those people normally things that benefit them instead of us, we are nothing for them. They need more to strengthen their power. you know, many politicians are wealthy, sometimes they buy vote of others....
anyway, I'm always voting for the one I hate not so much.
Topic: How do you feel about politicians and central bankers? (Read 76 times)
as for politicians.
i agree if politicians make a pledge to do something. their salary and all other hidden incomes should be on the line. it all gets put into a trust and they only get access to it if they achieve their goal.
then they will suddenly work faster to complete things.
a voting system can work. after all millions of people vote on americas got talent each week. so why not have a secure system where citizens regularly vote on legislation.
the hardest task would be setting up a way to ensure each person has a private wallet key that identifies them to ensure people cant just sell their keys to their nearest corporate lobby group offering to buy their vote
I think politicians have some sort of magic. They can make things sound like very good or very evil, they hide their intention and make sordid fact wear makeup, which I truly admire i agree if politicians make a pledge to do something. their salary and all other hidden incomes should be on the line. it all gets put into a trust and they only get access to it if they achieve their goal.
then they will suddenly work faster to complete things.
a voting system can work. after all millions of people vote on americas got talent each week. so why not have a secure system where citizens regularly vote on legislation.
the hardest task would be setting up a way to ensure each person has a private wallet key that identifies them to ensure people cant just sell their keys to their nearest corporate lobby group offering to buy their vote
whats not said is while normal people are getting into debt by the debt creation of mortgages/loans. governments are getting out of debt by the inflation caused by the debt money creation.
EG
if a country had a currency circulation market cap of say $1trill. and a government debt of say $100bill
and separetly 10million people got a debt of $10k each year.
thats another $100billion created circulation money.
meaning citizens are in debt of $100bill a year.
but the government now sees there is $1.1trill circulation in the economy. as people spent that $100b on houses/luxuries. so thats a GDP increase of 10%
so then taxing the circulation at say 20%. means last year they got 200bill tax. now they get 220b tax
they see it as their GDP rose by 10%. and they have 20bill extra in the treasury.
this means that the government debt has shrunk in real value turns(as $100b gov debt is now less than 10% of gdp.. gov has $20b it didnt have last year to reduce debt.. gov can inflate prices of good by 10% so that the 'value' of $100b debt is less produce value. thus less value).
but the citizen national debt has increased
in short citizens see loans as debt.. government see loans as GDP increase spending and their bond value (debt)reduction
..
free money inflation is just using debt to then create more debt. to create inflation to then need citizens to get more debt to buy the things they cant afford due to high pricing.. circling circling circling.
its not linked to any true GDP increases of any new employment. produce or population growth. its just based on the snowball of previous debt needing more debt just to survive
..
true GDP growth "should" be from manufacturing goods to sell to other countries to grab new money from other countries. not from creating its one (grab from elsewhere not create from within)
politicians wont want to rule out bankers. because to them bankers make their wheels go round and increase their GDP without actually producing/manufacturing goods/jobs.
government need GDP increases to offset their own bond debt value. but when not producing goods to sell. they are creating their own GDP value via debt of its own citizens..
and this is why any UBI should be done carefully, as its still creating money from within, and not from an outside source
EG
if a country had a currency circulation market cap of say $1trill. and a government debt of say $100bill
and separetly 10million people got a debt of $10k each year.
thats another $100billion created circulation money.
meaning citizens are in debt of $100bill a year.
but the government now sees there is $1.1trill circulation in the economy. as people spent that $100b on houses/luxuries. so thats a GDP increase of 10%
so then taxing the circulation at say 20%. means last year they got 200bill tax. now they get 220b tax
they see it as their GDP rose by 10%. and they have 20bill extra in the treasury.
this means that the government debt has shrunk in real value turns(as $100b gov debt is now less than 10% of gdp.. gov has $20b it didnt have last year to reduce debt.. gov can inflate prices of good by 10% so that the 'value' of $100b debt is less produce value. thus less value).
but the citizen national debt has increased
in short citizens see loans as debt.. government see loans as GDP increase spending and their bond value (debt)reduction
..
