Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

brit2006

Regulars
  • Content Count

    69
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About brit2006

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  1. So yeah, if hot American girls are going to post their photo then hot English guys must play along…… (Information for Charlotte: I’m 6ft 3in, dirty blond hair, big blue eyes, 20 yrs old)
  2. An article I found. I am not trying to promote ideas contrary to Objectivism, however I am wondering what the response to this article would be. Is any of it true?
  3. I'm not sure what I based my position on apart from vague feelings, therefore I am open to persuasion. Is the death penalty required for the worst crimes because of justice? Ie, an eye for an eye?
  4. ggdwill, You're kidding right? In my opinon that has to be the worst idea for a prison system ever. I don't want criminals to be advancing and earning better living conditions, I want them to sit in a cell and think about what they have done. Also, the value of a prisoner would be very high I think. This is what I was saying before, that there is an incentive to have prisoners. An example would be in the film "Shawshank Redemption". The guy was a very valuable prisoner by doing all the tax forms, and so the head of the prison kept him there. Finally, I don't think the state should have the right to kill anyone.
  5. Their employment is assured by the fact they are paid via taxes and don't have to make a profit. However a private prison system would be under pressure to find prisoners.
  6. If you had a privately run prison, it would have to make a profit. So they get the prisoners to produce goods which they then sell to pay for the prisoners food, prison upkeep, etc. The money left over is profit. Is this kind of a system not creating an incentive for the prison system to want there to be more crime? Ie. if there is more crime, the prison gets more prisoners which makes them more profit. You can even imagine a situation where a corrupt prison actively frames poor vulnerable people, knowing they will end up in their prison making more profits for them.
  7. This news story really makes me angry. Its seems exactly like Ayn Rand described in Atlas Shrugged. The politicians know that the carbon trading system won't work and in fact they are counting on it not working (because if it did work they know that the economy would be damaged). All the system seems to do is make the politician a middle man who says in effect "Yes I allow you to produce." I'm trying to decide whether I can actually believe what I just wrote in the above paragraph. You see, I'm not sure I really believe that politicians are evil. I think they may genuinely believe that what they are doing is good and may be genuinely pissed off that Britain polluted too much, yet they recognise that the economy is important to voters, and therefore allow Britain to pollute more so as not to damage the economy. Either way the situation sucks but the second way of looking at it sucks less in my opinion.
  8. DavidOdden, Are you British? I'm curious because you read a lot of English newspapers!
  9. Yeah, the Daily Mail is crap. Read about it here. I'm curious, you seem to have read the Mail quite often. Why are Americans reading it?
  10. I was browsing the web and came across these pictures. WARNING! They are not for the faint hearted! Picture of aborted fetus Does this persuade anyone that abortion should be outlawed? Personally, I have not given much thought to the topic, but seeing those pictures sure made me think. I guess you guys are going to say that just because it looks human doesn't mean that it is and should have rights. A picture may not be an argument but it sure is shocking!
  11. A quote from Ayn Rand: If all prices have risen by 2% (including my nominal wage), then my real wage has stayed the same. Whats the problem?
  12. brit2006

    Debitism

    Exactly and when enough business plans fail, the bank will start increasing interest rates, reflecting the fact that they don't want to supply to people who are investing in worthless ventures. (Btw, interest rates can be zero: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4788376.stm)
  13. brit2006

    Debitism

    The banks increase the money supply by the value of the extra goods that are being produced. No inflation is created. They do this by lowering the interest rate. Therefore A borrows $100 @ 5%. He invests his $100 and only gets $100 back because no other money exists yet. But then B comes along and borrows $100 @ 4%, pays A for some good allowing A to pay off his 5%. This continues until interest rates becomes 0%. Remember, this is still in the banks interest as they need to keep the money supply high in order for people to pay back their loans. Remember, also that no inflation is being created either. Now Y comes along and borrows at 0%. He doesn't have to pay any interest back and so the system has enough money to go around. Banks start increasing interest rates when people start borrowing and investing in things that pay no return (ie think of the technology bubble) and can't pay back their loan and become bankrupt. This is basically a business cycle. There is no significance in the 0% number above. People could start going bankrupt at 2% or 3%. At the moment though, things don't work like this because central banks impose a minimum reserve level. Therefore they force banks to borrow from the central bank (so the central bank can set interest rates) at the end of each day to meet the level. The central bank does this so it can try and smooth out the economic cycle. But the above business cycle still happens, albeit with central bankers having control over the business cycle. I know some people point to Japan to show why monetary policy doesn't work but I don't know enough about the economics to say. I know though that there are quite a few competing theories to explain that puzzle.
  14. brit2006

    Debitism

    Does all this not assume that the bank is some kind of Feudal Lord who owns all the money? The fact that both I as the debtor and another person (who also lends money from the bank thereby creating the money that I can earn to pay back my interest) are both free to work and trade, why do we not simply refuse to deal with this Feudal Lord and instead create our own currency and trade our values with that instead?
  15. brit2006

    Debitism

    After talking to Felix in the chat room, and reading this thread, I think I have an answer that will satisfy Felix. (I hope!) Say person x is the banker and person y is the debtor. x lends $100 to y. $100 is the entire stock of money in this economy. y must pay it back plus 5% interest, ie $105. How does he do this when there is only $100 in the economy? The answer, and this is what I think you are forgetting Felix, is that x is also a regular person. People have values. For example lets say that x loves good paintings. y is a good painter. y paints a picture that x thinks is worth $10. y gives back the $100 and the painting and has therefore paid back the debt (plus a bit extra which is important for later). Now I know what you will say Felix, that the contract was in dollars and that x needs to be paid 105 dollars bills! But as a real person with values, how foolish would x be to not accept the painting as payment when he is gaining the equivilant of $110, $5 more than was originally agreed! He is getting a fantastic deal and would surely accept payment of interest in this fashion. Now, if this happened on a large scale with more actors, paintings would eventually become an accepted currency because it is backed by the fact that x loves paintings. Instead of lugging paintings around people would exchange certificates of ownership, ie paper currency - new currency would be created. This paper currency would look exactly the same as the current $1 bills in the economy. This is not inflation. If a new $1 bill enters the economy (backed by the painting) at the same time as a new good enters the economy that is worth $1, then this does not add to inflation. Keeping in mind the sentence in bold above, why could new currency not be created?
×
×
  • Create New...