Hint of a new problem coming soon?

14 years ago

I haven't noticed it here yet, but I'm not surprised.
But most of the time when I shop at wally world it's for something I either haven't purchased before or something I haven't purchased in years.
Only exception is the oil filter for my bike.
I use 2 a year and purchase them once a year.
Price was still the same or close to last years price this year.

By the way the wally world Super Tech oil filter is one of the best on the market. They are actually built better then Fram. A heck of a lot cheaper also.

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2015189].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

HECK, the BOSTON firedepartment just got a 19% RAISE!!!!!!!! BEFORE the raise, almost everyone got well into the $80K+ range. People JOKED about how one guy must be impoverished because he ONLY made about $54K(BEFORE the raise).

The government is talking about RAISING the price of GAS! TAXES are going UP! They are talking about carbon taxes! Various income streams have dried up, or gone in reverse, due to the volcano.

And these prices are ACCROSS THE BOARD! That means WALMART will be hit JUST AS HARD! With lower margins, they may be more likely to raise prices.

Frankly, it was expected. It was only a questin of WHEN!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2015217].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

We're in for some deep poop alright - with all the new taxes they are loading, or trying to, down on us, even working people won't have the income to both house and feed themselves.

Anyhow - I didn't see too much change at WM in ID - some upward trending but not that much. Down here in CA, prices at WM are crazy higher than in ID. a 2 lb block of cheese in ID was 5 bucks there - it's 7.43 here and that's "special low price".
But then a LOT of people have quit shopping at WM because of their support for Chinese poison products, and others because of their nasty little employee abuse garbage. Conversely - that is the crap that kept their prices low so we are going to have a two edge sword going on that one. Either pay more for products that aren't poison and for employees to be treated better than your local livestock or have low prices and pay the price in quality. It sucks but that's the way it is.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2015875].message }}

JohnMcCabe 14 years ago

My wife works as a cashier at WM, and we haven't noticed any of that "abusive treatment"...

As for the price increases, much of the increases in food prices can be laid on two things - weather and cost of ingredients.

A lot of fresh produce was hurt by hard freezes in areas that rarely get them. Here in SW Florida, whole crops of things like tomatoes and strawberries were wiped out, forcing stores to import food.

Another big contributor is the ramp up in ethanol production for use as fuel or as a fuel additive. The price of corn has tripled in the last few years, meaning so has the price of corn oil, livestock feed, corn syrup, etc.

Once a new crop of produce comes in, prices of fresh veggies should ease back down, but prices on things like milk and other dairy products, meat, candy - anything that relies on corn products - will stay high.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2015899].message }}
- fvrnow 14 years ago
  
  Hahahaha!!! at your signature.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Earn An Extra Income- By Trading Paper Money For Precious Metals!
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2021490].message }}
Thomas 14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Either pay more for products that aren't poison...

:confused::confused:

(I can buy rat poison for just a few euros, but I wouldn't have it for dinner. )
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019822].message }}
- HeySal 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Thomas
  
  :confused::confused:
  
  (I can buy rat poison for just a few euros, but I wouldn't have it for dinner. )
  
  You don't have to, Tommy - MONSANTO has you covered. Ymmmmm - eat up.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Sal
  When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
  Beyond the Path
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019867].message }}

Ilya Feynberg

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

We're in for some deep poop alright - with all the new taxes they are loading, or trying to, down on us, even working people won't have the income to both house and feed themselves.

Anyhow - I didn't see too much change at WM in ID - some upward trending but not that much. Down here in CA, prices at WM are crazy higher than in ID. a 2 lb block of cheese in ID was 5 bucks there - it's 7.43 here and that's "special low price".
But then a LOT of people have quit shopping at WM because of their support for Chinese poison products, and others because of their nasty little employee abuse garbage. Conversely - that is the crap that kept their prices low so we are going to have a two edge sword going on that one. Either pay more for products that aren't poison and for employees to be treated better than your local livestock or have low prices and pay the price in quality. It sucks but that's the way it is.

And humans through out the ages have always spoken about the doom and gloom...the end of days....the deep poop...and the raising taxes. This isn't the middle ages anymore, and things are changing. The sooner American's stop holding up signs that read "Obama stole my future" or "Bush stole my future" and start some f**king responsibilities for their own life and destiny the sooner we will all be better off and progress forward. Stuff changes. Deal with it, move on or get left behind it's your choice.

P.S. I'm not attacking YOU directly by the way, just the general line of thought in the post.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2022824].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Ilya Feynberg

And humans through out the ages have always spoken about the doom and gloom...the end of days....the deep poop...and the raising taxes. This isn't the middle ages anymore, and things are changing. The sooner American's stop holding up signs that read "Obama stole my future" or "Bush stole my future" and start some f**king responsibilities for their own life and destiny the sooner we will all be better off and progress forward. Stuff changes. Deal with it, move on or get left behind it's your choice.

P.S. I'm not attacking YOU directly by the way, just the general line of thought in the post.

The future is NEVER here! NEVER! As annie says in her song, it is "ALWAYS A DAY AWAY"! And Social security was started with the idea that it would be a constant safety net allowing all to retire at a reasonable age at a relatively secure level. They are trying the set the base retirement age higher, increasing payments, and decreasing income. It is now little better than regular welfare.

GUESS WHAT, most DO end up having no future. WHERE did it go!?!?!? MOST will tell you that 10-20% of income in savings will give you a decent future. They also say the more the better, and this assumes starting around 20 and retiring around 65. Obviously, if you start later, or end sooner, you will likely need to save MORE!

OK,

WAGES $30,000
TAX $8,100 (average is supposedly 27%, includes all refunds)
REAL INCOME $21,900
CAR, INSURANCE HOME $11,600
GAS 15000/30*.2=$1066(30 MPG at $2/gallon)
Lunch, at fast food =$1,560 (assuming you don't brownbag it.)
So you end up with $7674 TOTAL for everything else Meals, supplies, etc....
SUGGESTED SAVINGS $6000

TOTAL for food, supplies, etc... if you have the suggested savings $1674

And this MAY be TAINTED!!!!! In looking through IRS stats, EVEN people making $30,000 may have had fuel credits, foreign tax credits, etc... And including families taints this enough. Realize that a one income family with 2 people will want to save twice as much. And I didn't even include HEALTH INSURANCE!

And don't forget that taxes affect everyone, and lead to, and increase by, inflation. They are like a cancer.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2023272].message }}

Ilya Feynberg

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

The future is NEVER here! NEVER! As annie says in her song, it is "ALWAYS A DAY AWAY"! And Social security was started with the idea that it would be a constant safety net allowing all to retire at a reasonable age at a relatively secure level. They are trying the set the base retirement age higher, increasing payments, and decreasing income. It is now little better than regular welfare.

GUESS WHAT, most DO end up having no future. WHERE did it go!?!?!? MOST will tell you that 10-20% of income in savings will give you a decent future. They also say the more the better, and this assumes starting around 20 and retiring around 65. Obviously, if you start later, or end sooner, you will likely need to save MORE!

OK,

WAGES $30,000
TAX $8,100 (average is supposedly 27%, includes all refunds)
REAL INCOME $21,900
CAR, INSURANCE HOME $11,600
GAS 15000/30*.2=$1066(30 MPG at $2/gallon)
Lunch, at fast food =$1,560 (assuming you don't brownbag it.)
So you end up with $7674 TOTAL for everything else Meals, supplies, etc....
SUGGESTED SAVINGS $6000

TOTAL for food, supplies, etc... if you have the suggested savings $1674

And this MAY be TAINTED!!!!! In looking through IRS stats, EVEN people making $30,000 may have had fuel credits, foreign tax credits, etc... And including families taints this enough. Realize that a one income family with 2 people will want to save twice as much. And I didn't even include HEALTH INSURANCE!

And don't forget that taxes affect everyone, and lead to, and increase by, inflation. They are like a cancer.

Steve

Steve,

You put it PERFECTLY and are absolutely correct! I completely agree with you on everything you wrote 100%.

But remember, that when you write and talk about "GUESS WHAT, most DO end up having no future", that they made the choice to live that way and take those paths in life. The "most" will always suffer and be the ones who take the brunt of it all. But in the United States, they have a choice...they made their choices.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2024225].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

John,

High gas prices, gas taxes, and high carbon tax fears may create a perception that E85 is better, etc.... THAT means more ETHANOL, and the major source in the US is CORN! That means the cost of corn goes up! All this stuff is tied together.

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2015938].message }}

JohnMcCabe

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

John,

High gas prices, gas taxes, and high carbon tax fears may create a perception that E85 is better, etc.... THAT means more ETHANOL, and the major source in the US is CORN! That means the cost of corn goes up! All this stuff is tied together.

Steve

I thought that was what I was getting at. There are underlying causes for the price increases apart from pure inflation of the dollar.

Before we left Nebraska, I watched a huge ethanol plant rise up out of the prairie - the local price for corn jumped from around $1.43/bu to over $3.85/bu in one season. The price of livestock feed followed it, and one local feedyard threw in the towel and built a golf course on the land.

On the other hand, most of the spike for fresh produce is the result of the harsh winter. The same thing has happened with sugar beets when the Red River floods in North Dakota. Once the next crop comes in, produce prices tend to ease. Given the demand for fuel to produce those crops, the prices are unlikely to drop to previous levels, though.

We might not live to see it, but I have the feeling that it won't be that long until someone perfects an energy source that makes fuel prices go the same way telecom services went - from a scarce, metered resource to a cheap commodity.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016006].message }}

sundrop881

14 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

I thought that was what I was getting at. There are underlying causes for the price increases apart from pure inflation of the dollar.

Before we left Nebraska, I watched a huge ethanol plant rise up out of the prairie - the local price for corn jumped from around $1.43/bu to over $3.85/bu in one season. The price of livestock feed followed it, and one local feedyard threw in the towel and built a golf course on the land.

On the other hand, most of the spike for fresh produce is the result of the harsh winter. The same thing has happened with sugar beets when the Red River floods in North Dakota. Once the next crop comes in, produce prices tend to ease. Given the demand for fuel to produce those crops, the prices are unlikely to drop to previous levels, though.

We might not live to see it, but I have the feeling that it won't be that long until someone perfects an energy source that makes fuel prices go the same way telecom services went - from a scarce, metered resource to a cheap commodity.

Sorry, the multiquote button did not work, but the quote button did.

I looked at the mag rack at woodman's recently and was surprised and alarmed to not find any solar or wind energy magazines!!! Anybody know what is up with that?? Do the mags exist, but are not being picked up by regular customers like woodmans or aren't there entrepeneurs out there hawking alternative technology magazines? I know millions are being poured into new technology at the moment. You would think the perfect place to sell the technology would be through new alternative tech mags, wouldn't you?

What is really going on? I haven't figured it out yet...

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016383].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

John,

High gas prices, gas taxes, and high carbon tax fears may create a perception that E85 is better, etc.... THAT means more ETHANOL, and the major source in the US is CORN! That means the cost of corn goes up! All this stuff is tied together.

Steve

Here's a nice read on ethanol in gas.
Problems and Disadvantages of Ethanol Alcohol Blend Gasolines - E10.
I know the landscape company I worked for went thru 2 stroke equipment because of E10 gas.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016958].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Here's a nice read on ethanol in gas.
Problems and Disadvantages of Ethanol Alcohol Blend Gasolines - E10.
I know the landscape company I worked for went thru 2 stroke equipment because of E10 gas.