free money inflation is just using debt to then create more debt. to create inflation to then need citizens to get more debt to buy the things they cant afford due to high pricing.. circling circling circling.
its not linked to any true GDP increases of any new employment. produce or population growth. its just based on the snowball of previous debt needing more debt just to survive
..
true GDP growth "should" be from manufacturing goods to sell to other countries to grab new money from other countries. not from creating its one (grab from elsewhere not create from within)
politicians wont want to rule out bankers. because to them bankers make their wheels go round and increase their GDP without actually producing/manufacturing goods/jobs.
government need GDP increases to offset their own bond debt value. but when not producing goods to sell. they are creating their own GDP value via debt of its own citizens..
and this is why any UBI should be done carefully, as its still creating money from within, and not from an outside source
Someone has to fill those shoes. The majority relies on banks for several reasons, the obvious being their current uses, most need a bank account because It's the most practical way to move/hold/exchange/save money in the current system we live in. Unless banks and everyone who supports one goes away (going by 2019 consensus, that's 95% of US households, most people even have multiple bank accounts. (about 50%) and of course banks provide jobs to millions as well. I see central bankers as in being in very lucky positions. (although doubt they'll view themselves as lucky)
Politicians are the other side of the same coin, sell out politicians and possible legitimate ones, who knows? I dare not speculate on politicians as a whole, might land on some list
firstly i just grabbed numbers and made presumptions due to your lack of enumerating your idea.
so looking at what an average full time wage was.. which is 40 hours. and in america $7.50 an hour. thus deemed what was an acceptable minimum living cost of $300(or 120 loaves of bread at $2.50)
but if the $ disappeared and we used a bread loaf valuation(true cost of living) lets say a 1hour coin is then 3 loaves of bread.. the rest of my spiel still applies whether it measured in dollars or loaves.
..
but now you have enumerated you want everyone to get 168 coins a week. what you wil end up finding out that 168coins or 40 coins would still end up exchange rating to the same nominal basic living standard of $300(120 loaves of bread).
infact if eveyone was getting free coins.. then 1 coin will debase down to even less value. meaning 1 coin wont even buy you a single loaf of bread in the future. (research inflation)
..
having a system where the money creation is part of say being born. where instead of people creating money when asking for a loan/mortgage they are creating money at birth that stays in a privkey lock until 18th birthday. where the value in the system is directly linked to the population. then that can balance things out.
as that money can then go towards healthcare college and other things of value that normally loans pay for. before it trickles around into the wider economy.
but just handing free money to people to spend that day.. will just raise the prices of products. because free money becomes useless
EG if the free money paid for public services(college healthcare) which then paid the public employees (lecturers/doctors) then the utility creates the value market. thus fixing value.
if however the free money paid for bread and milk. the market value creates the utility and you end up inflating prices. and destroying value
I think OP meant if they're just printing money it's useless anyways, so why not provide basic income, Im not a proponate for it, but there's already similar cases being "tested" and several other countries doing it, IMO we are just being held back by not doing it.
reference: https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/household-survey/index.html#:~:text=The%202019%20survey%20finds%20that,was%20first%20conducted%20in%202009.
Politicians are the other side of the same coin, sell out politicians and possible legitimate ones, who knows? I dare not speculate on politicians as a whole, might land on some list
First off it would not be 40 hour coins a week, it would be 168 hour coins. You are not getting the coins for working, you are just generating the m1 money supply instead of the FED creating it all, secondly you don`t know how much fiat they could be worth 168 hour coins could be worth 300 dollars, I would assume unlimited because people would stop accepting central banker fiat and accept the new timed/duration currency as the world reserve cash supply.
So it would not matter if you are a doctor or farmer or unemployed everyone would earn 168 hour coins a week. Then their salary or wage they decide with their employer to get paid on top of that.
I would be more incentivize to work for a fair money supply, I have negative desire to work for fiat or bitcoin.
