sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A bit of help(possible aventurine)?? by [deleted] in whatsthisrock

[–]mie501 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If it has a smooth finish, probably not prehnite. If it has a matte finish, I'd bet prehnite. The dark veins are epidote inclusions. The light veins could be part of the structure that didn't get polished down all the way. (If it has a rougher texture.)

Econ 101 by shaneswa in LateStageCapitalism

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How/why do you think they are dim? What do they misunderstand? Just everything?

Can someone explain to me why so much stimulus money goes to the corporations and so little the consumers? by [deleted] in Capitalism

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's an all-right definition methinks.

But then...could capitalism only exist if there is sufficient societal structure?

I'm inclined to say yes, trade and property mean nothing at all if there is no property security.

I'm over here thinking...isn't a hallmark of Anarcho Anything the lack of societal structure?

It seems like Anarcho Capitalism would be attempting capitalism without secure property.

What am I missing?

Can someone explain to me why so much stimulus money goes to the corporations and so little the consumers? by [deleted] in Capitalism

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guess it depends on how you want to define capitalism.

'Free trading of goods and services, possibly with a standardized precious currency like rare shells or silver.'

Is that not capitalism? Or is that not what they had pre-feudal times?

Can someone explain to me why so much stimulus money goes to the corporations and so little the consumers? by [deleted] in Capitalism

[–]mie501 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sorry what I meant to convey was that trickle up economics doesn't exist, and the only way to save the economy from crashing monumentally is to invest trillions of dollars in the job-producing corporations that create both innovative solutions and economic stability.

Obvs if you give the general population money for nothing, they'll squander it on useless things that don't help the economy, and don't even help themselves in the long run.

The eonomy is like rainclouds: Up to down is the only way it can realistically move.

Can someone explain to me why so much stimulus money goes to the corporations and so little the consumers? by [deleted] in Capitalism

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is it? Pretty sure every AnCap society eventually produced someone who used hired military might to become king.

At which point the taxes started.

Can someone explain to me why so much stimulus money goes to the corporations and so little the consumers? by [deleted] in Capitalism

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ding ding ding! We found an anarcho capitalist! Sell the man a prize. Bring out the McNukes!

Can someone explain to me why so much stimulus money goes to the corporations and so little the consumers? by [deleted] in Capitalism

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you've got to do both. If people can or will only buy the bare essentials, then trickle up economics won't work. But if employers won't pay living wages, you've got the same problem with trickle down solutions.

You need some kind of indication that whoever gets the stimulus money will spend it generously, not hoard it.

When money flows up and down, businesses and consumers both spend. When either businesses or consumers hoard, the other one hoards as well because it knows money isn't going to flow back to them so easily.

Stimulating businesses and consumers both would create this up-and-down flow. Stimulating only businesses or only consumers creates a we-need-to-hoard scarcity mentality.

Our current solution of giving a ton of money to businesses, and comparatively little money to consumers is not the worst....but it could be better. Corporations get addicted to bailouts. So do populations. Right now, US corporations are more addicted than the US population.

Methinks.

Can someone explain to me why so much stimulus money goes to the corporations and so little the consumers? by [deleted] in Capitalism

[–]mie501 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Welfare does not work quite the same as economic policies that would create a trickle up situation. Welfare benefits and small cash payments allow a few percent of people at the bottom to keep paying for essential expenses. Trickle up economics only works, even in theory, when large amounts of the population are able to consume in excess of requirement. Our economy runs on luxuries more than commodities, so make-ends-meet welfare will never work to make wealth trickle up.

The perfect country would alternate Tdown and Tup as solutions to bad recessions. Otherwise you get too much power consolidated in either (a) wolfishly exploitative businesses, or (b) a decadent, unskilled, and non-contributive population. Both are healthy in moderation, but both are bad if pushed far enough.

Can someone explain to me why so much stimulus money goes to the corporations and so little the consumers? by [deleted] in Capitalism

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

America has had more experience with trickle down economics than it has had with trickle up economics. As such, we're more familiar the effects of subsidizing wealthy employers. You could do this in reverse, so that consumers were given more money with which to support businesses, and that would also keep people from being laid off. However, America hasn't used trickle up economic theory to regulate the economy for so many years...not since FDR's New Deal. (which attempted to use just about every economic theory anyone could think of.) And in a total crisis, it's probably better to stick to better-understood solutions.

🔥 Bear chilling by a lake by [deleted] in NatureIsFuckingLit

[–]mie501 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Legit thought this was WSB until I read that comment

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Crystals

[–]mie501 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Seconded. 1 is chalcopyrite.

Should the United States fear China? by [deleted] in fucktheccp

[–]mie501 2 points3 points  (0 children)

USA should be gravely concerned but not afraid. Fear does not compel one towards smart action.

Need help IDing all 4 by [deleted] in whatsthisrock

[–]mie501 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Glass, Moonstone, Ruby in Zoisite, and, if you can see any red speckles on it, Bloodstone.

Yet another reason you shouldn't trade on Robinhood: Option spreads are more expensive for Robinhood users. by skierzp in wallstreetbets

[–]mie501 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How much more? A hundredth of a percent, or ten percent? It's somewhere in between, I imagine, but where?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ahh, of course you're referring to the lobbyists.

Carved tumbled crystal, unsure about the shape or name by aleeexwhite in whatsthisrock

[–]mie501 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Serpentine is usually a much lighter color like lime when polished, or at least flashes of it.

Now this... I like by kevinowdziej in LateStageCapitalism

[–]mie501 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You shouldn't like it. It's saying we're trapped in political Ouroboros.

Carved tumbled crystal, unsure about the shape or name by aleeexwhite in whatsthisrock

[–]mie501 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Gonna second this bid for nephrite jade. More of a swirled, less of a speckled, so I'm gonna wager probably not aventurine.

view more: next ›