Yeah, I THOUGHT as much! Gas in the US is MANDATED to be as much as 15% ETHANOL! I THOUGHT it odd since that is GAS! The automotive/gas industries official position is that Ethanol is CORROSIVE and that E85 should not be used in ANY non "flex fuel" approved car. They don't even tell you it has ethanol unless you read the fine print. GAS is supposed to be GAS. E85 is 85 percent ethanol, but even the NAME states that.

SUPPOSEDLY, 15% or less is OK. SUPPOSEDLY!

YEAH RIGHT!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2017089].message }}

salegurus

14 years ago

While iv'e only been living in the USA for 4 years i have noticed a definite increase in the cost of living. Just today the water rates here in Houston went up by 30%, which translates to about $15 extra per household.
I lived in South Africa most of my life so i am very familiar with high unemployment, inflation and living costs.
I just hope that the current financial crisis can be turned around (From what iv'e seen recently i'm not holding my breath).

I know the Government needs to generate more revenue to pay for Gov run Health Care etc. but i hope they don't bring the VAT tax to the USA because that is really going to raise prices, from the cornflakes you have for breakfast to the gas for your car.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.

― George Carlin

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2017476].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by salegurus

While iv'e only been living in the USA for 4 years i have noticed a definite increase in the cost of living. Just today the water rates here in Houston went up by 30%, which translates to about $15 extra per household.
I lived in South Africa most of my life so i am very familiar with high unemployment, inflation and living costs.
I just hope that the current financial crisis can be turned around (From what iv'e seen recently i'm not holding my breath).

I know the Government needs to generate more revenue to pay for Gov run Health Care etc. but i hope they don't bring the VAT tax to the USA because that is really going to raise prices, from the cornflakes you have for breakfast to the gas for your car.

You said above...

"I know the Government needs to generate more revenue to pay for Gov run Health Care etc."

Not correct.

The national HC bill is going to be paid for by a new round of taxes on families and businesses earning over $250K per year.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2018619].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You said above...

"I know the Government needs to generate more revenue to pay for Gov run Health Care etc."

Not correct.

The national HC bill is going to be paid for by a new round of taxes on families and businesses earning over $250K per year.

TL

Not to start another argument, but YOU brought it up! You CONTRADICTED yourself! They are NOW talking about NEW taxes, and VAT!!!!! So surely you MUST realize that Kay was and IS correct!

Or are you simply saying that eveeryone wants GIGANTIC raises? I mean like maybe several MILLION USD EACH!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2018637].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Not to start another argument, but YOU brought it up! You CONTRADICTED yourself! They are NOW talking about NEW taxes, and VAT!!!!! So surely you MUST realize that Kay was and IS correct!

Or are you simply saying that eveeryone wants GIGANTIC raises? I mean like maybe several MILLION USD EACH!

Steve

You're right.

It was a knee-jerk reaction.

Wait a minute - that was a knee-jerk reaction.

I believe I was responding to the person's inference that prices would be going up because of the HC bill.

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2018914].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You're right.

It was a knee-jerk reaction.

Wait a minute - that was a knee-jerk reaction.

I believe I was responding to the person's inference that prices would be going up because of the HC bill.

TL

HC BILL->taxes->inflation. YEP, it'll happen. They are ALREADY discussing direct immediate action to do that. They ALREADY setup indirect action that may take a year.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019170].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

HC BILL->taxes->inflation. YEP, it'll happen. They are ALREADY discussing direct immediate action to do that. They ALREADY setup indirect action that may take a year.

Steve

We'll see.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019322].message }}

JohnMcCabe

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

First of all, albertson's isn't THAT small. They are in California, and have been for some time.

I believe I HAVE seen some alternative energy magazines. Still, FEW places would carry such things. There is a limited market.

AMAZON.com DOES sell some alternate energy kits. READ REVIEWS THOUGH!

Steve

No quibble here. Maybe I should have said Albertson's still has a fairly small presence in my local market area.

I've seen a couple of AE magazines on sites like magazines.com or Amazon, but I think it's a niche enough market that you won't see it on the news racks next to Hot Rod, Style, National Enquirer, People, etc. The people who want to read about alternate energy seek the magazines out.

On the other hand, I've been seeing increased coverage in mainstream publications like Popular Mechanics, Popular Science and even Wired...

Uranium Is So Last Century ? Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke | Magazine

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019775].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

No quibble here. Maybe I should have said Albertson's still has a fairly small presence in my local market area.

I've seen a couple of AE magazines on sites like magazines.com or Amazon, but I think it's a niche enough market that you won't see it on the news racks next to Hot Rod, Style, National Enquirer, People, etc. The people who want to read about alternate energy seek the magazines out.

On the other hand, I've been seeing increased coverage in mainstream publications like Popular Mechanics, Popular Science and even Wired...

Uranium Is So Last Century ? Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke | Magazine

There are Albertson's in several states - and I believe they have the highest prices I've ever seen in a grocery store. If I have to pay those kind of prices, I'm going to shop local rather than at a chain of any kind. At least I'll know what I'm eating. I'm a huge fan of farmer's markets and know which farms in my area are organic and have grass fed animals, etc. and buy from them religiously whenever they are available.

As far as green power - more and more people will be learning about it and using it as we are about to get socked with the "Cap and Trade" tax. With all the new taxes that are creeping up on us, green will soon mean survival instead of just a good idea.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019851].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

You're right.

It was a knee-jerk reaction.

Wait a minute - that was a knee-jerk reaction.

I believe I was responding to the person's inference that prices would be going up because of the HC bill.

TL

It's having an effect already. AT&T will take a $1 billion accounting charge in the first quarter because of the healthcare overhaul. And I'm sure they won't be the only ones. So yes, HC bill will = rising prices. There's no way around it.

And it only makes sense, because the money has to come from somewhere. You could take 100% of the earnings from those making $250K and above, and still not have enough to pay for the amount of people they want to give healthcare to.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019815].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by garyv

It's having an effect already. AT&T will take a $1 billion accounting charge in the first quarter because of the healthcare overhaul. And I'm sure they won't be the only ones. So yes, HC bill will = rising prices. There's no way around it.

And it only makes sense, because the money has to come from somewhere. You could take 100% of the earnings from those making $250K and above, and still not have enough to pay for the amount of people they want to give healthcare to.

Gary,

You've said that before and I've cited the CBO report before.

Remember...

We're only talking about 50-60 billion in new revenues per year, to pay for the HC bill combined with savings ( not cuts ) from medicare - a total of about 100 billion a year, not

...200-300-400 billion a year.

The bill is only talking about taking another 2-3 percent in taxes from those making $250k plus to raise that 50-60 billion mentioned above.

Only 2-3 percent.

BTW...

Half the people you say they want to "give" health care to can pay something, they just can't afford to pay the normal going rate.

So, not all of the un-insured are getting a totally free ride.

There are trained economists at the CBO and 99% of the time, they get big respect from both sides of the isle so your contention about not being able to pay for the HC thing...

... even after taking a full 100% of the money from everyone that makes over 250k per year - flies in the face of the CBO report and the basic numbers involved.

( In the interest of not sounding like a blind follower of anyone... )

OK, perhaps there will be incidental small increases in this or that but not a wholesale 2% for example jump in the cost of all things in this society because of HC.

And...

... as far as I'm concerned even if we experience a small jump in inflation/prices the consumer protections and benefits in the bill are well worth it to the average American.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019978].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

Gary, I don't know where this figure comes from but it's laughable. I wouldn't keep using it. Lets look at some stats and find out why you are wrong.

First as TL said we are talking about the bill over a ten year period which is around a $1trillion, so that would make the cost about $100 billion a year. Second, if you only take the minimum earnings, $87,000,000 ( as of 2005 ), of the top 400 earners in the country this equals $35 billion a year! That's from just the top 0.000267% earners in the country! That's the minimum these 400 households earned! There are people making a $1billion per year. Plus, it's probably much higher than it was in 2005. Hell, these 400 households income could pay for the health care bill alone probably!

Affluence in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by garyv

You could take 100% of the earnings from those making $250K and above, and still not have enough to pay for the amount of people they want to give healthcare to.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020349].message }}

JohnMcCabe

14 years ago

Funny thing about "professional economists"...

They can have long, lucrative careers if they can do two things:

> Guess right about what's going to happen in the economy.

> Explain why they were wrong the other 99% of the time.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020398].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

Funny thing about "professional economists"...

They can have long, lucrative careers if they can do two things:

> Guess right about what's going to happen in the economy.

> Explain why they were wrong the other 99% of the time.

FYI...

The CBO simply responds to the programs & policies the national politicians want to enact and then they come up with a score as to what a program will do to the national budget and what it will cost the nation etc.

They get big respect from both sides and report to both sides.

They're not into wild speculation, are known for being conservative and they are experts on the US budget - which they have no control over...

... they're just the score keepers on particular programs - before they become law.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020843].message }}

JohnMcCabe

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

FYI...

The CBO simply responds to the programs & policies the national politicians want to enact and then they come up with a score as to what a program will do to the national budget and what it will cost the nation etc.

They get big respect from both sides and report to both sides.

They're not into wild speculation, are known for being conservative and they are experts on the US budget - which they have no control over...

... they're just the score keepers on particular programs - before they become law.

TL

Gee, thanks for the civics lesson...

Last time I looked, the CBO didn't deliver any of their guesses on stone tablets after a quick retreat in the mountains to consult a burning bush.

As you say, all they can do is analyze and score what they are given. If something gets changed, the easy (and legitimate) out is "that's not what we scored."

This thread is giving me a dizzy sense of deja vu, so I think I'll bow out now.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2021460].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Gary, I don't know where this figure comes from but it's laughable. I wouldn't keep using it. Lets look at some stats and find out why you are wrong.

First as TL said we are talking about the bill over a ten year period which is around a $1trillion, so that would make the cost about $100 billion a year. Second, if you only take the minimum earnings, $87,000,000 ( as of 2005 ), of the top 400 earners in the country this equals $35 billion a year! That's from just the top 0.000267% earners in the country! That's the minimum these 400 households earned! There are people making a $1billion per year. Plus, it's probably much higher than it was in 2005. Hell, these 400 households income could pay for the health care bill alone probably!

Affluence in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hey Tim!

You're 100% right.

This is a big country in terms of area and population and there are a lot of people ( maybe not percentage wise, but in raw numbers ) making a lot of money.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020406].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Second, if you only take the minimum earnings, $87,000,000 ( as of 2005 ), of the top 400 earners in the country this equals $35 billion a year! That's from just the top 0.000267% earners in the country!

Only 1.5% make over $250k - and then only 0.1% make over $1.6 Million. So after you get past the top 400 earners, the number drops off exponentially.

So if you take Obama at his word - (first he said 47 million) but now conveniently it's only 30 million people uninsured that will be covered. It costs the average person around $3k per year just to be covered, and that doesn't even count the out of pocket costs and emergency costs. So you're talking about at the very least $100 billion per year just for the people being added on.

I must admit that there is a very slim possibility that you could pull that amount of money from the top 1.5% of the earners if you took all of their money.

But none the less, just by looking at these numbers there should be no doubt from anyone that it will be an enormous burden on the top 1.5%. And it will kill millions of jobs in the process (because again the money comes from somewhere - it doesn't grow on a rich person's tree) So then even more people will be relying on the system causing in the end a huge snowball of mass failure.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2021004].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

Maybe you didn't see that statistic I quoted right. The top 0.000267% earners income could probably cover this. That is only a small fraction of the top 1.5%.