If you ask me 1 hour coin an hour = 730-740 a month that is better than the current welfare system we got now, let`s just say 1 hour coin = 1 dollar. That is still higher than people on welfare get in Canada, they give you $300 a month here for welfare and $600 for disability.
p.s. "A slacker at McDonald`s flipping hamburgers" works harder than all politicians combined and they actually serve the people.
So it would not matter if you are a doctor or farmer or unemployed everyone would earn 168 hour coins a week. Then their salary or wage they decide with their employer to get paid on top of that.
I would be more incentivize to work for a fair money supply, I have negative desire to work for fiat or bitcoin.
If you ask me 1 hour coin an hour = 730-740 a month that is better than the current welfare system we got now, let`s just say 1 hour coin = 1 dollar. That is still higher than people on welfare get in Canada, they give you $300 a month here for welfare and $600 for disability.
p.s. "A slacker at McDonald`s flipping hamburgers" works harder than all politicians combined and they actually serve the people.
firstly i just grabbed numbers and made presumptions due to your lack of enumerating your idea.
so looking at what an average full time wage was.. which is 40 hours. and in america $7.50 an hour. thus deemed what was an acceptable minimum living cost of $300(or 120 loaves of bread at $2.50)
but if the $ disappeared and we used a bread loaf valuation(true cost of living) lets say a 1hour coin is then 3 loaves of bread.. the rest of my spiel still applies whether it measured in dollars or loaves.
..
but now you have enumerated you want everyone to get 168 coins a week. what you wil end up finding out that 168coins or 40 coins would still end up exchange rating to the same nominal basic living standard of $300(120 loaves of bread).
infact if eveyone was getting free coins.. then 1 coin will debase down to even less value. meaning 1 coin wont even buy you a single loaf of bread in the future. (research inflation)
..
having a system where the money creation is part of say being born. where instead of people creating money when asking for a loan/mortgage they are creating money at birth that stays in a privkey lock until 18th birthday. where the value in the system is directly linked to the population. then that can balance things out.
as that money can then go towards healthcare college and other things of value that normally loans pay for. before it trickles around into the wider economy.
but just handing free money to people to spend that day.. will just raise the prices of products. because free money becomes useless
EG if the free money paid for public services(college healthcare) which then paid the public employees (lecturers/doctors) then the utility creates the value market. thus fixing value.
if however the free money paid for bread and milk. the market value creates the utility and you end up inflating prices. and destroying value
I think OP meant if they're just printing money it's useless anyways, so why not provide basic income, Im not a proponate for it, but there's already similar cases being "tested" and several other countries doing it, IMO we are just being held back by not doing it.
reference: https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/household-survey/index.html#:~:text=The%202019%20survey%20finds%20that,was%20first%20conducted%20in%202009.
First off it would not be 40 hour coins a week, it would be 168 hour coins. You are not getting the coins for working, you are just generating the m1 money supply instead of the FED creating it all, secondly you don`t know how much fiat they could be worth 168 hour coins could be worth 300 dollars, I would assume unlimited because people would stop accepting central banker fiat and accept the new timed/duration currency as the world reserve cash supply.
So it would not matter if you are a doctor or farmer or unemployed everyone would earn 168 hour coins a week. Then their salary or wage they decide with their employer to get paid on top of that.
I would be more incentivize to work for a fair money supply, I have negative desire to work for fiat or bitcoin.
If you ask me 1 hour coin an hour = 730-740 a month that is better than the current welfare system we got now, let`s just say 1 hour coin = 1 dollar. That is still higher than people on welfare get in Canada, they give you $300 a month here for welfare and $600 for disability.
p.s. "A slacker at McDonald`s flipping hamburgers" works harder than all politicians combined and they actually serve the people.
So it would not matter if you are a doctor or farmer or unemployed everyone would earn 168 hour coins a week. Then their salary or wage they decide with their employer to get paid on top of that.
I would be more incentivize to work for a fair money supply, I have negative desire to work for fiat or bitcoin.
