That's not serious, at all, that's a total JOKE Interesting to see the ridiculous list has been refined to one demand... but I think this new and improved demand is incomplete, is it not? I'm looking for a statement along the lines of "give more money to people that do not want to work for it" but I can't find it, where is it? Or perhaps the statement would be something more like "stop taxing us, and provide us with more services, such as keeping our streets clean, roads smooth, ambulances fueled, hospitals staffed, etc..." I also do not understand how this movement believe themselves to be the 99% of anything 99% of even New Zealand would be ~4 million people
I think that this is just one guy making the reasonable observation that political control of the country is ultimately in the hands of people who can buy the politicians. Nothing new here, 'tis always been so.
This is a video that is well worth watching if you are unfamiliar with the exponential function: Really interesting stuff.
I've mentioned before that this sort of thing, really needs to be taught from primary school in maths class. Many people don't realize that a thousand dollars today, can be worth approximately half as much in a decade, and many also don't realize, that money put in a compounding interest savings account, can very easily, not ever actually make you any profit. Why? Because who cares if money in a high interest version of such an account doubles after a decade, when just about everything costs twice as much a decade later It's also the sort of thing that members of this latest movement need to be taught, for they obviously have no idea what governments deal with... it would be nice if they at least had a rough clue about what inflation means, perhaps then they wouldn't be so confused and outraged by some big numbers
Very true, if you do watch it he covers population growth and asks politicians if they would be happy with 5% population growth to which they all say yes! It is shocking how little people understand about maths and I agree that it should be taught in much more depth at a much younger age.
Yeah, governments like population growth, and most citizens like seeing their nation develop. More people = more jobs and more spending = more tax income, more everything. Not many people care much about more pensioners to eventually support, that's a problem not just for who ever is running things decades from now, but for those that don't have any plans to take care of themselves, such as these protesters who were asking for all those handouts. It's like they think that every time the government's income doubles, that the citizen's benefits should also double
A zero nominal-interest economy is the solution for inflation....however putting into place a zero-interest economy in this day and age is very difficult...almost impossible...as all the worlds ecomies are intertwined and rapidly changing, and have stopped using silver/gold as currency. Have you ever noticed that the value of gold keeps on rising throughout the years? Why is gold considered to be solid and secure investment? Because its prices stay constant and steadily rise as inflation worsens...the base value of all goods should be measured against gold and that would actually reduce/halt inflation. Have a read of this article for more in-sight into a zero inflation economy...it is a little technical but if you skim over some of the more in-depth areas its a very detailed article.
Not impossible! A sole government would solve that, NWO anyone? Then we'd really see some protests... I mean WWIII If you want to stop inflation, you need to stop population growth, and balance the world's resources with the current world population. You need all supplies to equal demand, total equilibrium = I don't see that ever happening, sorry.
That's incorrect....population has never stopped growing yet there have been many examples when inflation has been zero or near zero....that state hasn't last in most situations nor because of population but because of the dynamics of current economic policies and world events.
I see these protests as a global awakening to a "system' failed. Although there are no demands or solutions presented, it is still a credible movement against the "system". Demands - there are so many, affecting so many, that they are difficult to itemize or prioritize. The problems are so deep and embedded in generations, that it is pointless IMO to be an issue. Solutions - you do not want to hear. Really. A complete "system: change is the solution. Is this possible, NO. Not in any continuation of lifestyle as we know it. This is the hole that has been dug for us. Removing the "gold standard", "globalization" and the trading of currency as a commodity, was the final grip needed by the "system" to take control. I have followed this from Greece's general strikes starting Feb. 2010. Egypt Jan. 2011 throughout western Arab countries. Spain May 2011. OWS Sept 2011. I feel this is just the start of the "change" about to happen, and guess what 2012 is almost here. Coincidence, I don' think so.
There have even been periods of deflation in history, and it wasn't because people stopped having sex, so the population continued to increase - the deflations were caused by human interaction with multiple natural resources and/or processed resources/lifestyle. I did NOT post that population alone was inflation's sole influence! It is the balance/availability between population and resources that determines inflation. When gold, diamonds, coal, oil, etc are depleted, then you will see inflation. Hopefully the world moves towards sustainable energy production before then, be it biodiesel, solar power, geothermal, all of the above perhaps, whatever, just not what's happening now. This movement might consider themselves significant, but it doesn't really matter what less than 1% think atm, for as many of them have stated in videos and blogs, they are actually learning a bit about how the world works whilst they are protesting... makes you wonder where their heads were in school
Yes you are right about inflation being linked to resources. However, my point is that linked to the gold standard that was removed in the 70s....gold has been a commodity thats ever increasingly becoming steadily 'more expensive'. However, its a relative effect. £1000 now buys so much less gold than 10 years ago, BUT THIS IS the indication of how much inflation has worsened. Using a limited resource as the staple of economy keeps the economy in check. Supplies of gold have been stable throughout the years, and its price has never dropped. But supplies of currency have increased...there are notes than ever before. If gold was used as the currency system it would stabilise any economy...with the amount of money we have if it was replaced by its weight in gold or if gold was used in the currency accordingly i.e like gold chips on paper...(main reason we have paper money is cos gold was too heavy to carry around easily in larger sums) it would keep an economy far more stable and healthy. The price of gold would go up yes quite a bit when trying to replace the currecy, but would that would be mean less of it was needed to value the currency we have in existance. Have you noticed that some of the worlds stronger economies have a large investment of gold reserves. China and Japan in particular. Saudi Arabia has a lot of gold too and its economy relies heavily on its gold reserves/exports (as well as of course its oil), but still has a decent economy - without its gold the economy would be far weaker; it has no real market power and the country has very little to export besides oil and gold. In any case establishing a gold standard currency has its limitations, but it would stabilise any ecomomy. Its most disadvantageous to debtors, and this limits borrowing and expenditure...limiting ecomomical growth. This wikipedia article is quite good at explaining more about the gold standard. The section at the end is most relevant; putting such a system in place now is next to impossible as our current currencies are embedded in paper and rely heavily on printing. PS. I see your point on population, but stopping growth doesn't help either. However, comtrolling resources in a gold standard is relatively easy...the value of gold just goes up requring less gold to be the same value. The main problem we have at present is the worlds ever increasing size of ecomomy....that needs to be better controlled. PPS. Just for interesting information. World's largest gold reserves.
I don't know if that would work, but I think they only way it possibly could, is again, with a unified world government. I don't think a unified government would work though, maybe things will be better in 1000 years, but they will probably be worse, if we haven't destroyed ourselves by then. Just look at this forum: we are a relstively small collection of people, with similar interests to boot, yet we argue about absolutely anything, every single day. I bet the mods wish they could taser members through their input devices to keep us in line!
He's got a point. I'm on the fence on the future potential for peace and unity. I think things on a national/global scale need economical and sociological reasons to happen, and a lot of the change we'd like to see has no such possible reason. There's no real incentive for objectively stable countries to start helping out and sharing economies with objectively ****ed countries; it makes less pragmatic sense to intervene and enforce democracy and human rights in developing countries than it does to just sit back and leave them to it, because intervention is hugely risky and rarely successful; and there's no real motivation to solve global debts and third world suffering other than "because it's wrong not to", which means dick to a leader and policy maker with books to balance. Short version, I think a unified peaceful world government is possible in principle, but I don't see any route to it from our current state. There's no reason for the key players to want to make it happen.