Originally Posted by garyv

I must admit that there is a very slim possibility that you could pull that amount of money from the top 1.5% of the earners if you took all of their money.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2021182].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Maybe you didn't see that statistic I quoted right. The top 0.000267% earners income could probably cover this. That is only a small fraction of the top 1.5%.

Actually your stat shows that The top 400 earn 35 billion a year - (That's 100% of their earnings and not what they pay in taxes). And even at 100% it's only 1/3 of what you'd need to just cover those that are uninsured now.

After you get past the top 400, the earnings drop off exponentially. So you'd be stretching it to even cover it with the top 1.5%. And that's if you take 100% of their earnings.

Plus let's still not forget that this $100 Billion doesn't grow on a tree. If you take money from those creating the jobs, they'll just cut their work force. They are not actually going to take this from their own pockets. And cutting $100 Billion worth of jobs is going to cause even more havoc on our economy.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2029530].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

No, the stat shows the minimum amount these top 400 earned was $35,000,000,000. All 400 earned at least $85,000,000 a year and many of these earn hundreds of million per year and even a $billion per year.

OK Gary, I found an updated stat here for you and this one is an average instead of a minimum. In 2007 the top 400 earners in America averaged $344.8 million per person which makes a total of $137 billion per year. So the top 400 individuals could pay for the total cost of the health care bill.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

These super wealthy are pretty much under taxed as it is. Don't believe me? Warren Buffett said it pretty simply: "I'm not paying enough in taxes, and neither are my fellow billionaires". "I'll bet a million dollars against any member of the Forbes 400 who challenges me that the average (federal tax rate including income and payroll taxes) for the Forbes 400 will be less than the average of their receptionists." "It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be."

Originally Posted by garyv

Actually your stat shows that The top 400 earn 35 billion a year - (That's 100% of their earnings and not what they pay in taxes). And even at 100% it's only 1/3 of what you'd need to just cover those that are uninsured now.

After you get past the top 400, the earnings drop off exponentially. So you'd be stretching it to even cover it with the top 1.5%. And that's if you take 100% of their earnings.

Plus let's still not forget that this $100 Billion doesn't grow on a tree. If you take money from those creating the jobs, they'll just cut their work force. They are not actually going to take this from their own pockets. And cutting $100 Billion worth of jobs is going to cause even more havoc on our economy.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2029741].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

These super wealthy are pretty much under taxed as it is. Don't believe me? Warren Buffett said it pretty simply: "I'm not paying enough in taxes, and neither are my fellow billionaires". "I'll bet a million dollars against any member of the Forbes 400 who challenges me that the average (federal tax rate including income and payroll taxes) for the Forbes 400 will be less than the average of their receptionists." "It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be."

You know, it is FUNNY! And this is an ESTABLISHED fact from over a decade ago! Warren Buffet USED to *****ONLY***** go into businesses he understood 100%! He does NOT now! Heck, He went into L3, without knowing ANYTHING about it! HECK, look at this:

Re: Re: L3 Communications

Well, Warren Buffett is going where he hasn't gone before. There is no real secret to what he did to amass his furtune! He KNEW the subject! He FOUND a market leader. And HE, along with MANY investing in him, BOUGHT a majority stake in the company! If it did well enough, he bought the WHOLE company! And most were STAPLES or real commodities. Candy, like sees, Insurance, like Geico, Restaurants/fast food, like Dairy Queen, or Transportation.

Here are the current holdings, where all internal seed capital is coming from:

Insurance and finance subsidiaries
Verisk Analytics
Duval
GEICO
General Re
Kansas Bankers Surety Company
National Indemnity Company
Wesco Financial Corporation
Applied Underwriters Inc.
Medical Protective
Nederlandse Reassurantie Groep
Berkshire Hathaway Assurance
[edit] Other subsidiaries
Acme Brick Company
Ben Bridge Jeweler
Benjamin Moore Paints
Borsheim's Fine Jewelry
Brooks Sports, Inc.
Business Wire
Clayton Homes
Cort Furniture
Dairy Queen
FlightSafety International
Forest River
Fruit of the Loom
Helzberg Diamonds
HH Brown Shoe Group
ISCAR Metalworking
Jordan's Furniture
Justin Brands Inc.
Marmon Holdings Inc
McLane Company
Mouser Electronics
Nebraska Furniture Mart
NetJets
The Pampered Chef
Richline Group
Russell Corporation
See's Candies
Shaw Industries
Star Furniture
R.C. Willey Home Furnishings
TTI, Inc.
Wayne Water Systems
World Book
Xtra Lease

BTW INTERESTING that L3 isn't there!

Want to see some of his later holdings he is looking at?

Berkshire Hathaway is a publicly traded holding company owning subsidiaries engaged in a number of diverse business activities. The company Chairman and CEO is Warren Buffet, one of the most highly regarded managers and investors in the world. Headquartered in Omaha, Nebraska, the company's invested assets derive from shareholder capital as well as funds provided from policyholders through insurance and reinsurance businesses ("float").

As of the most recent 13F filing completed by Berkshire Hathaway their holdings included:

• (AXP) American Express
• (BAC) Bank Of America
• (BNI) Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp
• (CDGO) Comdisco holding Compnay
• (CEG) Constellation Energy Group
• (CMCSK) Comcast Class A
• (COP) Conocco Phillips
• (COST) Costco Wholesale
• (ETN) Eaton Corp
• (GCI) Gannett Co
• (GE) General Electric co
• (GSK) GlaxoSmithklime Plc
• (HD) Home Depot
• (IR) Ingersoll rand
• (IRM) Iron Mountain
• (JNJ) Constellation Energy Group
• (KFT) Kraft Foods
• (KMX) Carmax Inc
• (KO)Coco cola Co
• (LOW)Lowes Companies
• (MCO) Moodys Corp
• (MTB)M&T Bank
• (NKE) Nike
• (NLC) NAlco Holding Company
• (NRG) Nrg Energy
• (NSC) Norfolk Southern Company
• (PG) Procter& GAmble
• (SNY) Sanofi-Aventis
• (STI) Suntrust Banks
• (TMK) Torchmark Corp
• (UNH) United Health Group
• (UNP) Union Pacific Corp
• (UPS) United Parcel Service
• (USB) US Bancorp
• (USG) USG Corp
• (WBC) WABCO Holdings
• (WFC) Wells Fargo & Company
• (WLP) Wellpoint
• (WMT) Wallmart Stores
• (WPO) Washington Post Co
• (WSC) Wesco Financial Group

For those that don't know, investing in a NATURAL person is complicated. There really isn't any standardized way to do so, so they setup a "person under the law" A CORPORATION, and go public. So you can go to its stock exchange, and INVEST! Berkshire Hathway IS, for all intents and purposes, WARRAN BUFFETT! So how much does one A share cost? $119,000 USD!

Frankly, I don't see the mystery. But so many figure a millionare must know EVERYTHING about money, right down to OTHER peoples interest. And HIS multibillionare status with a huge conglomerate should be somehow used to say that ****I**** am not paying enough? Let's put this into perspective, shall we? $10USD siphoned off each of the brk.A shares that he has in ONE DAY, and that is just a PORTION of his company, and about .00084% of its A class stock value TODAY, would ******ALONE****** meet my current retirement goals! HECK, I could pay for my house(even if I had NO equity), and STILL have enough left over.

Berkshire hathway probably takes several percent in management fees. His situation is NOTHING like mine!

And WHAT millionare would share his books in that way? WHO would determine if buffet is correct? And did buffet EVER really START a company? Berkshire hatway doesn't count, since it is basically a SHELL! An investment vehicle! Excess money may be used for hiring, etc... SURE, Warren Buffett's main employee is his receptionist, who he says does so much and he couldn't live without. But what of others that must handle the BUSINESS? And what of retirement? Warren is invested in TONS of companies. If a dozen go south, or several industries fail, he is STILL covered.

Safe and Cheap: Bonds: Here's the Glory

Gee, maybe buffett ISN'T such a wizard! He even bought bonds in ENRON!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2030201].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

No, the stat shows the minimum amount these top 400 earned was $35,000,000,000. All 400 earned at least $85,000,000 a year and many of these earn hundreds of million per year and even a per year.

OK Gary, I found an updated stat here for you and this one is an average instead of a minimum. In 2007 the top 400 earners in America averaged $344.8 million per person which makes a total of $137 billion per year. So the top 400 individuals could pay for the total cost of the health care bill.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

These super wealthy are pretty much under taxed as it is.

Don't believe me?

Warren Buffett said it pretty simply:

"I'm not paying enough in taxes, and neither are my fellow billionaires".

"I'll bet a million dollars against any member of the Forbes 400 who challenges me that the average (federal tax rate including income and payroll taxes)...

... for the Forbes 400 will be less than the average of their receptionists."

"It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be."

Good clear irrefutable research Tim!

And that is a Warren Buffet quote I remember quite well.

- Where to get the money is not the problem.

Also...

Gary is simply repeating ( probably unwittingly ) a repub myth/lie that if taxes go up on the wealthy, jobs will be cut.

Silly! ( not Gary )

BTW...

The tax rates were as high as 90% from the end of WW2 up until JFK relaxed them to around 70% and we enjoyed a Golden age before and after that as part of the result.

When Reagan came in (1980 ) the rates were relaxed a whole lot further.

The Tax Foundation - U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2010

Where to get the money for HC is not a prob and it won't kill jobs.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2030223].message }}

garyv 14 years ago

Wow... some incredibly dense thought processes going on in here. I'm glad people like you and Tim are not in charge of our economics otherwise we'd have really high unemployment right now... Oh wait... LOL

Just wait and see for yourself. If this ridiculous spending spree isn't stopped in November, and we end up having to pay for it w/ taxes, 10% will be considered a low unemployment number.

By the way, you just regurgitated a Dem lie/myth. The same one Obama used. He also said that losing jobs was a Republican myth. He said that if we passed the stimulus bill we would not reach 8% unemployment. Well guess what?? Good luck trying to convince people with that lie again.

BTW - People were offsetting their taxes during and after WW2 with incredibly high purchases of war bonds. They were tax free, and were taken straight out of people's pay checks.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Gary is simply repeating ( probably unwittingly ) a repub myth/lie that if taxes go up on the wealthy, jobs will be cut.

Silly! ( not Gary )

TL
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2030882].message }}
- seasoned 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by garyv
  
  10% will be considered a low unemployment number.
  
  OLD NEWS:
  
  Unemployment tops 20% in eight California counties - Los Angeles Times
  
  BTW As for WHY GDP is going up?
  
  GDP = private consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports)
  
  I have a GREAT way to skyrocket private consumption, gross investment, and government spending, and make imports/exports negligible AND increase unemployment! It is EASY!!!!!!! The government has been working on it for over 20 years! I guess I'll leave it up to YOU to figure out what I am talking about. I COULD list three characters, and have you google, but.... Let's just say that the G is GROSS and NOT per capita. I guess I am going to have to consider GDP even more worthless than I thought.
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2030967].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

John,

Does anyone TRULY know which way telecom services went? There must be SOME money in them, they have literally RIPPED UP STREETS to add new lines. Most of the internet goes over telephone lines! So say all that you want about VOIP, magic jack, etc.... The fact is that it is STILL over telephone lines. EVEN cell phones are.

Oh, and verizon is NOT cheap!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016120].message }}

JohnMcCabe

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

John,

Does anyone TRULY know which way telecom services went? There must be SOME money in them, they have literally RIPPED UP STREETS to add new lines. Most of the internet goes over telephone lines! So say all that you want about VOIP, magic jack, etc.... The fact is that it is STILL over telephone lines. EVEN cell phones are.

