Millionaires, Billionaires Own 79% of America's Wealth

What wasn’t true? How does it take away from you when another accumulated wealth? In your mind is there only a limited amount of wealth to be had?

 

Liberals never fail to demonstrate that they have zero understanding of economic issues.

 

I'm not discussing economics, you are.

I'm talking about personal action. Being the change, instead of just talking about it.

 

Actually capitalism works best when government gets out of the way.

 

What does it say about rent-seeking from the other side of that voluntary transaction? Anything at all?

For every rent-seeker seeking to "hire out" their property, there is an equal and opposite rent-seeker seeking to hire that property. Both are voluntary states to exist in, and the two come together in an agreed upon relationship voluntarily.

Meantime, remember that those who hire rather than buy do so because it's their preference. They like the benefits of not having to save money, plus no commitment, no maintenance, less responsibility, etc etc. They're happy to pay money for those conveniences. Renting is always more costly than buying, so we can even regard it as a luxury lifestyle option - one that many people simply prefer. Given that, the belief that there's some kind of exploitation going on is patently ridiculous.

 

Where did this “rent seeking” idiocy come from?

Wealth is not a finite pie. It’s created when it’s created. Creating more does not mean there’s less for others.

 

It comes from people with buyer's - or in this case, renter's - remorse. They didn't bother doing the hard yards to buy their own (because heck, that's no fun), and subsequently feel bitter about those who did do the hard yards.

 

The leading economists on the planet, Stiglitz, Piketty, etc.

 

If an economist claims wealth is a finite pie, he or she is an idiot.

 

Beat me to it. This is the problem Marxists have. They all think that new wealth cannot be generated. For example, I work as a transit operator right now. So, if I am able to secure capital through either investors or an SBA loan, buy a used motorcoach, and start a tour and charter company, what's to say that in 5, 10, or even 20 years' time, that company expands, I can build my fleet of buses, own a maintenance/administration facility, and hire more drivers? Then I am raking in more money for myself, my drivers, and my company. That's how it works.

 

In order to do so, you have to steal that money from your customers.

(yes, I'm joking .. but it's what they think businesses do).

 

You mean by offering five star top notch service at a fair price? And what about my staff? Drivers, Maintenance, Clerical, dispatch, etc. I would treat them so well there would be zero need for union involvement. How about that?

Of course the tongue in cheek reply

 

They don't, but a person too lazy to learn dismissing economists from a position of ignorance,...

 

How would you know? It has never existed except as an idea?

 

Economics isn't.science..There are different schools motivated by politics and personal values.

 

Sigh.

"Economics is regarded as a social science because it uses scientific methods to build theories that can help explain the behaviour of individuals, groups and organisations. Economics attempts to explain economic behaviour, which arises when scarce resources are exchanged.

In terms of methodology, economists, like other social scientists, are not able to undertake controlled experiments in the way that chemists and biologists are. Hence, economists have to employ different methods, based primarily on observation and deduction and the construction of abstract models."

The social sciences are part of science. Scientists can throw a field out, like astrology. But there is a long standing tradition to let things play out on their own.

In light of that, economics is very much a science, despite it's limitations.

https://www.economicsonline.co.uk/Competitive_markets/What_is_economics.html

 

We can thank two people for this, Ronald Reagan and Milton Friedman.

 

Uh. Sure.

 

Its nor hard science no more than so called social science. Like the social science of today its corrupted by ideology.

You have left wing economies and right.wing.economics. So sigh all you want..There is more than one.school of economics.. Hardly a science. Just because you can use math doesn't make it a real science..

 

Tell me when it existed without govt injecting itself. During the time when the robber barons ran the show?

If it ever existed it's life was.as long as a snowball in hell! It only existed on paper...An ideal..

 

Having different schools of thought is not unusual in the sciences. Cosmology is like a bus, if you don't want the current one, wait a while and another will turn up.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but matters pertaining to science are settled by scientists.

 

I have had that argument more times then I care to think of. 'Money' is an infinite pool, you can have a fixed slice of something that keeps changing....

 

The reality is that capitalism has always been a cooperation between business and government.

https://www.amazon.com/Civilization...1603236560&sprefix=braudel+civ,aps,170&sr=8-7

 

Capitalism dies not depend on government. Government places obstacles in the way of capitalism. Now, you may argue that some of those obstacles are appropriate.

 

It's still theft! You're making your customers buy from you!

You're like some kinda evil billionaire, ain't ya. I see you.

;p