Harrods Parking space for Sale

[Speelgoedmannetje]

T_Bone wrote:
But it's just another transaction.

No, it's fake economy. Like those non-existing islands in the Pacific.

[KennyR]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
No, it's fake economy.

Exactly.

[T_Bone]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:

T_Bone wrote:
Well, hell, that's not good. You stimulate the economy by letting the workers bring home a larger paycheck, by lowering taxes for example, not by cutting wages. She should have been more like Reagan. :-D

Bad idea. how do you want to pay public services, like maintenance of the infrastructure, or schools, or security, or laws for agreements and treaties, and caring institutions for the elderly.
The latter is more important for the economy than you might think. An African once came to the Netherlands and was amazed about this. Because many families have their hands full of caring for their families, it's hard for them to set up and run shops or other enterprises. Hm, maybe 'tis a better idea indeed to lower the taxes for this particular group workers and higher the taxes for the richer ones.

You should check out what happened when Reagan lowered taxes... the economy thrived so well that the government was taking in astronomical ammounts of taxes, even though the tax rate was lower.

[whabang]

Money isn't worth anything if they don't circulate. Do you have sales taxes in the UK? Here in Sweden a certain ammount of the money would go to the state, thus the transaction would be of gain to society.

[that_punk_guy]

T_Bone wrote:

that_punk_guy wrote:
But Harrods is hardly a modern-day Robin Hood. Besides, if you want to do some good with your money, you'd do it with your money yourself, or by donating it to a charity, not by buying a parking space. Illustrating that the people buying these spaces obviously are not interested in doing good for the world, they just want the parking space.

But it's just another transaction. Billions of transactions happen everyday. like I said, it's irrelevant to "good it could do" because that $100k doesn't dissapear, it just moves.  it could just as easily be given to charity after the transaction. The transaction is irrelevant.

So, say you wanna give some money to your kids, do you go out and buy something of equal value, and hope that the owners of the shop simply decide to give that money to your kids?

:-?

[KennyR]

T_Bone wrote:
You should check out what happened when Reagan lowered taxes... the economy thrived so well that the government was taking in astronomical ammounts of taxes, even though the tax rate was lower.

But effectively, the output came from borrowing. Taxes weren't being generated - just taken from digging a huge deficit that still lasts to this day, and that Bush is happy to make deeper.

A country thrives on its working class. There's no getting around that. The rest just live off them.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

T_Bone wrote:
You should check out what happened when Reagan lowered taxes... the economy thrived so well that the government was taking in astronomical ammounts of taxes, even though the tax rate was lower.

A. Was this economy boost really due to lowered taxes? And not due to new content on the market?
B. Did the government invest in the economy furthermore, or did it all go to the military?

[whabang]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:

T_Bone wrote:
But it's just another transaction.

No, it's fake economy. Like those non-existing islands in the Pacific.

I don't agree. Damage is done when the money is just lying there. If Harrod's decide to put the money in a big bag then there would be a problem.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

whabang wrote:
I don't agree. Damage is done when the money is just lying there. If Harrod's decide to put the money in a big bag then there would be a problem.

That's exactly what happens. They invest it again in something equal worthless. It's making one big balloon wich can burst anytime when it has become too big to maintain itself.

[T_Bone]

that_punk_guy wrote:

T_Bone wrote:

that_punk_guy wrote:
But Harrods is hardly a modern-day Robin Hood. Besides, if you want to do some good with your money, you'd do it with your money yourself, or by donating it to a charity, not by buying a parking space. Illustrating that the people buying these spaces obviously are not interested in doing good for the world, they just want the parking space.

But it's just another transaction. Billions of transactions happen everyday. like I said, it's irrelevant to "good it could do" because that $100k doesn't dissapear, it just moves.  it could just as easily be given to charity after the transaction. The transaction is irrelevant.

So, say you wanna give some money to your kids, do you go out and buy something of equal value, and hope that the owners of the shop simply decide to give that money to your kids?

:-?

Oh, I see what you're getting at, you think people that have money should give it away instead of spending it. that's not all that great for the economy, especially the workers who's employers just lost out on those sales.

[that_punk_guy]

T_Bone wrote:

that_punk_guy wrote:

T_Bone wrote:

that_punk_guy wrote:
But Harrods is hardly a modern-day Robin Hood. Besides, if you want to do some good with your money, you'd do it with your money yourself, or by donating it to a charity, not by buying a parking space. Illustrating that the people buying these spaces obviously are not interested in doing good for the world, they just want the parking space.

But it's just another transaction. Billions of transactions happen everyday. like I said, it's irrelevant to "good it could do" because that $100k doesn't dissapear, it just moves.  it could just as easily be given to charity after the transaction. The transaction is irrelevant.

So, say you wanna give some money to your kids, do you go out and buy something of equal value, and hope that the owners of the shop simply decide to give that money to your kids?

:-?

Oh, I see what you're getting at, you think people that have money should give it away instead of spending it.

I think they would be doing better for the world and for themselves if they used it for more positive, productive things.

[that_punk_guy]

T_Bone wrote:
that's not all that great for the economy, especially the workers who's employers just lost out on those sales.

It's not, but if the money was meant for your children anyway, what's the difference?

[T_Bone]

that_punk_guy wrote:

T_Bone wrote:
that's not all that great for the economy, especially the workers who's employers just lost out on those sales.

It's not, but if the money was meant for your children anyway, what's the difference?

The difference doesn't matter... the initial transaction itself was irrelevant, so any tangent off it is irrelevant too.

Your analogy doesn't make sense. Are you saying the $100k from the parking space is "meant" for someone? Who? And like your analogy, are you saying that instead of selling the parking space, it should be given away? why? Neither way creates wealth. :-?

[Fade]

@ T_Bone
"Oh, I see what you're getting at, you think people that have money should give it away instead of spending it."
------------------

No he doesn't! He only wants the very rich ones to do it.

[that_punk_guy]

Fade wrote:
@ T_Bone
No he doesn't! He only wants the very rich ones to do it.

How about you let me decide what I think?

[Fade]

@ TPG
"by donating it to a charity, not by buying a parking space."