Renewable Revolution

Quote from: agelbert on August 29, 2015, 07:14:21 pm

Apparently MKing, who accurately states that causality is important to scientists  , neglects to recognize the effects of inflation, DELIBERATELY ENGINEERED EFFECTS for BANKER SWAG, that CAUSE people on fixed incomes, like the older segment of the population, to lose buying power to the point of having to make choices between food and medications.

There is a difference between inflation, and poverty. If the fixed income was high enough, there would be no problem. Therefore, what you are describing isn't a inflation problem. It is an income problem. To solve it is easy, double social security payments. Nothing to do with banksters.b 

Quote from: agelbert

And that is just one of "coping strategies" that we-the-people at the wrong end of the economic inflation mechanism have to deal with.   

You talk as though you have never seen the consequences of poverty before?  In the world I grew up in there was no income, let alone someone guaranteeing a fixed one. God that would have been great. As it was, medicine was home recipes and food was something you better go shoot or grow, if you wanted to eat. This fixed income gig sounds pretty good, I think everyone should get one!

Quote from: agelbert

So, the banker elites make a PROFIT off the inflation engineered LOSS/MISERY of the rest of the populace.

This BLATENT cause and effect relationship of inflation seems to go right over MKing's "causality is important to us scientists" head.

Because you saying it doesn't make it so. Causality does matter. There are all SORTS of reasons that inflation happens, and all SORTS of effects. And sure, banksters have been trying to engineer a cut since banks and sters were invented. But inflation isn't the only thing they want a cut of, they want a cut of everything. You should see their percentage for setting up M&A financing. And there is no loss/misery except….in YOUR example…WHEN POVERTY GETS INVOLVED. And when I say POVERTY, I only mean "not enough money for folks to buy whatever they want or need" and this…THIS covers a lot more than what the government might consider POVERTY.

All it takes is a new drug and $100G month to get it and presto…Anthony is enraged that inflation did it!

Please.

MKing, you are using your scattergun approach again. Of course there is a world of a difference between abject poverty and coping strategy choices from geezers on pensions like yours truly. That goes without saying.

Social Security being doubled would just barely bring up the buying power of a pensioner on Social Security to the level they had 40 years ago. My point is that inflation EMBEZZLED/STOLE that buying power from them.

Of course there are a lot of scams going on out there to fleece we-the-people beyond inflation by the elite, be they bankers, stock brokers, fossil fuel industry price shock fun and games, Health Insurance Horsesh it and medical professional price gouging, etc.

But inflation is the big enchilada. It takes a bite out of EVERYTHING. It's the CAUSALITY of causalities, as far as buying power erosion.

I hear ya on poverty. I never directly experienced it but I saw pictures of how people lived in Puerto Rico in the 1930's in the countryside.

In the cities, it was nice houses, cars, running water and electricity. In the countryside, none of the above. The wooden (not concrete like they have now) houses had thatched roofs (i.e STRAW). The people mostly walked barefoot. Only city folk had shoes. Bilharzia disease was rampant. TB too.

Only socialist government policies changed all that. The elite, of which many fu cks in my family belong to, just did not give a sh it. The elite never give a sh it, no matter where they live and what their color is. But that is another sore subject. 

A cousin of mine is an Industrial Engineer (Georgia Tech graduate). He worked for a pharmaceutical corporation. He told me all about how much it costs to do what in those factories. MKing, regardless of the fact that the money spent on research is often lost (and needs to be recovered through successful drug sales) because many research projects are a dead end, the pharmaceutical corporations are involved in world class price gouging, FAR and above covering the research costs base. 

There is NO EXCUSE for the ROUTINE 2,000 to up to 40,000% mark up on cost on pharmaceutical drugs, PERIOD!