|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted July 27, 2010 07:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
JJ:
Quote:
that's why fun is diminishing every time you repeat something
This is only true for certain sources of fun. There are ways that do not suffer from diminishing returns, and don't depend on doing something new. Indeed, diminishing returns is one of the flaws of consumerism, but they can be avoided for the purposes of fun - by not being a consumerist.{/quote]As I said, EVERYONE is a consumer one way or another. And the flaw isn't a flaw of CONSUMERISM, it's a flaw of MATERIALISM - and guess what? Capitalism is a big promoter of materialism.
Quote:
Quote:
However, ou do not make a PROFIT that way, since the interest rate is just covering the price difference that comes with the delay.
Expected inflation is one component of the nominal interest rate, but not the only one. The other is the real interest rate - the amount of money you get for being willing to defer consumption. Otherwise, the interest rate would always be equal to expected inflation, which it isn't.
Except that the current interest rate is LOWER than the actual inflation.
Quote:
Quote:
it absolutely makes no sense to save for one, since interest rates for for loans are quite low
I'd bet there's some government subsidy for car loans.
Nope.
Quote:
Quote:
You should know that you make no point here.
So you have no response.
You made no point, you just came up with a rhethoric figure, so no answer is necessary.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 27, 2010 09:05 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 21:06, 27 Jul 2010.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Sure it is fair. You have the opportunity to work several jobs and start your own business just like I did. Don't whine about others taking initiative to work harder/more and about others being willing to take risks in order to start and run a business.
Do tell me... Since when did it become a boon to living standards to be "able" to work more than one job, since when did it become such a great thing to "needing to work hard"? If humanity is aiming for a better society, isn't that the opposite direction?
You seem to have failed to grasp my point.
In real life you won't find a genie bottle on a beach with a genie to grant you wealth from wishes. If you want something you have to be willing to work to earn it. Sweat, not wishes is the road to success.
By making sacrifices and working several jobs I was able to save up the capital I needed to start the business I wanted to start. I took the initiative to do what it took to chase my dream. I worked very hard and I make no apology for my wealth.
Quote:
Unfortunately socialism only offers economic slavery to the State-god.
And capitalism offers economic slavery to the bankers. With the difference that in Socialism the state = the people, which I keep telling you, and you keep ignoring. Which is also very very stupid.
No, the State is not the people because socialism teaches that the State gives the people rights.
No, I am slave to no one.  I work for myself and have absolutely no debt.
Quote:
people who are born in a rich family sure have to do a lots of effort to succeed. they are given everything. they can just slacken off and still be more successful than 90% of people.
So? If I leave my business to my children what business is it of yours? I worked for it. It is mine to give.
____________
Revelation
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 27, 2010 09:48 PM |
|
|
JJ:
Quote:
And the flaw isn't a flaw of CONSUMERISM, it's a flaw of MATERIALISM - and guess what? Capitalism is a big promoter of materialism.
Consumerism is just a better word for materialism.
Quote:
Except that the current interest rate is LOWER than the actual inflation.
I think you're confusing "interest rate" with "federal funds rate".
Quote:
Nope.
Actually, there is - it's called "cash for clunkers".
Quote:
You made no point, you just came up with a rhethoric figure, so no answer is necessary.
it's not rhetoric, it's the truth. You just have no response to it because you know I'm right.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 27, 2010 10:18 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
JJ:
Quote:
And the flaw isn't a flaw of CONSUMERISM, it's a flaw of MATERIALISM - and guess what? Capitalism is a big promoter of materialism.
Consumerism is just a better word for materialism.
That's interesting. You are not a materialist? Don't you think that we live in a materialist world?
Quote:
Quote:
Except that the current interest rate is LOWER than the actual inflation.
I think you're confusing "interest rate" with "federal funds rate".
And I think you are misinformed. Current interest rates for savings in Germany is a bit better than ONE percent, for immediately available cash. It's a bit better for fixed terms, but factually you lose money there-
Quote:
Quote:
Nope.
Actually, there is - it's called "cash for clunkers".
I don't know about the US, but in Germany there is no such thing. There has been such a thing due to the crisis, but that was just a limited amount of money. In Germany there has even been loans given by car banks for 0.0% - until the court declared that as illegal. You can get very good loans for cars in Germany.
Quote:
Quote:
You made no point, you just came up with a rhethoric figure, so no answer is necessary.
it's not rhetoric, it's the truth. You just have no response to it because you know I'm right.
