The future of the Forex industry - page 19
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
Starting to feel bad when a transcendreamer starts talking such blatant ...yoo.
Yes, and on a good footballer a clever uncle can make 1000 times more than paying his wages. And he will not make any money on the cleaner for sure.
Cunning people have always existed and profited from simpletons. Justice has never existed and never will.
And as beautiful sounding words from the universal declaration of human rightsaccepted by General Assembly of the United Nations in 10.12.1948. I'm hilarious)))))))))
Who gives a shit about anything)))) That's putting it mildly.
Proponents of this theory (a global struggle between financiers and industrialists) believe that the former are prone to generate all sorts of twists like "Soviet" "socialism",
This is an interesting hypothesis, but why would global financiers need Soviet socialism? - I can only assume to create a global threat factor - and then maybe to justify increased military budgets? - but too complicated scheme, it means that the highest ranks of kaiser's Germany, including minister of finance, chancellor and Wilhelm himself - they are all agents of global financiers? - And was it possible to calculate everything for years in advance?
In which there was, as you know, nothing Soviet and social.
I totally agree.
That is, it was usually state capitalism with a very secretive power structure in the state and an underprivileged population brought up in an extremely paternalistic spirit.
This has probably been the case in all countries to one degree or another.
It is assumed that the financiers have been winning lately and that in the not too distant future the whole world will be arranged in a manner similar to the global USSR.
So it's urgently time to go to Mars! 😁
It is especially often claimed that it is for this very purpose that the fight against covid is carried out the way it is carried out.
When the third wave and the horrors of the blazing fires in India with the double mutant started, I thought for a moment... what if... that prophetic schizophrenic Zeitgeist-style conspiracy video was true? - Where it said it was a multi-way to really sweep the world's population, but only there it said that people would die from the long-term effects of vaccination, not from new mutations.
So, within this discourse, you are right in terms of formal logic and your opponents are right in terms of dialectical logic) And only the future will show that it, as usual, shows nothing and teaches nothing)
But I still assume that the world is not as crazy as conspiracists write about it, and that the capitalist/financier/etc "conspiracy" is a quite natural state for it...
They ruin themselves with their useless strategies, but they don't want to admit that they fail and they need an image of an external enemy, and in the same way those who earn small salaries seem to have invented a myth about an evil capitalist who steals their money all their life, although they don't understand it, They just can't develop and can't offer something to the market, and this is the real reason why they suffer, but if you come up with an evil capitalist, then it would seem less offensive, as if they absolve themselves of responsibility for their own poverty.
Yes, cryptocurrencies should obligatorily only be studied as part of conspiracism and cryptodiscourse)
What I meant was that if the state blockchain works, the state will know everything in general about who farted how many times (if altcoins are criminalised) and that's already stressful.
Starting to feel bad when a transcendreamer starts talking such blatant ...yoo.
Yes, and on a good footballer a clever uncle can make 1000 times more than paying his wages. And he will not make any money on the cleaner for sure.
Cunning people have always existed and profited from simpletons. Justice has never existed and never will.
And as beautiful sounding words from the universal declaration of human rightsaccepted by General Assembly of the United Nations in 10.12.1948. I'm hilarious)))))))))
Who gives a shit about anything)))) That's putting it mildly.
Looks like someone's still getting a kick out of yesterday 🤣😂😁
you're just jealous of me - and it's obvious after your hysterical outburst and personality change
Looks like someone's still getting a kick out of yesterday 🤣😂😁
You're just jealous of me - and it's obvious after your hysterical breakdown and personality change
Have it your way.
And it's also not bad for you, dear one, to read the universal declaration of human rightsadopted by the UN General Assembly on 10.12.1948.
P.s.
I paused on purpose.
To say.
That everyone spits on it.
)))
Then it's time to go to Mars urgently! 😁
in quite a bit of sci-fi mars gets independence and is ruled by a military dictatorship, so that's such a choice ))
Have it your way.
You don't have to be so demonstratively hyper-compensated here😉
Note that I haven't blasphemed or discriminated against you personally - you're the one who's offended.
And it would be good for you, dear, to read the Universal Declaration of Human Rightsadopted by the UN General Assembly 10.12.1948.
P.s.
I paused on purpose.
To say.
That everyone spits on it.
)))
So what's wrong with it? and who's spitting on it? which article exactly is of concern?
It says, by the way: ... is entitled toequal pay for equal work 😊
in quite a lot of sci-fi, mars gets independence and is ruled by a military dictatorship, so that's such a choice ))
Shit, then let's go to Ceres right away!
Shit, then we're off to Ceres right away!
Assuming the name affects development, Venus is also a great option )
So why can't income over 10 average salaries be put to personal use?
Why can't it? Why is it unrealistic? Why such dogmatic judgments?
I wrote above that he pays his employees an adequate or even above average wage in the market, and you are ignoring it.
The entrepreneur saw an opportunity and created a new product/service/logistic chain and it turned out to be effective, he gets a salary 1000 times higher than the one at the factory, and it is a reward for his effectiveness, for not being stupid and not wasting time, and he created something new.
Why abnormal? And what is normal then?
I repeat thathe pays his employees an adequate average wage in the market, or even higher than the average.
