This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The Science Thread

Jump to new
I never said a small group, it would be of the same scale we have now.

I mean there would still be a mass market, because there would still be taxation funded welfare, and there would never truly be 100% unemployment.

and when society realized that the main way to increase you earnings above the welfare level was to own part of the system rather than work for the system, more people would become investors.

People would start asking children "what type of companies do you want to own when you grow up" rather than "what type of job do you want"
 
Value Collector said:
I mean there would still be a mass market, because there would still be taxation funded welfare, and there would never truly be 100% unemployment.
Click to expand...

It would have to be businesses paying most of the taxes to support the welfare system.

Value Collector said:
and when society realized that the main way to increase you earnings above the welfare level was to own part of the system rather than work for the system, more people would become investors.
Click to expand...

How can people on welfare afford to become investors if they spend most of their welfare on the cost of living ?
 


I don't think that will happen. Equity Mercantile societies will inevitably devolve to the few in charge, with govt intervention redistributing wealth in the absence of personal ownership.

What should logically occur is that manufactured products will become/relegated to, a primary commodity that is mined from production houses for use in new secondary industries which were once the tertiary industry. The new tertiary industries will be the driver of production and extraction.

The question is what that tertiary industry will be and will it be one of those epoch leaps that only the few innovators have knowledge of at the moment.
 
SirRumpole said:
It would have to be businesses paying most of the taxes to support the welfare system.



How can people on welfare afford to become investors if they spend most of their welfare on the cost of living ?
Click to expand...

The taxes are already funded by business, all tax revenues come from the out put of businesses, either directly as company tax, or as a tax on the income paid to employees.

In the future where there is mass automation an little need for human labour, "welfare" won't be stigmatized, everyone will get a payment of enough to live on.

If you want to increase your base income you could invest in the system via owning equity or debt.

Also, you could seek employment in areas where people want human interaction e.g. Producing art, entertainment (think of the kids making 1000's on YouTube), giving lessons on surfing, music, coaching etc
 

It would be good if it turned out that way, I hope it does.

Capitalism will have to take a hit, as your scheme sounds more like socialism. Not that I think that there is anything wrong with that as long as everyone is looked after.
 
SirRumpole said:
It would be good if it turned out that way, I hope it does.

Capitalism will have to take a hit, as your scheme sounds more like socialism. Not that I think that there is anything wrong with that as long as everyone is looked after.
Click to expand...

I think the best societies are the ones that are a mix of capitalist and socialist ideals.

E.g. I want society to encourage and reward people that Invest their money back into the economy, or work hard, or come up with new ideas and inventions, or take long shot risks that come good.

But I also want to look after those that get the short straw, by being born with a disability, or bad parents, or just bad luck.

but yeah, I think automation will bring great benefits to society in the next 100 years just like it has in the last 100 years.

And we should all be looking to own part of it.

If the rich are getting richer, it's only because the poor are focusing on working for the system rather than owning the system.

Everyone should be raising their kids to invest.
 

Your general arguments in post are very much socialistic. You can deny it, but you appear hard left, quite happy to accept ubiquitous social blending, govt control and ordered society.

I don't blame you for being confused what constitutes left and right, with many so called Liberals here suffering the same condition, even accusing me of being a leftie when they are the ones who behave like like old skool socialists. (hint read ALP policies from first 75% of 20th century)

Age will afford you clarity from the exuberance of argumentative youth and the fallacious social campaigning that goes with it.

BTW Oz people have always invested e.g. banks, property, pensions
 

I am simply not a hardline left or right person, I am probably in the sensible position of being somewhere in the middle, on social issues I am quite liberal, and on fiscal issues normally more conservative, however I can see that eventually there will be mass unemployment, so the hard line conservatives will have to give up their position eventually.

Age had brought me closer to the left, if you had seen me in my 20's, you would have seen a much more conservative staunch supporter of the right, but as I have gotten older I can see the silliness of those that lean to far to the right on social issues
 
Value Collector said:
E.g. I want society to encourage and reward people that Invest their money back into the economy,
Click to expand...

People work hard and also invest their money into the economy by buying the goods and services that business produces.

Without consumers there is no economy.
 
SirRumpole said:
People work hard and also invest their money into the economy by buying the goods and services that business produces.

Without consumers there is no economy.
Click to expand...

If two people work equally hard, in the same jobs but person A spends 100% of their money on consumption each week, where as person B only spends 90% and invests 10% back into business.

Don't you think over time the guy that invested 10% of his labour earnings deserves to have that saved capital produce an extra return for him?

I think after 10years of doing that he deserves to be earning more each year than the person who only contributed labour, and consumed all they produced.
 
Very nice, and hope you are right, the point you forget is 5 to 6 billion people starving in their homeland, even more brainwashed than we are who see people smelling roses and getting money for nothing on the other side of the border/sea ;automation will affect them too, and no safety net there
 
Value Collector said:
Don't you think over time the guy that invested 10% of his labour earnings deserves to have that saved capital produce an extra return for him?
Click to expand...

Of course, that is how the system works , if you have spare cash invest it and get a return, it's obviously a matter of how much spare cash you have.

If you want people to invest more in business then maybe something should be done about housing affordability where most of people's spare cash goes into paying back housing loans and not investing capital.
 

The answer to that is more investment, continue growing the economy globally.

There is no reason (apart from political reasons), why the continent of Africa could not be super productive.
 
http://www.healthyfoodteam.com/nasa-confirms-earth-will-experience-15-days-darkness-november-2017/

 
pixel said:
do we really have to put up with this kind of rubbish?
In case you didn't notice: This is the SCIENCE thread, not Flat Earthers Bugle.
Click to expand...



So you're saying it won't happen!
 
Tisme said:


So you're saying it won't happen!
Click to expand...
yes, it it complete crap.

1, adding hydrogen wouldn't cause an explosion the sun is made of hydrogen

2, even you did add hydrogen, it would be so little compared to the mass of the sun, nothing would happen.
 
Value Collector said:
yes, it it complete crap.

1, adding hydrogen wouldn't cause an explosion the sun is made of hydrogen

2, even you did add hydrogen, it would be so little compared to the mass of the sun, nothing would happen.
Click to expand...

It was intended to be a light hearted post. LOL. I recognised it as a rehashed spoof of many years ago and marvelled at its persistence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
The 'plan'
Replies
5
Views
2K
ducati916
R
First, Kill Your Ideas
Replies
2
Views
1K
finicky
R
Best Books I Read Last Year
Replies
18
Views
4K
MDWake
R
21 Lessons in Investing
Replies
6
Views
3K
divs4ever
The White House is sinking into a den of iniquity
Replies
3
Views
2K
Tisme
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...