Oh, and verizon is NOT cheap!

Steve

I didn't say there was no money in telecom. Obviously there is.

I wasn't even thinking about VOIP when I posted. I was thinking of going from the days when AT&T thought nothing of charging up to a dollar a minute for a long distance phone call. When I discovered AOL and CompuServe, my first long distance bill was over $400. Now I pay Verizon a fixed fee for unmetered long distance anywhere in the US. Compared to that $400+ bill for slow, unreliable dial-up access, my DSL bill seems pretty cheap.

In this neck of the woods, most of the new cable being laid is fiber optic, with capacity to burn compared to standard copper. A side benefit is that it pisses off the thieves who steal rolls of cable, only to have the salvage guy tell them there is no copper in it...

My hunch is that it will work the same way for energy. There will still have to be some potential for profit, even huge profits, or the development will not take place.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016314].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

I didn't say there was no money in telecom. Obviously there is.

I wasn't even thinking about VOIP when I posted. I was thinking of going from the days when AT&T thought nothing of charging up to a dollar a minute for a long distance phone call. When I discovered AOL and CompuServe, my first long distance bill was over $400. Now I pay Verizon a fixed fee for unmetered long distance anywhere in the US. Compared to that $400+ bill for slow, unreliable dial-up access, my DSL bill seems pretty cheap.

In this neck of the woods, most of the new cable being laid is fiber optic, with capacity to burn compared to standard copper. A side benefit is that it pisses off the thieves who steal rolls of cable, only to have the salvage guy tell them there is no copper in it...

My hunch is that it will work the same way for energy. There will still have to be some potential for profit, even huge profits, or the development will not take place.

Well, the "too big to fail" deal is a MYTH from the MEDIA and the stupid POLITICIANS! The TRUTH is that it has been ILLEGAL to be "too big to fail" for over 100 years! It was codified in law in 1890!

Sherman Antitrust Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SO got them upset, and we got EXXON, SHELL, ESSO, etc.....

AT&T got them upset and we got all the "baby bells". And THEY are called ILECs(Incumbant Local Exchange Companies). Well, it is now ILLEGAL for THEM to have a monopoly, so there are CLECs!!!!!!(COMPETITIVE Local Exchange Companies). So it isn't that we got any special technology, etc.... It is that the GOVERNMENT ******FINALLY****** provided some enforcement! BTW I ALSO had a hand in some ILEC/CLEC relationships, just so you know I was 100% on the bad side. 8-) That is how I found out about it.

In a way, the "too big to fail" myth is the government telling you they COULDN'T CARE LESS! BECAUSE, if they DID, they would use the laws, and offices, ALREADY in place to split things up.

And the DSL lines are cheaper because so many people want them that there is more reason to lay that cable, and CLECs start installing switches closer to the people that need them. MEANWHILE, the ILECs are REQUIRED to give the CLECs a good price, and the competition helps to reduce profit margins. The cost is lower because the risk is distributed.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016888].message }}

sundrop881

14 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

I thought that was what I was getting at. There are underlying causes for the price increases apart from pure inflation of the dollar.

Before we left Nebraska, I watched a huge ethanol plant rise up out of the prairie - the local price for corn jumped from around $1.43/bu to over $3.85/bu in one season. The price of livestock feed followed it, and one local feedyard threw in the towel and built a golf course on the land.

On the other hand, most of the spike for fresh produce is the result of the harsh winter. The same thing has happened with sugar beets when the Red River floods in North Dakota. Once the next crop comes in, produce prices tend to ease. Given the demand for fuel to produce those crops, the prices are unlikely to drop to previous levels, though.

We might not live to see it, but I have the feeling that it won't be that long until someone perfects an energy source that makes fuel prices go the same way telecom services went - from a scarce, metered resource to a cheap commodity.

Originally Posted by Kay King

As much as possible, I buy groceries, etc from local markets and only visit good old WalMart for specific items.

I made one of those WM forays last night and saw a disturbing trend. Products I buy frequently have ALL had price increases in the past month - sometimes more than one increase.

I'm not talking about a few cents - one item increased by over $1 and others were at least .50 higher. I've noticed increases in other stores, too, but it seems to be almost across the board at WM.

We've been warned of potential inflation for a couple years - and I can't help but wonder if this is the beginning. Anyone who remembers the spiralizing prices in the early 80s will be nervous about potential inflation.
Of course, this may just be pricing for more profit, too.

The funniest item I found was one I purchased 2 weeks ago for $7.50. It now has one of those little banners about "falling prices" - and the price is $9. Go figure.

kay

I only buy specific items at walmart, and most are not groceries. They have slowly raised their prices to where they are either a few cents higher than even woodmans or 20 -40 cents higher than all the other stores sale prices. If you think Walmart is the cheap one for groceries, think again. This has been going on for about 1 year.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016363].message }}

Bill Farnham

14 years ago

Originally Posted by sundrop881

If you think Walmart is the cheap one for groceries, think again. This has been going on for about 1 year.

No, actually this is the WM method of operation on many items for many years. They lead you to believe that ALL their prices are the cheapest when in fact that is not the case.

They start out cheap at all their new stores, drive the local merchants out, then jack the prices up.

What a lot of folks fail to realize is how cheap the products in their town would be if WM had not come there. Without the same level of competition the consumer is forced to pay artificial pricing on most items.

~Bill

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016393].message }}

JohnMcCabe

14 years ago

Originally Posted by sundrop881

I only buy specific items at walmart, and most are not groceries. They have slowly raised their prices to where they are either a few cents higher than even woodmans or 20 -40 cents higher than all the other stores sale prices. If you think Walmart is the cheap one for groceries, think again. This has been going on for about 1 year.

Like I said, my wife works at WM, and we don't even buy all our stuff there. We're lucky, in that we have three big dogs (WalMart, Publix and Winn-Dixie) and a couple of up-and-comers (Albertson's and Sweetbay) all competing. We simply round up the ads and buy from the best source each week.

Originally Posted by sundrop881

I looked at the mag rack at woodman's recently and was surprised and alarmed to not find any solar or wind energy magazines!!! Anybody know what is up with that?? Do the mags exist, but are not being picked up by regular customers like woodmans or aren't there entrepeneurs out there hawking alternative technology magazines? I know millions are being poured into new technology at the moment. You would think the perfect place to sell the technology would be through new alternative tech mags, wouldn't you?

What is really going on? I haven't figured it out yet...

I'm not really aware of any dedicated alternate energy magazines for the mainstream market. Most of the coverage is in mags like Popular Mechanics, Popular Science and the various handyman magazines.

An alternative tech magazine would be a great place to sell the technology - if you could get anyone to read it. From what I can tell, the people checking the racks in grocery stores are far more interested in who's doing who in Hollywood, or how to paint flames on their Yugo...

Just like developing the technology, there has to be a commercial reward for reporting on it, or it won't happen. And right now, I don't believe the profits are out there.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016435].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

I'm not really aware of any dedicated alternate energy magazines for the mainstream market. Most of the coverage is in mags like Popular Mechanics, Popular Science and the various handyman magazines.

An alternative tech magazine would be a great place to sell the technology - if you could get anyone to read it. From what I can tell, the people checking the racks in grocery stores are far more interested in who's doing who in Hollywood, or how to paint flames on their Yugo...

Just like developing the technology, there has to be a commercial reward for reporting on it, or it won't happen. And right now, I don't believe the profits are out there.

First of all, albertson's isn't THAT small. They are in California, and have been for some time.

I believe I HAVE seen some alternative energy magazines. Still, FEW places would carry such things. There is a limited market.

AMAZON.com DOES sell some alternate energy kits. READ REVIEWS THOUGH!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2016901].message }}

Patrician

14 years ago

There is a direct correlation between the price of gas and the price of goods. The price of gas has increased 80 cents in the past year across the board. Hence all the stuff delivered by truck (everything) has gone up.

We continue to pay high costs for gas only because of the same greedy mongers that are manipulating the stock market and because we continue to be dependent on foreign oil while we have more untapped oil in this country than anywhere else on earth. The excuse is that the ecologists and tree huggers forbid us from drilling in 'pristine' areas.

Too bad we can figure out how to go to the moon but we can't figure out how to use the resources we have without harming the environment.

What's the incentive? Lower prices for us, lower profits for the ones that control things. Go figure which is the priority - hint: it's not hoot owls.

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Patricia Brucoli
Plug-In Profit Site Helpdesk

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2017746].message }}

Kay King 14 years ago

I fully agree, Pat.

I've been wondering if we are going totally down the wrong path when it comes to food and "goods".

Our food is reasonably priced (when compared to the % of income used to buy it) and places like WM can sell cheaply because big conglomerates are now the growers. The way in which livestock is treated is abominable for a civilized nation. It's all for the dollar and fast to market is the goal. The complaint I've always had is that though I understand the need for livestock as food, I think it's wrong for those living creatures not to have a decent quality of life for their short lifespan.

We import thousands of items and additives from China - it's cheaper yet how many scares have we had in the past couple of years? Contaminated cheap imports have poisoned pets and people.

Farmers selling to the conglomerates must plant certain modified seeds, must feed certain modified grains. A farmer was removed by Monsanto from it's suppliers list because he refused to raise chickens in the dark for their entire life (they grow faster without light). He had the nerve to have windows in his chicken house. Poultry is grown so quickly using these methods that bones do not have time to mature and many can't walk more than a step or two. Can this really produce healthy food to eat?

Prices would rise if we practiced safer and more humane food growing methods but there would be fewer e-coli and other contaminant scares.
Cattle and pigs crammed together create a lot of waste runoff that can reach fields of growing vegetables. Cattle produce high volumes of methane only because of their "fast growth" diet. Fed naturally on grass, there is no methane problem - but nothing we eat today seems to be grown naturally except organic products and there's no way to tell if they are truly organic.

Can't help but wonder if the end result wouldn't be healthier people. Fast food venues are attacked by groups for selling "fat food" yet high calorie food in moderation wouldn't hurt you. If it weren't so cheap, it wouldn't be the daily diet of so many children. If food were more "precious" (costly) perhaps we wouldn't be as wasteful and gluttonous as we are today.

The same is true of many items we use. We discard and replace items our grandparents would have maintained for years because it's "cheaper to buy a new one".

So many of the problems are approached as stopping symptoms of an illness rather than going deeper and curing the disease.

kay
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2018152].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

And YEAH, there is too much over simplification. They figure that if the DNA is of a chicken, it resembles a chicken, it IS a chicken. If we had things down to SUCH a science that we could do things like grow chickens in the dark and be ASSURED that they were the SAME, we could probably DISPENSE with it all and manufacture the protein in factories. EVEN protein at healthfood stores is almost 100% originating from EGGS, MILK, PLANTS, and MEAT!

And will chickens even lay eggs if they are ALWAYS in the dark? Probably not.

BTW PLANTS grow faster in the dark ALSO! They probably don't generate many leaves, or anything of much value, and with absolutely NO light they will die, but they will FIGHT to get to the light ASAP. Maybe it is just a basic thing that physical growth means more ability to catch light.

A number of animal processes ARE regulated by light.
Vitamin D, rythms, somee hormones, like melatonin, are regulated by LIGHT even in HUMANS. Heck, they even have a malady called, interestingly enough, SAD! Seasonal affective disorder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2018665].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

MONSANTO is a real problem when it comes not only to health, but prices as well. Right now there are investigations going on - their lies about the biodegradability of what is now known to be a virulently poisonous pesticide - their mafia selling techniques, etc. Problem is that they are so integrated with the US gov now that it's likely that nothing will come of the investigations.

