Open-Minded Liberals?

[sirs]

Wealth is finite??  Frellin incredible.     No wonder such skewed and distorted accusations are so often aimed at "the rich"

[Rich]

>>Wealth is finite??  Frellin incredible.<<

Once again you have to question the reasoning behind such baloney. Is it ignorance or malice?

60/40 is my guess.

[_JS]

Wealth is finite??  Frellin incredible.     No wonder such skewed and distorted accusations are so often aimed at "the rich"

*sigh*

Listen carefully and try and follow along.

You open a restaurant in your hometown. You take in $2,000 a week in profit. Is that new money?

I haven't aimed anything at "the rich." You and rich are accepting a political one-liner, but you don't understand the economics behind it. Yes wealth is finite at any given time. Of course it is! To say otherwise would imply an absolute ridiculous assertion.

[kimba1]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/24/BAE4UKM70.DTL&hw=yul&sn=001&sc=1000

If anyone tries to open a restaurant in my town
2k aweek is definately not going to happen.

but this is north beach he shouldn`t of gone there
nobody goes to north beach

[sirs]

Wealth is finite??  Frellin incredible.     No wonder such skewed and distorted accusations are so often aimed at "the rich"

You open a restaurant in your hometown. You take in $2,000 a week in profit. Is that new money?  I haven't aimed anything at "the rich." You and rich are accepting a political one-liner, but you don't understand the economics behind it. Yes wealth is finite at any given time. Of course it is! To say otherwise would imply an absolute ridiculous assertion.

Js, you appear to be arguing some analogus concept that "at any given time", there are a finite amount of oxygen molecules....which technically may be accurate at that specific time.  However we don't live in a vacuum.  the U.S. doesn't have x amount of dollars, and "that's it".  At "any given time", you could make a claim that the total amount of money the U.S. has is x.  BUT, that's not a fixed #.  It's NOT a finite pie that never grows or shrinks beyond x.  Since we don't live in a theoretical vacuum, devoid of time or any other contributory factors, wealth is however much you can make.  Theoretically EVERYONE can get to be a member of "the rich".  But to target "the rich", lay claim as to how greedy, evil, and selfish "they" are, and so often the apparent impidement to everyone else's happiness, with the goal of most folks trying to attain a level of being part of 'the rich", is the personification of class warfare, and by no means a rational justification of claiming wealth is some finite pie.   

[Amianthus]

You open a restaurant in your hometown. You take in $2,000 a week in profit. Is that new money?

In a way it is.

You have provided your customers with X + $2,000 worth of food and services (so they haven't "lost" anything) and out of the total X + $2,000, you have paid your employees and suppliers (so they haven't "lost" anything, either) and you have $2,000 to spend that you did not have before.

Who "lost" the $2,000 if it's a zero-sum game?

[sirs]

You open a restaurant in your hometown. You take in $2,000 a week in profit. Is that new money?

In a way it is.  You have provided your customers with X + $2,000 worth of food and services (so they haven't "lost" anything) and out of the total X + $2,000, you have paid your employees and suppliers (so they haven't "lost" anything, either) and you have $2,000 to spend that you did not have before.

Who "lost" the $2,000 if it's a zero-sum game?

Well summized, Ami

[Brassmask]

Yes wealth is finite at any given time. Of course it is! To say otherwise would imply an absolute ridiculous assertion.

I agree with what you're saying but considering how the government is now finishing up a deal to just cut checks to people all over the country with nothing to back them up, I'd have to say that we're entering a world (or have been in for a long time) where wealth can just be conjured up by the federal reserve printing it as fast as it can.

[_JS]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/24/BAE4UKM70.DTL&hw=yul&sn=001&sc=1000

If anyone tries to open a restaurant in my town
2k aweek is definately not going to happen.

but this is north beach he shouldn`t of gone there
nobody goes to north beach

The issue is that the profit is made through a loss in another part of the sector. A restaurant elsewhere is going to lose business and the system as a percentage will remain relatively (though never perfectly stable). That's the point of competetion anyway. If the pie were infinite, as Sirs and Rich claim, then businesses would succeed at incredible rates and money supply would have no effect on other economic factors.

