Re: Obviously: GM biased report of ten best cars or the decade

 
That's not a service.  The lady showing people brochures in your
storefront or the guy doing your taxes is a service.  You are creating
the "thing" whose created value they take a cut from.  You can sell
your carpentry to an American, a Mexican, or an Eskimo.  The tax guy
can't say the same.


My denial would come because you are implying thoughts I don't have
nor ever expressed.

The US was once *wealthy* when we were independent and produced things
to meet our own needs.  We are now in debt up to our eyeballs and more
dependent than a welfare queen on our goods being moved from one place
(Asia) to another here.  That is just exactly the opposite of what you
are taking away from this.

 In article <21b873ba-352d-4d67-a0fa-
f1c36159638d@w17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, saddlebag@aol.com says...

So how is Picasso making lines on paper "creating wealth" but his
accountant making lines on paper not "creating wealth"?  Becuase the one
gets paid for the piece of paper while the other gets paid for the time?
 

to another...

So why is the US GDP still larger than any other country's by a huge
margin?

 
If Picasso had not made the art there would be no reason he would need
an accountant.  The accountant is there to service the producer.

Say our country consisted of three people, Picasso and an accountant
and an IRS agent and they live happily together. If Picasso's prices
are too high for the accountant and IRS agent, then Picasso can sell
his work to rich Italians. When Picasso dies, the Italians can sell
the work to richer Germans and take a cut off Picasso's labor.  The
Germans at some point can sell it off to uber wealthy at Chinese at
some point and make more money off of Picasso's labor.

Now that that sad day has arrived and Picasso has left our earthly
home, the accountant and IRS agent stand looking stupidly at one
another. The accountant only knows US accounting rules and besides,
the Italians, Germans, and Chinese have their own accountants to
service their producers.  The IRS agent can only force Americans to
give him their money and since the only one left is the accountant and
he is only capable of servicing himself and is going broke buying
things from Germany and China, the IRS guy is now shit outta luck too.

Does that help any?


Look up the GDP calculation.  It is not production.  It includes gov't
spending.  IOW, our country can increase it's GDP by simply having the
gov't spend more.  It is a bogus indicator and successfully fools the
masses.  Don't feel too ashamed about that.

The only important part of the GDP calculation is: imports - exports.
That's like the difference between your income and your expenditures.
If it is negative, you are going broke.  For the US, that has been the
case for many a decade now...

 "saddlebag"  wrote in message


Saddle, what I do *is* a service... The majority of my contracts with
builders requires them to have materials on site when I arrive to perform my
"service".. I bring a few tools and sell my labor to the fellow... I don't
create anything anymore than the painters, or the guys putting in shelving
in closets... I add "value" to the product, but I don't produce anything,
and by your definition, I don't create wealth...



Sir, you did express such.... You said that a service simply moves wealth
around, but does not create wealth... If I build you that shiny new canoe
you want, you pay me for my services and we have successfully moved wealth
from you to me... it's really not that tough.... even if I sell a canoe to
every warm bodied person in this country, I've not created any wealth except
for my own wallet, and it came from everyone else's....



you are not correct here... the US was once "wealthy", not when we produced
things to meet our own needs, that is only part of it, but when we produced
things that *other* people needed... we created wealth by transferring
theirs to us... just as others have done, and we transferred ours to them...

 
Say you live in a bubble with one other person and you both have $1.
You took your dollar and purchased lumber with it and with your skills
you made a cabinet worth $5 dollars on the open market of neighboring
bubbles.  But your neighbor really loves the cabinet and goes to the
bank and takes out a loan for $5 to buy it from you.  You started off
in your bubble with only $2, but now there are $7 in your bubble.  The
banker bubble isn't out anything, because if your neighbor can't do
something to repay the loan, the bank can repossess the cabinet and
sell it to any number of neighboring bubbles.

The word credit comes from the Latin "to believe" in Spanish it's
"creo."  Your neighbor and his banker have mutual "belief" that your
neighbor can figure out a way to pay for it and that if he can't, the
collateral product of your craftsmanship will see to it that the new
$5 created out of thin air and now a part of your bubble will not come
out of the banker's hide.

If you think I'm wrong about this, try to make up an equivalent
scenario where increase your bubble's wealth by $5 as a Walmart
greeter.  And remember, you live in a self-server bubble model.  You
and the neighbor each have a dollar and only do services for one
another.  The other bubbles have their own service providers inside
their bubbles and don't require your services.


You need to review the part of the thread about how fiat currency is
created or better yet Google it up and open your mind to how the game
is played.

Just a final note on this.  You may here people bellyache about the
"gov't printing money" these days.  Well, there is some of that, but
that's not how most of the money in our electronic economy is
introduced.  In any event, the bellyachers aren't altogether wrong.
The gov't does not want our money supply to collapse which would be
the natural thing to happen when all the service providers balk on
paying back loans for their expensive products i.e. houses and cars.
(This is one case where the bankers could have gotten stung as there
were few in neighboring bubbles to buy up the huge numbers of
foreclosed goods. Thankfully, the bankers had purchased a sufficient
number of politicians to pay for all these products out of your
current and future tax dollars. Wouldn't want the bankers to go
without their $50 million bonuses right before Christmas now would you
Scrooge?)

Anyway, the reason the gov't don't want money supply to collapse is
because they still owe debt themselves.  Less money floating around
the economy means less revenue for them. And greater debt to revenue
for them means less favors they can do for their high dollar base.
Less favors they can their high dollar base means less power and
opportunities for future high dollar jobs hob-knobbing with
zillionares on a golf course after their heroic stint in "gov't
service."

This is not why right wing politicians run for office ya know...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/matt-taibbi-the-crying-shame-of-j=
ohn-boehner-20110105