I was surprised when you DISPUTED what I said in the first post, and again surprised when you DISPUTED what I said in the second post, especially since your response was already shown to be inaccurate by my previous posts. I truly did NOT want any disputing to take place. But you did.
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Lee Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > CONGRATULATIONS, Zack! > > > > Your first two postings actually looked like honest, genuine questions. > Instead you were obviously trolling for issues upon which you could > exercise your naturally disputive disposition. > > In his autobiography, Ben Franklin had this to say about disputes: > > There was another bookish lad in the town, John Collins by name, with > whom I was intimately acquainted. We sometimes disputed, and very fond > we were of argument, and very desirous of confronting one another, which > disputatious turn, by the way, is apt to become a very bad habit, making > people often extremely disagreeable in company by the contradiction that > is necessary to bring it into practice, and thence, besides souring and > spoiling the conversation, is productive of disgusts and, perhaps > enmities where you may have occasion for friendship. I had caught it by > reading my father's books of dispute about religion. People of good > sense, I have since observed, seldom fall into it, except lawyers, > university men and men of all sorts who have been bred at Edinburgh. > > To which I add: "Amen". > Dennis > > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <zakbas@> > wrote: > > > > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Lee Wilson" > > dennisleewilson@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <zakbas@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > No, that's not quite it. No matter HOW you arrange your Currency, > > > > even if you put everything in terms of Gold Grams or Platinum > Ounces > > > > or whatever, even aside from Inflation due to overpublishing cash > or > > > > any other cause, it is possible for the value of most stocks on > the > > > > Market to fall (OR RISE) in value in a single day, wiping out the > Net > > > > Worth of millions of people in an instant. Yet it STILL is a > zero-sum > > > > game; SOME OTHER people have to be GAINING the exact same amount > of > > > > Wealth. > > ? > > > Wealth creation is NOT a "zero-sum game". > > > > > > > I very carefully stated that in the first post. I said that a MARKET > > TRADE is Zero-Sum. > > > > > > > > If I produce a book, a horse > > > shoe, a nail, a house --anything--the sum of the wealth of the world > is > > > INCREASED. > > > > > > > Of course. And that is not a MARKET, it is PRODUCTION. > > > > > > > > The stock market is merely a subset, an avatar of the wealth > > > being created. > > > > > > > No, it is a MARKET. And in a MARKET TRADE, no Wealth is Produced. > Duh. > > > > > > > > And so is paper money. And as we have seen, both those > > > avatars are subject to fraudulent manipulation. > > > > > > If yesterday, ABC stock sold for $100/share, everyone who owns that > > > stock "values" their own at that same price, i.e. the price of the > last > > > sale. If today, nobody will buy the stock for more than $60/share, > other > > > owners think they have lost wealth at $40/share. They still have > their > > > shares and the shares themselves did not change, only the price of > the > > > last trade. The same applies for a house or a horse shoe. > > > > > > In a barter economy, one in which gold or silver is bartered for > houses > > > or horse shoes, there are very small changes in prices over time > > > > > > > Listen to yourself. Can't you see that the very same loss of "Market > > Value" will occur in the above scenario whwther Gold or FRNs is used > > to gauge that Value? The Stock Market can "lose" a trillion ounces of > > Gold Value of its stocks in a single day, or in an hour, but the > > WEALTH is still there. Market Value is not Wealth. For every man who > > suddenly cannot sell his shares of Consolidated Veeblefetzers for as > > much as he would like, there is a man who can now Buy those shares for > > far less than he could yesterday. And the Company is still just as > > Productive as before. > > > > Try to phrase it in terms of Land, that keeps out some of the > > confusing variables. If the Land Market changes one day, then some > > people with lots of Land cnanot sell it as high as the day before, but > > others can now Buy land (land which constitutes the SAME EXACT AMOUNT > > OF UTILITY AND WEALTH AS BEFORE) more cheaply; and those exactly > > cancel each other out. > > > > If this were not true, then it would be possible for Wealth to be > > CREATED by fiat in a single day, without limit, just as you think it > > can be Lost in Market Trades; we would all become one brazilian or one > > jillion dollars Wealthier in an instant and we'd all be driving > > starships. Sorry Charlie, those starships do not exist; that much > > Wealth simply is not there, and no Trades can make it exist. And by > > the same token, if there ARE all those starships and MRI machines > > lying around, they are still there even after a Stock Market Crash. > > If some formerly Fat Cat cannot now afford to hang onto them, well > > SOMEONE ELSE will be able to take them off his hands. Zero Sum. > > >
