zero sum game?????????????

[volente_00]

Quote from whitster:

"Wealth is not made, it is merely transferred. "

ok. i had thought you were ignorant.

now, i know it.

if wealth is not made, then where did all the wealth COME FROM? the "wealth fairies"?

there was the same amount of wealth 3 thousand years ago as there is today? worldwide? amazing. care to compute the average wealth per capita today vs. 3 thousand years ago. heck, 200 yrs ago? all the inventions (harnessed electricity, motor transport, literature, science, medicine, vaccines, hydroponics, botany, etc. etc. etc. ) have done NOTHING to CREATE wealth. riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. you can't "transfer" what doesn't exist. if you TRULY don't understand that mass wealth has been (and is being created) you truly are a man completely 100% ignorant of the most basic concepts of human society. i feel badly for you. really/

some people are truly amazing. a billion points of data cannot wrest their petty prejudices out of their small minds.

if you REALLY believe this, then you are truly ignorant.

and this is a very very very rare thing.

How are you creating this so called wealth ?

Pulling it out of your ass ?


Did bill gates just make all of his wealth with a special recipe or was it transferred to him when you and millions of others bought a pc that used his product ?



Or maybe I just find wealth, I just found a 3 carat diamond, in order for me to sell it, someone somewhere must transfer their wealth to me to buy it.



Or maybe I buy a rent house for 100k and sell it for 200k 20 years from now. Did that 100k profit just get created out of thin air ? Or was it transferred to my pocket at the expense of the person who bought it from me ?

 

[QQQShort]

We have mixed "capital allocation" with "wealth creation".

The extraction and sale of raw materials, e.g., coal and oil, is a wealth creation process, while equity transactions are capital allocation.

When related to physical delivery of a commodity, it seems the futures market can involve both wealth creation and capital allocation.

 

[volente_00]

Quote from QQQShort:

We have mixed "capital allocation" with "wealth creation".

The extraction and sale of raw materials, e.g., coal and oil, is a wealth creation process, while equity transactions are capital allocation.

When related to physical delivery of a commodity, it seems the futures market can involve both wealth creation and capital allocation.

The point remains even with oil, coal etc. You have to sell the natural resource to a buyer, who then is once again transferring their wealth to you.

 

[whitster]

volente doesn't understand what wealth creation means

much as he doesn't understand what zero sum means.

thus, having a discussion with him is pointless

it would be like discussing whether what is in Vial X is a solution or a suspension, with a person who doesn't even understand what the terms mean. it's meaningless

of course bill gates created wealth. he created immense wealth.

again, volente can't answer the question.

compute wealth in toto NOW. wealth owned in total in the world right now

compute it 3,000 years ago. it's ok. it doesn't need to be exact.

do you HONESTLY believe there is not more wealth TOTAL in the world right now, than there was 3,000 years ago?

for pete's sake, arguing with the ignorant (volente) is like dressing up a pig.

wealth creation.

it exists. economists disagree on a lot of things. a lot. i have never heard any economist (or sentient being) argue that wealth creation does not exist.

MATTER cannot be destroyed .

wealth can. it can also be created.

i used this example about 50 posts ago.

i'll do it again

in the Year X, it takes a farmer 100 man hours and 1 acre to grow 1 bushel of Y

Johnny invents the supergrowinator. using this device, it now requires 50 man hours and 1/4 acre to grow 1 bushel of y

Johnny sells the growinator to farmers.

blah blah blah

anyways, if u don't believe wealth can be created, then explain WHERE DID IT COME FROM

there are only two options

1) wealth has not been created. there is no more wealth in the world NOW than there was 3000 years ago (if you choose this option, you are an idiot)
2) wealth was transferred from the magical wealth fairies (...)

you really don't understand markets, volente. i hope to GOD you trade. we need more lemming idiots like you. they provide liquidity

 

[volente_00]

Quote from whitster:

volente doesn't understand what wealth creation means

much as he doesn't understand what zero sum means.

thus, having a discussion with him is pointless

it would be like discussing whether what is in Vial X is a solution or a suspension, with a person who doesn't even understand what the terms mean. it's meaningless

of course bill gates created wealth. he created immense wealth.

again, volente can't answer the question.

compute wealth in toto NOW. wealth owned in total in the world right now

compute it 3,000 years ago. it's ok. it doesn't need to be exact.

do you HONESTLY believe there is not more wealth TOTAL in the world right now, than there was 3,000 years ago?

for pete's sake, arguing with the ignorant (volente) is like dressing up a pig.

wealth creation.

it exists. economists disagree on a lot of things. a lot. i have never heard any economist (or sentient being) argue that wealth creation does not exist.

