My first job was in manufacturing. I created things. Things that other people want
Ok, let me put it this way. What if you created something that you want, then wouldn't your labor have been the price to pay for your own creation?
Yes. So what? If I make something myself, I save others the effort of making it for me. But if someone else can do a better job of making it, it makes more sense for me to pay them to do it so I'm not wasting my time. Money allows us to concentrate on doing what we're good at doing and get other people to do what they're good at doing.
Nobody needs money to survive. You can't eat money, you can't cure diseases with money,
I plenty agree with that.
But I disagree that that is what creates stuff. *Perhaps it used to* It probably motivates people to save up to buy "stuff"
but let me ask you this,
Who does speculative trading help? It doesn't seem like a service that most people would have a use for.
It helps
price discovery. Anyone who ever buys or sells
anything benefits from this.
Let me compound the issue further by questioning why labor is outsourced when people would need a job in their own country.
When looked at from an idealistic standpoint, which is what you brought up, it sounds pretty logical. However when you factor in that there are people out there hoarding money, and doing nothing useful with it. *Such as speculation*
I wonder then, at that moment, what is being created that would benefit anyone.
Labour is outsourced when people in another country can do a better job for the same price, or the same job for a better price. This allows people in your own country to import better quality products, or the same products for less cost. And just what's so special about jobs in your own country, anyway? People in other countries need jobs too, you know. Are they somehow less deserving of a job than people in your country?
As an investor, you bet on goods and commodities. Which means that when you bet on a good and/or commodity to succeed *or fail*, you give up your ability to make arbitrary decisions about that good and/or commodity because your biased about it.
I never bet. Gambling is for losers. I am not biased about anything I invest in. I make decisions based on the best available evidence. Any investor who allows emotions to get the better of them is very likely to lose a lot of money very quickly. So I try not to let that happen. And so does anyone else who wants to make money.
Now imagine the system was rigged by people with biased feelings about investments. And they exist in a system that rewards such unethical behavior. The idealism and logic of the point you brought up, falls apart.
Because, while you may be helping people. The fact those people need help in the first place was caused by the manipulations of the various markets, and their affect on the political structure.
You've got it backwards. Politics drives market manipulation, not the other way around. Markets themselves are pure. If you have something I want, and I have something you want, we make a trade and we both leave happy. The various markets are simply millions of people engaging in such trades on a global scale.
A woman a few minutes ago posted a thread on this forum. Asking for help paying for her daughter's leukemia. In a just world, she wouldn't have to pay money to save her daughter's life. Instead she had to come here to beg.
If she didn't have to pay money for the treatment, where would it come from? Who would spend years researching the treatment if they weren't going to get paid? Who's going to manufacture it? Who's going to administer it? As much as doctors and scientists enjoy working for the benefit of humanity, they still have to eat. Fact is, if she didn't have to pay money for the treatment she wouldn't have any treatment at all.
If money helps so many people, then why do so many people find themselves condemned to death for lack of it?
Pay close attention, because I'm only going to say this once more: people don't die because of a lack of
money, they die because of a lack of
stuff. There is only so much stuff in the world to hand out to people who need it. Clearly, we need some of system to decide who deserves to have this stuff and who doesn't. Money is that system. You acquire money by producing stuff that people want or need, and retain money by not consuming stuff that other people want or need. In other words, by being helpful and not being a burden on society. There are basically three kinds of people in the world who don't have enough money:
1) Those who are too lazy to work hard. Do these people really deserve to have stuff handed to them?
2) Those who work hard, but then squander their earnings. By spending their money on stuff they don't need, there is now less stuff remaining for people who
do need it.
3) Those who, through no fault of their own, are unable to work, or have worked but have had their earnings stolen from them. These people are arguably the most screwed over by the system, but it is important to realise that money didn't
create their problem: they'd be equally unfortunate whether money existed or not. Their lack of money is a
symptom of their misfortune, not the cause. Life is just unfair, and money can't change that. But it does make life better for most people.
