yea because they have 1.3 billion ppl, theres no point in comparing it like that
I drink your milkshake! a metaphor for capitalism
- Thread starter rickyb
- Start date
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
China's rise is slowing because it is dependent on slave wages, and that isn't sustainable.
Not to mention that China's population is rapidly aging because they cut their own throat demographically with their one child policy.
US population growing at 0.5% which is down 50% from the 1% you used to be at since 1950.
Don't worry Ricky we're letting in millions of illegals. China isn't.
doesnt matter population growth down 50% since 2008 which is where it used to be at
a canadian province offering 0% unemployment for a certain field
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
governments need to focus on unemployment and poorly paid jobs and climate catastrophe
They aren't counting the millions let in illegally in those growth numbers.
no?
UnionStrong
Sorry, but I don’t care anymore.
HUDSON: Here’s what happened. Marx traumatized classical economics by taking the concepts of Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill and others, and pushing them to their logical conclusion. Progressive capitalist advocates – Ricardian socialists such as John Stuart Mill – wanted to tax away the land or nationalize it. Marx wanted governments to take over heavy industry and build infrastructure to provide low-cost and ultimately free basic services. This was traumatizing the landlord class and the One Percent. And they fought back. They wanted to make everything part of “the market,” which functioned on credit supplied by them and paid rent to them.
None of the classical economists imagined how the feudal interests – these great vested interests that had all the land and money – actually would fight back and succeed. They thought that the future was going to belong to capital and labor. But by the late 19th century, certainly in America, people like John Bates Clark came out with a completely different theory, rejecting the classical economics of Adam Smith, the Physiocrats and John Stuart Mill.
HEDGES: Physiocrats are, you’ve tried to explain, the enlightened French economists.
HUDSON: The common denominator among all these classical economists was the distinction between earned income and unearned income. Unearned income was rent and interest. Earned incomes were wages and profits. But John Bates Clark came and said that there’s no such thing as unearned income. He said that the landlord actually earns his rent by taking the effort to provide a house and land to renters, while banks provide credit to earn their interest. Every kind of income is thus “earned,” and everybody earns their income. So everybody who accumulates wealth, by definition, according to his formulas, get rich by adding to what is now called Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
HEDGES: One of the points you make in your book which I liked was that in almost all cases, those who had the capacity to make money parasitically off interest and rent had either – if you go back to the origins – looted and seized the land by force, or inherited it.
michael-hudson.com
None of the classical economists imagined how the feudal interests – these great vested interests that had all the land and money – actually would fight back and succeed. They thought that the future was going to belong to capital and labor. But by the late 19th century, certainly in America, people like John Bates Clark came out with a completely different theory, rejecting the classical economics of Adam Smith, the Physiocrats and John Stuart Mill.
HEDGES: Physiocrats are, you’ve tried to explain, the enlightened French economists.
HUDSON: The common denominator among all these classical economists was the distinction between earned income and unearned income. Unearned income was rent and interest. Earned incomes were wages and profits. But John Bates Clark came and said that there’s no such thing as unearned income. He said that the landlord actually earns his rent by taking the effort to provide a house and land to renters, while banks provide credit to earn their interest. Every kind of income is thus “earned,” and everybody earns their income. So everybody who accumulates wealth, by definition, according to his formulas, get rich by adding to what is now called Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
HEDGES: One of the points you make in your book which I liked was that in almost all cases, those who had the capacity to make money parasitically off interest and rent had either – if you go back to the origins – looted and seized the land by force, or inherited it.
The inversion of Classical Economics | Michael Hudson
Michael Hudson with Chris Hedges on why rentier income must be analysed as a destructive component of GDP.
Teamsters to do nothing after inquiry documents Canadian Pacific’s responsibility for fatal Field, B.C., derailment
The Teamsters union has responded to a federal safety board inquiry that effectively found CP Rail’s negligence and greed led to the deaths of three workers in a 2019 derailment by declaring it won’t lift a finger to fight for improved worker safety.
www.wsws.org
Theyre talking about corruption of teamsters cp rail union, and capture of regulators by big money
I used to do a job like this
UnionStrong
Sorry, but I don’t care anymore.
Fluffer?
Teamsters to do nothing after inquiry documents Canadian Pacific’s responsibility for fatal Field, B.C., derailment
The Teamsters union has responded to a federal safety board inquiry that effectively found CP Rail’s negligence and greed led to the deaths of three workers in a 2019 derailment by declaring it won’t lift a finger to fight for improved worker safety.www.wsws.org
Theyre talking about corruption of teamsters cp rail union, and capture of regulators by big money
I used to do a job like this
oldngray
nowhere special
Hands on experience.
Similar threads
- Locked
