|
|
Post by concerned on Feb 5, 2009 10:23:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 5, 2009 10:32:37 GMT -5
Their main argument seems to be some people get addicted to gambling. OK, so why aren't they against bars and liquor stores? Their argument should be that gambling is not productive. It simply moves money from some people to others. No net value is added to the economy.  |
|
|
|
Post by frankcor on Feb 6, 2009 17:07:06 GMT -5
Dave: "Their argument should be that gambling is not productive. It simply moves money from some people to others. No net value is added to the economy." I could make the same argument against all federal entitlements, including social security. |
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Feb 6, 2009 17:24:08 GMT -5
 That's it! I'm taking my social security check and going to the casino. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Feb 6, 2009 17:36:01 GMT -5
Gee, I just signed up for mine. Does that mean that I am "entitled" to a monthly trip to the casino in Cherokee NC? Whoopeeee! Can't beat that for fun. Prime rib and poker. What a combo. I promise to stop, both coming and going, to bolster the economy with some gas and a snack.  Yeppir. Lot's cheaper than attempting to use the free rooms at Turning Stone. They usually figure out by about June or July that we aren't coming back there for a while, and quit sending the free room offers, haha. But Cherokee? Hell, that is only a couple of hours from here, in the heart of the Smokey Mts. and an hour from Gatlinburg Tn. Gatlinburg is like Old Forge on steroids. A great place to visit. If we don't get free rooms at the casino, we stay in Gatlinburg and drive over the mountain through the beautiful Great Smokey Mountain National Park to the casino during the day, and back at night to stay in some of the nicest hotels in the area. THAT WILL ALSO BOLSTER THE ECONOMY! |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 6, 2009 19:59:23 GMT -5
Dave: "Their argument should be that gambling is not productive. It simply moves money from some people to others. No net value is added to the economy." I could make the same argument against all federal entitlements, including social security. I think we just found the best argument against money in general... |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 6, 2009 21:41:47 GMT -5
Dave: "Their argument should be that gambling is not productive. It simply moves money from some people to others. No net value is added to the economy." I could make the same argument against all federal entitlements, including social security. Hahahaha! That's right, frankcor and swimmy. And one could use the same argument about buying consumer goods. Or anything, for that matter. I guess you could ask, did the transfer of money create a synergy? Now, that's going to be hard to prove, but that must be what builds an economy from nothing to something. Gambling creates jobs and buys the products of a manufacturing system, as well as services. What metrics would we use to judge its goodness from a purely economic view? |
|
|
|
Post by clarencebunsen on Feb 6, 2009 23:00:49 GMT -5
One might want to consider the difference between creating wealth and exchanging money. I only know of three ways of creating wealth: make it, mine it or grow it.
"Making money" is meaningless unless you work for the Bureau of Engraving.
|
|
|
|
Post by snickers on Feb 7, 2009 9:18:18 GMT -5
Their main argument seems to be some people get addicted to gambling. OK, so why aren't they against bars and liquor stores? Their argument should be that gambling is not productive. It simply moves money from some people to others. No net value is added to the economy. quote] Hmm....not productive. Simply moves money from some people to others. No net value is added to the economy..... Sounds a lot like.....Government! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 7, 2009 10:06:36 GMT -5
Whenever I consider creating money out of thin air, I think of eBay. About two years ago, I sold some of my old radios, probably getting around $1200 total from various buyers. Their value was based upon them being offered on a world wide market, where buyers bid against each other and pushed the selling price up to a level that most were comfortable paying. Had I put the gear out on a table during a garage sale, I would have been lucky to net $200.
That's a thousand dollars of wealth created by a market that didn't exist only a few years ago.
It could be, I suppose, that eBay and the Internet have increased US citizens' combined "attic wealth" to more than that of a small country.
|
|
|
|
Post by clarencebunsen on Feb 7, 2009 12:56:48 GMT -5
Interesting point. To be consistent with my earlier post, I would maintain that the wealth was created when the radios were built and that by exposing them to a wider market you are able to exchange them for more money.
I'm not an economist and don't play one on TV. I can make some general deductions from the Law of Supply & Demand but I don't know of any way to make mathematical predictions. How does one get from "I can receive more money selling my radios on Ebay than at a garage sale" to "It will take x% increase in market exposure to increase the monetary value of my radios by y%"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Feb 7, 2009 19:27:15 GMT -5
However, the wealth of those radios depreciated in value with time, use, ware, and tare. That's why at a garage sale, you would only receive pennies on the dollar. But, at some point, the product becomes antique and one of a kind. If kept in mint condition, the value increases and surpasses the original wealth created at the product's creation. So there is a creation of value by selling them on e-bay.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 7, 2009 20:18:36 GMT -5
I think of it as eBay allowing me to reach my audience, those willing to pay more for the radio than might my neighbors stopping by a garage (actually porch) sale. Works the other direction, too, and it's a truly world wide audience. Two years ago, I bought a Telefunken German Navy radio, built in 1969, from a fellow in Germany. (I'm interested in shortwave receivers and transmitters built in the Forties and Fifties, mostly.) I lost out on one selling on eBay (a guy in the Nederlands), but then began trolling 2dehands, Marktplats.nl, eBay Osterreich, etc. It was a heavy military radio and when I found it ... NEW IN THE BOX !! ... I paid as much for shipping as for the radio. But I asked myself if the total was worth it to me, and it was, thus establishing a value, to me at least. Paying the guy was a problem, although he shipped me the radio before I sent him any money at all. Finally, he suggested I just put cash in a box and mail it to him. That worked. Here's a photo of the Telefunken Kurzwelle ELK 639 Empfanger. (All the panel labels and the manuals are in German. Thank God for babelfish!)  |
|
|
|
Post by frankcor on Feb 10, 2009 15:17:44 GMT -5
Wow, that looks like something out of an Ed Wood movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Feb 10, 2009 21:51:22 GMT -5
Ed Wood!
"... in 1956, Wood's Teenage Girl Gang script was produced as The Violent Years, an exploitation film about a gang of juvenile delinquent high school girls...it starred Jean Moorhead, Playboy Miss October 1955 centerfold model. The film is notable for its unusual girls-gone-bad premise and risqué abduction scene where a girl is bound and gagged with strips of her shredded dress while her boyfriend is sexually assaulted (off camera) by the lusty girl gang."
Now THAT's entertainment! OK, boys, raise your hands if you always wanted to be abducted by a girl gang!
|
|
That's it! I'm taking my social security check and going to the casino. ;D
