3 ms·

> Good luck eating your dollars I think I understand the point you are trying to make, but you are doing a terrible job at it and it assumes that people in thi

> Good luck eating your dollars I think I understand the point you are trying to make, but you are doing a terrible job at it and it assumes that people in this hypothetical future do not participate in a similar market to the one that exists today. People work for dollars because they use those dollars for the other things they need. Pension dollars are fungible with all other dollars, so the producer doesn’t know if they stop producing on Tuesday if the pensioners will go hungry or their family will.

neilwilson 5y ago
Who produces those other things in aggregate and why should they do that for somebody who doesn’t produce when the only thing they can buy with it are things they have to make anyway. The capitalism and the dollars are laundering the production process and clouding the issue. A better way of looking at it is that I produce a surplus I’m not permitted to consume to feed my retired parents and grandparents and those people who couldn’t have children. Who is going to do that for me in the future if I don’t replace my effort? Why should they put up with that? Why won’t they change the system so they don’t have to?
- thephyber 5y ago
  Nothing is clouding the issue. You are fabricating a contrived scenario which doesn’t exist today. The “surplus” is what producers use to pay back the loans they took out to be able to produce as much as they currently do. If they produce no “surplus”, they are trying to build a simple subsistence production which is not feasible in a modern society. No bank will loan them money and they can’t afford to insure against bad weather/crop/prices. They can’t produce large enough yields to benefit from Economies of Scale, so they work long hours using low tech and have small yields which have to compete against the high yields of their industrial-scale neighbors, so they make little return on their hard toil. You are trying to remove free market mechanics without any discernible reason. For the same reason that most farms/ranches today are big industrial operations (at least in the USA where regulations permit it), small subsistence producers can’t make a living and die off unless they can find a brand niche. The same would happen in this hypothetical future where whatever event you think happened would drive subsistence farmers into bankruptcy and lead to consolidation.

neilwilson 5y ago

Who produces those other things in aggregate and why should they do that for somebody who doesn’t produce when the only thing they can buy with it are things they have to make anyway. The capitalism and the dollars are laundering the production process and clouding the issue. A better way of looking at it is that I produce a surplus I’m not permitted to consume to feed my retired parents and grandparents and those people who couldn’t have children. Who is going to do that for me in the future if I don’t replace my effort? Why should they put up with that? Why won’t they change the system so they don’t have to?

thephyber 5y ago
Nothing is clouding the issue. You are fabricating a contrived scenario which doesn’t exist today. The “surplus” is what producers use to pay back the loans they took out to be able to produce as much as they currently do. If they produce no “surplus”, they are trying to build a simple subsistence production which is not feasible in a modern society. No bank will loan them money and they can’t afford to insure against bad weather/crop/prices. They can’t produce large enough yields to benefit from Economies of Scale, so they work long hours using low tech and have small yields which have to compete against the high yields of their industrial-scale neighbors, so they make little return on their hard toil. You are trying to remove free market mechanics without any discernible reason. For the same reason that most farms/ranches today are big industrial operations (at least in the USA where regulations permit it), small subsistence producers can’t make a living and die off unless they can find a brand niche. The same would happen in this hypothetical future where whatever event you think happened would drive subsistence farmers into bankruptcy and lead to consolidation.