Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
One has to marvel at the arrogance of the notion that savers are entitled to a non-negative risk-free return.

Savers make nothing, run nothing, build nothing. They are hoarding inherently worthless tokens - money - and demanding that society must maintain not merely a stock of the particular commodities they might wish to consume at some future date, but an entire industrial supply chain to provide them with fully flexible choice of what to consume, if and when they should decide to do so. And they have the utter gall to demand that society performs this astonishing service not merely for free, but at cost!

So fuck 'em. Inflate the fuckers' savings away, and if they piss and moan about not having old age pensions, well then they could have fucking voted against politicians who dismantle the public pension system. I have no sympathy whatever for people who first vote to destroy the public provision of old age pensions and then demand that the public must protect their private hoards.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Jun 4th, 2014 at 06:51:16 PM EST
"and if they piss and moan about not having old age pensions, well then they could have fucking voted against politicians who dismantle the public pension system."

You do realise that a great number of them would have done just that, only to end up in a minority because a younger generation had decided that there was no need for a social contract?
Also, many of the politicians who dismantled the system had campaigned on a promise to strengthen it.

There is an issue for people who played by rules that were imposed to them, only to find that the outcome is a collapse. I wouldn't say a working class saver is a hoarder.

Thankfully, there is a neat solution: it's not just the inflation but what causes the inflation. Credit every single person with an equal amount of money (we'd need to find a way to do that for people out of the banking system, and even out of the system entirely, such as hoboes), until the desired inflation is reached. That way, yes, there will be some reduction in the savings pile for people who don't know how to use anything other than the state-regulated savings account, but the effect would be much less than the increase in wealth from the transfers.

For genuine hoarders, not so much.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 02:35:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You do realise that a great number of them would have done just that, only to end up in a minority

Speaking from the Danish experience, less than ten per cent have done so consistently through the last three or four parliamentary election cycles.

And going by poll numbers, those ten per cent are not people with any savings worth mentioning.

Also, many of the politicians who dismantled the system had campaigned on a promise to strengthen it.

That's an excuse for voting for them the first time. Not consistently for ten or fifteen years.

It's not like the PES parties' stance on this issue over the last fifteen to twenty years has been in any way ambiguous when you look at the actual laws they've passed, rather than the mouth-noises they make in public.

Voters who take politicians' mouth-noises at face value might be worth my sympathy if they I didn't have to live with their stupid decisions. But I do, because elections have consequences.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 03:31:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
this would be the best policy. It would be certainly more popular than giving the money to the banks that created the problem in the first place.
by rz on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 03:47:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Instead: minijobs.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 05:55:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think you may be missing a couple of zeroes.
Alternatively, send 100. And again. And again...

This could be on top of a living wage.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 08:02:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Quite. No need for metaphorical helicopters. In the ideal case you could mandate that debts have to be repaid first. Then watch the financials atrophy due to lack of rents.
by generic on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 08:18:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"So fuck 'em. Inflate the fuckers' savings away"

But this is not the point. A different monetary and fiscal policy would produce much more growth. In a environment of growth it is possible to get good returns on savings.

But even more importantly: For everybody to have enough we need not money but enough goods. And 15% unemployment is not the way to create enough goods.

by rz on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 03:46:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In an environment of growth (or, which is a more realistic target, not backsliding), it is possible to get good returns on investment.

But in an environment of good returns on savings, it is impossible to get growth.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 07:31:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You are clearly right. I understand now what you mend to say in your original post.
by rz on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 07:35:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Basically: if you want wealth, start a business. If you don't want to or can't start a business, buy into current businesses, ideally through the stock market.

I think Jake might confuse a few people when he rails against savers - in lots of countries this word is used to describe not only people who have cash in the bank or own sovereign bonds, but also people who own shares in listed firms, who do risk their capital for the hope of a good return.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Tue Jun 24th, 2014 at 11:05:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course it was the lack of goods to purchase with the Mark that caused the hyperinflation. Too bad there is no practical way to remind the average German of that inconvenient fact.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Thu Jun 5th, 2014 at 09:12:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series