Of course that is not the case (nor can it possibly ever be the case). There can only be so many green bean farmers before some aspect of green bean production is saturated and the notion of "infinite wealth" becomes ludicrous. There can only be so many wine-makers and vineyard owners.

The market itself corrects for these issues through some simple mechanism (supply and demand) and through some very complex mechanisms (hyperinflation, stagnation).

So, for example, one could simply borrow heavily against lenders at low interest rates - but as we've seen with the subprime lenders and the housing market collapse, which involves a lot of negative equity - such things don't prove the "infinite pie" or "infinite wealth" notion any more correct.

It is a myth. One for candidates with a population that has little understanding of economics, but is easily swayed by political one-liners.

[_JS]

You open a restaurant in your hometown. You take in $2,000 a week in profit. Is that new money?

In a way it is.

You have provided your customers with X + $2,000 worth of food and services (so they haven't "lost" anything) and out of the total X + $2,000, you have paid your employees and suppliers (so they haven't "lost" anything, either) and you have $2,000 to spend that you did not have before.

Who "lost" the $2,000 if it's a zero-sum game?

When you learn to do proper cost/benefit analyses, this is not considered a net gain over a community.

The loss comes from other restaurants losing their business. Of course it is not a 100% loss. Likely you have gained some customers willing to spend extra, but most have not simply increased their home budgets to eat out simply for your establishment. They made a trade-off. Someone else lost.

[_JS]

Yes wealth is finite at any given time. Of course it is! To say otherwise would imply an absolute ridiculous assertion.

I agree with what you're saying but considering how the government is now finishing up a deal to just cut checks to people all over the country with nothing to back them up, I'd have to say that we're entering a world (or have been in for a long time) where wealth can just be conjured up by the federal reserve printing it as fast as it can.

On its face this would appear to be true, but between inflation and our public debt, economics has a way of biting us in the ass for such gimicks.

[Amianthus]

Of course it is not a 100% loss.

So, only part of it is "new" money? Still means it's not a zero-sum game.

[The_Professor]

<<Or, he could take the money to expand and make even MORE money, thereby hiring more workers.>>

Why would he wait for the government to hand him the money before expanding?  And why does expansion depend on hiring more workers rather than outsourcing or automating to increase productivity?  And why wouldn't a businessman who was going to expand not just find the financing one way or another and expand instead of waiting around for a government rebate of unknown size and date of delivery?  Why wouldn't he pay down an over-extended credit and then have more in his LOC to draw on if and when he decides to expand?  Why would the decision to expand come just when every one of his competitors is also getting the same rebate?

The whole idea that rebates mean more jobs is more fascist wool-gathering.  It's bullshit.  Show me where it's ever happened.

There are so many alternatives, even for expansion-minded businesses, to just blowing a windfall on payroll and related expenses.  Where does all this certainty come from that the rebate money will go to new jobs when you don't have a clue whether all or any of it will?

"And why wouldn't a businessman who was going to expand not just find the financing one way or another and expand instead of waiting around for a government rebate of unknown size and date of delivery? "

Well, for the same reason I am waiting for my Government tax rebate being promised now before I go to Disney World. I have already made reservations. Can't wait. But, why use my current depleted funds when the Govvies are giving me some soon?


Businesses can and do wait upon better government environments and actions before they in turn act. To not keep track of these events is irresponsible and/or intellectually-challenged.

[Knutey]

You obviously never participated in Washington Watch Room during the Bill Clinton lynching. Some RW nut threatened to kill Bill almost hourly.

Like most of your posts, Knutty, I'm pretty sure that this is made up.

All of yours are. You can check with any number of folks her . Many in here were there. You weren't , obviously.

[Universe Prince]

The loss comes from other restaurants losing their business.

That depends much on the market. A Jamaican restaurant and a Mexican Restaurant are not really going to be much competition to one another in a large market. But even similar restaurants can succeed. Not far from where I live, a locally owned Italian restaurant and a relatively new Carrabba's both seem to be doing just fine. I think the local Greek/Italian/Mediterranean restaurant lost the business, which is a shame, because their food was really good. Still, this is the nature of competition within the market, and that isn't really a bad thing.