JC Political Thread - For All Things Political Part 2

[shane_3800]

I don’t need proof of something that is as obvious as gravity.

Let‘s say we have an isolated world and they’re are 100 cars in that world that cost $1000 each and there are also 100 people who have an average of $1500 each.

Every one of those people needs one of those cars to go to work but 50 of the people have $500 and 50 of the people have $2500.

On average everyone can afford to buy a car and everyone would have a car to go to work, but only half of the people can actually afford to buy the car outright.

The 50 people with $2500 will buy the extra cars that can’t be bought by the people with only $500 and rent them out to them, thus depriving them of owning a car.

The people who don’t have at least $1000 will never own a car because the people with $2500 bought up all the excess cars that couldn’t be bought to rent out.

Now let’s say the parameters are exactly the same but everyone can only buy one car. Now the price becomes whatever the poorest people can afford to pay ($500) otherwise 50% of the cars will remain unsold and unused.

Capitalism tries to avoid wastage so the “excess stock” will be cleared out at a reduced price as the seller is better off getting something for the cars ($500) rather than nothing for them and leaving them to rot.

That is the stupidest example I have seen in a while.

If someone only has $500 they aren't being deprived of a car because they can't afford that car anyway.

What you want to do is take 500 from the people with 2500 and give that 500 to the people with 500 so they can afford a 1000 car.
This is called socialism, socialism doesn't work, because the lazy people with only 500 now get 500, so the people that work more and earn more then decide that they should work less make 500 and they will get an extra 500 for nothing.

 

[J_D 2.0]

No you do need proof, you're making claims that can't be substantiated.
The onus is on you to prove your claims.

Why because you said so? Bit rich from someone who has never substantiated any claims they have ever made on here.

 

[J_D 2.0]

This is called socialism, socialism doesn't work, because the lazy people with only 500 now get 500, so the people that work more and earn more then decide that they should work less make 500 and they will get an extra 500 for nothing.

Do you have any proof to substantiate your claim?

 

[J_D 2.0]

That is the stupidest example I have seen in a while.

If someone only has $500 they aren't being deprived of a car because they can't afford that car anyway.

It’s not my fault you can understand economics. The price of anything is determined by the amount of money chasing that good/service/land, etc.

If existing (rich) asset owners are constantly receiving rents from the assets they own and the middle class are always having to pay the income they receive as rents to those same asset owners who is going to accumulate all the assets?

It’s not going to be the middle class that accumulates the assets, it’s going to be the rich (who will have a constant stream of rents from the middle class) that will end up owning everything, and their money (actually your rent money) drives up asset prices.

 

[Immortality]

Ok so we need to import labour, that need housing also, to pickup the short fall to build the housing we are in short supply of.
You've just created a circular problem.
We can't keep upping immigration to help with a short fall in housing construction (and that's ignoring the fact all the other services and infrastructure aren't there for increased population).

That is what NZ did post covid at the behest of business and the opposition. Now the government (the former opposition) have changed their minds. I wish they would figure it out. Bunch of numpties.

 

[shane_3800]

Why because you said so? Bit rich from someone who has never substantiated any claims they have ever made on here.

Because you are making the claim it's true, what you want me to just take your word on it lol.

 

[shane_3800]

It’s not my fault you can understand economics. The price of anything is determined by the amount of money chasing that good/service/land, etc.

If existing (rich) asset owners are constantly receiving rents from the assets they own and the middle class are always having to pay the income they receive as rents to those same asset owners who is going to accumulate all the assets?

It’s not going to be the middle class that accumulates the assets, it’s going to be the rich (who will have a constant stream of rents from the middle class) that will end up owning everything, and their money (actually your rent money) drives up asset prices.

Again can you give me a vague time line to when the rich will own everything?

 

[J_D 2.0]

Because you are making the claim it's true, what you want me to just take your word on it lol.

I gave you a simple mathematical explanation. Not my fault if you can’t understand it.

 

[Immortality]

When you could take 40k out of super during Covid, I'm sure back then many people took money out to save for a deposit.
This is likely the cause of the price rise around covid times.
I know many people that dipped into their super around that time, they're going to be holding out the cup later in life, I'm sure.

Also you always accuse me of looking out for rich people while being poor.
Isn't it a little ironic that you bash home owners yet you are one.

Or maybe the high demand during covid was from all the expats returning for the safety of home?

We saw the same here in NZ, a huge spike in the average price of housing because all those kiwi's who found life too hard around the world came home and bought houses. many of those have since sold up and moved off shore again now that covid is mostly a bad memory.

 

[Immortality]

Again can you give me a vague time line to when the rich will own everything?

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/distribution-of-global-wealth-chart/

The majority of the wealth in the world is already held by a very small %age of people and that wealth is only increasing where as the %age of people with the least also continues to increase.

The term "working poor" will become more widespread in the near future. People who work all their lives and will have very little to show for it at the end. People who work to pay the bills but will never get ahead. Now that AI is almost here there are going to be many more people looking for a much smaller pool of work.