IMHO if we closed down MONSANTO we'd have a cleaner, safer, and cheaper world. They are also responsible for driving seed prices up. Before they took over the industry via brute force farmers were only paying around 4% of their income for seeds - now they are paying 16% and the seeds are so tainted that they can't harvest and use their own seeds to replant.

When you live in a world that allows corporations to violate every right of every farmer and every animal that they come near, there doesn't seem to be much hope of redemption for us. I don't think they see us any differently than the animals they allow to be abused beyond human reasoning. If they could put us all in tiny cages and force money out of us, they'd do it in a heartbeat. Only a worldwide boycott will put those *******s down.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2019712].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

withheld comment to avoid you know what... 8-(

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020003].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

TL - the HC bill takes 17% of the GPA, so where all those 2% figures come from, I can't figure out. Go read some of the BS that was added AFTER the bill passed and you will be shocked to your shoes........and sorry about our luck. Once you get the brunt of just the pharmaceutical price increased they just wrote in after the fact, you will see what your beloved HC takeover is all about.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020028].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

TL - the HC bill takes 17% of the GPA, so where all those 2% figures come from, I can't figure out. Go read some of the BS that was added AFTER the bill passed and you will be shocked to your shoes........and sorry about our luck. Once you get the brunt of just the pharmaceutical price increased they just wrote in after the fact, you will see what your beloved HC takeover is all about.

Yeah, they added a special tax to MEDICAL SUPPLIES! That tells you something since they say they tax what they want to LIMIT, right? And if they pay for the stuff, what good is the tax? It only 3-4 percent, but that is about $600 just on the little valve I had put in. My whole operation cost over $200K, if even 30% were materials, that is $1,800. And materials means gauze, syringes, masks, needles, sutures, etc.... Just that valve was $20,000, so 30% isn't that far out of line.

BTW TL, I consider myself average. I was told my taxes wouldn't go up, they have. My insurance was fine as it was. Did I hate spending like $1000/year just on tests? YEP! Do I hate spending $340/year on basic medicine(AFTER discounts)? YEP! But I could live with that, and I had a choice.

BTW the CBO is FAR from perfect. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET office. That tells you a lot right there. But look at their HISTORY!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020077].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Yeah, they added a special tax to MEDICAL SUPPLIES! That tells you something since they say they tax what they want to LIMIT, right? And if they pay for the stuff, what good is the tax? It only 3-4 percent, but that is about $600 just on the little valve I had put in. My whole operation cost over $200K, if even 30% were materials, that is $1,800. And materials means gauze, syringes, masks, needles, sutures, etc.... Just that valve was $20,000, so 30% isn't that far out of line.

BTW TL, I consider myself average. I was told my taxes wouldn't go up, they have. My insurance was fine as it was. Did I hate spending like $1000/year just on tests? YEP! Do I hate spending $340/year on basic medicine(AFTER discounts)? YEP! But I could live with that, and I had a choice.

BTW the CBO is FAR from perfect. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET office. That tells you a lot right there. But look at their HISTORY!

Steve

Steve, glad you decided to join us.

Are you saying that your medical situation is normal or average??????????????

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020126].message }}

seasoned 14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Steve, glad you decided to join us.

Are you saying that your medical situation is normal or average??????????????

TL

I may actually be WORSE than many my age. HECK, I have an aneuryism that COULD get worse, and is monitored every year, that costs about $6K/year, take two drugs that COULD easily cost over $6K a year. The INR tests COULD cost about $700 a year!

LUCKILY, the insurance lowers the ct tests to less than $2000. The insurance coupled with discounts lowers drugs to about $240, and I do my OWN INR tests so they COULD cost less than $200. I actually STILL spend about $600 on those tests to stabilize things, and track it better. BTW that stupid machine cost me $2000. Explain to me how THAT cost so much, and the GOVERNMENT created a bunch of STUPID laws to raise the REAL cost by over $500! And they gladly operated as pawns to further increase costs, and could have KILLED people.

Now I KNOW people are WORSE off than I am. A coworker said she needed a drug, to keep her RA at bay, that cost over $30,000 a month(Insurance meant she could have it at a WHIM! LITERALLY! She was ECSTATIC!) KIMW obviously is far worse off. But I can tell you that stuff is NOT cheap! And even the U.S. government, under NEW laws is paying less and for a shorter period. Of course, bothe she, and kim, are about a decade older than I am. My father was about 68 before he had a heart bypass.

OH, and I DO have an abdonimal hernia I got with the heart operation. It was triggered TWICE today, in fact. I had to apologize to a woman for stepping in front of her because some jerk made me backup and I had to move quickly to get my hernia to snap back into place.

Still, I have known MANY peoplle that were even close to twice my age that didn't have these kinds of problems.

BTW Joined WHAT? And I am just stating facts, I don't want to be accused of being some sort of troll that only talks politics. I have been here longer than most, and have talked relatively little about politics. HECK, I spoke to my taxi driver about his PHONE service, and ***HE*** mentioned he followed obama everywhere! I spoke to him about tax implications, and things started sounding REALLY fishy! Oh well, long story short, he sold a hooded jacket at all the conventions. He said he made a LOT of money and bought a nice new car with it.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2022026].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

TL - the HC bill takes 17% of the GPA, so where all those 2% figures come from, I can't figure out. Go read some of the BS that was added AFTER the bill passed and you will be shocked to your shoes........and sorry about our luck. Once you get the brunt of just the pharmaceutical price increased they just wrote in after the fact, you will see what your beloved HC takeover is all about.

Hey Sal...

I was simply responding to Gary V's comments etc.

I do understand that HC in this country takes up about 17% of all spending etc.

That's one number.

The 2-3% number I'm talking about is new taxes from those making over $250K to help pay for the new people coming into the HC plan.

I understand that you are Konspiracy Central but, ( the spelling is my own )

...you should take some time and read the posts instead of jumping to conclusions etc.

After the fact???

When did they sneak this new and secret nefarious stuff in??

During reconciliation???

Are you reading some secret bill somewhere, like the death panel stuff you were touting when the death panel BS was hot???

Or...

when you claimed that our national debt was about to expire ( yes expire ) in 2008 but...

... they ( naughty forces ) engendered the banking collapse to stop or replace it from expiring etc.

I've been to Konspiracy Central also but I know when to let it go.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020205].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Hey Sal...

I was simply responding to Gary V's comments etc.

I do understand that HC in this country takes up about 17% of all spending etc.

That's one number.

The 2-3% number I'm talking about is new taxes from those making over $250K to help pay for the new people coming into the HC plan.

I understand that you are Konspiracy Central but, ( the spelling is my own )

...you should take some time and read the posts instead of jumping to conclusions etc.

After the fact???

When did they sneak this new and secret nefarious stuff in??

During reconciliation???

Are you reading some secret bill somewhere, like the death panel stuff you were touting when the death panel BS was hot???

Or...

when you claimed that our national debt was about to expire ( yes expire ) in 2008 but...

... they ( naughty forces ) engendered the banking collapse to stop or replace it from expiring etc.

I've been to Konspiracy Central also but I know when to let it go.

TL

I'm a conspiracy theorist because you don't do any research?
If you don't know what they are adding to that bill, maybe it's time to get motivated enough to do some research instead of just sounding off about "conspiracy theories". It's not hard - everything going through congress is online to read. No excuse to call names when you could just as easily look stuff up and keep track of what is being done without depending on your MSM corporate news team to inform you. Yes they are adding stuff after the fact. One thing they just added is a big spike on pharmaceutical drugs that were already outrageous compared to what other companies pay.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2021198].message }}

M_Jones

14 years ago

I believe the info you are looking for can be found here:

largest food price spike in PPI in 26 years.....

hxxp://xxx.businessinsider.com/hidden-in-the-ppi-data-was-the-largest-food-price-spike-in-26-years-2010-4

Hidden In The PPI Data Was The Largest Food Price Spike In 26 Years

See chart here:
hxxp://static.businessinsider.com/image/4bd0708b7f8b9afd31200000-590-/chart.png

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2020883].message }}

Profit-smart

14 years ago

Way off. This has nothing to do with healthcare; this is a trend that will only continue.

This is something I've been predicting since I was a kid - Sadly - and its coming true. To many people, depleted resources, and growing civil discontent.

See-

Market Skeptics: Blue Gold: Have the Next Resource Wars Begun?

#159 Threats of Peak Oil to the Global Food Supply | Richard Heinberg's website

To list off a few.

That, and the general economic situation all play into it.

Thanks

Signature

1Linklist - Millions Of Fresh VERIFIED Gsa Ser/Scrapebox Targets ... DAILY

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2021173].message }}

salegurus

14 years ago

Yip, i may be wrong.
I am not an economist but you don't have to be one to see that by increasing taxes on people/businesses making over $250K alone is not going to be enough. That's why a VAT is going to be hard for the Gov to overlook.
It's not an increase in income tax, but a sales tax that will have to be paid by everyone. Europe and others have had vat for years, some 18%+ and it's a huge stream of income for them.
It's my belief that taxes will increase for middle class Americans and that they will after the mid terms.

PS! These are just my opinions, if you need to correct me in any way that's fine, just don't get your knickers in a not.
Cheers

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.

― George Carlin

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2021703].message }}

Kay King

14 years ago

the seeds are so tainted that they can't harvest and use their own seeds to replant.

Actually I think it's because the seed is so genetically altered. For centuries farmers allowed some of their crop to go to seed - they cleaned the seed for planting the next year.

With Monsanto, farmers HAVE to buy their seed from Monsanto and are not allowed to clean seed to use for the next harvest or to use any other seed. Kind of makes you wonder what's in the seed....

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2021775].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Actually I think it's because the seed is so genetically altered. For centuries farmers allowed some of their crop to go to seed - they cleaned the seed for planting the next year.

With Monsanto, farmers HAVE to buy their seed from Monsanto and are not allowed to clean seed to use for the next harvest or to use any other seed. Kind of makes you wonder what's in the seed....

Yeah, TELL ME ABOUT IT! You know, they decided to make tryptophan using bacteria. It worked for a while. THEN, some IDIOT in japan decided to modify it. It LOOKED like tryptophan. It seemed to work kind of like tryptophan. They produced it for dozens of companies. THEN, one day, people noticed that mysterious deaths were all tied to this tryptophan. They ran it through a spectrometer, and found it was DIFFERENT! SLIGHTLY, but DIFFERENT! NOW, all tryptophan has to be natural. For a time, they didn't allow it at all.

So people LAUGH at people that speak against GMO, etc... The fact is that there IS cause to worry. And the world has MANY things that are not stable. We have NO valid control group to study! Maybe we ought to figure out what is wrong with the environment and food BEFORE changing them.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2022088].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Ilya Feynberg,

In my last job I wasn't making all that much, and I saved a PALTRY sum. NOW, I am planning on saving almost as much as I used to make. And the GOVERNMENT says it is TOO MUCH, but it is to make up for the past. NOW, FINALLY, the government says that oldER people can save more, but NOT until most can't make it up.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2024451].message }}

senderbot

14 years ago

Hi,

What you may have noticed is a price increase based on the increas of the value of homes in your area. This may be why people in other WM catchment areas havent noticed the same increase.

In the UK this has been going on for years. The exact same product in two identical stores will be priced based on the ability for the locals to pay. So shop in a poor part of town and you'll pay less.

Its bad but it works.

