Human nature makes this an impossible goal.
I am a case in point: I am retired and have plenty of money. I could have even more if I got another job. I am too lazy and enjoy my extra “free” time, which is all the time.
BTW, there are a multitude of excuses why I am not able to work. It’s not like this would be a new idea.
The socialist cure is redistribution of wealth.
He doesn’t seem to think business owners really work either, so are they considered employed?
What about land lords? Employed or nah?
Will these affect 100% employment?
Its exchanges like these that make it all worth while.
Catatoli is so baffled today he doesnt know which way is up.
And what kind of jobs were they? Pay, etc.?
I thought being disabled was a given. Does anyone say that full employment means the disabled ought to work to fulfill full employment?
So full employment is not one of the mitigating factors of currency creation?
And it is not a theory. It is merely a description of monetary operations.
Depends on who’s holding the guns.
In our real working economy, we the people are holding them.
In all of your failed examples, the handicapped and mentally unfirm are the first to go.
If that doesn’t motivate the next most disenfranchised group then they’re next.
Yes. To their capability.
If any would not work, neither should he eat.
I dont know. You’d have to look at the bureau of labor and statistics for that info.
I only had one, which was pretty good. Until I had a really bad heart attack. Then the pandemic that attacks the cardiopulmonary system hit, so I was kinda fucked. All in pretty quick succession.
Making taxpayer money available for people to pay for college, homes or healthcare without price controls or incentives to those providing the goods/services is just a way to get tax money into the hands of those providing good and services and is completely negated by the rise in prices of those goods and services.
Free market capitalism is when the successful businesses are those that can offer higher product quality at lower price. Predatory oligopolistic business strategies like collusion between healthcare providers, drug companies and hospitals to squeeze out competition, and undercutting small competitors prices in the short term to make their businesses unviable are not free market forces, and it is an appropriate role of a protectionist central government to eliminate such predatory antagonistic business strategies either by statute, tax incentive/disincentive or other mechanism of pressure such as exempting smaller businesses from corporate taxes or allowing them to pay a lower minimum wage, while larger corporations capable of controlling a sector through various monopolistic means should be disincentivized. On the contrary, the central government currently works to decrease competition from small businesses to give the largest corporations more control of the sector and more ability to harm small business ventures in exchange for those big businesses working to get federal representatives elected on both sides of the aisle.
Actually there is a strong possibility that we will be paying 80% of the population an income just to get their asses to the store to buy their groceries within the next 20 years or so.
Wealth is not a good measure of disparity between classes. You can live for 80 years, get an education, eat, have a home, clothes, and have recreation and vacation and never have positive net wealth. Wealth is defined as what you have after all of your needs and some of your “wants” have been met.
Who says that the disabled must work? Some capitalistic asshole?
Right…
What the hell are you even talking about?
I think he was quoting Saint Paul.
It is difficult for many to contribute more efficiently or effectively than a robot. And that will lead us to much lower percentage of working people. Technology is a two edged sword.
At least people on here know what law school not to attend.
Wow, this is so close to the teachings of Christ.
You might know that self organization among disabled people in the Soviet Union was a crime technically punishable by death (dissidence).
Sorry, it was Lenin. And Saint Paul. Paul was referring to people who were too lazy to work though, not people who were disabled.
A natural outcome of capitalism.
Too bad of the thing called corporate capture.