/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>50634478
>you're really fucking shit at achieving it then
Really? During the most free market period of american history, with no central bank, we had prices coming down constantly as real wages rose.
Hours fell dramatically without government or unions mandating them.
Unions were only like 4% of the workforce back then too.

The reason working hours aren't falling now is central banks and government intervention.

>>50518096
this is a very poorly thought out strawman argument and isn't how privatized roads systems would work in reality
for more information read this book, even though you cannot read:
https://www.amazon.com/Privatization-Roads-Highways-Large-Print/dp/147833844X

>>50518107
>2010 facebook/reddit memes
HAHAHAHAHAHA
You truly have to go back.
It was the free market that ended child labor in the first place. It was the free market, not government or unions that decreased working hours in the first place.
Pic related.

>>49301538
>Famously people worked fewer hours in the u.s. when we had less government intervention.
The period with the freest markets in american history resulted in the largest reduction in working hours.
u mad?

>>27429820
Moving towards bigger government literally created all of these problems.
Do you really think Tesla is worth more than every car company in the world?
No, it's a central bank created bubble.

>>27430221
>just fucking kek if you think worker rights were something achieved passively through economic growth
I know this is very difficult for you dogmatic children to accept but it's literally true, pic related
Working hours fell significantly before the government or unions got involved. I mean unions were only 4% of the workforce and constantly lost their battles anyway.

The idea that workers got more goods because they "fought for them" instead of because the economy produced more of them makes absolutely ZERO sense if you just sit down and think about it for 2 fucking seconds.
You're saying something that makes ZERO SENSE

>imagine being this fucking stupid
Dude, it's literally true, learn the history of child labor.

>>24875193
>There were massive recessions in the 19th century
They were relatively minor compared to the ones have since the fed.
All of those recessions were either caused by central banking or government heavily intervening in the market/banking.
https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Panics

>Do you agree that deflationary pressures are a problem at all?
I think Keynesians are retarded and that a normal natural deflation being the result of an increase in efficiency is an amazingly good thing. Inflation is what is bad.
>How can you service growing production with a stagnant money supply without massive deflation?
Are you people actually this brainwashed? From 1865-1913 we had a massive increase in production, massive increases in living standards all while on a deflationary gold standard.
How the fuck do you explain this?
Price fell year after year.
>Iran is destroyed because of your nation (US presumably) enforcing an international oil export embargo on them.
Also due to their central banks, but okay.
>Yes, states can have the interest of the Nation and people at heart:it's called fascism.
That's when the state has it's own interests in mind and tells the people to be it's slaves, only cucks think otherwise.
>The industrial revolution tripled yearly working hours in my country
This is highly unlikely or you are extremely confused.
The industrial revolution in america massively reduced working hours, long before government or unions got involved to change anything. pic related
>modern wage slavery.
Something you idiot inflationists SUPPORT. You're happy your wages constantly lose value and the working class has no savings.

>>22528317
>it's an increase in living standards the same way a keynesian or klaus schwab defines living standards
No it's not.
Workers got to consume a lot more while working a lot less.
How is this not an increase in living standards?