Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

Yep!... blissfully aware!...


No prob's... anytime!

Gee it's good when you can ignore empirical evidence and say, "just try to keep an open mind", sounds more and more like free energy machines.


Interesting feel good theory, but in real life it doesn't work like that... Once again, it was tried, and charitable donations dropped under such ideals. It worked the opposite to what you suggest, in real life.

I have been watching documentaries on New York City. Everything SuperVeg is talking about sounds like New York in the 1800's. There were people making massive ammounts of money. There were people that could not afford to live. There were far more people that could not afford to live. There were no social support nets. There were RIOTS. I'm not talking the tame Los Angeles riots of the 1990s. I am talking people draging dead bodies through the streets. The police being beaten to a pulp, then thrown into the river. Church run orphanages being razed. The homes of the wealthy also razed. There is no definitive body count, because they couldn't find all the bodies. Now I work full time. I used to do charities giving out christmas presents at Christmas time to people on welfare. The exception was the people that were just taking handouts. There was one house where the kid had nicer toys than I did. That was the exception. There were far more houses where these people were barely living. I could have handed the kids a wad of duct tape and called it a ball, they would have been profusely grateful. A lot of times the poor kids would not get to play with their toys for long, because their parents needed to sell the toys to put food on the table. I fully support giving WIC vouchers to single mothers who need to feed their babies. I fully support paying unemployment to people while they look for a job. I needed it when I was younger. Thank god it was there. I also support disability pay for maternity and paternity leave. That is not time you get to make up with an infant, and it should be spent with them. The abusers of the system are the exception not the rule. For every example of someone abusing the system, there are 50 people too ashamed to admit they are on welfare.

I'm not ignoring empirical evidence. What am I ignoring ?

Interesting feel good theory, but in real life it doesn't work like that... Once again, it was tried, and charitable donations dropped under such ideals. It worked the opposite to what you suggest, in real life.[/quote]
Are you still referring to the Chile example?
I can get evidence for my claims but that isn't going to change your opinion. You were not really open to what I wrote so I don't think references will change that. Am I wrong?

You only referenced one article and I am arguing (for the reasons above) make incorrect conclusions. There was no discussion, just condemnation.

Is it a bit like how the power of crystals won't work unless you are open to it?

It's not about convincing me, it's about backing things up with some facts and figures, some examples..

If you say, "when people are taxed less they will give voluntarily to to help the underprivileged, so we don't need social security systems and safety nets."

Well hang on, that sounds like a seriously flawed theory, where is proof this that would happen? Is there any? There's evidence that it actually goes the other way in the real world, what about examples to back up what you are stating...

Why would it go the other way?
People already give to charity, despite the high tax burdens they already have.

Are you suggesting if we tax people 80% of their wage, they will somehow donate more to charity?
This is very basic logic.

Does anyone believe that if taxes were much lower or non-existant people wouldn't give more to charity ?
Would you EB give (more) to charity if you had more money ? Or would the extra money somehow corrupt your very being and make you a different person.
I would. Who else? we can have a vote right here... as an experiment

LOL basic economics ......
How old are you?
Mild inflation creates demand
If you know something is going to be dearer in the future you are more likely to buy it now.
The bank will lend you money on a house if they know inflation will increase the price and decrease their risk.
Where deflation would create the opposite and stall any economic growth.
And stable prices would destroy investment,stall demand and growth.
Your economic fantasy doesn't stack up it needs exponential growth driven by cheap oil.
Cheap oil doesn't last forever every time its spiked we have gone into recession today is no different.
Maybe do some research on EROEI and get back to us.

Inflation caused by govt debt is theft.
The govt prints money (when raising taxes is unpopular) so it can spend it on things that make it look good.
Inflation (and the collapse of) is the underlying cause of pretty much every depression in history.
That is the way of it today yes. In times past of a more "free" interest rate, people saved to buy things, not went into debt for them. Debt is fantastic for the govt though, it expands the money supply and makes GDP numbers bigger.

We can agree here, deflation is economically devastating (like inflation, just more obvious)

This is totally wrong. Investing soley for capital gains makes everyone look like an investor during boom periods of monetary expansion. What about during economic contraction??
Smart investors invest for income or yield, with capital gains merely being a bonus, not the sole requirement.
All growth is not a good thing. The growth rates we have had for the last 20-30 years are too high, that is why the global economy is falling apart. Currency devaluation always ends with the destruction of the currency. Give me one example in the history of mankind when this hasn't been so.

Fantasy, do you mean reality ?
But we can agree that we are extremely oil dependant and high oil prices do correlate with lower or negative economic growth. However this is secondary to currency devaluation.

You obviously suscribe to keynesian economic theory... it's becoming a little more unpopular these days isn't it, with all the horror stories coming out of the US and Europe and China and Japan ?

Never thaught of that, but it actualy might be so.
I think we have the highest taxes in the world here in Scandinavia.
And still people are giving/donating woulenterly to differente chairitys at a top level compared to other western countrys.
Maybe we are used to share and show solidarity?

cheers

If Norway had San diego's weather, I would move there! I have never met anyone from Norway that was resentful of their government and it's socialist programs. Why? Because it is well balanced. Sure norways taxes are high, but the government spends it on making sure it's citizens quality of life is high. When you don't need to worry about paying medical bills, you can afford to donate to charities. And the charities that get donated to are real charities. Hospitals and universities are lousy charities. They aren't charities there because they get what they need from the government. I have a hard time donating my money to a place that charges $150.00 for a little eyewash, or requires loans to attend.

Earlier you linked inflation to no longer being on the gold standard. I would like to point out that the gold standard did not help us avoid the Great Depression. The U.S. was still on the gold standard until 1933.

What do you believe were the causes of the great depression ?

Actually it might be more informative if you explained this. I would say it boiled down to speculation on the stock market. Many people and banks were investing on margin and thought they had lots of money but when it boiled down to it this was only on paper. With the stock market woes many of the banks failed leaving those with deposits up a creek since there was no deposit insurance at this time. Unemployment and reduced spending resulted which fed the flames. Other problems exacerbated the situation.

Your turn. It would also be nice if you would explain how going back on the gold standard is going to prevent this.

Well unfortunately that's not what happens in reality.. This is what I mean, you say these things as though they are facts when the evidence shows the opposite. Perhaps it's because charity donations are normally tax deductable, if your not paying any tax, there aint no deduction to be had, so no reason to give it away.

Once again, you give no references, no examples.. Was it alright for the poorest under the only example of free market economy that we can look at? No.



The rich get richer, the poor get poorer or die...

As much as I feel our government is too restrictive (check out my planning issues) we still need governments. for what of a better word libertarians push their barrow way past common sense. A huge proportion of our prison population have significant mental illness. If we cared for these individuals in a government funded health system then the community would be ahead because funding health care, providing government funded/subsidised employment and housing is cheaper than providing the extra resources to the police, judiciary and custodial system. Not to mention the saving from various crimes not occurring. Ie no lost productivity do to injury, theft, insurance etc.

Even with the safety nets that we have we still have people falling through. How much worse if we relied on ad hoc philanthropic sources to care for individuals that in many cases are not very lovable.

Are we over regulated yes I believe we are but saying that we should remove regulations altogether is worse than saying that football should be played without a referee.