grinnbearit

10 ms·

61.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
I'd argue that its their reaction to new ideas (as one point), I've met plenty of people who've held opposing views but were open to discussing them. Eventually either they changed or I changed. Nothing to dislike about them.
62.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Fair enough. Although disliking a person for their ideas seems rather petty, don't you agree?
63.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Coordination isn't free, shuffling money around is a distributed and parallel way to reach consensus. More efficient options may exist but to the best of my knowledge none currently do
64.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
I understand where your coming from but "injustices were once done" is a pretty terrible reason for aid. If you go back far enough every group has committed some atrocity on another, Europe on most of the world for instance (also
65.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Do governments have persistent identity? Does it break after a revolution? What about a constitutional Monarchy like England's? If its a democratic government does having ancestors who voted for an oppressive government make them respo
66.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
And the not so wealthy since its a lot harder to buy property/commodities on a monthly salary, forget moving them around with you.
67.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
HFT is not the same as front running, this post does a good job in explaining why. http://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2014/mark_cubans_hft_idioc... There are other posts by the same author which cover the same topi
68.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
I understand your morals could be different from mine but heres how I see it. A Chinese or Indian citizen is an individual, like any other, just like you even. Through no fault of their own they've been born in a country that doesn&#x2
69.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Considering its the only real option for anyone in China/India to work in the US, what would you replace it with? Or do you prefer they stay right where they are?
70.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
The value the customer gets from the labour should be higher than the cost the employer pays to labour, otherwise no labour will be bought or sold. If the price of a persons labour is insufficient for their living needs the only option is t
71.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Its not only about what I can produce but what you can provide. Why would I give you money to trade for goods I own, seems like a losing proposition.
72.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Buyers are irrelevant if you can already produce (or demand) everything you need. Money is credit for value in the future, not value itself.
73.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
> such markets weight present utility experienced by market participants by past wealth accumulation, and thus are progressively distortive in terms of distribution of utility Are you against the accumulation of capital or do you feel it
74.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
> The incentive to take whatever job you can is that even if a job pays very little, that's on top of the basic income. The goal isn't to provide largess (is it?) its to provide the basics with no strings attached free of charg
75.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
"because the overhead costs are higher and people's needs differ." I don't understand how the overhead costs are higher with more predictable results and mass production (or are we defining costs differently?). Isn'
76.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
This isn't a centrally planned economy, its a centrally planned expense. Once you know how many people you need to provide for, how much it costs is simple multiplication. Mass manufacturing and predictable consumption will help reduce
77.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
The idea is to have a floor on consequences, people make bad choices or are just plain unlucky. Think of basic welfare as a utility, to draw upon as and when you need it, hopefully temporarily as you get back on your feet. Eliminating choic
78.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Why a basic income? I propose basic welfare, food + clothing + shelter, even entertainment. Mass produced in order to minimise costs. Then allocate a fixed amount of tax revenue to fund it, say 10%. Then as productivity goes up and goods be
79.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
IQ (as one imperfect measure of intelligence) is significantly hereditary. <quote> Various studies have found the heritability of IQ to be between 0.7 and 0.8 in adults and 0.45 in childhood in the United States.[4][7][15] It may seem
80.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Popular opinion or not, selfishness and generosity are calibrated by your moral values. You're proposing an economic transaction where X pays, Y benefits and your moral desires are fulfilled. I doubt X would have a problem with you don
81.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Well it is their income being taxed, why do you feel they should feel obligated to give a portion of it up? (keyword: obligated) they obviously do not.
82.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
A minimum wage is a minimum price on labour, its quite similar to a minimum price on chips and the market will respond in the same way
83.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Why push that burden on the job creators? If the labour value someone provides is lower than a living wage, why not let them survive on welfare (food + clothing + shelter) If this isn't happening, I'd think its more important to p
84.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
Raising the minimum price of chips will increase the amount of money given to chip companies which will give them more money to spend creating more jobs. How does artificially increasing the price of something make the market more likely to
85.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
As yummyfajitas says, marginal utility not overall value. The first superman in Metropolis can charge a huge amount for his services, the second, perhaps half that. Every subsequent superman will add less utility to Metropolis and be paid l
86.
by grinnbearit 12y ago
The blockchain makes Bitcoin less fungible than gold, think of blacklisted addresses for example. Of course using something like open transactions improves things substantially.
87.
by grinnbearit 13y ago
FTFY "... their trolling better represents economic policy than Bitcoin" A money is a refrigerator for productivity, not an abstraction over goods and services.
88.
by grinnbearit 13y ago
Don't forget the same level of intelligence and good looks
89.
by grinnbearit 13y ago
Or maybe mutual assured destruction prevents the potential murder of millions giving an atomic bomb positive moral value
90.
by grinnbearit 13y ago
The best model I've found that explains Bitcoin is Moldbug's Monetary theory. If you had to read just one article I'd recommend http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.in/2011/04/on-monet... But if

More ›