Don't be ridiculous.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 27, 2010 10:30 PM |
|
|
JJ:
Quote:
That's interesting. You are not a materialist? Don't you think that we live in a materialist world?
The problem with the word "materialism" is that it means too many things. I am a materialist in that I think the only thing that exists is matter, but that is not the meaning of materialism that is related to the current discussion. Thus, I prefer consumerism for the meaning that we are talking about and materialism for the philosophical doctrine.
Quote:
Current interest rates for savings in Germany is a bit better than ONE percent, for immediately available cash.
For savings deposits, sure. For certificates of deposit, no. And certainly not for the loans the bank gives out.
Quote:
In Germany there has even been loans given by car banks for 0.0%
Now this just baffles me. Why would someone give such a loan?
Quote:
Don't be ridiculous.
It's not ridiculous. It's varying degrees of risk. If you put money under your mattress, you are certain that you will have it in the future (unless, of course, someone steals it), but you are equally certain that it will lose value equal to the rate of inflation. You can try to fight inflation (and theft) by putting money in a savings account, but you'll still lose (but by less), but you have to deal with the bank and there are risks inherent in that. You can buy a certificate of deposit, and then you will beat inflation, but then you won't have any access to that money until whatever time the deposit says - and that, of course, further increases risk. Or you can be even more risky (relatively speaking) and invest in bonds, or stocks, or even capital. The higher the risk, the higher the reward.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 27, 2010 10:50 PM |
|
|
Quote:
There are multiple jobs for everyone, work is there for everyone who really wants to work and looks for work. Only the lazy bums claim there's no work available, because they actually do not want to work hard.
that might be true, but you also have to look at the quality of the job. if you want to work as a slave in dangerous conditions and be underpaid, lots of people will be happy to hire you. there are not just a lots of lazy bums. there are also a lots of people who want to work, but they can't do what they want, because there's not enough work in that field, and they don't want to take a crappy job instead.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Sure it is fair. You have the opportunity to work several jobs and start your own business just like I did. Don't whine about others taking initiative to work harder/more and about others being willing to take risks in order to start and run a business.
Do tell me... Since when did it become a boon to living standards to be "able" to work more than one job, since when did it become such a great thing to "needing to work hard"? If humanity is aiming for a better society, isn't that the opposite direction?
You seem to have failed to grasp my point.
In real life you won't find a genie bottle on a beach with a genie to grant you wealth from wishes. If you want something you have to be willing to work to earn it. Sweat, not wishes is the road to success.
By making sacrifices and working several jobs I was able to save up the capital I needed to start the business I wanted to start. I took the initiative to do what it took to chase my dream. I worked very hard and I make no apology for my wealth.
I think you are the one who don't understand. people who seriously complain about work don't do it because they want to become rich sitting on their butt... work is a cause for many of world problems.
health problems, from tiredness and stress to more serious illness
psychological problems due to pressure at work, or simply the alienation due to a repetitive task for example. work makes people stupid.
deterioration of social life, due to people becoming stupid and to the education learning you that life is competition.
by extension, defection from political life, due to people having lost their ability to think AND not having enough time for it anyway, since they are spending their time working their ass off.
and of course, critical environmental problems due to industrials wanting to keep selling mass of useless items. producing something doesn't only involve the work of some people, but also, a lots of pollution, and often, the utilisation of that item will also cause pollution.
and the system actually encourages people to contribute to that disaster : if you want to be happy, buy stuffs, if you want to buy stuffs, work harder that way more stuffs are produced. if you want them, work even harder.
notice also that the "miracle" solution to "save the world" usually is to "relaunch the economy" which basically means polluting more and brainwashing people.
and seriously, you can just laugh when people so concerned about economy talk about ecology, because they can't care less about the future of the planet, the only thing they see is how much money they can save thanks to ecology on the long term. (I read Paul Aries who just slaughters the pseudo-ecologist. guys who try to look respectable but only care about their own interests)
Quote:
Quote:
people who are born in a rich family sure have to do a lots of effort to succeed. they are given everything. they can just slacken off and still be more successful than 90% of people.
So? If I leave my business to my children what business is it of yours? I worked for it. It is mine to give.
it's what doomforge said :
Quote:
Besides, you know, it's hardly fair when you are rich and I'm not cause your dad was a success and mine was a failure. Equal start, my ***.
will you dare telling someone who failed in business that he didn't work hard enough, whereas you got everything from the work of your father, doing nothing yourself?