Cheers

Max

Thanks

Signature

PornStarStamina is for sale! - Buy the book rights and website! or Just Download the Book For FREE! - Check it out!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2029854].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

TL,

Do you guys ever listen to yourselves? I mean if you were 100% right, you could simply tax everyone 100% and everyones problems would be over. Never mind that you would end up with basically slavery and communism, your problems would be over.

Of course, what happens when the government spends it all? And HOW do they spend it? I mean giving it to people would be stupid if you simply ask for it all back.

But if you can't spend it, doesn't it become worthless? And nobody abroad would accept it because the local government wouldn't use it, and effectively outlaw it to the people.

BTW I found out late last night that THOUSANDS of delta workers will lose their jobs this friday. At least the one I spoke to won't work for them part time, because SHE WON'T GET HEALTHCARE!!!!!!! HER words, not mine!

If loss of money isn't going to cut jobs, then why do people fail to hire because they don't have enough, and why do jobs get cut because income drops? What is significant with a drop of income if a loss of money isn't significant? And why aren't ALL jobs service jobs, if they can be hired, and will work for no money? What are unions for? What is the minimum wage for? I'm SERIOUS, I have trouble reconciling ALL this stuff.

I guess you call this progressive, huh?

1947

$44,000 @72=12320
$100,000 @89=11000
$200,000 @91=18000

You bring in almost 5 TIMES as much, and only get to keep less than 50% more? Or how about bringing in over twice as much and making LESS!?!?!? I guess I would be working for mcdonalds, WHY take the risk!?!?!?

One interesting thing though, this DOES indicate that my last figures were faulty. I relied on some internet sites. According to this, the tax value I gave was LOW!!!!!! So my illustration, that I thought was bleak, was actually LESS bleak than it should have been.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2030798].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

TL,

Do you guys ever listen to yourseleves? I mean if you were 100% right, you could simply tax everyone 100% and everyones problems would be over. Never mind that you would end up with basically slavery and communism, your problems would be over.

Of course, what happens when the government spends it all? And HOW do they spend it? I mean giving it to people would be stupid if you simply ask for it all back.

But if you can't spend it, doesn't it become worthless? And nobody abroad would accept it because the local government wouldn't use it, and effectively outlaw it to the people.

BTW I found out late last night that THOUSANDS of delta workers will lose their jobs this friday. At least the one I spoke to won't work for them part time, because SHE WON'T GET HEALTHCARE!!!!!!! HER words, not mine!

If loss of money isn't going to cut jobs, then why do people fail to hire because they don't have enough, and why do jobs get cut because income drops? What is significant with a drop of income if a loss of money isn't significant?

Steve

The issue was...

could HC be paid for or not by taxing the well off??

GaryV keeps saying that...

... even if we taxed everyone making over 250k per year - all 100% of their income, we still couldn't pay for the HC bill.

Remember, we're only talking about 100 Bill a year.

That was the issue that him and Tim were going round and around about.

I say Tim won the argument hand down. ( it was a very easy one )

Steve...

No one's in favor of taking 100% of anybody's income.

That's silly for anyone to make that claim.

If this were a court of law, the judge would sustain my objection because you're simply being argumentative.

Raising taxes on high income earners loses jobs???

I maintain the position that taking more tax dollars from the well off etc. is not going to cause this economy jobs.

Never has, never will.

I maintain...

It's a republican lie/myth to convince gov officials and lower income earners to be against higher taxes on higher income earners.

They'll just pay up and/or find another way to get the income they lose on the tax hike.

I that clear enough??

You said...

BTW I found out late last night that THOUSANDS of delta workers will lose their jobs this friday. At least the one I spoke to won't work for them part time, because SHE WON'T GET HEALTHCARE!!!!!!! HER words, not mine!

Quitting her job because she won't get HC sounds silly since the new HC bill will help her get HC no matter what her status is.

She should do some research on the bill and when the benefits kick in etc.

If she continues to work at least she can pay some of the cost.

TL

Ps. I know you said some ugly things about the CBO the other day but they're just the score keepers.

There's no need to dis them just because you don't like their calculations.

Even the repubs are silent and respectful on the CBO HC numbers.

I think Lindsey Graham said something but that was about it.

Must meet someone for lunch!

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2030951].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Quitting her job because she won't get HC sounds silly since the new HC bill will help her get HC no matter what her status is.

She should do some research on the bill and when the benefits kick in etc.

If she continues to work at least she can pay some of the cost.

TL

You see this is another part of the equation where the Dems have their blinders on. That $100 billion per year number is just for those that are currently uninsured. It doesn't take into account the millions that will be dropped from their insurance by their employer. That $100 billion will easily triple if not more.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031009].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

Won't happen. Small businesses will be given incentives to cover their employees. Large businesses will be fined for not covering their employees.

Originally Posted by garyv

It doesn't take into account the millions that will be dropped from their insurance by their employer. That $100 billion will easily triple if not more.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031184].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Won't happen. Small businesses will be given incentives to cover their employees. Large businesses will be fined for not covering their employees.

Tim, I should have known better than to try to reason with these two after tangling with them over the Rusher.

They won't admit anything, and now GaryV has moved on to the corny argument that HC costs will explode to triple costs bla, bla, bla etc.

The repub house leader called it Armageddon just before the HC bill was passed.

I'm awfully glad these folks are outnumbered and will be out numbered into the near future.

My prediction is that the dems even won't suffer a major defeat in the upcoming midterms.

The only thing that might be able to save GaryV, Seasons and their friends in 2012...

...is the the fact that corps will try to help the repubs by spending at least a couple billion to defeat the president in 2012.

That's a lot of negative ads.

But the mind once expanded, never returns to it's former state.

Let hope that common sense continues to rule the day. (LOL)

TL

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031250].message }}

seasoned 14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Let hope that common sense continues to rule the day. (LOL)

If you and tim leave, that hope will be closer to reality!
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031262].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

TL, Faux news is destroying brain cells by millions. LOL.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Tim, I should have known better than to try to reason with these two after tangling with them over the Rusher.

They won't admit anything, and now GaryV has moved on to the corny argument that HC costs will explode to triple costs bla, bla, bla etc.

The repub house leader called it Armageddon just before the HC bill was passed.

I'm awfully glad these folks are outnumbered and will be out numbered into the near future.

My prediction is that the dems even won't suffer a major defeat in the upcoming midterms.

The only thing that might be able to save GaryV, Seasons and their friends in 2012...

...is the the fact that corps will try to help the repubs by spending at least a couple billion to defeat the president in 2012.

That's a lot of negative ads.

But the mind once expanded, never returns to it's former state.

Let hope that common sense continues to rule the day. (LOL)

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031268].message }}

garyv 14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

TL, Faux news is destroying brain cells by millions. LOL.

Well I'm glad you can admit that there are some brain cells there. MSNBC caters to the mindless koolaid drinking Obama zombies.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031289].message }}
seasoned 14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

TL, Faux news is destroying brain cells by millions. LOL.

I ASSUME you are trying to say fox. I guess you don't know english OR french. CNN is closer to faux news much of the time.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031296].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

The only thing that might be able to save GaryV, Seasons and their friends in 2012...

...is the the fact that corps will try to help the repubs by spending at least a couple billion to defeat the president in 2012.

TL,

I tried to reconcile this, and I am ******REALLY****** curious about your answer.

YOURS, and tims, STATED claim is that "you know who" will save *****US***** YOU, TIM, ME, and GARY!

So WHAT are you saying that the republicans will say me and gary from?

BTW I am not even really invested in healthcare, or ANYTHING related to it, if at all. My money is tied up in governments, commodities, and staples. If my investments fail, it pretty much means the WORLD is failing. In fact, I have a fund set aside to move things into if the world should fail. It basically shorts it. Right now I only have about 0.035% of my money there, and that is ONLY to track things, and keep ratios.

AND, my current client IS in healthcare but, if they go bankrupt, a LOT of people will likely start dying. As I understand it, their life expectancy will drop to like 3 DAYS! YEP, 72 hours! So I don't think that is too likely. I doubt hospitals could take up the overflow, especially since many outsource to, and buy supplies from....

So frankly, I am ISOLATED from healthcare as long as MINE is provided for. I don't trust the industry, so I could ride it out for about 3 years. MILLIONS will die from such a shortage before I will.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031551].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

TL,

I tried to reconcile this, and I am ******REALLY****** curious about your answer.

YOURS, and tims, STATED claim is that "you know who" will save *****US***** YOU, TIM, ME, and GARY!

So WHAT are you saying that the republicans will say me and gary from?

BTW I am not even really invested in healthcare, or ANYTHING related to it, if at all. My money is tied up in governments, commodities, and staples. If my investments fail, it pretty much means the WORLD is failing. In fact, I have a fund set aside to move things into if the world should fail. It basically shorts it. Right now I only have about 0.035% of my money there, and that is ONLY to track things, and keep ratios.

AND, my current client IS in healthcare but, if they go bankrupt, a LOT of people will likely start dying. As I understand it, their life expectancy will drop to like 3 DAYS! YEP, 72 hours! So I don't think that is too likely. I doubt hospitals could take up the overflow, especially since many outsource to, and buy supplies from....

So frankly, I am ISOLATED from healthcare as long as MINE is provided for. I don't trust the industry, so I could ride it out for about 3 years. MILLIONS will die from such a shortage before I will.

Steve

Oh, sorry, I was talking about the possibility of you and GaryV being saved from 4 more years of democratic domination as the corporations will contribute at least 2 billion to the republican cause in 2012 in a bid to stop Obama from reelection.

Not any type of HC situation.

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031730].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Oh, sorry, I was talking about the possibility of you and GaryV being saved from 4 more years of democratic domination as the corporations will contribute at least 2 billion to the republican cause in 2012 in a bid to stop Obama from reelection.

Not any type of HC situation.

TL

But ***YOU*** claim the dems have EVERYONES best interest at heart, so why should I and Gary need to be "saved"? I'm STILL ***VERY*** curious!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031861].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

But ***YOU*** claim the dems have EVERYONES best interest at heart, so why should I and Gary need to be "saved"? I'm STILL ***VERY*** curious!

Steve

I'm talking about your's and especially GaryV's mental anguish of at least 4 more years of a dem President and dem domination of this nation.

Is that cleat enough for you to understand????

The supreme court, as a direct response to the Obama machine's ability to raise money has now allowed corps to get into the game with unlimited funds - like I said maybe that will save you.

Your friends, the republicans, have dominated this country for 22 of the last 30 years and we as a nation have nothing to show for it...

... do we????

Who...

... can argue that we as a nation are better off after the last 30 years of mostly republican rule?

The best you can do is try to proclaim the last 30 years as some type of joint venture of the two parties.

Since Reagan & 1980 there has been only a 8 year dem presidency until Obama in 2008.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031996].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

It's a republican lie/myth to convince gov officials and lower income earners to be against higher taxes on higher income earners.

They'll just pay up and/or find another way to get the income they lose on the tax hike.

New York State tried taxing the rich more.
They moved.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032107].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

New York State tried taxing the rich more.
They moved.

A state is one thing a country is another.

Folks are not leaving America until we get tax rates into the 60's, we're not even close and also that high of a tax rate is not necessary at all.

Some people simply want to roll the tax rates for well off people back to what it was under Reagan - around 38% - a loss of 4 or 5 percent.

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032142].message }}

ThomM 14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

A state is one thing a country is another.

So who do you think is making up the taxes in the state?
Sure a country is different but that doesn't matter to people who live in states like NY and Ca. that are the closest to being bankrupt.
Any type of new taxes on anyone living here no matter how much they make could be the last straw. Sure they may not move out of the country but moving to a state with lower taxes could be just as bad.
What if two of the largest states in the union declared bankruptcy?
Will the feds bail them out?
Where will that money come from?
- Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032335].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

A state is one thing a country is another.

