To the people who want to actively destroy government, I ask “Why turn to violence? Don’t even bother.” In the long run, every single government will inevitably destroy itself.
Free Market Solutions to GMO Labeling
People wonder what happens if we don’t have mandatory labeling of GMOs.
Freedom of choice is a two way street. As a consumer, you should have the ability to choose what you consume, but producers should also have the ability to choose what they produce and how they package it and introduce it to the market.
How would that work?
Those who choose to label their products do so and then the public decides if it cares enough to buy labeled products or it prefers the cheaper goods even if they know they are modified or they simply don’t care either way.
This is why you can’t force people’s hand. What if some people prefer GMO food? What if some people prefer the cheaper prices? What if you’re artificially increasing those prices by requiring labeling?
Why don’t we just take a step back and let the market decide exactly where it wants to go?
In the end, if the public prefers Non-GMO and also prefers it to be labeled, those producers who provide products that fit those preferences will win out and those that don’t change their products will be left with a smaller share of the market (or no share at all).
In the real world, it’s not mandatory to label GMOs, yet some stores, Whole Foods and Sprouts, do so. As do some manufacturers. What is more prominent in the market is not the labeling of GMOs but the labeling of Non-GMOs.
This is actually a better approach, since it doesn’t force anyone to label anything, but those that don’t use GMOs and want to notify the public can get on board and those that don’t want to notify the public don’t have to and can risk the public no longer purchasing their product.
Walk into a Whole Foods right now and you’ll find all kinds of products, from Non-GMOs to Organic to Naturals to regular foods. And everyone can shop their and everyone can buy the type of product that fits all of their preferences; both dietary and financial.
When we talk about choice, I think a lot of people only focus on a single side of the coin. They assume that choice in a marketplace only refers to the consumers choice. That’s only half of the picture. A truly free market has choices for both consumers and producers.
If producers want, they can supply goods that are contrary to the preferences of the consumers. They might be breaking through to a brand new market and revolutionize the industry or they might be headed for a cliff. Why not let them do what they want and let consumers buy what they want and the future of the industry will be determined by what new preferences consumers form by testing what’s available for them?
It is philosophically inconsistent to advocate for less government intervention yet want government to force the hand of producers. It’s also inconsistent to advocate for the freedom of choice for you and people in your group while also asking to limit the choices of a different group of people.
If you really want GMOs labeled or even gone for good, start by only buying Non-GMOs. If enough people agree and also buy Non-GMOs, the rest of the equation will solve itself.
The minimum wage in 1955 was $1.00/hr.
That would be four quarters, back when quarters were made with silver. The melt value of those four quarters (in today’s money) is about $20.gee I wish this had a source..
you can literally google every aspect of this post.
1995 minimum wage, silver content in US quarters pre-1964, spot price of silver
These are not hard pieces of information to find. Not everything needs to be injected directly into your thick skull from somebody else in order for you to know about it.
I mean honestly. Are you that fucking dumb?
I hate lazy people who want a source for everything as if Google doesn’t exist on your computer, phone, playstation and tv.
All of the info in the world, right there at your fingertips and you are too lazy to search or to comfortable with your skepticism that you refuse to do so.
Someone yesterday asked me “If IP law hurts individuals, why isn’t there anything written about it?” I wanted to cut my neck with a pencil, pull my brains out with a toothpick and jam them down my throat so I could suffocate to death.
Minimum Wage in 1955 to 1956: $1/hour (via Dept of Labor)
Price of an ounce of Silver in 1955: $0.95/ounce (via The Silver Institute)
What $1 in 1955 is worth in 2013 dollars: $8.23 (via Bureau of Labor Statistics)
Price of an ounce of Silver in 2013 (3/28/13): $28.82 (via MonEx)
The US dollar literally lost $20.59 or 71.4% of it’s value since 1955 due to inflation.
Next time don’t be so damn lazy.
Bitcoin Investment and Profitability.
Bitcoin has been building up quite a head of steam lately and I’ve decided to pay attention. I’ve been doing a lot of reading and the idea seems sound, to a degree. I haven’t looked too much into the programming and I probably won’t since I don’t speak that specific dialect of nerd. But one thing I have looked into is the profitability or value of converting or at least investing in some Bitcoins.
Last night I was doing some crude math with bitcoin values just trying to see where bitcoin is and where it can end up. . It’s probably safer to assume that bitcoin, if successful, will only be one of a number of major currencies in use (I can best imagine a scenario or 3 or 4 different currencies at play). It’s also highly likely that bitcoin will fail. There are some programming or coding weaknesses, especially in privacy/anonymity, and other issues regarding government intervention and regulation, outlawing and so on. For simplicity’s sake, I’ve assumed that bitcoin will eventually replace the entire US currency system but not the entire world’s system. I’m sure if I my intrigue of bitcoin grows a little more, I’ll probably build a few models, factoring in growth, size and risk factors but for now just plain crude math.
Here’s some simple numbers:
- There will only ever be 21 million bitcoins created
- Each bitcoin is currently valued at around $75 a coin (3/25/2013)
- In 2009 there was about $8 trillion US dollars in existence.
- Since 2009, the Fed has significantly increased the world’s US Dollar supply, but I don’t know the exact number. Let’s leave this figure at $8 trillion for now.
I won’t try to calculate bitcoin’s value based on the world’s total money value because that would first of all be beyond optimistic, even more so than this post is already and secondly bitcoin is supposed to bring about a new revolution in money where people have competing, free market currencies, so it would be pointless to assume bitcoin will hold a monopoly on the world’s currency. It was never supposed to do such a thing.
So, what happens if bitcoin replaces the US dollar completely? Well, it would have to carry the weight of the value of those dollars, or come close to doing so. But for the sake of simplicity, let’s just say that it would have to replace the dollar completely.
This means that 21 million coins would have to hold a value of 8 trillion dollars.
That’s an absurd amount. How absurd?
Well, each bitcoin is currently worth about $75. There are 10 million or so coins currently in circulation. Let’s assume that the total value of bitcoins stays static until 21 million coins are released. Each coin would be worth about $36.
That’s about 0.01% of what a bitcoin would have to be worth for it to replace the US Dollar. If you’re not good at math, that means that each of the 21 million bitcoins would have to be valued at $358,000 each. That’s an increase of over 4,700%.
Just to bring some gravity to the situation, this is all calculated on extremely gracious assumptions. There are still very real risks in investing in bitcoin.
The price needs to stabilize for the currency to become something more than just an investment. If the price keeps climbing people will only invest and hoard bitcoin. Very few will be willing to pay with or trade bitcoins out of fear that they might lose out on the next price jump. Some of this is due to the fact that some “investors” still look at the dollar as their main currency and see bitcoins as investments. Others because bitcoin isn’t accepted as a payment method in the overall marketplace. Unless people start to openly accept bitcoin, there’s no real way to obtain or capitalize on the value of bitcoins short of “cashing out”.
Here’s where competing with governments hurts bitcoin. Governments can still step in and make it illegal to buy, sell or hold bitcoins. This would mean that unless you can use bitcoins to buy things, there’s no way to extract the value and the investment is now useless.
There are other real fears with bitcoin; The whole thing could be a big scheme by early adopters to pump and dump. The code can theoretically be hacked or manipulated at some point. Electronic records are much more potent that standard paper keeping. In the electric world no one is really anonymous, some just do a better job of hiding their tracks.
It’s safe to say that it’s probably worth investing $100, $500 and maybe even a $1,000 in bitcoins, if you can afford it just for the fun of it. It will make for a good story, if nothing else.
I’m personally still holding out but watching with a curious eye and a fist full of money to invest.