Comment: To which I shall

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: As I've said, what 3 times now? (see in situ)

To which I shall

To which I shall reply:


...gotta love caps lock. ;)

...and your "five times as wealthy" idea is easy to rebut, as follows:

I work at wendy's.
John works at Mc Donalds.

I could purchase 5 McDoubles with the earnings from a single order of chicken nuggets(99 cent on the value menu).

OR.... John could purchase 5 orders of chicken nuggets with the earnings from a single McDouble( also 99 cents on the value menu).

...It's rather obvious that both situations can't exist at the same time.

... We could both charge $5, but neither of us would get more of the other's labor for less of our own.

Yes, we would have more currency, but no extra products.

Remeber, economic progress allows us to buy more STUFF with less labor. More dollars, but the same amount of stuff is not economic improvement. More dollars means they are worth less. Simple supply and demand.

The ill effects of inflation exist simply because the extra money is spent BEFORE EVERYONE ELSE FINDS OUT THAT THERE IS MORE CURRENCY. If we all knew that more money existed, we would immediately raise our prices, and inflating the money supply would have absolutely ZERO effect. However, it takes time for this knowledge to spread(there's that time element again).

Bseides there is no stock pile of 4 times the houses, 4 times the sweatshirts, 4 times the gasoline, 4 times the advil, 4 times the cheeseburgers, 4 times the televisions that are in the market or our homes.

Even if there is a stock pile of 4 times the currency, releasing that into the market would make YOUR paycheck worth 1/4 of what it is worth today, not more.

What you present is a basic example of the "grocer's fallacy":

"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."