's crucial to focus on sustainable and productive government spending/investment. Spending that enhances the economy's productive capacity can support more substantial and stable long-term growth. Investments in infrastructure, education, and technology can increase productivity, potentially leading to an expanded economic base that can sustain higher levels of money without inflationary pressures. For a market capitalist economy like ours, as a communist, I'm of the position that we must avoid frivolous, unproductive spending. Spending should be PRODUCTIVE.
What economic behaviors do federal taxes incentivize and disincentivize?
Consumption: Taxes can be used to influence consumer behavior. For example, sales taxes can affect the overall level of consumption, while excise taxes on specific goods like tobacco, alcohol, and sugary drinks are used to discourage consumption of these items due to their health implications.- Investment: Tax incentives, such as lower rates on capital gains or deductions for certain types of investments, can encourage individuals and businesses to invest in particular sectors, such as renewable energy, real estate, or startups. Conversely, higher taxes on certain investments might discourage them.
- Savings: Tax-advantaged savings accounts, like retirement accounts (e.g., 401(k) plans, IRAs in the U.S.), encourage saving for the long term by providing tax benefits either at the time of contribution or upon withdrawal.
- Work and Employment: Income taxes can influence decisions to work or the amount of work one chooses to do. Progressive tax systems, where higher income brackets are taxed at higher rates, might influence high earners' work and investment decisions.
- Production and Efficiency: Taxes can incentivize businesses to adopt more efficient or environmentally friendly practices.
- Wealth Redistribution: Progressive taxation, where higher-income individuals are taxed at higher rates, aims to redistribute wealth within the economy. This can influence social equity and economic mobility by providing even more resources for public services and social programs that benefit lower-income groups.
- Health and Safety: Taxes on hazardous substances or activities can reduce their prevalence. For example, high taxes on cigarettes are intended to reduce smoking rates, which can lead to improved public health outcomes.
- International Trade: Tariffs and trade taxes can influence the balance of trade between countries by making imported goods more expensive compared to domestically produced goods. This can protect local industries.
In essence, the US Fed Gov, through the strategic use of taxes, aims to mold economic behavior in a way that aligns with broader social, economic, and environmental goals. The effectiveness of these tax policies in controlling or influencing behavior can vary significantly based on how they are structured and implemented, as well as on the responsiveness of individuals and businesses to these incentives and disincentives.
Soon the government might have to heavily tax capitalists who employ robots or advanced automation systems to produce goods and services rather than paying wages to human labor (Human employees = paying customers = profits/markets/capitalism/capitalists, hence without that the capitalist system collapses, forcing society to adopt a non-profit, centrally planned and controlled system of production/communism).
The taxes may be as high as 90% to artificially create a non-productive paying customer base that receives an income paid by the government. This is the only way to maintain capitalism in a nation like ours, when production is almost fully automated, without being forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit, marketless system of production a.k.a. communism. In other words, you're going to need Uncle Sam to bail out the capitalists every month with a universal income for consumers (They call it now a UBI or Universal BASIC Income, but it won't be a "basic income" if it becomes people's primary source of income).
This is why billionaires are talking about a UBI or "Universal Basic Income", because they see the writing on the wall. Listen to what Elon Musk says at the end of his comments in the second video below:
- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
www.youtube.com
He says that the government is going to have to come in and "regulate" the use of advanced, intelligent automation. I agree, that's the only way to keep capitalism on life support for the duration of the lifetime of these billionaires. Eventually, that system of "free government checks" for the populace will collapse as well, becoming superfluous due to technological advancement (The individual consumer can produce everything he or she consumes, no longer needing capitalists or the state) or due to social unrest as a consequence of scarcity and injustice. The danger of us falling into this situation after a few decades under Uncle Sam's Universal Welfare Check is quite high:
Techno-Fuedalism/Slavery.
Or we can go the Star Trek route which would be much better:
Eventually, the individual consumer will have so much control over the production of goods and services, that there will be no need for central planning or even a state. This was the original Marxist view of economics and politics.
