76

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: Q> Certainly when at us cancel cash and cards become a unique instrument of payment Then the beggar should get mobile data terminals for alms reception: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgsIWNAmbQc

77

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: Q> Talked about, whether it is required to transport cash between banks. No. Talked about, whether it is necessary to transport cash at clearing settlements. And initially you searched for situations when cash needs to be transported for non-cash banking calculations. For support of operation with a cash, it is obvious that it should be transported. Q> Matter of course, I about it also wrote, at a considerable quantity of clients the great bulk of payments transits a clearing settlement. But in due course the disbalance which collects it is necessary to eliminate. A disbalance of cash operations inside/between clients of one bank. Under your initial version any disbalance of calculations between two any banks.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

78

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, pagid, you wrote: Q>> Talked about, whether it is required to transport cash between banks. P> is not present. Talked about, whether it is necessary to transport cash at clearing settlements. Above  found my citation. There it is clearly told that when at non-cash transfers the disbalance money should be transported physically collects. P> and initially you searched for situations when cash needs to be transported for non-cash banking calculations. I searched for the situations underlining inevitability of a disbalance. Real situations differ only that the total of non-cash transfers many times over more than the totals of physically transported money. But completely to eliminate transportation it is impossible.

79

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: Q> Above  found my citation. There it is clearly told that when at non-cash transfers the disbalance money should be transported physically collects. But not so, it is physically necessary to transport it only at a disbalance of cash calculations between clients of bank. Or as a whole region when the share of cash calculations or increases or decreases, or as in Crimea the currency of cash calculations changes. But it already care of the Central Bank. Q> I searched for the situations underlining inevitability of a disbalance. Real situations differ only that the total of non-cash transfers many times over more than the totals of physically transported money. But completely to eliminate transportation it is impossible. You and did not understand For clearing settlements, to transport a cash it is not necessary, never, in any situations.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

80

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: P>>> It is your personal representations about differences, an unknown and not clear origin. And yes, incomes of the investor -  a C>> From what it? The person fairly earned money. Understood where to enclose, and it too work. Q> a problem of your discussion in different interpretation of terms. Probably you hearing expression "unearned incomes" you imply that they unfair. But it not same. These incomes - yes, unearned, after all he does not work for their obtaining (at least after it understood where to enclose). But it does not mean that they unfair. Incorrectly. Labor if the person puts up money earned by the work. It them not , it enclosed the work, therefore incomes from the contribution receives on work.

81

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: Q>>> "the Market socialism" it about the same, as "the pregnant virgin". When the socialism becomes market, from turns to capitalism. Cs>> Yes, drove in such bosh with all into the USSR. Knowing understand that the market is always and is shown on a miscellaneous. If what idiot counts that the market needs to be clamped, instead of to develop that learns a deficit, shadow economy, total dependence on officials and mandatory crash in the end of tortures. You esteem history of the USSR, can you will understand. Q> the kid, I should not read this history, I in it of cores and itself can tell it. I perfectly know that happened in the USSR that there clamped the market and consequently for a long time acquired that the socialism (that is market clamping) is a rare shit with which it is necessary to struggle the same as with fascism. It is not unique, attempts to liquidate the market met in the history though and it is rare, but for some reason people again would like to walk smack in this shit. You can be understood, I really kid and did not find Stalin and Khruschev's time. Can at this time really  was. So, tell that you remember? Q> so, once again, "socialism" == "absence of the market". If in your concept there is a market, if you please to name it in another way. Because the word "socialism" is already occupied. As this word is called that was in the USSR. And wrong it cannot be on determination, state it so silly, how to tell that Kavendish opened wrong hydrogen, or incorrectly named it. The USSR constructed a socialism, therefore and named it as considered it necessary. And you who such to give it other titles and to take away it to yourself? At the first socialism in Paraguay and at the Lenin NEW ECONOMIC POLICY the market did not clamp. Why to Stalin you grant the right to usurp a word "socialism", and to me to return initial sense are not present? A C>> What inexpressible persistence to name black white, and white black! Note, Scandinavians and do not name the system socialist. Q> is not present, road, it you note! It you with companions with enviable obstinacy name this system socialist and who to you granted on this right? Scandinavians did not give it! Why I need to ask permission to speak at them? Their reforms went under the social justice slogan, and it is a way at a socialism in initial sense, instead of yours. Q>>> you have more to liking when you pay 60 % of surtax on which there live migrants from Asia? You, apparently, broadcast something about justice? Where it? A C>> You flies from cutlets learn to separate. And here this dullness obvious to us imposed from the outside. Or you think that it is possible only for us to impose any idiocy? Q> that for a mere verbiage? To decrypt? Considering your age, please: delivery of migrants in the European countries is imposed from the outside, the majority of the population against it. But to them do not listen, as did not listen to the majority which wanted to save the USSR.

