Ed Vineyard

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Demographics matter.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

@OldeWorldOrder The vast majority of people do not understand the difference between a democracy and a republic.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Not a huge shock.

[Visual Capitalist @VisualCap]

Mapped: The Trust Gap Across Europe 👥

This graphic by The European Correspondent is one of the many incredible data-driven charts and stories from creators featured on our website. ✅

https://t.co/zh7J2VqMe4

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Exactly as economic theory predicts.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Interesting.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Capialism is not the problem!

[Rock Chartrand @RockChartrand]

The welfare state's strongest argument is often a confession:

"We've made people so dependent on redistribution that removing it would be catastrophic."

That's not proof the system works. It's evidence of how much it has replaced self reliance.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

As a SS retiree...Yikes!

[Wall Street Mav @WallStreetMav]

The US govt used to collect more FICA taxes than was paid out to Social Security and Medicare.

It was huge amounts of $$$ for decades. Hundreds of billions of dollars. Over time, it added up to near $3 trillion. What did Congress do with that $3 trillion? They spent it every year, and they ordered the US Treasury to stuff the Social Security and Medicare trust funds with US govt bonds.

The money was spent. It was not invested. The money is gone.

A few years ago, with aging population, the amount the US govt spends on Social Security and Medicare began to exceed the annual FICA taxes collected. So how does the govt makeup for that shortfall? The govt cashes in the US govt bonds to pay retirees.

In reality, those bonds just get converted from being owned by the trust fund to being owned by the public investors.

But each year the amount of US govt bonds owned by the trust fund declines. It has fallen from the peak of $3 trillion to about $2.5 trillion now. In 6 more years all of that $2.5 trillion will have been completely cashed in and added to the regular national debt.

What happens then? Under current federal law, Social Security will automatically cut benefits to match what is being collected by FICA taxes. It will be about a 22% cut in benefits for everyone.

In reality, Congress will likely pass emergency legislation to keep funding social security at current levels and will just add $500 billion (or more) to the national debt per year.

This will just accelerate the debt spiral that our government is in.

You probably don't own enough gold.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

@exQUIZitely Nope...just a USA gamer.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Exactly. The directors take resources without contributing anything. That is a loss to society.

[Rock Chartrand @RockChartrand]

Capitalism doesn't require poverty. It's the system that turns yesterday's luxury into today's ordinary purchase through innovation, investment, and voluntary trade.

Socialism, by contrast, depends on a population convinced it cannot manage without political direction. The more people can afford, build, and manage for themselves, the less need they see for those promising to manage their lives for them.

If you can provide for yourself, what exactly do you need a government planner for beyond protecting your rights?

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Exactly.

[Creative Deduction @CreativeDeduct]

“That wasn’t real communism.”

The excuse has been repeated for over a century, from the Soviet Union to Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Castro’s Cuba, and more recently Venezuela. The claim is that these regimes distorted Marx’s vision. But in reality, the authoritarianism and economic failure were not bugs - they were features built into the ideology itself.

Marxism demands the complete abolition of private property and the market. Once property is seized by the state, someone must decide what is produced, how resources are allocated, and who receives what. This cannot be done through voluntary cooperation. It requires a central authority with coercive power to override individual choices on a massive scale. The “dictatorship of the proletariat” was never a temporary phase; it was the necessary instrument to enforce the new order.

Without market prices, rational economic calculation becomes impossible, as Ludwig von Mises demonstrated. Central planners have no reliable way to know what people value or how scarce resources truly are. Shortages, waste, and collapse follow. To maintain control amid the resulting chaos and discontent, the regime must suppress dissent, control information, and eliminate independent centres of power. This is why every serious attempt to implement Marxism has produced one-party rule, secret police, and mass repression.

The pattern is not accidental. It is the predictable result of trying to replace spontaneous order with total state direction. “Real communism” has never existed because the project itself is incompatible with human nature and economic reality.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

@WallStreetMav Age discrimination is real, never doubt that. I am 64, retired, and I don’t need a full-time salary. I have master/doctorate skills but no one will interview me. They assume I am too expensive.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

@exQUIZitely I played the entire series.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

@monsterhunter45 Got mine on the shelf and will be reading it soon!

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Amazing.

[Trad West @trad_west_]

The tilma of Guadalupe still hasn’t decayed after 500 years.

Its colors can’t be reproduced. And in her eye? A reflection of witnesses, 1/100th of a millimeter.

This is the story of the image that shouldn’t exist:

[Tax Foundation @TaxFoundation]

Who pays federal income taxes?

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive: https://t.co/2j4Mgt539W

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

@Handre Yup. I have been retired for 7 years…gotten a 1% increase in my state pension. Woo Hoo!

[Peter St Onge, Ph.D. @profstonge]

The Chinese Miracle just hit a wall with "shockingly bad" economic numbers — some of the worst in 20 years.

China tried to central plan their way to number one. It’s turning into a Japan bust with extra zeros.

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

I think many of the more expensive nations have implemented “green” energy policies that artificially make their electricity pricey. A lot of the lower priced nations use govt funds to subsidize their prices, or are weakly industrialized.

[Visual Capitalist @VisualCap]

Ranked: Where Electricity Costs the Most and Least ⚡

https://t.co/nwzXffny5F

[Ed Vineyard @EconMaj]

Well said.

[Creative Deduction @CreativeDeduct]

Food is not a human right.

Most people assume it must be. Food is a basic necessity for survival, so it feels natural to treat access to it as a fundamental right. But when activists and politicians declare that “everyone has a right to food”, they are not talking about a right in the traditional sense. They are claiming a positive right – an entitlement that others must be forced to fulfil.

This view confuses needs with rights. A genuine right, properly understood, is a claim of non-interference. You have a right not to be killed, assaulted or stolen from. These rights impose a duty on others to refrain from certain actions. They do not require anyone to provide you with food, shelter or healthcare.

A “right to food", by contrast, means that farmers, truck drivers, shopkeepers and taxpayers can be compelled - through taxation, regulation, or outright seizure - to supply it. This turns productive people into obligated servants of those who claim the right. It is not a right; it is a claim on other people’s labour and property.

Once the state accepts a duty to guarantee food, it must also claim the power to control production, prices and distribution. History shows what follows: central planning, shortages and the expansion of coercive authority over those who actually produce the food.

You cannot have both a right to other people’s labour and genuine individual rights at the same time. One must give way to the other.