were Mr. Beniste's "two kids" with him in NYC, or back in Haiti? he would hire another guy to drive the other twelve hours so that even while he was home with his family While that doesn't prove his family was in NYC for all 14 years, I think that it's a reasonable assumption they have been here at least most of that time.
Was all this good for their growing up? Having a hard-working father around who saved $300/month and then invested those savings to then hire his own employee (and who knows how many more he will hire later on) seems to be extremely good for their growing up. Would you prefer he instead live on unemployment so he could spend more time with his kids setting them an "alternative" example?
$220K is a lot of money. It was set by the market, and the main reason the medallions are that valuable is the limited supply. Your government at work. But still the holders of those medallions are able to recoup their investments. Every business starts and lives on loans and lines of credit. You don't get paid until the good is delivered or the service is rendered. As for who is pocketing the money, the previous owner of the medalion, who also put a substantial sum of his savings into it. And the bank (and its depositors--such as Mr. Beniste--whose savings made the money for the loan possible in the first place) will also make some money. The government will get a portion of all of this money as well from taxes, much of which will then be delivered to people who don't save part of any paychecks they may be getting. When the time comes for Mr. Beniste to retire then the savings and earnings he put into this medallion will go back into his pocket. The money did not simply disappear. It was exchanged for an asset that at a later date can be exchanged back into money. That's how the system has worked ever since the invention of currency thousands of years ago in Asia Minor.
how long does a Haitian take to earn that back in Haiti, anyway? The broken markets of Haiti are their problem. In NYC it seems to take 14 years at least from Mr. Beniste's example. Why can it be done in NYC and not in Port-au-Prince? The rule of law, particualarly with respect to private property. God Bless America and Rudy Giuliani.
Good thing that medallion doesn't cost more, as well it might! Actually Mr. Beniste is counting on that medallion to cost more in the future. That's the whole point of investing.
Your real problem seems to be with the notion of profits, free markets, and accumulation of capital. What a sad life you must lead with that outlook. Mr. Beniste did not "beat" his way to the top. He saved. Anyone can do it. Just be willing to live a little bit within your means. 3 simple rules: Stay in school and get a diploma. Don't have kids out of wedlock. Get a(ny) job and keep it. And save some of that paycheck. "Impossible!" you cry? Hardly. $50,000 in 14 years is about $50/week put into savings (including earnings over time on those savings). Even $20/week is $1000/year if you just stuff it in a mattress. With compounded interest it's much more over 14 years. But $50 a week! OMG how can anyone do that? Don't smoke or use other expensive recreational drugs. Don't blow $5 or $10 a week on lottery tickets. Don't eat out every night. Buy the $40 Reeboks instead of the $200 Nikes. Pay your bills on time (since you are living within your means) and don't carry a credit card balance past the grace period. And when you have a nice pool of capital built up, leverage it into a better rate of return. Spend the money to get a college degree. Or get a loan to buy a medallion and a new cab.
The medallion is still a risky investment. The big danger is that the government might well change the rules in the middle of the game. For example, they might double the number available, which would bring down the resale value. Or they might eliminate them entirely, although that's hardly likely.
All investments have risks, and indeed that is an apparent one. Until you realize that it is NYC, a liberal mecca, currently under the rule of Nanny Bloomberg. The city might make more medallions available, but that would mean more cabs on the crowded streets. The real risk is that the city would try to cash in some of those medallions--at the license fee value instead of the fair market value.
Your description of how "anyone" can save, achieve and succeed is very encouraging -- however, plain logic tells me that the market would not allow all the strivers to succeed. The stakes would simply get set higher and higher, squeezing out some who'd remain, striving or not, closer to or at the bottom. Profit is like some big pyramid scheme: doesn't it depend on a wide base at the bottom for people paying in so others higher up (who have attained their position through, what, hard work or privilege?) may skim it off?
You are wrong if you include me in "our" country (unless that's just a figure of speech). It was mine (and my forebears for generations) but not any more. I left.
I chose to live in what I consider a more fair system, one that implements socioeconomic policies aimed at ensuring the welfare of all its inhabitants according to some basic human rights. Kibbutz, in case you're unfamiliar with it, is a sort of village-based communism with direct-plus-representative democracy to set policy.