82

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: the C>> jars on You not sense of structure, and a title. I concern the USSR with sympathy and understanding. Also I do not hesitate to take from its experience the best. A C>> Or you against planning, independent ratings, uniform information basis of the state? Q> yes, certainly! Nobody should plan manufacture of the goods, private businessmen on the money and for the risk should produce them. Nobody should create any ratings, to estimate the enterprises buyers the money should only. I do not know that for information bases you mean, but anyway in it the state should not be engaged. There should be you overheard that the information is too the important goods which participates in a market exchange on a level with other goods. Also that the modern society is called as information. And so, the state should not interfere with the information market the same as in any another. It is liberalism in a pure ugly type. It is direct as at Gaydar and Chubays. You are valid their admirer?

83

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, pagid, you wrote: Q>> Above  found my citation. There it is clearly told that when at non-cash transfers the disbalance money should be transported physically collects. P> but it not so, it is physically necessary to transport only at a disbalance of cash calculations between clients of bank. You so speak, as if cash and clearing settlements are something in essence different. There are calculations, for simplification (and for reduction of volumes of transportation of money) clearing settlements are invented. But completely to liquidate transportation all the same it is impossible. P> You and did not understand For clearing settlements, to transport a cash it is not necessary, never, in any situations. What for cavils to words? Certainly it is not necessary for clearing settlements, on determination, because they non-cash. But at calculations generally without them not to manage. Simply because sometimes it is required to pay cash, and they cannot get to Kolyma on wires, they should be carried physically.

84

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, Cornetov, you wrote: the C> Is liberalism in a pure ugly type. It is direct as at Gaydar and Chubays. You are valid their admirer? Why Gaydar, instead of Pak Chon of the Chi, Dan Sjaopina or Lie Kuan ? I, well, will not mention George Vashingtona or Charles  Gaulle. Also what the ugly can be in freedom?

85

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: the C>> Is liberalism in a pure ugly type. It is direct as at Gaydar and Chubays. You are valid their admirer? Q> why Gaydar, instead of Pak Chon of the Chi, Dan Sjaopina or Lie Kuan ? I, well, will not mention George Vashingtona or Charles  Gaulle. Because Pak Chon of the Chi, Dan Sjaopina and Lie Kuan  and close not were liberals, and George Vashington or Charles  Gaulle if and it is possible to name with great reserve liberals, quite reasonable, unlike Gaydar. How you think who entered indicative planning into France? Q> also what the ugly can be in freedom? Anything while this freedom does not hinder the remaining. But it not about pure liberalism.

86

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, Cornetov, you wrote: Cs> Because Pak Chon of the Chi, Dan Sjaopina and Lie Kuan  and close not were liberals Yes you ? And who they? Communists? There a planned economy? A C> As you think who entered indicative planning into France? Yes, communists very much love a word "planning" and rejoice always when see this word. Even when it is a question of normal control of economy by the government that is its direct duty. And differently what for they exist? Q>> also what the ugly can be in freedom? A C> Anything while this freedom does not hinder the remaining. But it not about pure liberalism. To me bothered to be engaged with you . I should clarify now sense of a word "pure"? I (unlike you) use all words in their dictionary value. Generally even pure liberalism is proclaimed that by freedom of one person coming to an end there where freedom of another begins. Your way I should state it each time when I write a word "liberalism"? I should explain for you that I understand as liberalism not that that you, and what this word means actually? Is not present, if you please learn values of these words to talk to people in their language, instead of on invented by you.

87

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

88

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, Cornetov, you wrote: a C> Yes, planned market, Clearly, "the pregnant virgin". With you all is clear. A C> as well as should be. To whom should?

89

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: a C>> Yes, planned market, as well as should be. Q> to whom should? All normal. How more correctly to work with the plan or without it? Or you of anything never plan?

90

Re: 2qwertyuiop - About specific economic sentences

Hello, qwertyuiop, you wrote: Q>>> Above  found my citation. There it is clearly told that when at non-cash transfers the disbalance money should be transported physically collects. P>> but it not so, it is physically necessary to transport only at a disbalance of cash calculations between clients of bank. Q> you so speak, as if cash and clearing settlements are something in essence different. There are calculations, for simplification (and for reduction of volumes of transportation of money) clearing settlements are invented. But completely to liquidate transportation all the same it is impossible. P>> You and did not understand For clearing settlements, to transport a cash it is not necessary, never, in any situations. Q> that for cavils to words? Certainly it is not necessary for clearing settlements, on determination, because they non-cash. But at calculations generally without them not to manage. Simply because sometimes it is required to pay cash, and they cannot get to Kolyma on wires, they should be carried physically. Well listen, I look you already back give, I then will write the full text of the old message: D> Here even as i.e. when what that the country pays for example Russia gas they by trucks transport money to Russia? Stop to expose itself for a public laughing-stock. Q> such impression that at you a problem with Russian. Unless I not clearly wrote:" Non-cash there are only calculations "? You as a refutation result just calculations. Q> as to trucks - that yes if the flow of non-cash transfers the durable time is directed to one side they should be transported physically including by trucks. And your way whence in Russia there were cash dollars? Whence there were in Crimea roubles? If your firm obtained the credit in bank (non-cash, it it is finite) it is spent including for the salary of workers, on payment of gasoline by drivers and other cash expenditures. Whence cash in your opinion undertakes? Speech did not go generally about fishermen on Kamchatka or where that still, speech did not go generally about physicists to whom is necessary , it was a question about payment for gas.