Crap...

Mostly, outsourced to asia, and even the asians aren't doing the nitty gritty work. It's dem machines.
Outsourced? What are you talking about, they produce their own automobiles. Japan has created millions of jobs in its homegrown auto industry. You still need people to assemble the vehicles, always have.

Capitalism creates the incentives for ultimate 100% unemployment where we can all live lives of luxury.
Capitalism or socialism, I don't care. There will never be a fully mechanized society, but if there was, everyone would be a worthless waste of air who is better off dead than alive, living quite unproductively.

Redistribution can certainly be an economy booster, because poor people are more liable to spend than save
How is that good? You are basically just collecting money from the working to give it to the non-working class, in which case they will proceed to spend said money, the drawback being that not all of that money goes back into the hands of the people who spent it.

Its a catch22 all the way. Whereas a job on the other hand doesn't create the volatile and downward spiral welfare creates. There are a couple circumstances where welfare policies are boosting the gross domestic product per capita, but that takes a toll on resource wealth and nominal GDP, so eventually the money bank will run dry and these nations that are inflating the welfare bubble will pop.

Savings take money out of the economy for later - which wouldn't be a problem if they eventually went into super-productive sectors, but that's the thing, they don't
I agree that the circulation of money is good for the economy, but saving is a lot more fiscally responcible than overspending.

Matter of fact, Canadian research shows the rich cost the country a thousand times more through tax evasion alone than all the deadbeats put together.

First of all you made that research up. Show me the source and I'll prove to you it says something different. 1000 times is such bullshit.

Second of all, that conclusion is a fallacy. Tax evasion doesn't cost a nation money, in the sense that you aren't actually losing anything. The rich still contribute more to the tax pool than the poor.

BTW, I just wanted to make a quick remark since you know nothing of the automobile industry. Japan created millions of jobs during the rise of their auto industry, but now they are actually outsourcing jobs to the US. That's right, they are hiring trained workers from the Big Three to take corporate positions or work in their American manufacturing plants. It is very common.

Blackflag: Sure, but these are executives. The Fordist production line doesn't exist in Japan or anywhere else. Hence the whole retirement fund thing. It's cheaper to mass produce a car than to individually panel beat each part - and the quality is higher, too.

This here is how a modern auto plant looks:

Note: few if any workers, lots of robots building cars.

I don't see a lack of generated wealth or employment as equivalent to unproductive. Quite the contrary, I think it would be perfectly possible to live an amazing life that way. I don't think anyone is better off dead than alive and generally think you should be wary that pro-genocide comments don't breach site terms... even so, it's morally abhorrent to suggest killing unemployed people. Just because you're jobless doesn't mean you're worthless.

There's two ways to measure economic GDP - spending and production. The two are supposed to be equivalent according to various economic laws. So when people spend more/save less then that, by definition, means more economic activity. I don't see not all the money going back into the hands of those who spent it as a drawback at all - governments have the power to redistribute wealth again if necessary, so inequality is actually reduced. I showed you how this works in a thread a few weeks ago I think.

Nations that underspend on welfare are the ones that pop. Nobody wants to live in South Africa.

I agree that in the present economic climate, increasing jobs is important. However, this cannot come at the cost of human life and livelihood. Some measure of equality must be maintained at all costs.

I disagree that saving is always more fiscally responsible than overspending. There are definitely cases when the reverse is true, as Keynes practically demonstrated.

The research I mentioned wasn't made up. Source: http://thestandard.org.nz/tax-fraud-benefit-fraud-proportional-response/
Keep in mind that beneficiaries are legally required to look for work in both those countries, so being a deadbeat counts as benefit fraud. It's interesting seeing the NZ follow-up study as well, showing we relentlessly pursue deadbeats but never look at tax evasion by the wealthy.

Tax evasion does cost a nation money. It's money that the nation cannot spend, the wealthy cannot declare, that generally gets moved to foreign accounts and handled by illegal actors. That means a decline in the real wealth of that nation, as the wealth is moved away.

Sure, but these are executives. The Fordist production line doesn't exist in Japan or anywhere else. Hence the whole retirement fund thing. It's cheaper to mass produce a car than to individually panel beat each part - and the quality is higher, too.

Duh, Ford makes cars here, along with GM and Chrysler. I was referencing to the fact that Japan has production centers here in which Americans work, so they are actually the ones outsourcing.

