4 ms·

Sounds very much like a "everyone for themselves" attitude to me. Which seems to be one of the bad things about the US.

randallsquared 17y ago
Not at all. If those jobs were a net loss (and I have no idea about that), then finding something for those people to do which benefits everyone more is a win, both for "us" and "them".
- bumblebird 17y ago
  Sure but thats an unattainable dream. Some people are always a drain on society. Either you leave them to die, or you give them a hand.
  - nostrademons 17y ago
    I think there are a large number of people who are not necessarily a drain on society, but have taken positions that aren't tangibly productive because easy credit has meant that that's where the money is. I know a lot of financial professionals, real estate agents, insurance salesmen, and corporate lawyers who are very bright and hardworking, but just shuffle money around all day instead of building things people will use, because that's the path of least resistance to a well-paying job. The financial industry in particular is filled with incredibly brilliant people who spend their days trying to figure out how to outsmart each other, the government, and the public at large instead of inventing things that make peoples' lives better. Wall Street could easily support another dozen Googles or so, but rather than organize the world's information, they prefer to use it to siphon off the world's money.
bilbo0s 17y ago
I think what @lvecsey meant was that many Americans have jobs that exist only because of the liquidity in the financial markets. That is, without access to credit, or resources from investors, many companies in the US would not be able to pay their employees. So what he is really asking, I assume, is whether or not the debt or investment resources were being well spent on those positions? My honest answer would be I don't know. That said, the double whammy that we take on a lot of jobs is pretty interesting. Clearly a non trivial number of Americans have jobs that are net losses for them individually, since they use credit card debt to get by, and net losses for the larger economy since access to credit provided by the financial markets is the only thing that makes their paychecks clear. It makes you wonder, if access to credit were to dry up tomorrow, what would that look like? Who would still have a job? I don't know, it's just interesting brainstorm material.
- forensic 17y ago
  Since the entire money system is based on debt, the difference between credit and currency is difficult to discern.

Not at all. If those jobs were a net loss (and I have no idea about that), then finding something for those people to do which benefits everyone more is a win, both for "us" and "them".

bumblebird 17y ago
Sure but thats an unattainable dream. Some people are always a drain on society. Either you leave them to die, or you give them a hand.
- nostrademons 17y ago
  I think there are a large number of people who are not necessarily a drain on society, but have taken positions that aren't tangibly productive because easy credit has meant that that's where the money is. I know a lot of financial professionals, real estate agents, insurance salesmen, and corporate lawyers who are very bright and hardworking, but just shuffle money around all day instead of building things people will use, because that's the path of least resistance to a well-paying job. The financial industry in particular is filled with incredibly brilliant people who spend their days trying to figure out how to outsmart each other, the government, and the public at large instead of inventing things that make peoples' lives better. Wall Street could easily support another dozen Googles or so, but rather than organize the world's information, they prefer to use it to siphon off the world's money.

bilbo0s 17y ago

I think what @lvecsey meant was that many Americans have jobs that exist only because of the liquidity in the financial markets. That is, without access to credit, or resources from investors, many companies in the US would not be able to pay their employees. So what he is really asking, I assume, is whether or not the debt or investment resources were being well spent on those positions? My honest answer would be I don't know. That said, the double whammy that we take on a lot of jobs is pretty interesting. Clearly a non trivial number of Americans have jobs that are net losses for them individually, since they use credit card debt to get by, and net losses for the larger economy since access to credit provided by the financial markets is the only thing that makes their paychecks clear. It makes you wonder, if access to credit were to dry up tomorrow, what would that look like? Who would still have a job? I don't know, it's just interesting brainstorm material.

forensic 17y ago
Since the entire money system is based on debt, the difference between credit and currency is difficult to discern.