He gets 1000 times more because the company is efficient and the product / service was in demand, and it is his legitimate right to collect the profits, and that is how one becomes a millionaire, understand it.
Typical Marxist socialist myth, and you are probably saying all this because you have no experience of entrepreneurial/project management.
Realize that value added (and net profit) can be obtained not only through extreme cost optimization, but also by improving other indicators, or rather their ratios, for example a trivial revenue growth, when an expensive but demanded product/service is created and the costs are highly inelastic to the volume, that is, as revenue increases, costs grow much slower than revenues - can you imagine that? And employee salaries are not affected in any way, but profits fly into space, and the shareholders/owners legitimately receive them.
Only Marx defined surplus value solely as an increase inthe value of the labour force of workers, but now even a schoolboy probably understands that Marx's deductions are a marginal dogmatic doctrine, aimed exclusively at a marginal audience, to justify their class struggle, and this doctrine was not confirmed in practice, I remind that the theory of labour cost does not work, and the law of lowering the profit norm does not work in reality, and the recognized great economists such as Keynes are very unlikely.
But it's not the entrepreneur's fault that the labour market is like this, is it?
In essence you are now complaining that wages are low everywhere and demanding profit sharing for yourself 😁 on completely incomprehensible grounds.
Congratulations, you are a dangerous Marxist socialist and need to be isolated urgently 😆😄😅 (no offence)
Actually the market decides, and for a certain kind of labour the salary will always be low, unless it's smart labour related to intellectual capital, so there's only one way for a worker to start developing themselves to qualify for more...
If you want to earn more, you have to be unique.
This is enough, more than that, people have to look for their own ways of increasing their wealth.
It would be deeply wrong if prosperity was given for nothing.
So who is to blame if workers are such helpless rabbits and cannot cooperate on their own?
There are, by the way, wonderful examples of synchronized mass strikes in history.
The market decides... if they don't protest it means the conditions are acceptable - understand that... it's very simple... It's one or the other: if people feel that it's too much and they can't stand it, they take their pitchforks in their hands, and if they don't, it's not so bad.
No need to be dramatic, you do not work 20 hours a day with no days off in a room without ventilation, with chemical vapors, with columns of dust, with hot steam, with 40 people in a room?
That's another Marxist word for "exploitation"... and if I go to the shop, then I exploit the shop assistant?
I highly recommend you to give up this style and way of thinking, as if you are from the beginning of the last century straight from the factory 😃🤣😂
The state does not and should not have the task of making you rich.
The government's job is to make sure laws are enforced equally for all, courts work adequately, police catch bandits, + disaster support, collective defence etc.
And the entrepreneur must act like an angel without striving for profit, right?
What is wrong with making a "trough"? (better to use the phrase "profit generation" in a decent society).
And it must be understood that the employees themselves can share in the profits of the company if they buy shares in their factory.
Radicalism is so market oriented)
Well, God himself told the tithe to share, apparently by association.
In 1000 or a million makes no difference, you are deceiving further questions of economics ends and questions of power and often coercion begins.
I hope you are not claiming that 90 percent of land capital owned by 1 percent of the population is EARNED to be earned honestly.
The idea that everyone should receive according to their labour and abilities is proclaimed in all states, but often the structure of society does not allow this idea to become a reality.
And as it is strange, to receive according to work - it is utopia which on the ground it does not turn out, further the power prevents, here are examples of a salary to workers it is reality, directly such a nudge))))) Undoubtedly, we must strive for a just distribution, and labor and entrepreneurial skills are playing a part in that distribution, but so radical and one-sided is too much).
So is a 1,000 ruble coat and 3 ruble mittens. A fur coat without mittens is not for sale. Who sews a fur coat and mittens should receive in proportion to price or evenly, or by time and difficulty of work?
And finally. Do you think that in the state the cleaning women should not be able to earn money to buy a flat, cars, to educate their children?
After all, they are also in the chain and if they don't have them, it will get messy).
And whose question is it, the cleaners or the state or entrepreneurs?)
"society is wasting resources to feed useless biomass, it's just inefficient, it's better to let them starve..."
No one gets to decide who is useful. Everything happens. Mental exhaustion, or maybe a person is brilliant. One has to treat the whole population well. It will produce better results. Can you evaluate creativity as well? Which creativity is effective and which is not? Or will the creativity committee decide?
What do corporations get in return? They just have to feed the losers and that's it?
If there is no copyright/patents/licences, who would be interested in busting their balls, investing huge amounts of money to create something groundbreaking? Have you thought about that?They get the market in return. And why should society need a corporation that is self-enriching? We are talking about things like microsoft, google, amazon when a corporation wields power, spies, censors publicly important information, usurps optimal solutions in science with patents. The answer is obvious, it has a negative impact on science and social interactions.
Writers/poets/programmers/scientists/inventors must be beggars? 😆😂😀
They all get money from selling a product or service, from popularity and many more. And you should make payments from taxes to those who do meaningful things for society. And think how much progress science would make if every scientist was a friend not a competitor. The best minds in the world would not be working on problems for mercenary teams.
Now quickly and decisively define justice! 😉
This is a societal philosophical consensus that is being modified all the time. But good politics can be made now. It is enough to be guided by humanism, common sense, honesty.
Isn't it more convenient to write in a quote?