This here is how a modern auto plant looks:
I know, I've been in and out of them countless times. They are huge facilities, bigger than the downtown of a city. There are countless employees in each one. There are the machine operators, then there are the manual assembly workers for small parts, there are usually half a dozen repair teams stationed along the lines, multiple office buildings near the facilities, and much more. There are hundreds of individual facilities that go into an automobile plant, all of which have employees working in them. Most of them are on contract.

Note: few if any workers, lots of robots building cars.
Lol, the plant isn't even functioning. I've been in those same rooms with the same exact machines, and they are busy as hell.

Half of my state is connected to the auto industry in one way or another. People are either working for the big three, or they work for subsidiary manufacturers that are subsets of the big three brands, or they are working in the THOUSANDS of companies that make all those machine parts, along with the actual components that go with the car, such as the synthetic rubber plants. Then you have to take into account all the jobs that the actual automobile has created in the modern world, outside of the automobile industry.

Jobs continue to grow in the auto industry, especially for Ford Motors and Japanese companies. Stock has reached pre-recession levels in a lot of American companies, and the more advances that come in technology, the more jobs there are, they are just different and require more specialized training.

I don't think anyone is better off dead than alive and generally think you should be wary that pro-genocide comments don't breach site terms... even so, it's morally abhorrent to suggest killing unemployed people.
In the scenario you described, everyone was unemployed and money was abolished. Under those circumstances, I said everyone would be better off dead than alive, because in reality that is a miserable existence. I obviously don't support murdering homeless people.

I don't see a lack of generated wealth or employment as equivalent to unproductive. Quite the contrary, I think it would be perfectly possible to live an amazing life that way. I don't think anyone is better off dead than alive and generally think you should be wary that pro-genocide comments don't breach site terms... even so, it's morally abhorrent to suggest killing unemployed people. Just because you're jobless doesn't mean you're worthless.
Because your standards for a happy life are shit, along with anyone else who honestly believes everyone should be absolutely financially and socially equal. The truth is that people aren't equal, and it hurts society when we treat everyone as such.

Just because you're jobless doesn't mean you're worthless.
It makes you worthless to society. No one owes you anything in this world, but there are people who try to leech off of others regardless, and are quite successful. People who are unemployed for a long period of time ARE pathetic and worthless, at least until someone gives them a kick in the ass.

The two are supposed to be equivalent according to various economic laws. So when people spend more/save less then that, by definition, means more economic activity
Wow, spend more save less? Is this world getting stupider and stupider? I'm not saying you should sit on a pile of wealth, but welfare money isn't the individuals to own. It is at best a loan by society, and people are expecting a return on their investment. That means welfare hounds need to stop spending money they don't have and start investing in their own future.

The research I mentioned wasn't made up. Source: http://thestandard.org.nz/tax-fraud-benefit-fraud-proportional-response/
Yes it was. It absolutely was.

Here is what you said: Research from Canada suggests that the rich take 1000 times more than what they contribute to the economy

Here is what your article says: Research from a New Zealand university shows that tax evasion accounts for a lump sum 25-50 times greater than welfare fraud in NEW ZEALAND

Show me the research you first mentioned, the one I said was made up.

It's interesting seeing the NZ follow-up study as well, showing we relentlessly pursue deadbeats but never look at tax evasion by the wealthy.
We do, but it is a totally different issue than the one we are discussing. Fraud and Tax evasion are in different categories, therefore not mutually exclusive. The deadbeats engage in tax fraud all the time along with welfare fraud. They would also engage in tax evasion if they had the means to start up a savings account in the Caymans.

Nobody wants to live in South Africa.
Wrong, a lot of people do want to live in South Africa. Mostly because it is the richest state in Africa, and it wasn't because of welfare, but smart fiscal policy and trade with the NATO block.

Tax evasion does cost a nation money. It's money that the nation cannot spend
This is how idiotic your kind have become in regards to economics.

By principal, you can't lose what you never had, and you can't spend what you don't have. It is honestly that simple.

To complement the whole welfare debate, people on welfare should be restricted in the kinds of things they can spend their money on, should be seperated from their children should they remain on welfare for a prolonged period of time (because they deserve better), and should be on an earned income policy plan. It should also accumulate as extremely low interest debt, and cap out after an individual exceeds a certain line of credit, which can restore itself dependent on the individuals ability to pay off welfare checks and be productive.

Welfare, if it were to exist, is best privatized under a kind of insurance plan for families. The cap also needs to be lowered from 10,000$.

The GDP per capita in the developed world for people on welfare is still higher than the GDP per capita of people off welfare in modernized third world countries, such as Bosnia. That's ridiculous.