by the way, I meant virtuous cycle, not virtual cycle!

Alien, I too, am against wasteful production of stuff that doesn't last and uses far more resources than befits it's utility. But good service is just a way of making the things that most people do with some kind of regularity - eating in a restaurant, shopping in a chaoshi, taking a taxi/bus/train/plane, staying in a hotel, exercising in a gym or studio etc etc - more enjoyable. Even a 5% spending increase would be a massive injection into the economy and thereby taxes. I'm not talking about producing more low skilled, low paid jobs, I'm talking about getting people to be worth more money by being more skilful and making the companies that employ them more successful. Every time I see an employee sitting watching TV or playing on their phone on the job, I think 'someone is paying a small amount for that person to do very little'. That is waste. To be effective, an economy must have workers that work shorter hours but are efficient and effective in those hours. That way, they can be paid more per hour, have more free time to do the things they enjoy, as well as a greater sense of worth.

@ Geezer: the 'Socialism' that you refer to is the model that I was referring to. And I'm not sure what you mean by 'natural'.
@Haali: OK, but efficiency in doing what? And who decides what the taxes will be spent on - as well as the profits?

China has a pretty good labor law. If the labor law was enforced, China would have more jobs, important or not, and people would have more to spend or save. China would benefit greatly.

A great American innovator, business man and Capitalist really screwed his workers by paying them more and shortening the work week. He once tried to regulate their non working time but stopped when it tended to offset his exploitation of them as they began to complain and quit.

His company was 100% family owned for 53 years and is still family controlled 111 for years with over 180,000 workers. Yes, you guessed it, he was Henry Ford.

Wonder why the labor law isn't enforced - is there some systematic tendency preventing it? What is it?

Smith, you gotta read both of his books), David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus and John Stuart Mill all discussed the relationship of capital, land, labor and human nature. It seems natural to mankind to want to own things. Work, live and have a little more is a natural propensity for humans. If a man is smarter, works harder and uses his income wisely he ends up with more than the guy who doesn't use his smarts, screws off and pisses away his income.

Socialism ignores that men are not equal in ability and not equal in what they want. By force, Socialism attempts to make all men equal, except for the leaders and favored few. The force comes by taking from the rich, appropriation or taxation, and giving some to the poor. But the in power guys do the natural thing and acquire more stuff cuz they can.

@Geezer: Again, that's the model of 'Socialism' I dislike (if you want to say that 'Socialism' always MUST mean what you say, then we can call what we want something else).
A problem with your statement, I think, is that (1) what is smarts in one situation is not necessarily smarts in another; and (2) what you say about working harder etc. depends on a level playing field, which we have not got. And concentrated wealth in private hands automatically exerts a 'force'.

Yeah, it is called a one party system. Marx predicted the masses would revolt and over throw the Capitalistic systems the created lousy working conditions and low wages. Unfortunately, Politicians had to compete for votes. As there were, and are, relatively less rich people, to win elections the politicians had win over the workers.

The 8 hour day, 40 hours a week was a socialist idea (China's labor law is 8 hour work days and a 44 hour week) and implemented by the Capitalist Ford.

As this is where you ask, "Where did Ford get his money?" He was smart and was financed by other guys who had money and liked Ford's ideas.

@Geezer: I agree with all of what you've just written. But after being financed, he made more money through financing (using his possession of the product of surplus labor to multiply it) - on top of the work he did (I've never thought of him as lazy). Increased the 'force' he could apply. No level playing field.

"(1) what is smarts in one situation is not necessarily smarts in another" is pablum and uninteresting.

"2) what you say about working harder etc. depends on a level playing field, which we have not got" Nonsense. Only a quitter or someone looking for an excuse for lacking ability blames the playing field.

I have a friend who at 14 with his older brother came illegally from Mexico. He worked hard, became a citizen, earned an engineering degree, started a company and took out more than $450 (From SEC filings) before he left the company. America offers opportunity for those that got the balls and brains and want it.

Alien why bother to ask such obvious questions? Efficiency in doing whatever needs doing. In a restaurant it would be serving food to customers. It's not efficient to sit doing sod all when there is something you could be doing to help the venture be successful.

The government decide what to spend the taxes on, obviously. People can of course submit their ideas and opinions to the government for consideration, but someone has to make the decisions, and be held accountable for the decisions.