Folks are not leaving America until we get tax rates into the 60's, we're not even close and also that high of a tax rate is not necessary at all.

That has been PROVEN wrong! People have ALREADY left at LESS! People have moved to other states to save a few percent or have better rates.

INCREDIBLE!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032409].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

That has been PROVEN wrong! People have ALREADY left at LESS! People have moved to other states to save a few percent or have better rates.

INCREDIBLE!

Steve

Errr Steve, we were orginally talking about federal taxes.

Are you talking federal taxes or state taxes??????????????

Cause no matter where you move to, you won't escape fed taxes unless you leave the country.

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032448].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Errr Steve, we were orginally talking about federal taxes.

Are you talking federal taxes or state taxes??????????????

Cause no matter where you move to, you won't escape fed taxes unless you leave the country.

TL

I started talking about how some have moved out of the COUNTRY because of TAXES! I followed up by how people have moved their company(and incidently laid off people, etc....) to save a few percent on state taxes. Raising prices means they outsource, cut back, get subsidiaries, shut down, or actually MOVE! Probably in that order, but it ALL has the same effect.... There is less income domestically, and are fewer jobs that pay well! I could ALSO mention that plans are curtailed or STOPPED, but that is often not so obvious.

Anyway, kay is right. Go ahead and talk, I'm out of here.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032524].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Errr Steve, we were orginally talking about federal taxes.

Are you talking federal taxes or state taxes??????????????

Cause no matter where you move to, you won't escape fed taxes unless you leave the country.

TL

Actually there are a ton of companies moving their forces over-seas to escape not only taxes, but to find a cheaper labor force. I worked at a large Motorola plant here in Illinois that moved to China for it's cheaper labor and lower taxes. Motorola alone has moved over 100k jobs to China and Mexico.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032544].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Oh, sorry, I was talking about the possibility of you and GaryV being saved from 4 more years of democratic domination as the corporations will contribute at least 2 billion to the republican cause in 2012 in a bid to stop Obama from reelection.

Not any type of HC situation.

TL

You see that's the big difference, Dems see them as evil corporations. Republicans see them as job providers. There's no need for Corporations to contribute much to this election, because a majority of people are going to vote for jobs.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031867].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by garyv

You see that's the big difference, Dems see them as evil corporations. Republicans see them as job providers. There's no need for Corporations to contribute much to this election, because a majority of people are going to vote for jobs.

Yeah, through most of my early career about 80% of my customers were BANKS! TODAY, they are all over, but I DID work for 5 GULP insurance companies! I DID work for 2 medical firms. I did work for two companies I saw as LEECHES!

One thing about them, they ALL paid. I didn't know how CMOs would eventually be blamed. I didn't know my mortgage tracking system would one day track subpar loans. The IDEA was to make sure assets were GOOD, and tracked well. HECK, I did some work for one of the largest advertising spot marketing firms in the country. Did they advertise for bad guys? WHO KNOWS?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031919].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

Well, then Obama shouldn't have to worry about anything. He's turned around the total disaster that your heroes left behind. The public will also see that it's the Repugs who are fighting bank reform.

Originally Posted by garyv

There's no need for Corporations to contribute much to this election, because a majority of people are going to vote for jobs.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032158].message }}

Kay King 14 years ago

Thanks to the pro and anti O forces - this thread will get nuked like others where we try to discuss financial issues WITHOUT the politics.

Suggest you guys start your own political thread instead of inserting your politics into threads where we are trying to discuss economic issues WITHOUT breaking the rules here.

geez
- [ 3 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032177].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Well, then Obama shouldn't have to worry about anything. He's turned around the total disaster that your heroes left behind. The public will also see that it's the Repugs who are fighting bank reform.

WOW, I was GOING to say someone spent a few seconds with photoshop, but you don't even need THAT for this! I guess this means we don't need to close anything more, have anymore cash for ..., collect new taxes, etc.... WOW! If ONLY it were real! IMAGINE! We could just stop NOW!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032420].message }}

TimPhelan 14 years ago

Steve thanks Kay for saying he and others have spoiled this thread and then just keeps on going. Lol. Anyone else notice this? He can't stop himself.
- Thanks
- 2 replies
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032428].message }}
- seasoned 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Steve thanks Kay for saying he and others have spoiled this thread and then just keeps on going. Lol. Anyone else notice this? He can't stop himself.
  
  Well, I was pointing out the silliness of your graph, I didn't start this, she is right,. etc.....
  
  I could point out how you start so much, work with TL there, etc... and try to rebuke me for giving a proper thankyou. HEY, I hate TV, think a lot of the shows are stupid, denigrate it, etc.... I EVEN stopped watching it for TWO YEARS! Alas, I still watch it. 8-(
  
  Comcast SWORE they would disable my analog signal 4/1. They DIDN'T! NOW, they swear they will on 4/28. I'll let you know how my mother reacts, if they do. I didn't hook the adapter up to the TV she has access to. 8-)
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032506].message }}
- garyv 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Steve thanks Kay for saying he and others have spoiled this thread and then just keeps on going. Lol. Anyone else notice this? He can't stop himself.
  
  LOL - you put a thanks in there as well. You really do have blinders on don't you?
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032523].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Well, then Obama shouldn't have to worry about anything. He's turned around the total disaster that your heroes left behind. The public will also see that it's the Repugs who are fighting bank reform.

What a bogus chart - here's the real numbers you should be looking at:

What your chart doesn't show is that the jobs lost are not being recovered, so actually we've hit a plateau of lost jobs. So showing a flatline at the bottom would be a more accurate representation of what's actually going on. Not to mention the fact that they've used the Census workers to prop up their numbers.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032503].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

Your chart shows the same thing: the jobs loss was in a free fall when Obama took over. Thanks for helping my arguement. Maybe Obama can take you on the campaign trail this year.

Originally Posted by garyv

What a bogus chart - here's the real numbers you should be looking at:

What your chart doesn't show is that the jobs lost are not being recovered, so actually we've hit a plateau of lost jobs. So showing a flatline at the bottom would be a more accurate representation of what's actually going on. Not to mention the fact that they've used the Census workers to prop up their numbers.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032552].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Won't happen. Small businesses will be given incentives to cover their employees. Large businesses will be fined for not covering their employees.

It will happen and is already happening as pointed out above.

Plus you're going into areas that are outside of the $100 billion dollar cost. That cost was only for insuring the 35 million that are currently uninsured. It was not for incentivizing the insurance of those that are currently insured.

Also - the fee for employers not covering their employees will only be $2,000 - The average family health insurance policy is $13,375. Which one do you think the employer will opt for?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031256].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by garyv

Also - the fee for employers not covering their employees will only be $2,000 - The average family health insurance policy is $13,375. Which one do you think the employer will opt for?

OK, 13375-2000=11375*1000000=11.375BILLION! And that is if just 0.303% of employers take that option. Bear in mind that most WILL because most will simply do NOTHING, as opposed to something. OTHERS, that HAVE done something, because of outside forces, will STOP! I could see over 1% rescission, or an additional cost of about 35billion minimum.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031287].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

OK, 13375-2000=11375*1000000=11.375BILLION! And that is if just 0.303% of employers take that option. Bear in mind that most WILL because most will simply do NOTHING, as opposed to something. OTHERS, that HAVE done something, because of outside forces, will STOP! I could see over 1% rescission, or an additional cost of about 35billion minimum.

Steve

Oh I'm sure the number will be higher, because no employer will feel bad paying that fee, because they know that the government will give their employees the insurance that they are taking away. There will be absolutely no "business smart" companies out there that will be paying for insurance. It would make no sense to.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031302].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

Yeah, I think so too. But what does Gary do? Does he admit he was wrong for repeatedly making an unbelievably ridiculous and ignorant claim? No, he ignores that and then says we are dense. LOL. Well, that's a tea partier for you.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

The issue was...

could HC be paid for or not by taxing the well off??

GaryV keeps saying that...

... even if we taxed everyone making over 250k per year - all 100% of their income, we still couldn't pay for the HC bill.

Remember, we're only talking about 100 Bill a year.

That was the issue that him and Tim were going round and around about.

I say Tim won the argument hand down. ( it was a very easy one )

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031026].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Yeah, I think so too. But what does Gary do? Does he admit he was wrong for repeatedly making an unbelievably ridiculous and ignorant claim? No, he ignores that and then says we are dense. LOL. Well, that's a tea partier for you.

Nope - it's only ignorant to those that obviously have no economic sense. I've already clearly pointed out how you are obviously wrong. But you're one of those stubborn ones - you know the "we won't go past 8% unemployment" types.

Here's one for you. Do you think someone is going to give up their lifestyle so that they can pay for everyone's healthcare? Or do you think that the more likely scenario is that they'll keep their lifestyle and pay for the tax hike by dropping their employees from health-insurance?

And when the top 1.5% of earners drop their employees from their insurance, we'll have a lot more than 35 million that are uninsured. So it will cost way more than just $100 billion. That number only assumes that no one will be dropped from their employers insurance. Which we're already seeing is not the case.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031123].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

Gary, lets stay with one ridiculous claim at a time. How did you prove I was wrong? I think it's clear to anyone with half a brain that you were wrong. Here is how in simple detail:

1. You claimed "You could take 100% of the earnings from those making $250K and above, and still not have enough to pay for the amount of people they want to give healthcare to."

2. I showed that no, you are wrong because you wouldn't need the 2 million plus people who make over $250,000. In fact just the top 400 individuals make enough to cover the health care bill.

LOL. That leaves over 2 million people who make over $250,000.

I will admit I am wrong when I am. Apparently you won't.

Originally Posted by garyv

Nope - it's only ignorant to those that obviously have no economic sense. I've already clearly pointed out how you are obviously wrong. But you're one of those stubborn ones - you know the "we won't go past 8% unemployment" types.

Here's one for you. Do you think someone is going to give up their lifestyle so that they can pay for everyone's healthcare? Or do you think that the more likely scenario is that they'll keep their lifestyle and pay for the tax hike by dropping their employees from health-insurance?

And when the top 1.5% of earners drop their employees from their insurance, we'll have a lot more than 35 million that are uninsured. So it will cost way more than just $100 billion. That number only assumes that no one will be dropped from their employers insurance. Which we're already seeing is not the case.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031175].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Gary, lets stay with one ridiculous claim at a time. How did you prove I was wrong? I think it's clear to anyone with half a brain that you were wrong. Here is how in simple detail:

1. You claimed "You could take 100% of the earnings from those making $250K and above, and still not have enough to pay for the amount of people they want to give healthcare to."

2. I showed that no, you are wrong because you wouldn't need the 2 million plus people who make over $250,000. In fact just the top 400 individuals make enough to cover the health care bill.

LOL. That leaves over 2 million people who make over $250,000.

I will admit I am wrong when I am. Apparently you won't.

Actually I did say above that the top 1.5% probably could barely pay it. (not paying attention again as usual) However, that's at paying 100% of their earnings. And it doesn't take into fact the number of people that will become uninsured as these taxes are having to be paid. That $100 billion cost will easily triple if not more.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031222].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

The issue was...

could HC be paid for or not by taxing the well off??

GaryV keeps saying that...

... even if we taxed everyone making over 250k per year - all 100% of their income, we still couldn't pay for the HC bill.

Yeah, And I was just stating an interesting point. I didn't even bring up the subject there! BTW her statement strongly implied that they had NO interest in us because their future was in danger.