Withering away of the state - Wikipedia
Eventually, technology liberates the individual consumer (humanity) from relying on anyone else to produce the products they consume. Imagine a future where land is considered a burden to own and is avoided, and people prefer to be mobile, or to live in large vehicular crafts or ships, traveling and exploring, rather than remaining stationary in one place all of their lives. Imagine a human order of life where people who live in communities do it not out of a need for products and services but because they want genuine human company. They want to develop human relationships:
Home
reimagining civilizationwith floating cities Seasteading means building floating societies with significant political autonomy. Nearly half the world’s surface is unclaimed by any nation-state, and many coastal nations can legislate seasteads in their territorial waters.
www.seasteading.org
Seasteading - Wikipedia
The Colonization of Space – Gerard K. O’Neill, Physics Today, 1974 - NSS
Reproduced with permission from Physics Today, 27(9):32-40 (September, 1974). © 1974, American Institute of Physics.The late Gerard K. O'Neill was professor of physics at Princeton University.Careful engineering and cost analysis shows we can build pleasant, self-sufficient dwelling places in...
nss.org
We're social beings hence people will form communities or sea colonies and space colonies (and of course continue living in communities on land, but that's boring, why live here when you can travel and explore the seas or even outer space? You can create earthlike environments in your space colonies and essentially take Mother Earth with you wherever you go in the universe...). If technology continues to advance in the area of production, eventually human beings will become scarcity-free and "godlike", when it comes to civility (The way we treat each other) and in our production of goods and services (The production of the stuff that we consume to live). I just gave you the big picture of modern, human economics, starting from capitalism. A lot more is possible.
Last edited:
It slowly weakens great economies. We have the reserve currency of the world. The middleman currency. Great wealth from that. From WW 2 on. At its peak it was around 90% of all exchanges. Now around 50/60%. We had to turn China into the 2nd most powerful nation in the world to keep our lifestyles as we purchase much of our products from them. We replace tens of millions of manufacturing employment with service employment along with a growing social construct that pays more and more people from government. The costs of things we make here are increasing way past inflation. California politicians wants to pay fast-food employees 50 dollars and hour. See the direction.
Couchpotato
Platinum Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 15,125
- 7,336
- 938
It’s money we have to pay back. Having a sw
I write a "so-called" national debt because a nation like ours doesn't have a debt. When you say the word "debt", concerning macroeconomics under the conditions our nation is in economically, you're committing an error. Our "so-called" debt, isn't a debt, it's more like a ledger of how much money the US Federal Government has inserted into the US economy (the private sector), without taxing it back or receiving it in government fees (permits, licenses, tariffs..etc). The US FED GOV has to spend money before we can have money in our pockets (use it to purchase products and services, save or invest it).
Why does the US FED GOV tax us?
- Why federal taxes?: Countries that issue their own currencies, and taxes do not fund spending in a traditional sense. Instead, taxes serve to (a) control inflation by reducing the purchasing power available to the public, (b) redistribute wealth, and (c) incentivize or disincentivize certain economic behaviors. The primary constraint on money creation is inflation, not solvency. The US FED GOV, will never go insolvent.
- Balancing Act: The challenge for policymakers is to balance money creation and spending to support economic growth without causing inflation. This balance involves careful consideration of the economy's output gap (the difference between actual and potential economic output), the velocity of money (the rate at which money circulates in the economy), and the capacity of the economy to absorb additional spending without overheating.
- Sustainable Economic Policies: It's crucial to focus on sustainable and productive government spending/investment. Spending that enhances the economy's productive capacity can support more substantial and stable long-term growth. Investments in infrastructure, education, and technology can increase productivity, potentially leading to an expanded economic base that can sustain higher levels of money without inflationary pressures. For a market capitalist economy like ours, as a communist, I'm of the position that we must avoid frivolous, unproductive spending. Spending should be PRODUCTIVE.
What economic behaviors do federal taxes incentivize and disincentivize?
Consumption: Taxes can be used to influence consumer behavior. For example, sales taxes can affect the overall level of consumption, while excise taxes on specific goods like tobacco, alcohol, and sugary drinks are used to discourage consumption of these items due to their health implications.- Investment: Tax incentives, such as lower rates on capital gains or deductions for certain types of investments, can encourage individuals and businesses to invest in particular sectors, such as renewable energy, real estate, or startups. Conversely, higher taxes on certain investments might discourage them.
- Savings: Tax-advantaged savings accounts, like retirement accounts (e.g., 401(k) plans, IRAs in the U.S.), encourage saving for the long term by providing tax benefits either at the time of contribution or upon withdrawal.
- Work and Employment: Income taxes can influence decisions to work or the amount of work one chooses to do. Progressive tax systems, where higher income brackets are taxed at higher rates, might influence high earners' work and investment decisions.
