Hoss.... one of the answers to land aristocracy was the corporate farm. I knew of 2 of them in our area alone.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by entropy View PostHoss.... one of the answers to land aristocracy was the corporate farm. I knew of 2 of them in our area alone.
FWIW, I would prefer you. Booze would always be cheap.
- Top
Comment
-
- Top
Comment
-
hack said:.....The practical side of me recognizes that we're all better off when capital is spread around. Left in the hands of too few and we get the bullshit we have now. I can think of very few things for which the concept of a balance of power does not apply.
And it is the role of a banking system to spread the money around. Money that is "...in the hands of too few..." is actually in a bank or in a financial instrument if there are positive real interest rates. The bank then "spreads" it to those who need money for productive ventures. Financial instruments just eliminate the middleman.
And how do we determine who gets the loan? Well, consider a project with a 15% rate of return, and one a 6% ROR. If the bank is charging 5% for the money, it is unclear who will get it. But if the bank is charging 8%, then only the first project gets funded. Could the bank charge a higher rate? Sure, but money is totally fungible, so there is a lot of competition to make the loan to the first project. This is both a democratic and a merit-based way of allocating capital.
Now, imagine a negative real rate, or more pertinently to the US, an artificially low rate created by the printing of $ 10 Trillion by the government. First, there is no incentive to use banks: no interest. Second, money flows to paper assets that provide some return (causing a stock bubble). Third, and IMO most important, there is no way to determine the most productive uses of capital, so we get low growth. Fourth, the main risk to the owners of capital is a political risk, and not an economic risk.
- Top
Comment
-
Talent, I've never considered an Estate Tax that doesn't tax real property. As you point out, that solves the liquidity problem that affects farmers. Frankly, there are lots of liquidity problems with small businesses and the death of a "partner", but focusing on liquidity in addition to "value upon death" is a good idea.
- Top
Comment
Comment