|
The logical next step is boxsharing.
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
We need to focus less on 'things' and more on 'being', and that's not just because there's no room in my pod for 'things' or 'movement.'
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Later than you'd think possible, but when it does happen it will be faster than you'd think possible.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
The more money people have the more money they have to spend. Odd how doing it via tax breaks is a-OK but doing it in a manner that benefits the poor more than the rich is so abhorrent.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
I'm probably botching this, but I think it boils down to something like DB extending billions in loans to Italian banks which are now bankrupt and if forced to realize those losses (instead of getting bailed out in a circuitous manner as happened with Greece) DB would go bankrupt as well. People who seem to know what they're talking about (as far as I can tell) think there's a good chance that if the referendum fails it could precipitate a new Euro crisis and lead to the breakup of the Eurozone, which I find to be pretty reasonable as it's been obviously unsustainable for years, barely limping by through massive bank bailouts at the expense of the citizens of everybody other than Germany. The other thing is that if the referendum does pass it increases the odds that the 5-Star Movement take power in the next election, so it's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Mozi fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
The breakup of the Eurozone would be the eventual consequence of the collapse of the European banking system, but I'm not sure of the actual processes that would be involved. I should say again I don't have a really great understanding of these matters.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
The great (?) thing about living in interesting times is we get to see what happens.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Dawncloack posted:I was thinking of that, but also of the fact that that DB seems to be very undercapitalized (and while trying to give you a figure for that I found this and this.), and also it has a derivatives portfolio of 47 trillion USD. (For reference, Germay's GDP is 3.36 trillion USD). Ah, yikes. Considering the fear of their collapse if the US's $14b fine is levied, this seems a bit much.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Funny to think that things are fragile enough right now that even a mistake might possibly set things off.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
If it crashes investors stop making money so there's a shared suspension of disbelief to keep the lie going. Wile E. Coyote always gets a certain distance in the air over the cliff before he falls. It took some time after people started defaulting on their mortgages before the securities that backed those mortgages actually recognized that fact.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
And in what ways do you estimate the world economy is better off and safer now than it was before the last time it blew up?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
That's an interesting thought - while it used to work where manufacturing moved to where wages were lowest, thus boosting the lower/middle class in a succession of countries, once these basic tasks can be automated or the cost of robots is cheap enough, that will break the whole cycle. Countries will be able to industrialize without creating jobs or boosting wages, which was kind of an important point. vvv Who was that a response to? Mozi fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Jan 11, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Your point being.... culture and the arts are better under state repression?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
AKA Pseudonym posted:So now that Trump has revealed himself to be a true blue protectionist why is the stock market still going up? Because if it goes down they will lose money.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Helsing posted:That's absolutely not the consensus, there's a growing recognition that the damage done by trade was been hugely underestimated (or more accurately ignored). You're being incredibly reductive here, squeezing about ten thousand different global trends and developments into one big process and acting like it's all a package deal when in fact there's a wide range of approaches for how a country handles increasing economic integration. No, the big picture view is meaningful and the numbers are very clear. Your nitpicking is myopic. Damage from trade is real and underestimated, and vast wealth has been stolen by corporations and the wealthy that should have assisted with that. That does not mean that billions have not benefited, because they have.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
Proud Christian Mom posted:And the benefits did not outweigh the cost. I'm saying that they did, though - unless you count a poor person from China or India to be worth less than an American.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Prove it. Because for some reason he didn't respond, I think this is an illustrative graph: (http://voxeu.org/article/global-income-distribution-1988)  The great majority of the world's population sits on the left of the graph and has enjoyed historically unprecedented growth over the recorded period. The 1% on the very right have also done very well for themselves. The 75-99% range, however, votes in America and Europe.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
It does make clear that (in my opinion) the fundamental problem is not free trade/globalization in and of itself, but the concentration of growth in the top 1% as a result of what more or less boils down to massive, often legalized, tax evasion.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
For longer than at best a human lifetime, at any rate.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
I'm taking that perspective as a way of saying 'let's reform the system to make it work' as opposed to 'blow it all up,' because I am actually concerned about outcomes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Getting the wealthy and powerful to pay their fair share is something that might take a revolution to accomplish and enforce but I would rather be revolutionary in that direction than in a direction that will actually give them relatively more power and influence.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
As said, it's mostly that he has correctly predicted Brexit and Trump (and the Renzi referendum) and more importantly, he has a coherent narrative that explains what is going on in larger terms than a single country's politics. I don't necessarily agree with everything he says but given how things have evolved it's hard to argue he's entirely wrong. Thought-provoking at the very least.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
Every system has benefitted the rich and powerful the most, but this is the first one that has the side effect of benefiting the poor as well. Just to be clear, I am not a free trade zealot and I think that the idea of perpetual growth is a horrible, destructive fantasy. I think that we should conceive of a world where zero or very low growth is achieved without sacrificing peace and stability (which the current system cannot deliver.) I think there is a place for keeping some production and industry local, because a lot of what life is about is the day-to-day quality of it that is not reflected in a pay stub if that life is lived in a hollowed-out shell of something that once was. But at the same time, trade does deliver real, unprecedented benefits to huge numbers of people. There needs to be a balance, as much as the politics of the moment denies that can exist.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Well, my problem is that I don't believe that to be true.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:If you don't think that equities will have a positive return on a 30 year timescale, where are you putting your money? Real estate? Dried food? Asbestos mines? I think the world in 30 years is going to look massively different and not much of what we're talking about now will have any relevance. Not really something you can plan for an investment strategy. Mainly to protect against a near-term correction I've moved some money out of large and small cap index funds into money market accounts just to have a safety net, but long-term, I think it's more about building up your knowledge and experience to increase self-reliance or community-based sufficiency than planning out an investment strategy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 17:13
|
|