If you ask me 1 hour coin an hour = 730-740 a month that is better than the current welfare system we got now, let`s just say 1 hour coin = 1 dollar. That is still higher than people on welfare get in Canada, they give you $300 a month here for welfare and $600 for disability.
p.s. "A slacker at McDonald`s flipping hamburgers" works harder than all politicians combined and they actually serve the people.
firstly i just grabbed numbers and made presumptions due to your lack of enumerating your idea.
so looking at what an average full time wage was.. which is 40 hours. and in america $7.50 an hour. thus deemed what was an acceptable minimum living cost of $300(or 120 loaves of bread at $2.50)
but if the $ disappeared and we used a bread loaf valuation(true cost of living) lets say a 1hour coin is then 3 loaves of bread.. the rest of my spiel still applies whether it measured in dollars or loaves.
..
but now you have enumerated you want everyone to get 168 coins a week. what you wil end up finding out that 168coins or 40 coins would still end up exchange rating to the same nominal basic living standard of $300(120 loaves of bread).
infact if eveyone was getting free coins.. then 1 coin will debase down to even less value. meaning 1 coin wont even buy you a single loaf of bread in the future. (research inflation)
..
having a system where the money creation is part of say being born. where instead of people creating money when asking for a loan/mortgage they are creating money at birth that stays in a privkey lock until 18th birthday. where the value in the system is directly linked to the population. then that can balance things out.
as that money can then go towards healthcare college and other things of value that normally loans pay for. before it trickles around into the wider economy.
but just handing free money to people to spend that day.. will just raise the prices of products. because free money becomes useless
EG if the free money paid for public services(college healthcare) which then paid the public employees (lecturers/doctors) then the utility creates the value market. thus fixing value.
if however the free money paid for bread and milk. the market value creates the utility and you end up inflating prices. and destroying value
Our politicians have failed us time and time again, else nothing will prompt such an exclusive thought. However, it is also important to remember that the process of governance and government is a continuous process and most incoming politicians make loud campaign promises knowing in their hearts it is easier to change/make certain laws & policies orally than in reality. When they finally win the hearts of voters and enter office, they are faced with the reality that some laws and policies as simple as they seem have beneath them a lot of beauracracy. To however suggest to replace them with softwares is to wholeheartedly surrender the whole system to cybercriminals and hackers.
as for politicians.
i agree if politicians make a pledge to do something. their salary and all other hidden incomes should be on the line. it all gets put into a trust and they only get access to it if they achieve their goal.
then they will suddenly work faster to complete things.
a voting system can work. after all millions of people vote on americas got talent each week. so why not have a secure system where citizens regularly vote on legislation.
the hardest task would be setting up a way to ensure each person has a private wallet key that identifies them to ensure people cant just sell their keys to their nearest corporate lobby group offering to buy their vote
i agree if politicians make a pledge to do something. their salary and all other hidden incomes should be on the line. it all gets put into a trust and they only get access to it if they achieve their goal.
then they will suddenly work faster to complete things.
a voting system can work. after all millions of people vote on americas got talent each week. so why not have a secure system where citizens regularly vote on legislation.
the hardest task would be setting up a way to ensure each person has a private wallet key that identifies them to ensure people cant just sell their keys to their nearest corporate lobby group offering to buy their vote
I fully agree with you. The salary schemes and retirement packages need to be put more public for politcians and there should be more laws against abusing power and still receiving benefit. The problem here is that politcians won't likely make any laws that will result in a negative impact for themselfs. Why would they ever limit their salaries or hold themelf acountable. In my country we can see it every year. The salary increase for politicians is always higher than the increase for the average worker or the retired people. It will be hard to change these laws ever.
having a coin of 1 hour just makes EVERYONE on a 40 coin a week income
farmers wont the farm if all they ever gonna get is 40coin a week
think about it one guy working non stop outdoors in the rain on a building site. scuffing their hands up straining their muscles building new housing for 40 coins. and then another person slacking off at mcdonalds. spending half the day chatting and smoking on breaks and the other have lazily flipping burgers for the same 40coin...
