5 ms·

>America needs phosphate and imports it currently. Sure, right now the economics work out that it's cheaper to import phosphate then produce it locally. >We c

>America needs phosphate and imports it currently. Sure, right now the economics work out that it's cheaper to import phosphate then produce it locally. >We cannot produce enough locally. We might not produce enough locally to meet the current demand right now, but that doesn't mean we can't. It about whether capital is currently allocated toward the production of phosphate. It doesn't need to be because we can import it. If we couldn't produce it under any circumstance that would be a massive national security flaw. :) > Yeah, making up money and having people sit at home (thus not paying taxes) is really going to inspire people to hold American debt! Having as many people as we can bear sit at home is the best course of action at the very present moment to avoid spreading this virus. The people sitting at home need to be able to buy what they need and pay the essential workers producing and transporting what they need to them. The alternative is worse: you spread virus and can't pay working people. People will hold American debt if the American government can assure debt holders that its people and institutions can survive a pandemic. >... is really going to inspire people to hold American debt! In the end we agree, it really is about faith :)

tathougies 7y ago
> If we couldn't produce it under any circumstance that would be a massive national security flaw. :) Yeah, it's so much a national security flaw that American law gives American citizens the right to claim islands as parts of the United States in order to secure access to a very difficult to acquire resource. > Having as many people as we can bear sit at home is the best course of action at the very present moment to avoid spreading this virus. This is not up for debate, and I never disagreed with it. > The people sitting at home need to be able to buy what they need and pay the essential workers producing and transporting what they need to them. Certainly. I wasn't disagreeing with you that people will need compensation for lost income. However, what we were discussing was this: > Who will suffer if we shut down unessential businesses and just mail people checks? We'll still be able to eat, we'll still have roofs over our heads, etc. The only ones who will really see their lives change significantly are the ultra-rich, who need us riding around in Ubers, renting Airbnbs, and buying plane tickets so they can fund their wealthy lifestyles. The ultra-rich are not going to suffer. They have their own personal capital they will use for their enjoyment. The people who will suffer are the American tax payer (regardless of income) who now has a larger debt burden. At some point, the American tax burden will overshadow the service we pay on debts. Then all faith will be lossed. It may not happen after this bill. It may not happen after 100 of these bills, but it will happen eventually, and it'll not harm the rich, I'll tell you that.
- omegaworks 7y ago
  >it'll not harm the rich, I'll tell you that. Inflation, once it is an actual problem, can be taxed away and we can structure that tax progressively. The rich will pay their fair share. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/4/16/18251646/modern-monetary-theory-new-moment-explained https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/4/16/18251646/modern...
  - tathougies 7y ago
    They'll just leave the United States, then? Why is it 'fair'? They made their money by giving people things they wanted in exchange for money the people were happy to give them. How is taking it back fair?
    - omegaworks 7y ago
      > They'll just leave the United States, then? American citizen expatriates pay tax. >How is taking it back fair? We live in a society. :)
      - tathougies 7y ago
        > American citizen expatriates pay tax. Not if they give up their citizenship for a small fee. Plenty of countries want rich citizens and would be willing to give them citizenship. > We live in a society. :) Oh, so because society is stronger than one individual, it's right for them to exercise their force? That sounds like might makes right. Your ethics are atrocious. Part of that society is that if two people agree to give each other money in exchange for things, the one who pays cash for an equivalent asset doesn't come asking for it back. Otherwise, you must be okay with employers asking for wages back.
        omegaworks 7y ago
        >Your ethics are atrocious. Now you're just engaging in personal attacks. "Taxation is theft" libertarian dead-ender thinking. You're going to have to do the work yourself of understanding that there is a cost to maintain the system that enables your exchange and varying opinions as to who should pay that cost. Asserting that the cost doesn't exist is fanciful ignorance. Good day.

tathougies 7y ago

> If we couldn't produce it under any circumstance that would be a massive national security flaw. :) Yeah, it's so much a national security flaw that American law gives American citizens the right to claim islands as parts of the United States in order to secure access to a very difficult to acquire resource. > Having as many people as we can bear sit at home is the best course of action at the very present moment to avoid spreading this virus. This is not up for debate, and I never disagreed with it. > The people sitting at home need to be able to buy what they need and pay the essential workers producing and transporting what they need to them. Certainly. I wasn't disagreeing with you that people will need compensation for lost income. However, what we were discussing was this: > Who will suffer if we shut down unessential businesses and just mail people checks? We'll still be able to eat, we'll still have roofs over our heads, etc. The only ones who will really see their lives change significantly are the ultra-rich, who need us riding around in Ubers, renting Airbnbs, and buying plane tickets so they can fund their wealthy lifestyles. The ultra-rich are not going to suffer. They have their own personal capital they will use for their enjoyment. The people who will suffer are the American tax payer (regardless of income) who now has a larger debt burden. At some point, the American tax burden will overshadow the service we pay on debts. Then all faith will be lossed. It may not happen after this bill. It may not happen after 100 of these bills, but it will happen eventually, and it'll not harm the rich, I'll tell you that.

omegaworks 7y ago
>it'll not harm the rich, I'll tell you that. Inflation, once it is an actual problem, can be taxed away and we can structure that tax progressively. The rich will pay their fair share. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/4/16/18251646/modern-monetary-theory-new-moment-explained https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/4/16/18251646/modern...
- tathougies 7y ago
  They'll just leave the United States, then? Why is it 'fair'? They made their money by giving people things they wanted in exchange for money the people were happy to give them. How is taking it back fair?
  - omegaworks 7y ago
    > They'll just leave the United States, then? American citizen expatriates pay tax. >How is taking it back fair? We live in a society. :)
    - tathougies 7y ago
      > American citizen expatriates pay tax. Not if they give up their citizenship for a small fee. Plenty of countries want rich citizens and would be willing to give them citizenship. > We live in a society. :) Oh, so because society is stronger than one individual, it's right for them to exercise their force? That sounds like might makes right. Your ethics are atrocious. Part of that society is that if two people agree to give each other money in exchange for things, the one who pays cash for an equivalent asset doesn't come asking for it back. Otherwise, you must be okay with employers asking for wages back.
      - omegaworks 7y ago
        >Your ethics are atrocious. Now you're just engaging in personal attacks. "Taxation is theft" libertarian dead-ender thinking. You're going to have to do the work yourself of understanding that there is a cost to maintain the system that enables your exchange and varying opinions as to who should pay that cost. Asserting that the cost doesn't exist is fanciful ignorance. Good day.