Under what conditions do you think the people who are working will continue to pay for the people who are not, whenever there is a contraction in the capacity for consumption?
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-15 00:25:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812644631642825074
Reply addressees: @slenchy @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812644102825037909
He’s right. When he published we all knew he was right. It’s unfortunate that the incentives were such that they almost guaranteed he would be right. And now reversing that crisis, which devastated the everything from the atlantic to the mississippi and more will take at least a century to reverse, and that will occur in concert with the reproduction, marriage, and population crisis, as well as the coming technological transition that crushes white collar jobs.
Reply addressees: @RussellJohnston @A1CandyBomber
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-14 23:35:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812631919349088257
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812630580510548153
I am not sure ‘believe in manufacturing’ is the right framing but yes, you are correct. The ‘rot of financialization’ has fully permeated every aspect of society from education to advertising to government to media.
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-14 23:20:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812628369109811376
Reply addressees: @A1CandyBomber
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812628059540869368
Correct. My my estimation, which I haven’t recalculated since 2020, is that there are 100M surplus people in the USA given the present level of technology, and worse, for the coming levels of technology – including consideration for repatriation of all non-polluting and strategic industries. This is not a difficult number to calculate if you are intellectually honest and understand the limit of employability (unemployability) in relation to the minimum skills necessary for the extant technological means of production.
Reply addressees: @whatifalthist
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-14 22:07:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812609995445293057
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812584356579533104
Class: Depends on the degree of precision:
Lower vs upper (division at middle vs upper middle)
Lower vs middle vs upper
Lower vs lower middle, vs middle, vs upper middle vs upper.
Out of sight lower vs lower lower vs upper lower, vs lower middle vs upper middle, vs lower upper,… https://t.co/2y8kn1WfMs
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-14 21:33:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812601445595885654
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1812597050577760477
That’s nonsense. What broke the USA was the petro dollar, the resulting debt, college tuition, and outsourcing, and the resulting inflation. That’s the truth. And there is no alternative. And I don’t know any leading economist that could survive debate on the subject. Every…
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-12 17:20:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811812855198396908
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811791141982830660
—Q: “Why should we choose markets for everything @curtdoolittle?”—
I’d have to understand the context of your question.
Because it’s not just markets I refer to. It’s that under the rule of law by the natural law of sovereignty and reciprocity, markets, and moral markets at that, free of imposition of costs by externality on the demonstrated interests of others, produce the maximization of cooperation, production, and velocity, producing the maximum innovation, adaptation, and evolution, thus continually exceeding previous rates of conversion of energy into work or mass, and thus producing greater choice of individual and collective fulfillment, in the shortest time, with the greatest certainty at the lowest risk.
In other words, it’s the optimum evolutionary strategy bot IN time and OVER time. 😉
Reply addressees: @junkodama10 @PirateWires
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-11 17:16:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811449578069315584
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811412682936861035
We knew it was happening. But I had no idea it was 90% of ad dollars. That’s a cartel. That’s going to have legs.
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-10 17:15:28 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811086852218093987
Reply addressees: @whatifalthist @benshapiro @Jim_Jordan @realDailyWire @realDonaldTrump @joerogan @elonmusk @FoxNews @BreitbartNews
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1811086535351042225
Mises ignored the commons, and not only physical commons, but especially informal and formal commons. Hayek demonstrated commons were an extraordinary asset, and that were the most important asset. And that wester civ outcompeted otehrs because of it’s high trust ability to build commons that reduced costs for all. So while Mises and rothbard are easy to understand they are also a false promise just as much as marxists propose a false promise.
Reply addressees: @femboy_swift
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-09 16:35:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1810714436979888129
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1810713189060858268
RT @LukeWeinhagen: One example of separating the insurers (cost payers) from the deciders (cost creators).
Source date (UTC): 2024-07-07 21:55:45 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1810070222436520337