.. i dont see that playing well
farmers wont the farm if all they ever gonna get is 40coin a week
think about it one guy working non stop outdoors in the rain on a building site. scuffing their hands up straining their muscles building new housing for 40 coins. and then another person slacking off at mcdonalds. spending half the day chatting and smoking on breaks and the other have lazily flipping burgers for the same 40coin...
.. i dont see that playing well
First off it would not be 40 hour coins a week, it would be 168 hour coins. You are not getting the coins for working, you are just generating the m1 money supply instead of the FED creating it all, secondly you don`t know how much fiat they could be worth 168 hour coins could be worth 300 dollars, I would assume unlimited because people would stop accepting central banker fiat and accept the new timed/duration currency as the world reserve cash supply.
So it would not matter if you are a doctor or farmer or unemployed everyone would earn 168 hour coins a week. Then their salary or wage they decide with their employer to get paid on top of that.
I would be more incentivize to work for a fair money supply, I have negative desire to work for fiat or bitcoin.
If you ask me 1 hour coin an hour = 730-740 a month that is better than the current welfare system we got now, let`s just say 1 hour coin = 1 dollar. That is still higher than people on welfare get in Canada, they give you $300 a month here for welfare and $600 for disability.
p.s. "A slacker at McDonald`s flipping hamburgers" works harder than all politicians combined and they actually serve the people.
as for politicians.
i agree if politicians make a pledge to do something. their salary and all other hidden incomes should be on the line. it all gets put into a trust and they only get access to it if they achieve their goal.
then they will suddenly work faster to complete things.
a voting system can work. after all millions of people vote on americas got talent each week. so why not have a secure system where citizens regularly vote on legislation.
the hardest task would be setting up a way to ensure each person has a private wallet key that identifies them to ensure people cant just sell their keys to their nearest corporate lobby group offering to buy their vote
i agree if politicians make a pledge to do something. their salary and all other hidden incomes should be on the line. it all gets put into a trust and they only get access to it if they achieve their goal.
then they will suddenly work faster to complete things.
a voting system can work. after all millions of people vote on americas got talent each week. so why not have a secure system where citizens regularly vote on legislation.
the hardest task would be setting up a way to ensure each person has a private wallet key that identifies them to ensure people cant just sell their keys to their nearest corporate lobby group offering to buy their vote
having a coin of 1 hour just makes EVERYONE on a 40 coin a week income
farmers wont the farm if all they ever gonna get is 40coin a week
think about it one guy working non stop outdoors in the rain on a building site. scuffing their hands up straining their muscles building new housing for 40 coins. and then another person slacking off at mcdonalds. spending half the day chatting and smoking on breaks and the other have lazily flipping burgers for the same 40coin...
.. i dont see that playing well
if what you are asking for is a Universal basic income where everyone gets ~$300($7.50x40) but then allowed to earn whatever they like then after that...then what. how is that going to change things for the uber rich people..its not
having a UBI initially helps the super poor. where everyone is then entitled to some minimum living value no matter the circumstances. but thats just beneficial to the people that have gone passed their mandatory 16week 'look for work' employment scheme
havng $300/w for life guarantee will just create the slum-landlords to set rents at $150 a week for crackden-esq apartments. will just make electric/utilities set $100 and leave people with just $50 for the rest
thus doing nothing in the end but inflating prices of things, where decent clean housing ends up being over $300 a week, again pricing the poor out of adequate living standards
in the UK local government have budgets for housing the poor which is like $150 for a single person for a private landlord to take them in.. but if you see these places. its smaller than a jail cell. where they share bthrooms
yes local government also run social housing which is only $90, the quality/space is better. but the amount of apartments/housing they have available is not enough.
but my point is by law uk local government do have provisions to give the poorest shelter and an allowance for any reason. and still UK has alot of poverty.
its not organised into a universal payment system. its different pots of cash in different departments reserved for different extreme needs. but even if organised into a central pot of universal income. where its then distributed by blockchain instead of debit cards... wont change things
farmers wont the farm if all they ever gonna get is 40coin a week
think about it one guy working non stop outdoors in the rain on a building site. scuffing their hands up straining their muscles building new housing for 40 coins. and then another person slacking off at mcdonalds. spending half the day chatting and smoking on breaks and the other have lazily flipping burgers for the same 40coin...