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted July 27, 2010 11:39 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
In Germany there has even been loans given by car banks for 0.0%
Now this just baffles me. Why would someone give such a loan?
To sell cars at all? If Ford in the USA would have done that the last 2 years, maybe they wouldn't have ended close to bankrupcy?
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 12:15 AM |
|
Edited by Moonlith at 00:17, 28 Jul 2010.
|
Quote:
You seem to have failed to grasp my point.
In real life you won't find a genie bottle on a beach with a genie to grant you wealth from wishes. If you want something you have to be willing to work to earn it. Sweat, not wishes is the road to success.
By making sacrifices and working several jobs I was able to save up the capital I needed to start the business I wanted to start. I took the initiative to do what it took to chase my dream. I worked very hard and I make no apology for my wealth.
Fair enough.
Quote:
No, the State is not the people because socialism teaches that the State gives the people rights.
... Excuse me? Since when does a state "give" somebody rights? Nobody GIVES you rights, rights are universally accepted and untouchable, a state's job is to PROTECT those rights. So I'm not sure what your source on socialism is....
Quote:
Quote:
people who are born in a rich family sure have to do a lots of effort to succeed. they are given everything. they can just slacken off and still be more successful than 90% of people.
So? If I leave my business to my children what business is it of yours? I worked for it. It is mine to give.
The point is that that goes against the entire idea of "Giving everyone equal chances", because by giving them that, clearly you are undermining that principle. Now I'm not saying you have no right to give it to your children, I agree it's yours to give to whom you want, I'm just saying you can't do that AND proclaim capitalistic societies provide equal chances for everybody, that would be hypocritical.
That said, I think you are a bit too deluded with your thoughts of being an individual, being independant, and owning your own stuff. Especially if you own a business. You would be right; had you not been living in a country. You are dependant on others just as much as your country is dependant on its individual companies. There is no individualism and independancy in a society unless you're actually living on your own on an island and work a farm. That's the biggest illusion most individualism-supporters tend to have.
____________
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 01:04 AM |
|
|
Quote:
there are also a lots of people who want to work, but they can't do what they want, because there's not enough work in that field, and they don't want to take a crappy job instead.
It is a fact of life that you don't always get what you want. It is a fact of life that when you start any job you usually will not start off on the top rung. If you have to work a job that you don't like work it with a good attitude and you will be more likely to rise to tghe top in the company. An employer will appreciate your hard work and you doing your best every day without whining. You are morel likely to receive promotons and raises the more valuable you are to the employer.
And since I have worked "low quality" jobs myself I really can't be too symphathetic with someone crying about their job being "crappy."
Quote:
I think you are the one who don't understand. people who seriously complain about work don't do it because they want to become rich sitting on their butt... work is a cause for many of world problems.
health problems....psychological problems ...deterioration of social life,....by extension, defection from political life,...and of course, critical environmental problems
Some types of work are hard on a person physically or mentally, certainly, but that is true of life in general. Mostly the effect work has on you depends on your attitude and there are plenty of ways to blow off steam that are not destructive.
Work is a means of making a living and earning what you want. Work is not primarily a source of problems. It is a fact of life that most people will indeed have to work. Sorry if you don't like that fact of life.
Quote:
will you dare telling someone who failed in business that he didn't work hard enough, whereas you got everything from the work of your father, doing nothing yourself?
First, I got my wealth by my own work, not from my father.
Second, there are no guarentees in life. If a person tries and fails, at least he tried. I will dare applaud such a person for trying and to tell him to not lay in the mud puddle of failure but to get up and try, try again.
Sorry to break it to you but there is no such think as "equal start in life."
I was not born a natural athelete. Is it "fair" that Michael Jordon was and that he made millions (billions?) simply because he could dribble a basketball and jump? (he had no jump shot when he first joined the NBA.) Is it "fair" that some people are born with more intelligence that others?
People are born with different abilities and in different situations. That is a fact of life. Should we give everyone cancer because someone else has cancer, to equalize out things? Some people are born without arms or legs so I suppose we should cut off everyone's arms and legs to give everyone an equal start. But wait, some are born deaf or blind so let's poke out the eys of babies and remove their eardrums.
Stealing money from a person that was "born with money" is exactly like mangling the legs and arms of a person who is a natural born athelete.
