What Is Economic Fairness?

of course you cant call the rich parasitic in a Republican capitalist society since they give far more than they receive to get rich. Do you want to a billionaire? All you need to do is sell $100 billion of stuff to people. Got anything to sell to the the people to improve their lives?

 

Almost all American homes are privately owned. But many fewer are resident owned.

GET IT???

 

1) might as well count from 1929 since FDR copied Hoover's policies
2) bizarre to call the Great Depression a period of economic expansion!! Why not tell trump to plan a Depression too!!! See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

 

No, that's just more absurd and disingenuous garbage from you. They get rich by TAKING, via privilege, much more than they GIVE. That is obvious, and I have explained to you in detail, many times, exactly how they do it.

"Stuff" that others created, or that you were privileged to stop others from creating. Right.

Sure. But the really valuable stuff I'm giving away.

 

Aren't you tired, yet, of having your absurd claims laughed at by everyone who knows any history?

By definition, all the time after the lowest point of the Great Depression -- right when Roosevelt came into office -- was a period of economic expansion. I realize you have to refuse to grasp such elementary points.

What makes you think he isn't? Oh, no, wait a minute, that's right: he hasn't got the brains to plan anything.

I see living proof of the Duning-Kruger effect.

 

And the growth in China is happening because China is so far behind and is a ripe market for profiteers. A clumsy, inept, befuddled leader and government would preside over a booming Chinese economy because China is so in need of commodity production.

 

Given you ignore labour market exploitation, your opinion is no more relevant.

 

No, that's just your uninformed and incorrect opinion. Unlike you, I actually understand HOW labor is exploited; those such as you who have imbibed Marxist drivel cannot understand it, and consequently always advocate the wrong remedies, like income tax or socialism.

<yawn> It's at least a reasoned and informed one, unlike yours.

 

You forgot to mention why all labour economists disagree with you. Is it part of that conspiracy again?

 

No, they are just selectively blind. A "labor economist" is someone who doesn't understand that land is causally prior to labor.

 

In fact growth in China started exactly when they switched to Republican capitalism. Total perfect delusion to imagine otherwise.

 

I guess you could call the fascism and corruption in China Republican, but you can't call it capitalism: the land is still all publicly owned.

 

to use land in China you pay for it just like you do here so for all intents and purposes it as private as our land is here. You have no shame!

 

yes you would call China Republican and enjoying 8% growth a year for 30 years to eliminate 40% of the entire planets poverty.

 

There you go, everyone but the Georgists are wrong.

Your understanding of labour markets is as ignorant as the Austrian Economists.

 

What is Economic fairness?

Answer: A stupid question.

 

Naive effort! Economics naturally refers to both efficiency and equity.

 

any transaction wherein both parties freely agree to make the transaction

 

Nope. Equity goes way beyond that. See, for example, the Rawlsian approach

 

No, everyone but me is wrong, including the Georgists.

Wrong again. Like "labor economists," you don't even understand that labor markets are based on landowners forcibly depriving workers of access to economic opportunity they would otherwise have. Compared to that, all the market influences they and you obsess about are derisory.

 

Yep, a ranter!

You think you look reasoned when you can't be arsed to refer to labour markets? Your Georgism continues to be childish.

 

You merely confirm that you prefer economic unfairness.

 

"He who knows, and knows he knows, is wise; follow him."

<sigh> I have not only "referred to" them, I have explained the dysfunction that characterizes them in capitalist countries better than "labor economists" ever have.

Your obsession with pretending that anyone who demonstrates that they are aware of facts about land must be a Georgist continues to be disingenuous.

 

You said nothing, again! Surely you thought to refer to something about economic equity? Or were you found out?

 

Nope. Flat wrong. There is a difference between paying the community that makes the land valuable for it and paying the same amount to a rich, greedy, privileged private parasite for doing nothing. See the difference between Hong Kong and Bangkok.

No, that's just more false and disingenuous garbage from you, and the Chinese themselves would laugh in your face for making such an ignorant comment, as they are buying up as much land as they can in places where, unlike in China, they are allowed to own it.

You continue to disgrace yourself. I am ashamed to reflect that such disingenuous garbage as yours is produced by a member of my own species.