.. i dont see that playing well
if what you are asking for is a Universal basic income where everyone gets ~$300($7.50x40) but then allowed to earn whatever they like then after that...then what. how is that going to change things for the uber rich people..its not
having a UBI initially helps the super poor. where everyone is then entitled to some minimum living value no matter the circumstances. but thats just beneficial to the people that have gone passed their mandatory 16week 'look for work' employment scheme
havng $300/w for life guarantee will just create the slum-landlords to set rents at $150 a week for crackden-esq apartments. will just make electric/utilities set $100 and leave people with just $50 for the rest
thus doing nothing in the end but inflating prices of things, where decent clean housing ends up being over $300 a week, again pricing the poor out of adequate living standards
in the UK local government have budgets for housing the poor which is like $150 for a single person for a private landlord to take them in.. but if you see these places. its smaller than a jail cell. where they share bthrooms
yes local government also run social housing which is only $90, the quality/space is better. but the amount of apartments/housing they have available is not enough.
but my point is by law uk local government do have provisions to give the poorest shelter and an allowance for any reason. and still UK has alot of poverty.
its not organised into a universal payment system. its different pots of cash in different departments reserved for different extreme needs. but even if organised into a central pot of universal income. where its then distributed by blockchain instead of debit cards... wont change things
I`ll start
I think politicians and central bankers are leech parasites.
I think we should replace politicians and central bankers with software.
Are we not en$laved?
We have limited time, goods and services and they have unlimited fiat money. Do they not get all our worth for free?
As a farmer I back my goods with time, work and resources.
It takes time to grow the crops, it takes hard work to grow the crops and harvest them, it takes resources like petroleum and fertilizer to grow my crops. When I create goods, I create things that keep people alive. Then I exchange it for fiat which takes them no effort to create and is backed by nothing.
This seems like a pretty shitty deal, so I stopped selling my fruits and veggies for fiat.
Why not have a software that distributes the money supply at a fair rate to everyone rather letting a select few create all the supply?
Like have everyone earn 1 hour coin an hour or something? everyone have the same stake of 1.
Why do we vote people to vote for us? Like we voted for Obama because he said he was going to remove all the troops for Afghanistan then when he got in he sent another 30,000 more. Trump said he was going to put Hilary in jail and never did. He said he was going to drain the swamp and printed trillions upon trillions of the swamp money.
Don`t you think we should just vote on issues, rather voting people to vote for us, since time has proven you can`t trust other people to execute decisions for you.
If you ask me, we should hang all the politicians and bankers back in 1971, when they stopped backing the money with gold.
I think politicians and central bankers are leech parasites.
I think we should replace politicians and central bankers with software.
Are we not en$laved?
We have limited time, goods and services and they have unlimited fiat money. Do they not get all our worth for free?
As a farmer I back my goods with time, work and resources.
It takes time to grow the crops, it takes hard work to grow the crops and harvest them, it takes resources like petroleum and fertilizer to grow my crops. When I create goods, I create things that keep people alive. Then I exchange it for fiat which takes them no effort to create and is backed by nothing.
This seems like a pretty shitty deal, so I stopped selling my fruits and veggies for fiat.
Why not have a software that distributes the money supply at a fair rate to everyone rather letting a select few create all the supply?
Like have everyone earn 1 hour coin an hour or something? everyone have the same stake of 1.
Why do we vote people to vote for us? Like we voted for Obama because he said he was going to remove all the troops for Afghanistan then when he got in he sent another 30,000 more. Trump said he was going to put Hilary in jail and never did. He said he was going to drain the swamp and printed trillions upon trillions of the swamp money.
Don`t you think we should just vote on issues, rather voting people to vote for us, since time has proven you can`t trust other people to execute decisions for you.
If you ask me, we should hang all the politicians and bankers back in 1971, when they stopped backing the money with gold.
Jump to: