3 ms·

You just contradicted yourself, and agreed that the rich invest while the poor consume. Glad we are in agreement!

• pbhjpbhj 11y ago
  >agreed that the rich invest while the poor consume // You just twisted my words and acted disingenuously. I said, for the third time, the rich consume. The rich consume far more than the poor. The rich invest more than the poor, but that's because the poor don't have money to invest. Take all the money from the rich and give it to the poor and consumption and investment will shift. The people holding the money aren't as special as capitalism would have us assume.
  • yummyfajitas 11y ago
    The point is what will happen in aggregate. If the poor gain $1 additional and the rich lose $1 additional, will investment go up or down? If it goes up then we should target fiscal stimulus at the rich during bad economic times. If it goes down then a BI will reduce future investment. You are unfortunately in the situation that the stated reasons for your preferred policies contradict each other. That's quite strange - it's almost as if those stated reasons are post-hoc justifications and not your real motivation.
    • aninhumer 11y ago
      Perhaps investment goes down, but it will be more focused on things that benefit society as a whole, because they are much more able to consume it. Basic Income makes "vote with your wallet" a meaningful concept, instead of a hollow joke.