/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>15083283
Giving poor people free money doesn't help them. They just consume it with vices and pointless material possessions. Individually, most poor people can not be helped. As a group, only hardship will improve things, but slowly and over the very long term.

>>15083403
Rich people spend more on vices. People are poor based off their choices, beliefs and environment. If you're born rich, much more likely to be rich, even if you're an idiot child fucker like trump

>>15083283
It would naturally creep into the supply and cause inflation. Inflation and rates are too low in USA and everyhwere else too, they need to rage the min wage fast to increase inflation in the areas needed most here. Local

>>15083283
The more money people have generally the more they will consume and with more consumption there is more demand and prices will naturally go up. It doesn't have to be "secret" for the economy to feel it. And if you're talking like 50k for some poor households over a long period of time, sure maybe it won't make a noticeable difference. But you can't just print money and give it to poor people consequence free considering the fact that money supply is directly related to inflation and you'd just be adding to it just cuz poor people

>>15083403
>>15083454
My question wasn't about helping poor people, I could have said why they don't give those money to the richest. What I wondered was why money couldn't just be printed secretly and used by a few people. The common answer is inflation but I don't understand how how prices would go up.

>>15083283
youre asking the right question, anon. and the right questions dont have answers

>>15083283

Free rider problem. Why the fuck should I wage cuck when some nig ger gets paid just to exist fuck off

>>15083485
More money in circulation = money goes down in value in a grand scheme which causes items we buy to go up.

>>15083283
+ of something = - price/value

>>15083283
Beacuse money by itself wouldn't make their lives better,lack of education does.
You give them some money they would buy some dumb shit, you give them a lot of money and they would buy a lot of dumb shit, but if you teach them how to take care of their money they could work towards to make a better life for themselves

>>15083283
You need to go to school anon. Or stop posting, you're embarrassing yourself.

>>15083470
>>15083481
only posts that actually addressed OP's major economic fallacy

>>15083283
they already do that (minus giving it to the poo lol), its called tether

>>15083540
who or what recognizes the amount of money in circulation? like, money moving faster through different people and businesses would probably give the illusion of more money in circulation, so would that cause inflation? if a huge amount of perfect counterfeits went into circulation would that cause inflation?

>>15083531
>>15083590
he's not asking whether we should you stupid faggots, its a hypothetical about the nature of money supply and inflation

>>15083454
>FUUCK DRUMPF HES SO DUMB AND ORANGE

>>15083283
>Explain how you can't just secretly print some money and give it to the poorest people to help them out.
They spend it immediately. The money goes directly to someone else. Look up their savings rate, it's always essentially zero.

>In4: "inflation bro prices would go up" How?
If you don't go overboard, and only give small amounts to each person at a time, you may not get any significant consumer price inflation at all.
The reason is that for consumer prices to rise, either supply of the good must be strained/restricted (which it will not be), or consumers must be able (and/or willing) to pay more for it, which they also will not be, assuming you follow the constraint above and drip-feed the money.

You would cause asset-price inflation though (if you do it enough), because you would expand the amount of money available to the corporations and individuals who sell the products that your poor beneficiaries would buy, giving them more purchasing power versus the same general quantity of scarce assets.

>>15083283
They already do this, leftie NGOs have infinite money.

>>15083485
>why money couldn't just be printed secretly and used by a few people
It can be. And it kinda is: to most people, the fact that banks print money is a secret.

In the ancient world, when the ruling elites did this too much, it caused massive inflation in everything, because of what the elites did with the money (bought stuff that commoners and peasants also bought and sold, eg grain, horses, slaves, etc). Because the commoners didn't have access to the spigot of new money, they suffered horribly from this, and economic ruin almost invariably ensued, unless a smart ruler took power and reformed the currency quickly.

After industrialization, the link between the elites' new money and the general economy loosened dramatically, because the elites could now spend only a tiny and relatively constant fraction of their income on normal things like food and fuel that commoners buy as well.
The rest, they used for industrial investment (which tended to make everyone better off, and counteracted inflation with its deflationary power), or for speculation. This uncoupled consumer price inflation from asset price inflation.
The latter caused periodic disasters because of massive speculative financial bubbles in stocks, bonds, lands, commodities, etc: banks printed enormous amounts of money to finance these, and when they popped, the economy ground to a halt as deflation corrected the inflation.
Here are a few samples of this phenomenon from the US:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1819
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1837
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1857
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1873

The biggest bankers eventually got together and built central banks (eg the Fed) to rein in the smaller ones, but the problem still persists today, and is in fact getting worse as interest rates drop across the developed world.

