Originally posted by lordtyp0
The first point, and I admit-this is a low blow: You just said slave labor is good for everyone. You said earlier that it was tyrannical government
that made that possible. Thus: Slavery is good because one pays a bit less at the store. Low blow: but it is what you are saying.
Freed up labor = unemployment. This also means fewer people buying things. In this scenario either costs go up (suicidal) or it becomes cyclic and
more people are laid off or more commonly fired because lay-offs give unemployment benefits whereas a typical firing the company pays nothing.
Otherwise: I am sorry, profits do not usually get reinvested in the economy. They go into someones bank account.
If walmart creates jobs, how do you see those jobs as going into non sales/grunt work jobs?
The financial crisis was made because of LACK of regulation. The regulation was laxed and allowed banks to mix investment banking with normal banking.
Thus tieing people's savings and retirements to super risky investments for banking gain. Had that regulation been left in place (was first done in
1933) this problem would not have happened.
It was then exacerbated by the bailout necessity. I say necessity because of the institutions involved defaulted it would have been hundreds of
billions of dollars-essentially vanishing. I am under the opinion that is a company is too big to allow to fail-it is too big to allow to exist and
should be broken up into independent segments.
Walmart is obviously not tied to the investment crisis. Their impact is more local. The relationship is similar to a drug dealer.
Seduces and moves in, then the ripples make it so it is difficult to afford going elsewhere.
Personally I only buy two things from walmart: Generic Excedrin and dog food. Otherwise I go to local grocery stores. The amount I would save on
groceries by going to a walmart are less than $10 a trip.
Here are some interesting articles, pro and con for walmart.
I never said slave labor was a good thing, you're putting words in my mouth. In fact I said our government could take numerous steps to correct the
situation that don't involve additional regulation, but they don't because the big businesses benefiting from that labor lobby government to keep it
that way - regulation is making this slave labor possible. The result of this slave labor is the American consumer benefiting by having lower prices.
This is not my opinion, this is a fact.
If foreign slaves made all our goods, America would be benefiting enormously from this.
I don't condone slave labor, but the facts are we DO benefit from this in the form of lower consumer prices.
As for your assertion that freed up labor = unemployment, if the government suddenly decided to end the wars we are in, do you think people in the
military industrial complex would be out of work?
Do you think America should wage endless wars to ensure those people keep their jobs?
Of course not!
Capital, jobs and resource merely shift to other sectors of the economy. The reason we have such massive unemployment right now is because government
controls the financial sector.
You blame the repeal of glass-stegal for our economic situation, I blame the fact our banking and monetary system is run by private banking cartel.
In a free market, banks would have no lender of last resort and would not engage in the insane lending practices that brought us into this situation
in the first place.
In a free market, interest rates would have sky rocketed under the enormous debt accrued and lack of capital savings.
In a free market, banks wouldn't be able to lend 90% over their reserves by creating money out of nothing.
The very fact we have a federal reserve bank that artificially suppresses interest rates and bails out banks creates a MASSIVE moral hazard.
This total economic collapse could never have occurred without the federal reserves existence and government regulation of the financial markets.