3 ms·

that's an option. When you sell such a 'potential service at a fixed future price to actually buy it' you are not ACTUALLY buying the product. In fact, options

by bawana 8y ago

that's an option. When you sell such a 'potential service at a fixed future price to actually buy it' you are not ACTUALLY buying the product. In fact, options have been a windfall for this inflationary debacle we are in. You might argue it's fueled the silicon valley miracle, but really it's only bait. People going into CS courses because of the 'option' to make money. When in reality, the industry needs code monkeys so how do you attract them? It's a form of dishonesty tricking people into doing what they dont really want to do for money. And when they are rudely awakened, they feel justified in even worse usurious behavior.

lordnacho 8y ago
Sure, I get what you're saying. But aren't you making it worse by trying this particular intervention? Chances are wealthier, better connected people have better access to whatever the workaround is. Just like with tax.
- bawana 8y ago
  indeed, lawyers would find some offshore or foreign loophole where this restriction does not exist. Financial money would find financial instruments in other nations - Germany, France etc. Why do Apple and Google keep so much money offshore? The same can be said for any tool whose purpose is to redistribute income. But the reinvestment of financial gains in the REAL economy is ALREADY happening. We call that phenomenon a 'startup' and those who are doing it are angel investors and VCs. I just want to formalize it out of silicon valley to the rest of the US, to the rest of the industries, to the rest of the nation. Heck, why not get creative and have a kickstarter for building 'smart roads' - you know roads with built in telemetry that would make self driving cars a cinch. Sounds outlandish? Well building interstate highways back in the way was equally outlandish. If there was a restriction against financial reinvestment of financial profits, and maybe a tax credit for investing in the REAL economy, we would see these things happen. The tool of taxation and the bureaucracy of redistribution would be sidestepped and the money would go more directly to the REAL economy.

by bawana 8y ago

lordnacho 8y ago

Sure, I get what you're saying. But aren't you making it worse by trying this particular intervention? Chances are wealthier, better connected people have better access to whatever the workaround is. Just like with tax.

bawana 8y ago
indeed, lawyers would find some offshore or foreign loophole where this restriction does not exist. Financial money would find financial instruments in other nations - Germany, France etc. Why do Apple and Google keep so much money offshore? The same can be said for any tool whose purpose is to redistribute income. But the reinvestment of financial gains in the REAL economy is ALREADY happening. We call that phenomenon a 'startup' and those who are doing it are angel investors and VCs. I just want to formalize it out of silicon valley to the rest of the US, to the rest of the industries, to the rest of the nation. Heck, why not get creative and have a kickstarter for building 'smart roads' - you know roads with built in telemetry that would make self driving cars a cinch. Sounds outlandish? Well building interstate highways back in the way was equally outlandish. If there was a restriction against financial reinvestment of financial profits, and maybe a tax credit for investing in the REAL economy, we would see these things happen. The tool of taxation and the bureaucracy of redistribution would be sidestepped and the money would go more directly to the REAL economy.