Quote:
... Excuse me? Since when does a state "give" somebody rights? Nobody GIVES you rights, rights are universally accepted and untouchable, a state's job is to PROTECT those rights. So I'm not sure what your source on socialism is....
Marxists generally disavow the existence of God and say that rights come from the state, not from God.
I say rights come from God, exist apart from the government, and that the government is formed by the people to protect their rights. The power of the government is limited to what the people give it and the governemnt can't grant rights becasue it has no rights to grant.
Quote:
You are dependant on others just as much as your country is dependant on its individual companies. There is no individualism and independancy in a society unless you're actually living on your own on an island and work a farm. That's the biggest illusion most individualism-supporters tend to have.
Sorry, but you are wrong. Rugged individualism is a prime reason for the success of America. Each person is ultimately responsible for himself. For ensureing his own success in life.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 03:33 AM |
|
|
Dear rich person,
I'm writing to tell you that you are a bad person. You are evil and wicked. You should stop working so hard. You should stop being a sugar daddy and buying me so many nice things. You should stop paying all those taxes that buy my schools and fire departments and roads and nice parks. Those things are evil, so I wish you would quit buying them. Please stop being rich and paying all those taxes. That way if I want evil wicked things like schools I can work a lot more hours to pay for them myself.
If you would please stop being a sugar daddy I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you.
Sincerely
Poor person who wants to work more hours
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 03:34 AM |
|
|
angelito:
But then why not just sell at a lower price?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 03:40 AM |
|
|
@Mvass
American car companies give 0% loans also. There shouldn't be anything mystical about their reasoning.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 03:45 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Rugged individualism
As opposed to delicate and manicured individualism.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 04:10 AM |
|
|
Binabik:
I'm not familiar with these kinds of loans. Is their sole purpose to get the car off the lot? Because it's not making them any money.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 04:34 AM |
|
|
Yes, the purpose is to sell cars. More cars will be sold with a 0% loan than with a 0.1% loan. And more cars will sell with a -1% loan than with a +1% loan. And yes, I have seen negative interest rates like that. Think of it this way, if you just consider the bottom line, is there a difference between a negative interest rate and a rebate? In both cases they return money to the buyer, one is a lump sum and the other is interest payments. It's just another cost of selling.
I'm not sure by the way he worded it, but I got the impression that Angelito was talking about loans from the car companies themselves, something like the German equivalent of GMAC. GMAC is the loan division of General Motors. The parent company is looking to maximize profits (or minimize losses). If a loss in one division is more than offset by a gain in another division, then it's a good business decision.
You also have to consider things like cost of inventory. It's expensive to keep inventory. Companies try to maximize inventory turnover. In other words they don't want anything sitting there any longer than necessary. If there is an excess inventory, then you start discounting to reduce that inventory. Discounts can come in many forms, including lower interest rates.
(btw, when analyzing a stock, one thing to look for is a CHANGE in inventory turnover rate.)
If the lending banks are private rather than a division of the car company, there could easily be a kickback from the car company to the bank. In other words, the car company is "hiring" the bank to help sell more cars.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 04:37 AM |
|
|
Elodin:
I think you completely missed the point and the discussion.
Thank you.
____________
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 04:41 AM |
|
|
I'm going to design a bus that doesn't use oil and put a patent on it
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 06:11 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Elodin:
I think you completely missed the point and the discussion.
Thank you.
The fact that you seem to think this thread is about oil and that you think busses don't use oil explains a lot. Unfortunately, you are wrong on both counts.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 07:17 AM |
|
|
Its not my fault that finding a picture or someone shouting "How could he miss the broad side of the barn" is hard to find
More or less...............
What is wrong with the system:
Quote:
I think you are the one who don't understand. people who seriously complain about work don't do it because they want to become rich sitting on their butt... work is a cause for many of world problems.
health problems, from tiredness and stress to more serious illness
psychological problems due to pressure at work, or simply the alienation due to a repetitive task for example. work makes people stupid.
deterioration of social life, due to people becoming stupid and to the education learning you that life is competition.
by extension, defection from political life, due to people having lost their ability to think AND not having enough time for it anyway, since they are spending their time working their ass off.
and of course, critical environmental problems due to industrials wanting to keep selling mass of useless items. producing something doesn't only involve the work of some people, but also, a lots of pollution, and often, the utilisation of that item will also cause pollution.
and the system actually encourages people to contribute to that disaster : if you want to be happy, buy stuffs, if you want to buy stuffs, work harder that way more stuffs are produced. if you want them, work even harder.
notice also that the "miracle" solution to "save the world" usually is to "relaunch the economy" which basically means polluting more and brainwashing people.
and seriously, you can just laugh when people so concerned about economy talk about ecology, because they can't care less about the future of the planet, the only thing they see is how much money they can save thanks to ecology on the long term. (I read Paul Aries who just slaughters the pseudo-ecologist. guys who try to look respectable but only care about their own interests)
The points are numberous, and some are even deep.
