''…will be sufficient by itself to determine an optimum rate of investment. I conceive, therefore, that a somewhat comprehensive socialisation of investment will prove the only means of securing an approximation to full employment; though this need not exclude all manner of compromises and of devices by which public authority will co-operate with private initiative. But beyond this no obvious case is made out for a system of State Socialism which would embrace most of the economic life of the community. It is not the ownership of the instruments of production which it is important for the State to assume. If the State is able to determine the aggregate amount of resources devoted to augmenting the instruments and the basic rate of reward to those who own them, it will have accomplished all that is necessary…''

rothbard vindicated once again

FRB isn't usury in itself. FRB (Full Reserve Banking) actually causes deflationary monetary policy which leads into usury.

I believe in FRB (Fractional Reserve) with no interest

all that argues is that usury should be done by the state and not private business

:yes: but not by income tax

by LVT

<:chad:793675087064465449>

LVT is based indeed

LVT is the best feudalism

we love our feudalism

every citizen a feudal lord

bad take

Personally I have come to believe that interest – or, rather, too high a rate of interest – is the ‘villain of the piece’ in a more far-reaching sense than appears from the above. But to justify this belief would lead me into a longer story than would be appropriate in this place.

Keynes, ‘Saving and Usury’, 1932

💯

well having too high an interest rate is obviously bad but I don't think you can have an economy without interest due to the time value of money

you mean time preference?

you can have time preference without interest

most people care about the expected return on capital (basically the profit businesses make)

not return on savings

well its an implication of time preference, but specifically the time value of money

https://fixingtheeconomists.wordpress.com/2014/05/01/arguments-against-free-trade-and-comparative-advantage/

Fuck Free Tradeeeeee

whats it say

Competitive advantage works up to a point but it doesn't scale to infinity like some people would like you to think

It doesn't work at all really

tl;dr wrong because full employment assumption, industry stripping, etc

@slavecaste What is the concept of "free trade" exactly?

The fact that we can trade globally without any tariffs and it'd be all good

So what is the problem with it?

Yes it does

In principle it works, specialisation and labour division increases efficiency

If there was no cost to transport or sell/buy goods (ie no tax, costs to enter market ect.) Then it would be fine

The reason it doesn't work is because of geopolitical concerns and unfactored costs

You can have that without free trade

There are way more reasons that it won't work that aren't even that

Because it doesn't work how theorized (wages fall, industries disappear, unemployment rises, etc)

Competitive advantage had nothing to do with free trade, I do not agree with the author combining the two. Unemployment may rise in the short term but will fall in the long term

And industries dissapering is not it "not working"

You would expect industries to dissaper

It only falls due to government stimulus, not free trade