- Production and Efficiency: Taxes can incentivize businesses to adopt more efficient or environmentally friendly practices.
- Wealth Redistribution: Progressive taxation, where higher-income individuals are taxed at higher rates, aims to redistribute wealth within the economy. This can influence social equity and economic mobility by providing even more resources for public services and social programs that benefit lower-income groups.
- Health and Safety: Taxes on hazardous substances or activities can reduce their prevalence. For example, high taxes on cigarettes are intended to reduce smoking rates, which can lead to improved public health outcomes.
- International Trade: Tariffs and trade taxes can influence the balance of trade between countries by making imported goods more expensive compared to domestically produced goods. This can protect local industries.
In essence, the US Fed Gov, through the strategic use of taxes, aims to mold economic behavior in a way that aligns with broader social, economic, and environmental goals. The effectiveness of these tax policies in controlling or influencing behavior can vary significantly based on how they are structured and implemented, as well as on the responsiveness of individuals and businesses to these incentives and disincentives.
Soon the government might have to heavily tax capitalists who employ robots or advanced automation systems to produce goods and services rather than paying wages to human labor (Human employees = paying customers = profits/markets/capitalism/capitalists, hence without that the capitalist system collapses, forcing society to adopt a non-profit, centrally planned and controlled system of production/communism).
The taxes may be as high as 90% to artificially create a non-productive paying customer base that receives an income paid by the government. This is the only way to maintain capitalism in a nation like ours, when production is almost fully automated, without being forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit, marketless system of production a.k.a. communism. In other words, you're going to need Uncle Sam to bail out the capitalists every month with a universal income for consumers (They call it now a UBI or Universal BASIC Income, but it won't be a "basic income" if it becomes people's primary source of income).
This is why billionaires are talking about a UBI or "Universal Basic Income", because they see the writing on the wall. Listen to what Elon Musk says at the end of his comments in the second video below:
- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
He says that the government is going to have to come in and "regulate" the use of advanced, intelligent automation. I agree, that's the only way to keep capitalism on life support for the duration of the lifetime of these billionaires. Eventually, that system of "free government checks" for the populace will collapse as well, becoming superfluous due to technological advancement (The individual consumer can produce everything he or she consumes, no longer needing capitalists or the state) or due to social unrest as a consequence of scarcity and injustice. The danger of us falling into this situation after a few decades under Uncle Sam's Universal Welfare Check is quite high:
Techno-Fuedalism/Slavery.
Or we can go the Star Trek route which would be much better:
Eventually, the individual consumer will have so much control over the production of goods and services, that there will be no need for central planning or even a state. This was the original Marxist view of economics and politics.
Withering away of the state - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Eventually, technology liberates the individual consumer (humanity) from relying on anyone else to produce the products they consume. Imagine a future where land is considered a burden to own and is avoided, and people prefer to be mobile, or to live in large vehicular crafts or ships, traveling and exploring, rather than remaining stationary in one place all of their lives. Imagine a human order of life where people who live in communities do it not out of a need for products and services but because they want genuine human company. They want to develop human relationships:
View attachment 904216
View attachment 904217
View attachment 904218
View attachment 904219
Home
reimagining civilizationwith floating cities Seasteading means building floating societies with significant political autonomy. Nearly half the world’s surface is unclaimed by any nation-state, and many coastal nations can legislate seasteads in their territorial waters.
Seasteading - Wikipedia
The Colonization of Space – Gerard K. O’Neill, Physics Today, 1974 - NSS
Reproduced with permission from Physics Today, 27(9):32-40 (September, 1974). © 1974, American Institute of Physics.The late Gerard K. O'Neill was professor of physics at Princeton University.Careful engineering and cost analysis shows we can build pleasant, self-sufficient dwelling places in...
We're social beings hence people will form communities or sea colonies and space colonies (and of course continue living in communities on land, but that's boring, why live here when you can travel and explore the seas or even outer space? You can create earthlike environments in your space colonies and essentially take Mother Earth with you wherever you go in the universe...). If technology continues to advance in the area of production, eventually human beings will become scarcity-free and "godlike", when it comes to civility (The way we treat each other) and in our production of goods and services (The production of the stuff that we consume to live). I just gave you the big picture of modern, human economics, starting from capitalism. A lot more is possible.
Nope the nation owes money to any number of entitles. You can cut and paste al the bullshit you want about your fantasy land sea colonies but that wont change anything.
