The future of the Forex industry - page 174
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
What's the sacrificial animal? A moose, perhaps?
Homo sapiens of course!
If you cut the elks all the time there will be no profit ).
Ancient wisdom says: If you look at a trade for a long time, you can see a dying moose.
Ancient wisdom says: If you look at a trade long enough, you can see a dying elk.
If you look at a trade long enough, you can see a dying deposit.
Look, once upon a time there was an engineer, working in a factory, drawing all sorts of drawings, a good engineer, doing some good.
But the factory was not very successful and there was not much profit.
And then the engineer transferred to another plant, and it turned out to be much more successful, because the product of the plant is much more competitive than the first one.
And the engineer is doing exactly the same job.
But now he's demanding a pay rise for him because that factory has a big profit margin.
😁
Comments?
The employee should not demand anything, I already wrote about it, but you still can't get rid of your fantasies. The minimum wage that affords a decent standard of living should be determined by the state.
But now he is demanding a pay rise because this factory has a big profit margin.
The capitalist should pay more!
I'll tell you why :) Take monkeys, for example. What is the basis of male dominance? A big bicep? Correct. Big fangs? Correct. The ability to make scary faces? Also correct.
But there's another very important reason - it's the attitude of the females towards the alpha and the general mood of the pack. If all members of a pack love each other, stroke each other, comb out fleas, then any strange male will be shamefully ejected, most of all females.
And why replace their good, caring master with an unknown hto?
Now, an intelligent, calculating capitalist should, no, he is simply obligated to give his employees all sorts of bonuses that increase the importance of our employees compared to those, foreign, not our employees.
So that they always say while drinking a beer at the bar: "Our boss loves us, not like your bourgeois!"
That's it!
Nobody. I've already written, but don't you get it? For example: the main breadwinner in a family with five children has died or become disabled. In a family with 3 children, there's a divorce, the father's hiding from child support. A child in the family becomes ill and needs a very expensive operation. A person has been in a car accident and has become disabled. The state has to help in all of these cases.
There are funds, social security and voluntary insurance, doesn't it come to that?
And for alimony, there are court orders, for example, and so on.
But this is not the main thing.
Do you think all poor people are handicapped?
The question wasn't about the disabled, it was about the poor.
Why are you again hitting sophisms and twisting?
I'm not demanding that an entrepreneur feed someone. They feed themselves by getting paid, but the minimum wage should not be at a beggarly level. The means to raise the minimum wage can be obtained by raising the marginal rate, which I've written about 10 times already, or by using a progressive tax system, as in Sweden for example. Where rich people with incomes above 675,700 kronor pay a tax of 57%. Why do you think this is unacceptable for Russia when in some countries this has been working for a long time. The minimum wage level is high and there is little controversy in society.
The minimum level depends on a large number of factors and on the wealth of the country as a whole.
Maybe the country can't provide well for everyone at all at this stage, have you thought about that?
Well just divide the GDP by the entire population and see what you get.
For Russia it will be less than 30 thousand dollars a year, if I remember correctly.
And that is if you divide it evenly - which of course is wrong - because it does not take into account individual contribution and success.
And why do you want to increase the minimum level by increasing the burden for the richer? - What's the point? - By doing so you discourage the successful and encourage the loser poor.
If at this stage the ratio of productive forces and population is so, someone will have to bear with it...
Initially, everyone is on an equal footing (well, almost) in the sense that everyone has a certain set of abilities and talents.
It's just that some have managed to take advantage of it, some haven't.
It's only fair that those who managed to do something more valuable get more.
As for high taxes - yes there are such practices - but as you probably know the rich leave such jurisdictions for more favourable ones.
There is no point in doing that at all.
No one.
Since Mr Khorosh is evasive, I will ask the question more directly:
Who is to blame for the poor being poor?
... The tax rate, which I have already written about 10 years ago, or a progressive tax scale, as in Sweden for example. Where the rich with incomesabove 675,700 kronor pay a tax of 57%. Why do you think this is unacceptable for Russia when in some countries this has been working for a long time. The minimum wage is high and there is practically no significant contradiction in society.
But they are jealous there too, aren't you aware of that? 😁 They even have their own socialist communists...
No matter how many raises you give people, they can't get enough.
Compare the median incomes across countries, you'd be surprised...
A progressive scale is essentially a penalty for success, it just turns out stupid.
...
In fact you are demanding that the more successful feed you (and the poor) through tax redistribution.
You can't deny that.
But most importantly it makes no sense.
Realise that introducing a progressive scale in countries has not reduced their income inequality.
For the rich find new and more efficient ways to optimise and it's all over again.
It's a futile game.
People are simply leaving jurisdictions for other jurisdictions.
At the same time official reports can get the Gini coefficient to go greener 😁
In this of course the EU is different from the US.
But again, this is hypocritical flirting with socialism based on deception.