>>15083454
"ORANGE MAN BAD"

poorfag detected

>>15083283
>Printing counterfeit
>implying OP has a good machine
>situation where a homeless man gets cuaght with a counterfeit bill and gets yelled at to leave/go to jail.

OP. You're fucking stupid.

>>15084842
>Culter member detected.

>>15083403
Yup, some people are poor due to bad luck or shitty circumstances. But the majority are simply lazy, dumb, and/or made a series of bad choices and have little desire to improve their situation. These people will end up right back where they are again and again

>>15083283
I hear Pakistan is flooded with either real or fake NOK.

>>15083283
>Explain how you can't just secretly print some money and give it to the poorest people to help them out.

You can. The Federal Reserve prints out money all the time and do it whenever they damn well feel like it. They could give money away to poor people which would actually stimulate the economy since they actually spend it on things they need unlike bailing out the banks who keep the money to themselves and outside the economy.

But the reason why they would never bail out poor people is because... why should they? What's in it for the government?

>>15083403
WHAT? NOOO, YOU FUCKING HATE POOR PEOPLE IS WHAT! FUCK YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU ASSHOOOOLE

>>15083283
Povos duplicate if you give them money.

>>15085106
I just spent 2 months going over crypto taxes so that I could have the good fortune of paying my state all of my retirement money.
Fuck you

>>15084268
why are trumptards so fucking spergy

>>15083283
>In4: "inflation bro prices would go up" How? Nobody would know it
The beauty of the market, thats how. Here is a kiddie version:
A shop carries five watermellons. Usually only four to five families in the poor area can afford a watermellon a day so its fine.

Now you've airdropped money on everybody in the area. All twenty families living in there rush to the shop to buy watermellons, and they are sold out. A lad stacking shelves in the shop sees how demand for watermellon has went up, so he drives to a farm and wants to purchase more. The farmer says that he can supply only ten watermellons maximum per day, so the lad buys the five spares and opens up his own stall. However, there is still too much demand and too little supply so both the shop keeper and the lad with the stall gradually raise prices until their ten watermellons are bought at the maximum price. So does the farmer who notices the pressure in demand. So at the end of the day the price stabilizes at the amount of money the 10th family can pay for the 10th watermellon.

>>15085534
Their orange oligarch was their hope. Too bad the cheeto bitch destroyed the emerging crypto industry and spread his ass cheeks wide open for the centrally planned banks.
Obama did it too. Motherfuckers should start a book club

>>15084144
People being able to buy more because of more currency means that demand for things is going to go up, the profits visibly are going up
Inflation doesnt have a negative effect because everyone knows the dollar is being inflated, most people never even think about it , there isnt a conscious "oh there's more of these bills so now they mean less to me"

Prices are based on output/demand
More money means more people able to spend means more demand
If I normally sell five candy bars so I produce about five a day, then all of a sudden some points mysteriously have money and I suddenly need to produce SIX CANDY BARS to meet demand at the current price, I can either back up prices on my five candy bars, or pay workers/spend more of my own money/time making a sixth one. Me spending money means I need to make it back, so my choice is either just jack up the price artificially to recalibrate with new level of demand, or have to jack up the price for real to afford the extra labor and resources needed to produce the greater quantity of product.

Either way, prices are going up.

>>15085579
Alternatively I can still sell just 5 candy bars for the same price I already did, and just have to deal with buttraged customers who missed out every day, and various groups of sharks prowling about trying to buy my business because they see I'm a retard who's wasting potential

>>15085579
The economy is not a zero sum game. There are zero sum games within the economy, mostly as it pertains to available women.
Selling a candy bar does not diminish supply when everything is automated.
The monetary controls exist for pedos to rape our women.

>>15085665
>electricity costs, equipment costs, shipping costs, retailer wages, raw materials
Do you think robots just breathe in oxygen and shit it out at candy bars?

>>15085701
At scale these issues need to be solved once for unlimited candy bars.
Its a 'none or practically infinite' problem. None until the process exists then practically infinite once all the kinks are worked out.
It's why obesity is a #1 problem in a lot of cities while starvation is non-existant. Noone is going hungry so another can eat.