Red Front
Gold Member
- Jul 7, 2022
- 5,253
- 1,463
- 138
- Banned
- #178
We never borrowed it. Why would the US Federal Government need to "borrow" USD when it issues the USD ex-nihilo? You don't understand how treasury bonds work and what they're for now, under our current monetary system. We're not under the gold standard anymore. The USD is a modern, fiat currency, that is exclusively issued by the US FED GOV. Before responding to what I wrote, actually read it. You read one sentence and started firing. You ignored everything I said.
Red Front
Gold Member
- Jul 7, 2022
- 5,253
- 1,463
- 138
- Banned
- #179
There was no need for us to gut our manufacturing base and move it to China in the 1980s. That was a completely unnecessary, selfish, unpatriotic decision made by American elites to make huge profits in the short-term, at the expense of the American economy in the long term. Macroeconomics requires so-called "national debt", because the government has to spend for the private sector to have money.
The so-called national debt is just a way for capitalists to scare the populace into handing all of their national resources or commonwealth into their hands. Privatizing every single industry and resource in the country, allows the wealthy elites to profit. The demonization of a democratic-republican government by capitalists until it becomes a plutocratic oligarchy, that they can control and suck dry:
Download results as CSV or XML or Save your search (Click here for information on download subscriptions)
| RANK | PARENT | SUBSIDY VALUE . | NUMBER OF AWARDS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Boeing | $15,388,954,161 | 952 |
| 2 | Intel | $8,355,503,416 | 127 |
| 3 | Ford Motor | $7,718,954,966 | 684 |
| 4 | General Motors | $7,494,705,750 | 783 |
| 5 | Micron Technology | $6,786,681,915 | 19 |
| 6 | Alcoa | $5,727,691,764 | 134 |
| 7 | Cheniere Energy | $5,617,152,523 | 43 |
| 8 | Amazon.com | $5,532,086,473 | 433 |
| 9 | Foxconn Technology Group (Hon Hai Precision Industry Company) | $4,820,110,112 | 74 |
| 10 | Texas Instruments | $4,286,328,869 | 69 |
| 11 | Volkswagen | $3,880,517,317 | 209 |
| 12 | Sempra Energy | $3,828,022,782 | 51 |
| 13 | NRG Energy | $3,405,383,876 | 264 |
| 14 | Venture Global LNG | $3,285,883,566 | 6 |
| 15 | NextEra Energy | $3,008,691,129 | 116 |
| 16 | Sasol | $2,836,049,845 | 72 |
| 17 | Tesla Inc. | $2,829,855,494 | 114 |
| 18 | Stellantis | $2,795,436,436 | 213 |
| 19 | Nucor | $2,518,064,340 | 171 |
| 20 | Walt Disney | $2,483,328,762 | 255 |
| 21 | SkyWest | $2,418,120,282 | 981 |
| 22 | Iberdrola | $2,380,537,196 | 109 |
| 23 | Toyota | $2,304,226,689 | 237 |
| 24 | Shell PLC | $2,210,816,246 | 131 |
| 25 | Samsung | $2,178,196,443 | 83 |
| 26 | Oracle | $2,167,890,528 | 90 |
| 27 | Mubadala Investment Company | $2,124,035,097 | 62 |
| 28 | Nike | $2,104,917,829 | 153 |
| 29 | Hyundai Motor | $2,048,610,159 | 17 |
| 30 | Alphabet Inc. | $2,010,825,527 | 124 |
| 31 | Brookfield Asset Management | $1,968,826,437 | 231 |
| 32 | Meta Platforms Inc. | $1,963,051,772 | 61 |
| 33 | Exxon Mobil | $1,906,554,975 | 227 |
| 34 | Paramount Global | $1,845,796,313 | 332 |
| 35 | Nissan | $1,842,814,165 | 98 |
| 36 | Apple Inc. | $1,833,837,442 | 61 |
| 37 | Comcast | $1,827,808,120 | 390 |
| 38 | Berkshire Hathaway | $1,821,579,761 | 1,190 |
| 39 | Summit Power | $1,783,593,414 | 6 |
| 40 | General Electric | $1,737,066,990 | 994 |
| 41 | Air Products & Chemicals | $1,726,928,435 | 87 |