MATTER cannot be destroyed .

wealth can. it can also be created.

i used this example about 50 posts ago.

i'll do it again

in the Year X, it takes a farmer 100 man hours and 1 acre to grow 1 bushel of Y

Johnny invents the supergrowinator. using this device, it now requires 50 man hours and 1/4 acre to grow 1 bushel of y

Johnny sells the growinator to farmers.

blah blah blah

anyways, if u don't believe wealth can be created, then explain WHERE DID IT COME FROM

there are only two options

1) wealth has not been created. there is no more wealth in the world NOW than there was 3000 years ago (if you choose this option, you are an idiot)
2) wealth was transferred from the magical wealth fairies (...)

you really don't understand markets, volente. i hope to GOD you trade. we need more lemming idiots like you. they provide liquidity

First off, answer my questions instead of attacking me or changing the subject. Avoidance of my questions just adds to my case.


Second, I traded YM for one full year and posted the majority of my trades real time under the thread I started that just happens to be most replied thread to in the history of et. Where are your trades at ?



There is actually a good rebuttal to my argument, unfortunately you either do not understand the principle or perhaps just posted in haste without thinking rationally.




"in the Year X, it takes a farmer 100 man hours and 1 acre to grow 1 bushel of Y

Johnny invents the supergrowinator. using this device, it now requires 50 man hours and 1/4 acre to grow 1 bushel of y

Johnny sells the growinator to farmers."






And back to my original point, the farmers had to buy , or TRANSFER money aka wealth



Now the farmers produce more efficiently, have lower fixed and variable costs but gee guess what happens.


Supply increases, and price falls.


So how does their wealth increase ?

 

[bitrend]

I'm not going to contradict anyone, I thought I'd just throw in my two cents worth. I remember the first physics course about the definition of the energy in the Universe as a whole. The question is do we have only one Universe or more than one? The conclusion is we have only one Universe since we don't lose nor gain energy, the energy is just transformed, from one form to another. The law of conservation of energy says that energy is neither created nor destroyed. If we have two Universes then we must have lose or gain energy.

Regarding the Market, it's only one Market as a whole; stock market, commodity market or currency market is a one entity Market. Then the money, goods or wealth are only exchanged from one hand to another or from one country to another country. The FED cannot print the money as it wishes unless it has enough wealth to support the value of the dollar.

Base on the above, if one lose money in the market, please don't worry your money is not really lost, someone will find it.

 

[1000]

Quote from whitster:

volente doesn't understand what wealth creation means

much as he doesn't understand what zero sum means.

thus, having a discussion with him is pointless

it would be like discussing whether what is in Vial X is a solution or a suspension, with a person who doesn't even understand what the terms mean. it's meaningless



you really don't understand markets, volente. i hope to GOD you trade. we need more lemming idiots like you. they provide liquidity

1. Those words came out of your mouth whitster, with due respect, what you say is valid, but when you think someone else doesn't understand, it really means the opposite (need to learn how the brain is wired up).

2. No one can argue about increasing capital in the bank accounts, yet the debt of the whole country keeps on increasing.

3. Don't go down that solution or suspension discussion because I am going to throw in micells and surfactants (you are not alone!).

4. If you believe in your theory, which is all it is, then every human that is born is born bankrupt. Explain that.

5. Tell me where the money in my account came from. You cannot answer that question just like you cannot prove zero sum.

6. Explain economic responsibility, or may be you could do a PhD on those two words alone.

 

[1000]

Quote from whitster:


for pete's sake, arguing with the ignorant (volente) is like dressing up a pig.


MATTER cannot be destroyed .

Johnny invents the supergrowinator. using this device, it now requires 50 man hours and 1/4 acre to grow 1 bushel of y

Johnny sells the growinator to farmers.

you really don't understand markets, volente. i hope to GOD you trade. we need more lemming idiots like you. they provide liquidity

1. Read up on physics experiments, and then realize that MATTER can be destroyed, and created, and re-engineered.

2. You forgot to include slippage, insurance, carry costs.

3. 1 + 1 = 2, and 1- 1 = 0, is only to make the shoe fit, it is not really true, just to keep a lot of simple minds happy. Try and figure out how you would sheppard 6.5 billion people.

4. They do dress up pigs, did anyone forget to tell you.

5. You still haven't answered my question of several pages ago, what do you understand about the word liquidity? Answer it, if you are man enough.

 

[1000]

Quote from bitrend:

I'm not going to contradict anyone, I thought I'd just throw in my two cents worth. I remember the first physics course about the definition of the energy in the Universe as a whole. The question is do we have only one Universe or more than one? The conclusion is we have only one Universe since we don't lose nor gain energy, the energy is just transformed, from one form to another. The law of conservation of energy says that energy is neither created nor destroyed. If we have two Universes then we must have lose or gain energy.

You obviously don't know what is going on in NM. We do gain energy. Energy has just been created, and more than once.

Whether it was transformed or not, no one knows where it came from. You cannot prejudge that, just because you cannot imagine that it could have been created. OR because it may be contrary to the current law that may have to be disregarded.

 

[volente_00]

Quote from 1000:

You obviously don't know what is going on in NM. We do gain energy. Energy has just been created, and more than once.

Whether it was transformed or not, no one knows where it came from. You cannot prejudge that, just because you cannot imagine that it could have been created. OR because it may be contrary to the current law that may have to be disregarded.

So that is what happens in area 51.



I do not believe that energy is created. It is just transferred from another resource such as coal, water, sun or atoms.