The future of the Forex industry - page 177
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
You're referring to yourself, aren't you? I've only just got you right.)
Naturally.
Just don't chase me around all the branches like your best friend secret has been doing for four years now.
Why and why?
What is the point? - To raise by reducing the income of richer people?
Can you explain it clearly?
What is the point of explaining it to you for the 10th time if 9 was not enough for you?
Alexander_K2:
Just don't follow me around like your best friend secret has been doing for 4 years now.
You're a megalomaniac, my dear boy.)
We should shake Renat down.) He should at least give me a better hint. At least in person.
By the way, yes!
Sasha_AK, if you need the Grail, it's up to Renat now. I hope 50% a day will suit you?
No help for the lazy and slackers.
Then you must also agree that entrepreneurs and more active people in general should get markedly more. 😁
The minimum wage should be such that a person would be interested in working and not in getting unemployment benefits.
That's usually the case, of course,
you just want too much.
So? Are all the capitalists in Sweden running away? Or is the Swedish economy still alive and well?
Doesn't it make sense that the successful and valuable get more and the losers/babes get less?
Again a platitude. Who can argue with that?
Now I'm not ready to say much about Sweden specifically, but I will point out that their Gini coefficient is quite low, it's true, but at the same time: only 5% of households own 77% of the total number of shares owned by all households. This provides that 5% with the income that the rest of the population gets from labour.
Capitalism has won again, hehe.
As you can see in any situation the most successful win.
People do.
Is this verified information?
And do all these people make a significant enough contribution to the total social product or factors in its growth?
Also the socialist wing, represented by Mr Khorosh, has again leaked the question :
What minimum level is considered "normal" (previously the phrase "decent living" was used).
And who is going to finance it.
Categorically incorrect judgement.
Demonstrates the depth of your misunderstanding of economics.
He must not just work, but work efficiently (in the broad market sense) not to be poor!
Realise what poverty is.
Poverty is being at the tail end of the distribution.
There will always be poor, no matter what level of development the country has reached.
Is that supposed to be clear?
So to not be poor (= not to be at the tail end) you have to be more efficient than others.
Have I made myself clear?
A worker has to comply with technological instructions and performance standards. And efficient is not specific.
Poverty is a consequence of the wrong structure of society. In a just society, there should be no poor and if a person works and works honestly and conscientiously, he should not be poor. The poor only exist when the minimum wage is unfairly low. No matter what I am told, I will always maintain this position on this issue.
I work in a factory from morning till night, and all I have is money for vodka. My wife takes the rest... and I don't know where she goes...
I pray the Lord to send down the Holy Grail. So I can cut my cash while I'm sitting in my panties at the monitor.
I put a turkey in the branch machine just for you ;)
but there's a lot of spamming going on after that, so we'll have to look it upBy the way, yes!
Sasha_AK, if the Grail is needed, it's up to Renat now. I hope 50% a day will suit you?
I think Renat has something... But, he's too vague. Let's just say it's not academic. You're much better at it too, so it's more interesting to argue.
It's impossible to argue with Rena, because his words are imbued with the mysterious power of the Grail.