| 42 | Cleveland-Cliffs | $1,705,497,604 | 129 |
| 43 | Southern Company | $1,694,958,172 | 45 |
| 44 | Energy Transfer | $1,680,763,748 | 155 |
| 45 | JPMorgan Chase | $1,663,593,063 | 1,147 |
| 46 | Vornado Realty Trust | $1,623,857,336 | 33 |
| 47 | Duke Energy | $1,580,417,759 | 86 |
| 48 | Wolfspeed Inc. | $1,560,125,015 | 63 |
| 49 | Rivian Automotive Inc. | $1,532,854,012 | 3 |
| 50 | IBM Corp. | $1,495,438,545 | 367 |
| 51 | General Atomics | $1,476,687,046 | 111 |
| 52 | OGE Energy | $1,427,570,182 | 15 |
| 53 | SCS Energy | $1,419,011,796 | 5 |
| 54 | Panasonic | $1,384,147,584 | 61 |
| 55 | Microsoft | $1,363,926,937 | 111 |
| 56 | Lockheed Martin | $1,334,594,360 | 319 |
| 57 | Sagamore Development | $1,320,000,000 | 2 |
| 58 | Northrop Grumman | $1,275,514,883 | 284 |
| 59 | Corning Inc. | $1,262,885,869 | 389 |
| 60 | Vingroup | $1,254,000,000 | 1 |
| 61 | Continental AG | $1,244,875,478 | 111 |
| 62 | RTX Corporation | $1,168,240,858 | 779 |
| 63 | Jefferies Financial Group | $1,144,919,260 | 17 |
| 64 | SK Holdings | $1,081,550,283 | 9 |
| 65 | Valero Energy | $1,053,812,692 | 207 |
| 66 | Dow Inc. | $1,049,354,213 | 640 |
| 67 | AES Corp. | $1,030,194,632 | 132 |
| 68 | Hyannis Air Service Inc. | $1,018,366,272 | 417 |
| 69 | Abengoa | $988,188,652 | 43 |
| 70 | Exelon | $982,955,949 | 57 |
| 71 | CF Industries | $982,271,715 | 129 |
| 72 | Pyramid Companies | $966,050,097 | 91 |
| 73 | Mazda Toyota Manufacturing, U.S.A., Inc. | $900,000,000 | 1 |
| 74 | Apollo Global Management | $896,345,186 | 586 |
| 75 | LG | $881,567,511 | 87 |
| 76 | Delta Air Lines | $878,093,932 | 17 |
| 77 | Centene | $877,508,496 | 56 |
| 78 | Bayer | $850,128,391 | 212 |
| 79 | Honda | $849,832,301 | 92 |
| 80 | Shin-Etsu Chemical | $828,683,936 | 106 |
| 81 | Enterprise Products Partners | $826,988,371 | 89 |
| 82 | SunEdison | $813,584,873 | 113 |
| 83 | Goldman Sachs | $800,873,386 | 253 |
| 84 | E.ON | $782,609,880 | 38 |
| 85 | Archer Daniels Midland | $771,819,773 | 1,116 |
| 86 | EDF-Electricite de France | $766,205,550 | 36 |
| 87 | Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. | $764,594,690 | 217 |
| 88 | Triple Five Worldwide | $748,000,000 | 4 |
| 89 | Bank of America | $744,566,157 | 929 |
| 90 | EDP-Energias de Portugal | $733,674,868 | 14 |
| 91 | Related Companies | $687,200,000 | 1 |
| 92 | Koch Industries | $673,998,188 | 495 |
| 93 | Caithness Energy | $670,379,738 | 29 |
| 94 | Wells Fargo | $653,074,103 | 540 |
| 95 | Entergy | $638,345,893 | 234 |
| 96 | OCI N.V. | $627,879,406 | 5 |
| 97 | FedEx | $621,948,452 | 624 |
| 98 | Chevron Phillips Chemical | $619,839,444 | 20 |
| 99 | Bedrock Detroit | $618,000,000 | 1 |
Now the big money capitalists are all talking about a UBI i.e. Universal Basic Income. They need Uncle Sam to provide everyone with a monthly check, to maintain a customer base. Robots don't earn wages or purchase products and services, human who earn a wage do that. With advanced, intelligent automation, the writing is on the wall for market-for-profit capitalism. Capitalism automates itself into oblivion.
Last edited:
Couchpotato
Platinum Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 15,125
- 7,336
- 938
You cant be this dumb.
I dont think you have any understanding of what money is.
So again if the US Government can just print the money it needs why does it collect taxes? Just print it. No reason to take my dollars.
Similar threads
