ebola?
Bluelight Crew
>>
It seems to me that there are plenty enough unmotivated impoverished people out there to fill the economical niche for the lowest-of-the-low, but what if there werent? Could every single poor person in a capitalist nation such as the USA just up and become thriving members of society one day, or would there be a certain percentage who are physically incapable of finding a job that would rise them above the poverty line?>>
Well, if it helps to answer your question, there is a finite amount of productive capital in existence, so there is thus a finite amount number of people who may be employed under the current economic arrangement. Given that even in the best of times, usage of capital is below capacity, there MUST be a certain number of individuals who are unemployed at any given moment.
Of course, if every capitalist were to start employing more people spontaneously (this would reduce profits), there would be more wage-earners, and thus more consumers to buy the capitalist's goods. The problem is that no single capitalist will act altruistically in the name of macroeconomic health (with rare exceptions, eg Ford).
ebola
It seems to me that there are plenty enough unmotivated impoverished people out there to fill the economical niche for the lowest-of-the-low, but what if there werent? Could every single poor person in a capitalist nation such as the USA just up and become thriving members of society one day, or would there be a certain percentage who are physically incapable of finding a job that would rise them above the poverty line?>>
Well, if it helps to answer your question, there is a finite amount of productive capital in existence, so there is thus a finite amount number of people who may be employed under the current economic arrangement. Given that even in the best of times, usage of capital is below capacity, there MUST be a certain number of individuals who are unemployed at any given moment.
Of course, if every capitalist were to start employing more people spontaneously (this would reduce profits), there would be more wage-earners, and thus more consumers to buy the capitalist's goods. The problem is that no single capitalist will act altruistically in the name of macroeconomic health (with rare exceptions, eg Ford).
ebola