It doesn't work well; in some cases it's collapsed -- primarily because a significant percentage (though not a majority, but they leveraged deals to achieve a takeover) of the wage-earners chose to stop supporting the less-productive needy (including the elderly and children) so they could pocket their earnings (call it tax relief) and enhance their own standard of living which they equate with a better quality of life.
I'm sorry for our failures but they don't negate the values for which the system stood. I hope there will always be places where workers and communities find a way to adjust and implement values for the common good.
First off, my apologies about "our" government. Yes, I meant that "our" as Americans referring mainly to myself, alexpgp, and the author and subject of the story.
"Plain logic" sees profit as a pyramid-scheme only if you accept that there's a fixed-size pie. In fact, increased profits mostly result from increased economic activity which creates a larger pie. Granted, in a healthy economy the gap between those that help increase the economy and those who don't will increase. But 2 > 0 is not inherently more unfair than 1 > 0.
Rant on socialism and capitalism would fill a book. I'll just point out that charitable giving rises in a growing economy, and tends to fall with increased government involvement as people wonder why they should contribute to charities if they are already paying taxes to care for the poor, the sick, the elderly. Also just about every economic system agrees "People are self-interested, greedy if you will" but only capitalism said "Let's make greed work" by pairing it off in free markets. The other systems, such as socialism and communism, said "People are the problem, they must be changed" which is why the 20th century saw so many millions slaughtered by their own totalitarian governments.
I happen to know of other applications of socialism and communism that are not the State, totalitarian varieties. I left the USA to go live in a system like that; it's called a kibbutz and mainly exists in Israel. I don't claim that it's perfect; far from it. But neither is it brutal.
Since my last commments, I've given a lot of thought to this story of the immigrant pursuing the American dream. I can see how this is tremendously appealing to those who believe that this is a superior, even ideal solution for those individuals who choose to devote themselves to it.
The fundamental act requires, of course, that they leave their country of origin. And this is where we part company. The perspective that interests (and concerns) me, is based in consideration of the situation and circumstances of remaining in one's native land.
From that perspective, emigration is mainly a brain- and/or talent drain. My focus is on options for those living outside the USA, particularly in underdeveloped countries. It seems vitally significant and important to me to seek and effect changes by enlisting ways and means to improve the situation personally and on a broader scale (e.g. community, locality).
I think I see the point of your position, and thank you and alexpgp for expressing them here. Having been exposed to them helps me more clearly see that I really have an awful lot to do, and that my place is elsewhere.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: DOESN'T work for me!
Date: 2003-02-08 02:29 pm (UTC)he would hire another guy to drive the other twelve hours so that even while he was home with his family While that doesn't prove his family was in NYC for all 14 years, I think that it's a reasonable assumption they have been here at least most of that time.
Was all this good for their growing up? Having a hard-working father around who saved $300/month and then invested those savings to then hire his own employee (and who knows how many more he will hire later on) seems to be extremely good for their growing up. Would you prefer he instead live on unemployment so he could spend more time with his kids setting them an "alternative" example?
$220K is a lot of money. It was set by the market, and the main reason the medallions are that valuable is the limited supply. Your government at work. But still the holders of those medallions are able to recoup their investments. Every business starts and lives on loans and lines of credit. You don't get paid until the good is delivered or the service is rendered. As for who is pocketing the money, the previous owner of the medalion, who also put a substantial sum of his savings into it. And the bank (and its depositors--such as Mr. Beniste--whose savings made the money for the loan possible in the first place) will also make some money. The government will get a portion of all of this money as well from taxes, much of which will then be delivered to people who don't save part of any paychecks they may be getting. When the time comes for Mr. Beniste to retire then the savings and earnings he put into this medallion will go back into his pocket. The money did not simply disappear. It was exchanged for an asset that at a later date can be exchanged back into money. That's how the system has worked ever since the invention of currency thousands of years ago in Asia Minor.
how long does a Haitian take to earn that back in Haiti, anyway? The broken markets of Haiti are their problem. In NYC it seems to take 14 years at least from Mr. Beniste's example. Why can it be done in NYC and not in Port-au-Prince? The rule of law, particualarly with respect to private property. God Bless America and Rudy Giuliani.
