India following facist model according to Indian author 1722

Straydog we are talking of definitions - not money.

well -different dictionaries have different viewpoints. But 'landlording' is hardly a profession.

They may or may not have to be licensed depending on the functioning of the state. Being licensed is not a pre-requisite for it to be called (the world's oldest) profession. If it is the world's oldest -then it must pre-date the concept of licensing.

yeah -nothing unusual about it. Indians have had a holistic view -whereas Islam and later Victorian ideology considered all these things a taboo. With the british having left and islam being sidelined -you can expect that we are reverting back to square one. Oh btw -another invention for which you can think India -kamasutra.

then professional would be an adjective to indicate his proficiency.

yep - I do.

Believe me, there is no 'fountain of wealth' for americans to keep splurging. Conversely, show me how you can afford to keep importing and splurging without exporting anything comparable. The thing that caused a splurge to begin in the US was a monetary expansion by AG. Read this:-

Fractional reserve banking is practised everywhere and anywhere. The lower the CRR -the greater the risk of a financial collapse, and the higher the bar for proper financial management.

because they are able to negotiate such deals. If there are more high performing CEOs -companies will be able to hire one off the cheap without any of the above. CEO wages, like anybody else's wages are based on demand & supply of manpower. Is something holding back underpaid employees for applying for the CEO's post?

Is someone compelling companies to bring in investors? nInvestors put money where they are invited to do so. If you keep a company private and raise capital from amongst workers -investors will be sidelined. When you bring in venture capital or tap the public markets for investment -those who invest will demand a return on investment and a say in the functioning of a company to be sure their investment will pay off.

so it is like what goes around - comes around. If americans hadn't supported a cold war with the evil empire regardless of how it ruins the lives of people there -there wouldn't be poor people now to compete for americans' jobs. The greater the poverty overseas and the greater the number of failed states -the more you will be affected by it.

yes -you need to be a ruined state for there to be a surplus of cheap labour at throwaway prices.

The chinese were a counter-weight by the US against the USSR.

Exchange rates facilitate that -but there is also a difference in std of living. If all Indians who are as productive as americans -start splurging like americans, with exchange rates intact -they will also lose their compebreastive edge vs americans. The strong dollar policy faciliates your higher level of consumption.

Nothing -but money is still not wealth. Wealth is trade-able goods-services and money is a means to transact in such trade-able goods-services. If gold costs $500-oz and the US federal reserve increases money supply 10 fold -it will not lead to an increase in the amount of gold americans can buy by 10 times. It will instead cause inflation aka a gold rally and gold will probably reach $5000-oz coz while the amt of gold (real wealth) is constant, the liquidity and the demand for gold has gone up by 10 times. If increasing money supply by 10 times can lead to an automatic increase in the amt of gold in the world market by 10 times -then your buttertion of money being an alias for wealth would hold true.

sometime in B.C

Im not. All financial instruments have zero residual value.

I do understand it.

you need to read more on money supply and wealth before you make a declaration 'you still do not understand ...'.

I am not complaining. I am telling you money supply is inconsequential to wealth creation.

no -it isn't the only country.

does that answer my question? It doesn't.

if they generate exports -that can sustain import of goods by the US to the extent that there is demand and warfare doesn't come to an end.

I have.

Its worth nothing other than what is denominated in USD. The real buttets of your country aka wealth are all denominated in USD. If they sell their USD reserves, the USD will tank and their reserves will be worth nothing. So, to ensure their reserves are worth something -they will not sell their USD but buy real wealth with the reserves they ahve. When you buy goods-services from other countries by giving them USD -it is them loaning you goods-services for USD(promisory notes), not you loaning them real wealth in return for goods-services. From what I understand, all major mortgages in the US are-will be owned by foreigners.

No -just that they do not have a good monetary system in place.

because of liquidity. Ref the example of gold above. Every govt has money supply which needs to be adjusted to keep the economy in a goldilocks situation. Its like engine oil -which you need to keep tuning to keep the functioning of the car smooth. But it is not a subsbreastute for gas which you feed to mvoe the car from pt A to pt B.

and the reason why he was a be-fitting president is the latter.

its not to do with the US govt. They have real wealth (oil-gas-wheat-hi-tech exports etc..) which they can trade for the goods they need. USD is a mechanism to trade in real wealth i.e. gve what they have and buy what they want. You can replace the USD by swiss franc or euromoney or anything else or just do barter trade not involving currencies issued by a central bank.

ok

They do. Their willingness to spend money on employing underlings depends on their ability to raise capital and the financial viability of employing someone i.e it should yield them a return on investment to hire someone.

snip

regards -kamal