>>15085747
No, but businesses still gotta make contracts to buy and sell the candy, yeah?
Doesn't this just bring the same issue up another level from consumer to retailer?

Also, I used candy bar as example, I could've said something that wasn't food. Point is the extra money in the supply encourages people to either sell more, which necessitates a price raise, or raise prices enough to justify the current rate of production

>>15085825
The rate of production approaches infinity. Scarcity of most assets is a lie propogated by the market participants to disenfranchise those outside their peer group.

>>15083283
Are the poor people going to spend their money? If so, the business that make the products the poor people buy will raise prices to keep up with demand. I.e inflation

>>15085910
I don't know much about that. Resources are finite. Supposedly we're getting to a point where we'll have to eat bugs or something cause there'll be too many niggers for us all to eat hamburgers.
I'm trying to answer OP with normal economics as I understand it, not conspiracy monger twiddly moustache oligarch stuff.

>>15085910
Can anyone verify that commies are actually this dumb or is this anon trolling?

>>15086110
This was the entire point of the industrial revolution, that is still happening.
Now we are about to have robots. Imagine what that means for construction, space constraints, and any of the other zero sum games that do still exist.
But you wont because you cant gg

>>15086155
We do not live in post-scarcity, just big production surplus.

>>15086219
And when does that switch?
When does having too much of something for a population turn into post-scarcity?
When the resource loses scarcity?
Or some undefined event that is far off in the future so you don't have to concern yourself with how fucked you and your peers are getting from the existing distribution?

>>15085551
You're right that this is a possibility. But it only happens when you flood the economy with donations. Mansa Musa II was said to have crashed the economy after converting to Islam and deciding to shower everyone around him with gold. His generosity singlehandedly crashed the economy. But that's the kicker, he made everyone rich to the point where they could afford anything and everything.

If someone were to give universal welfare, $1000 a month to every citizen will not do anything adverse. People have school debt, medical debt, utility bills, rent, taxes, on top of the gazillion distractions that suck up people's time and money (Amazon, videogames, phone apps, etc). The money will go right back into the economy and there's so much competition that there won't be enough demand to force the supply to go up in price.

>>15086251
When it's permanent and genuinely infinite (never)

>>15086333
>(never)
Good boy pay your taxes and close your eyes.
Look its mexicans they coming to stela your candy bar

>>15085910
>>15086110
Anyone? I've heard starry eyed quixote ideas about how the venus project and robots would end scarcity in the future, but i've never actually heard reds claim that scarcity has always been a malicious lie by the top hat and monacle class to keep the po' man down. Is this the new parody level of rhetoric that commies espouse now, without any hint of self awareness? Genuinely interested to know.

>>15086361
You have some way to create matter from nothing?

>>15086403
I'm a futurist not a commie. I believe in personal empowerment and sovereignty for all people regardless of border agreement or approval.
Open source is the model for the future.

>>15086403
I mean I guess you could ration things? Aside from that, people consume so much that we're literally driving some food-species into extinction, but this fucktard thinks we have legit post-scarcity.

>>15086454
>personal empowerment and sovereignty
This just sounds like boomer shit that means nothing

>>15086509
> i dont understand it
> must not mean anything

>>15086535
Sovereignty over what, boomer? Because it just sounds like either communism or anarchism with extra newspeak.

>>15086572
Post scarcity empowerment does not detract from some to enable others. It's not zero sum.
But you don't seem to believe we are entering post-scarcity. Maybe when self driving comes out you will accept it. Or automated cooks, dish washing robots, self delivery drones. Maybe the last mile will convince you that past ideologies are not sufficient for new realities.

>>15085106

the united statues is nothing more than a rigged casino designed for the individual to lose.

>>15083283
>>15083485

>>15085171
>why should they? What's in it for the government?
Power; votes. Giving simple people money is a good way to buy their loyalty.
Entire political parties are dedicated to this strategy.
Some of them even support exactly what you described, called "people's QE" (eg British Labour party).

>>15085551
>>15085579
This can easily fail to hold true nowadays because large-scale manufacturing works in reverse.
If I go to a widget maker and ask him for 100 widgets, he can sell me each widget for, let's say, $10 each.
If they sell out and I go to him to buy 1000 widgets, he might quote me $8 per widget this time.
If all of those sell out and I ask him for 10000 widgets, i might get them for $5 each.
The inflation has to be economy-wide in order to force the widget-maker's costs up.