Good thing that medallion doesn't cost more, as well it might! Actually Mr. Beniste is counting on that medallion to cost more in the future. That's the whole point of investing.
Your real problem seems to be with the notion of profits, free markets, and accumulation of capital. What a sad life you must lead with that outlook. Mr. Beniste did not "beat" his way to the top. He saved. Anyone can do it. Just be willing to live a little bit within your means. 3 simple rules: Stay in school and get a diploma. Don't have kids out of wedlock. Get a(ny) job and keep it. And save some of that paycheck. "Impossible!" you cry? Hardly. $50,000 in 14 years is about $50/week put into savings (including earnings over time on those savings). Even $20/week is $1000/year if you just stuff it in a mattress. With compounded interest it's much more over 14 years.
But $50 a week! OMG how can anyone do that? Don't smoke or use other expensive recreational drugs. Don't blow $5 or $10 a week on lottery tickets. Don't eat out every night. Buy the $40 Reeboks instead of the $200 Nikes. Pay your bills on time (since you are living within your means) and don't carry a credit card balance past the grace period. And when you have a nice pool of capital built up, leverage it into a better rate of return. Spend the money to get a college degree. Or get a loan to buy a medallion and a new cab.
Re: DOESN'T work for me!
Date: 2003-02-08 03:00 pm (UTC)Re: DOESN'T work for me!
Date: 2003-02-08 04:10 pm (UTC)Re: DOESN'T work for me!
Date: 2003-02-08 04:21 pm (UTC)Maybe "anyone" can do it, but not "every"one
Date: 2003-02-08 03:56 pm (UTC)You are wrong if you include me in "our" country (unless that's just a figure of speech). It was mine (and my forebears for generations) but not any more. I left.
I chose to live in what I consider a more fair system, one that implements socioeconomic policies aimed at ensuring the welfare of all its inhabitants according to some basic human rights. Kibbutz, in case you're unfamiliar with it, is a sort of village-based communism with direct-plus-representative democracy to set policy.
It doesn't work well; in some cases it's collapsed -- primarily because a significant percentage (though not a majority, but they leveraged deals to achieve a takeover) of the wage-earners chose to stop supporting the less-productive needy (including the elderly and children) so they could pocket their earnings (call it tax relief) and enhance their own standard of living which they equate with a better quality of life.
I'm sorry for our failures but they don't negate the values for which the system stood. I hope there will always be places where workers and communities find a way to adjust and implement values for the common good.
Re: Maybe "anyone" can do it, but not "every"one
Date: 2003-02-08 04:55 pm (UTC)"Plain logic" sees profit as a pyramid-scheme only if you accept that there's a fixed-size pie. In fact, increased profits mostly result from increased economic activity which creates a larger pie. Granted, in a healthy economy the gap between those that help increase the economy and those who don't will increase. But 2 > 0 is not inherently more unfair than 1 > 0.
Rant on socialism and capitalism would fill a book. I'll just point out that charitable giving rises in a growing economy, and tends to fall with increased government involvement as people wonder why they should contribute to charities if they are already paying taxes to care for the poor, the sick, the elderly. Also just about every economic system agrees "People are self-interested, greedy if you will" but only capitalism said "Let's make greed work" by pairing it off in free markets. The other systems, such as socialism and communism, said "People are the problem, they must be changed" which is why the 20th century saw so many millions slaughtered by their own totalitarian governments.
Other solutions for other people
Date: 2003-02-27 11:49 pm (UTC)Since my last commments, I've given a lot of thought to this story of the immigrant pursuing the American dream. I can see how this is tremendously appealing to those who believe that this is a superior, even ideal solution for those individuals who choose to devote themselves to it.
The fundamental act requires, of course, that they leave their country of origin. And this is where we part company. The perspective that interests (and concerns) me, is based in consideration of the situation and circumstances of remaining in one's native land.
From that perspective, emigration is mainly a brain- and/or talent drain. My focus is on options for those living outside the USA, particularly in underdeveloped countries. It seems vitally significant and important to me to seek and effect changes by enlisting ways and means to improve the situation personally and on a broader scale (e.g. community, locality).
I think I see the point of your position, and thank you and