Lost in Translation

Keep in mind that yin does not mean dark per-se, rather is means darker; and yang does not mean light, but rather lighter. I keep coming back to this color chart. I guess a picture does speak a thousand words!

One begat two. Two begat three. Three begat the ten thousand things. One represents heaven. Two represents earth. Three represents heaven, the union of heaven and earth. Separate yet joined. Multiple yet one. Duality and non duality are one. In the words of The Oracle, that'll bake your noodle.

The best music ever comes from the 1970's rock 'n roll scene. Rock 'n Roll Fantasy by Bad Company. Pandora finally understands me.

I don't think it's about trickle down economics or any other economic theory. Essentially it's about the role of government. What is the role of government? One answer could be "anything it wants to do". That's fine, but that's a rather extreme view of government. Another answer could be "Securing the public welfare". OK, that's a better answer. The next question is to define public welfare. Some may see basic income as part of welfare, others may not. Why? Well, income is something that a person can receive without the aid of government. What about public defense? Individuals could defend themselves. That would be a "wild west" kind of society but it could happen. Generally speaking though people can't defend themselves so that role falls upon the government. This is the kind of analysis that a people should perform. As a society we need to know what functions are best suited for which levels of society. Defense against foreign aggression? That's a national level issue. Protection against criminals who cross state lines? Also national. Protection against local criminals? That's a state issue. International commerce? Again, national. The local bakery? That's a county or even a city issue. Earning a living? I dare say that's an individual or family affair. Not everything needs to be a national issue. Basic income is one of those issues that is best handled locally. If a local government wants to implement this then fine, but expect a massive influx of low earners and a corresponding outflux of high earners. Soon the local government will become broke and ask for state of national support. When that happens what do we do? I would hope we do nothing. If people vote for unsustainable policies then they need to feel the consequences of their choices. If I am wrong and it works out roses, then let them receive the rewards. I'm not against people. I want them to succeed. I just don't want the government holding a gun to my head to force me to co-sign for their loan.

Thank you. I may have misinterpreted your questions as back hand assertions. My apologies if I offended.

Another straw man! I am not saying screw the environment, and even if I was then so what? If we're dumb enough to destroy our own environment and we suffer or die then we get what we deserve. What I am saying is let humanity use its resources to solve our problems. Don't handcuff us. But we've gone off topic. If you want to discuss biosphere issues then make a new topic.

California is an excellent example. It's what every other state will become if you are not careful.

Here is one example from my home state of California. In a nutshell, California is a in a drought and the farmers in the central valley are struggling to survive. While this is ongoing millions of gallons of water are being washed out to the Pacific ocean to maintain the habitat of the Delta Smelt fish. The California regulators clearly value the lives of this fish over the well being of their constituents. To make matters worse, the farmers are not allowed to pump sufficient ground water to grow their crops due to a second regulation that controls ground water pumping. So farmers are struggling to grow food and consumers are struggling as food availability is less and costs go up. Just to be clear, I am not saying screw the environment or let nature burn. I am saying that the interests of human beings must come first in a crisis, and this clearly is a crisis. https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article117741143.html

That's a straw man argument. I did not say we need no regulations. I said we need less regulations.

The middle class has not disappeared because Jeff Bezos is a billionaire and created Amazon. The middle class has not disappeared because Bill Gates is a billionaire and created Microsoft. The middle class is disappearing because regulations are strangling businesses and because the free market is too constrained . Look what has happened in the last two years. The president lowered taxes and reduced regulations and now unemployment is at its lowest point in years. (1) How is that not good for the middle class? http://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/national-employment-monthly-update.aspx

Currently there are 155.5 million workers in the US as of July 2018 (1). Assuming that the interest on the $ 21 trillion debt is only 3% we can calculate the monthly cost per American worker. The results are below. National Debt $21,000,000,000,000 Interest Rate 3.00% Monthly Interest $52,500,000,000 Working Americans 155,576,000 Monthly Share of Interest per Working American $337 This means that, on average, $337 of your taxes goes to paying the interest on the debt. This does not include any principle markdown. Why in hell would we do this to ourselves? This is economic suicide! But, as I said before, money is too abstract for most people to understand and the government goes not produce chickens or beer. http://www.dlt.ri.gov/lmi/laus/us/usadj.htm

I understand you. My point is that when the government gives people money, the cost of goods and services go up. The more money the government gives, the more the costs rise. The best way to level the economic playing field is for the government to get out of the way and let the free market competition take over.

Then expect the UBI to increase continuously and the cost of food to follow suite. Eventually someone will ask why food is so expensive when it used to be so affordable. Politicians will lambaste the food industry. Regulations will be imposed. People will gnash their teeth and pull their hair. Back in the day people helped each other. The government stayed out of it.

Think about it this way. Imagine that own a restaurant. You sell food for $20/plate. The government comes along and decides that food is a basic right and they give everyone a $500/month stipend to spend on food. At first everyone is happy. People come into your restaurant more often. Then you realize that people have more money to spend on food so you raise your prices to $25/plate. How does this help anyone, especially if everyone in the food industry does that same? This is exactly what happens in real life. Look at how the cost of college tuition has increased since the implementation of government guaranteed student loans.

This is a problem. A society can only absorb change so fast. If the change is too fast then people suffer. As a society we need to understand this. As regards automation, a major factor in the push towards automation is the increasing minimum wage.

Exactly! Governments don't produce stuff. Governments take stuff. Everytime the government gives money it takes that money from someone who works. Eventually 50%+ of the workforce reaches the point where they receive more from the government than they give. At that point the government begins printing money. This is called quantitative easing and it's exactly what happened in 2007-11. This money magically appears out of nowhere. At first it's great, then the economy adjusts to the increased amount of money and objects begin to cost more. This is called inflation. This is the reason that a movie used to cost $6.00 in 1990 and now costs $15.00. This is the reason why a car used to cost $4,500 in 1970 and now costs $30k. A certain level of inflation is necessary to account for population growth and to give the economy liquidity. Too much is disastrous. Look at Venezuela! They need barrels of cash to buy stuff - literally! In fact, they have given up on money and resorted to barter 'cause no matter how hard the government tries they cannot magically produce more chickens or bread.

Let's get real here. Imagine that there is no money, since money is too abstract for many people. Instead we have a pure barter system and every month the government gives you three chickens, two dozen eggs, ten loaves of bread and five gallons of beer. Who raises the chickens? Who grows the grain to make bread and beer? Who bakes the bread? Who brews the beer?

Who's gonna pay for it?

Who you talking to? Me or Lima? I know that I am occasionally offensive. I don't have a problem with that. I really can't see where you could consider Lima as being offensive. I may be biased because I like him. I was talking to Lima. This is spinning out of control. Misunderstanding piling upon misunderstanding. I think it's time for me to do other things for a while.

Hi Lost in Translation, I am DEAD serious... Thanks Dada-da. - LimA I believe you. I also think you do not understand what you are saying or how your words might be perceived. I think you are accidentally offensive, which is a shame because I like you.

You may intend this comment to be lighthearted and joking but it has potential to be easily misunderstood.

Beautiful stuff. This brings to mind the notion that yang is the southern side of a mountain while yin is the northern side. Conversly yin is the southern side of a river while yang it its northern side. (Reversed in southern hemisphere). This is due to the nature of the sunlight upon these geographies. In light of this conversation that makes much more sense.

As do I...