I just think you completely missed the point when you started quoting and ranting :/
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 28, 2010 08:52 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I am a materialist in that I think the only thing that exists is matter, but that is not the meaning of materialism that is related to the current discussion. Thus, I prefer consumerism for the meaning that we are talking about and materialism for the philosophical doctrine.
The problem is still, that there is no difference. You are like a smoker who says, I'm not smoking because I'm addicted, NO. I smoke because it tastes so fine. And while the addicted will smoke EVERY brand, no matter what, YOU insinst on only smoking that one or two brands that tastes fine, while the rest tastes like crap and if there were only those brands you'd immediately stop.
Nonsense.
There is no such thing as "consumerism" as opposed to, what, "reasonablee partaking in the consumer society"?
I repeat, it doesn't matter ONE thing, whether you have fun BUYING things or whether you have fun buying THINGS. The former may be called consumerism, the latter materialism, but in the end there is no difference at all because capitalism is serving everyone.
As a last thought I daresay, as a consumerist you can have one hell of a lot of fun, sitting in front of your pc and watching ebay - which may not be that great for capitalism, in fact, since BUYING may not include the term NEW,UNUSED (which is another holy cow, that stuff has to be MINT to be of value, which isn't included in consumerism).
Quote:
Quote:
Current interest rates for savings in Germany is a bit better than ONE percent, for immediately available cash.
For savings deposits, sure. For certificates of deposit, no. And certainly not for the loans the bank gives out.
Not for the bank loans, but that is something completely different. For certificates it's not much better. For a 5 years the best you can get currently is Bank of Scotland with about 4%. With GERMAN banks the best you can get for FIVE years is TWOPOINTFIVE percent.
I've talked about that issue with a banker lately, and the banker said, while the spectre of inflation rates of 7-8% would be overstated - in his opinion - we should expect inflation rates of 3-4% in the next years.
I leave the rest to you. Saving won't make you any money (but the banks will profit).
Quote:
Quote:
In Germany there has even been loans given by car banks for 0.0%
Now this just baffles me. Why would someone give such a loan?
That was explained. To answer a question, of course these were loans by the private car bank.
However, the important thing is, you can turn that round and round like you want, the fact is, that it doesn't pay to delay consuming, if you want to buy a car - it doesn't get any cheaper than now. And note, that long ago it was said, you couldn't get a discount when taking a loan out - not so. You first make the deal, negotiate the price - THEN you negotiate the loan.
Companies want to sell cars.
Of course that somewhat destroys the market for used cars, but that's another problem.
Quote:
Quote:
Don't be ridiculous.
It's not ridiculous. It's varying degrees of risk. If you put money under your mattress, you are certain that you will have it in the future (unless, of course, someone steals it), but you are equally certain that it will lose value equal to the rate of inflation. You can try to fight inflation (and theft) by putting money in a savings account, but you'll still lose (but by less), but you have to deal with the bank and there are risks inherent in that. You can buy a certificate of deposit, and then you will beat inflation, but then you won't have any access to that money until whatever time the deposit says - and that, of course, further increases risk. Or you can be even more risky (relatively speaking) and invest in bonds, or stocks, or even capital. The higher the risk, the higher the reward.
While that is generally true, it is generally wrong in the sense you make that point, because the ratio risk/win isn't a continous process but an abrupt one.
When saving your money with a bank for a fixed interest rate, there basically is no risk, especially when you have it freely available - you can take it away from one day to another. And in this case, as we have seen, you get LESS interest rate currently than inflation rate, which means, delaying spending is losing money.
Going into fonds and shares and so on isn't saving, though. It's GAMBLING. It's speculating, and you may make losses as well. The reason is, that you are not "delaying consumption" - you are making an investment with the aim to make money, which is something completely different than "saving".
The bottom line is, that "delaying consumption" doesn't pay - and that is no happenstance, because the base rate is deliberately set so.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