Remember, we're only talking about 100 Bill a year.

I thought ***WE*** were talking healthcare. YOU bring up the 100Billion. BTW 1Trillion over 10 years is NOT $100Billion! The 10 is NOT ten, it is 4+6!!!!!!!!! SO, 1Trillion, 100Billion*(4+6 TAX)=1000Billion! 1000/6(expenses)=166.67Billion/year according to the CBO which was GIVEN the figures and they don't take things, like the bad economy, into account. They ALSO don't take into account the increased costs at the 9 and 14 year marks.

That was the issue that him and Tim were going round and around about.

I say Tim won the argument hand down. ( it was a very easy one )

YEP, easy with ignoring facts, etc...

No one's in favor of taking 100% of anybody's income.

That's silly for anyone to make that claim.

If this were a court of law, the judge would sustain my objection because you're simply being argumentative.

But YOU said taxes don't hurt jobs! YOU showed a list showing tax rates up to 91% to "back that up"! YOU set the stage, I didn't. I guess you haven't watched enough court cases. USUALLY when someone brings up a fact that requires excluded evidence to back it up, or it touches on that evidence, ALL the evidence is allowed!

Raising taxes on high income earners loses jobs???

I maintain the position that taking more tax dollars from the well off etc. is not going to cause this economy jobs.

Never has, never will.

As said in court, I REST my case!

They'll just pay up and/or find another way to get the income they lose on the tax hike.

I that clear enough??

YEP, you used MORE excluded evidence, so I have to bring that in! HOW do they "find another way to get the income they lose on the tax hike"? There are only TWO ways! Reduce costs, or INCREASE INCOME! Reducing costs means lowering wages, lowering quality, or firing! INCREASE INCOME means lowering quality, or raising prices!

Quitting her job because she won't get HC sounds silly since the new HC bill will help her get HC no matter what her status is.

She should do some research on the bill and when the benefits kick in etc.

If she continues to work at least she can pay some of the cost.

Apparently it WON'T!

Ps. I know you said some ugly things about the CBO the other day but they're just the score keepers.

There's no need to dis them just because you don't like their calculations.

Even the repubs are silent and respectful on the CBO HC numbers.

I think Lindsey Graham said something but that was about it.

I guess you haven't listened to the news much!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031027].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

I don't know why we are all talking here! Lets just go to the moonbase in our special rocket cars( You know, the ones that fold into a briefcase!), and let our robot helpers argue about healthcare! GRANTED, they will turn on us, like asimov dictated, but until THEN....

OR, we can let our pet apes do all the work. HECK, they can help out as nurses in the hospitals?

And for DEFENSE?!?!?!? Let's use THIS guy! Colossus: The Forbin Project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I mean if we are going to follow estimates that go a decade into the future based on talking points, and extrapolate for the next hundred years, we might as well look to movies, "news clips", cartoons, and talking points of the past, right?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031245].message }}

Thinker1

14 years ago

I have also noticed the same thing. I try not to pay too much attention to it. I kind of like to divert my attention to bringing more income. Then, it won't matter how much things cost. Sounds easy but it takes a while to get there. Just one foot in front of the other is all expected from us at this moment - I guess.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2031957].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Yes the Job loss numbers were in a free-fall, and now there's a slight plateau (shown on my chart, but not yours) And that plateau is thanks to the Census workers. Many economists say the number is still on a steady increase, but appears to be leveling off because many people's unemployment benefits have run out, so they are no longer reporting.

Plus let's not forget to put an asterisk there at 2009 where Obama said the number would stop at 8%.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032576].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

Hey, lets do what Kay said and start our own thread and then I'll be happy to debate you point by point. I originally was just trying to correct you on that one claim you kept making out of the kindness of my heart.

Originally Posted by garyv

Yes the Job loss numbers were in a free-fall, and now there's a slight plateau (shown on my chart, but not yours) And that plateau is thanks to the Census workers. Many economists say the number is still on a steady increase, but appears to be leveling off because many people's unemployment benefits have run out, so they are no longer reporting.

Plus let's not forget to put an asterisk there at 2009 where Obama said the number would stop at 8%.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032630].message }}

Kay King

14 years ago

The problem isn't who started the downward slide or who is in charge now - it's that for the majority of the country, there is STILL a downward slide.

There is no "he's to blame" or "he's fixing it" - there is no "aisle" between those who wore blinders and those who have floundered since because both sides have spent us into oblivion.

But as long as "they" can keep people arguing from one partisan side shouting to the other partisan side, "they" hope to keep people from demanding better of all of "them".

The idea that a crisis would rise up on ONE day and take people in charge by surprise is the most ludicrous idea I've heard - and yet that's what we've been asked to believe.

The idea that we can spend our way out of a massive economic downturn is the second stupidest idea - and yet we've been asked to believe that one, too.

Point is - we're in trouble. It's not gotten better unless you are on Wall Street. The employment numbers look better because they are now being "figured" a bit differently. You can find a poll or a chart or a set of numbers to support almost any position - but Rome is still burning.

At some point, people will realize that saying "everything is getting better" doesn't make it so.

kay

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032720].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

The problem isn't who started the downward slide or who is in charge now - it's that for the majority of the country, there is STILL a downward slide.

There is no "he's to blame" or "he's fixing it" - there is no "aisle" between those who wore blinders and those who have floundered since because both sides have spent us into oblivion.

But as long as "they" can keep people arguing from one partisan side shouting to the other partisan side, "they" hope to keep people from demanding better of all of "them".

The idea that a crisis would rise up on ONE day and take people in charge by surprise is the most ludicrous idea I've heard - and yet that's what we've been asked to believe.

The idea that we can spend our way out of a massive economic downturn is the second stupidest idea - and yet we've been asked to believe that one, too.

Point is - we're in trouble. It's not gotten better unless you are on Wall Street. The employment numbers look better because they are now being "figured" a bit differently. You can find a poll or a chart or a set of numbers to support almost any position - but Rome is still burning.

At some point, people will realize that saying "everything is getting better" doesn't make it so.

kay

Thanks for taking what appears to be the high road but clarity is necessary.

But...

... as far as I'm concerned it makes no sense to pretend that everyone committed a serious crime when it's clear that Johnny is the one that did it.

Pretending that Johnny didn't commit a crime only allows Johnny to commit another crime...

...and it also gives cover to his minions ( along with their malignant philosophy )...

.. to continue to move among us with respectability as too many of the population will be confused as far as who did what.

Because...

Somebody has got to answer for Santino. ( from the Godfather movie )

BTW...

I have a Nobel prize winner in economics that begs to differ with you regarding whether we can or should spend ( actually it's invest ) our way out of this mess.

Who should I give more credence to when it comes to economic theory?

You or him?

- I don't know what idiot has been saying this crisis just popped up??

It simply came to a crescendo right around Sept 15th 2008 ( The Ides Of September ) and...

... the admin had to make it public, but I'm sure they wanted to wait until the election was over but just couldn't.

The Pain...

- Sure, there still is plenty of pain out there but saying it's not.... getting any better completely ignores the facts.

Finally, there is a real and historic difference on how the two parties approach and view domestic affairs/nation building and for anyone to suggest different is shear folly.

You said...

"But as long as "they" can keep people arguing from one partisan side shouting to the other partisan side, "they" hope to keep people from demanding better of all of "them".

I say...

One side is attempting to fix problems and the other side...

( because of their domestic philosophy and attitudes )

is...

... simply playing the historic role of someone attempting to "gum up the works."

They are noisy, ugly, disruptive and historically out of wack.

( let me add, that many of the minions, seem to not know any better...

... so I say as you know who said... "forgive them father for they know not what they do" )

If that sounds partisan, it can't be helped since the leadership and their minions need to,...

... (for lack of a better word) - be quarantined and their influence severely limited for the sake of the nation.

Thanks for taking what appears to be the high road but I beg to differ with a few of your opinions listed above.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035431].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Thanks for taking what appears to be the high road but clarity is necessary.

But...

... as far as I'm concerned it makes no sense to pretend that everyone committed a serious crime when it's clear that Johnny is the one that did it.

Pretending that Johnny didn't commit a crime only allows Johnny to commit another crime...

...and it also gives cover to his minions ( along with their malignant philosophy )...

.. to continue to move among us with respectability as too many of the population will be confused as far as who did what.

Because...

Somebody has got to answer for Santino. ( from the Godfather movie )

BTW...

I have a Nobel prize winner in economics that begs to differ with you regarding whether we can or should spend ( actually it's invest ) our way out of this mess.

Who should I give more credence to when it comes to economic theory?

You or him?

- I don't know what idiot has been saying this crisis just popped up??

It simply came to a crescendo right around Sept 15th 2008 ( The Ides Of September ) and...

... the admin had to make it public, but I'm sure they wanted to wait until the election was over but just couldn't.

The Pain...

- Sure, there still is plenty of pain out there but saying it's not.... getting any better completely ignores the facts.

Finally, there is a real and historic difference on how the two parties approach and view domestic affairs/nation building and for anyone to suggest different is shear folly.

You said...

"But as long as "they" can keep people arguing from one partisan side shouting to the other partisan side, "they" hope to keep people from demanding better of all of "them".

I say...

One side is attempting to fix problems and the other side...

( because of their domestic philosophy and attitudes )

is...

... simply playing the historic role of someone attempting to "gum up the works."

They are noisy, ugly, disruptive and historically out of wack.

( let me add, that many of the minions, seem to not know any better...

... so I say as you know who said... "forgive them father for they know not what they do" )

If that sounds partisan, it can't be helped since the leadership and their minions need to,...

... (for lack of a better word) - be quarantined and their influence severely limited for the sake of the nation.

Thanks for taking what appears to be the high road but I beg to differ with a few of your opinions listed above.

TL

And here in lies the problem.
If either party cared as much about the country as they do about proving they are right, we wouldn't be in this mess.

This is coming from an 'outsider' who doesn't have ties to either party.
I already know you'll tell me I'm wrong, because you have to defend your party.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035503].message }}

Kay King 14 years ago

AMEN - I'm not in either party myself.

My opinion is just that - and it doesn't change because you "know someone" - I know lots of experts and I don't always agree with them, either. In fact, they often disagree with each other.

The point is - and it's a big POINT - party loyalty doesn't fix things and neither side has it right for the situation we are in. The total inability of the partisans to compromise for the good of the country is damaging to the country as a whole - and that goes for both sides.

Blame does nothing - it's as useless as guilt when what matters is moving forward to accomplish something.

kay
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035538].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

And here in lies the problem.
If either party cared as much about the country as they do about proving they are right, we wouldn't be in this mess.

This is coming from an 'outsider' who doesn't have ties to either party.

I already know you'll tell me I'm wrong, because you have to defend your party.

Thom,

If you understood how the fed gov works you would not have made that statement.

FYI...

If one party controls the white house, has a 1 vote majority in the house ( that is the congress persons ) and has 60 votes in the senate they can pass whatever legislation they want.

( in certain situations all they need is 51 votes )

Now when I said above that one party has been a lot badder than the other, I'm not saying that the dems do not share any blame for this mess.

But, since the repubs at total control of the country from 2000-2006

( like I mentioned above )...

...and passed a bunch of legislation that exacerbated our national problems, as far as I'm concerned they deserve 70-80% of the blame.

BTW...

It is a fact that they just happened to be...

...in the drivers seat twice in the last 80 years ( the only two times ) when we faced a mess like the present day one.

Some want to say it's just a coincidence.

I think not.

TL

Ps. Herein lies a really big problem...

Most Americans do not understand the different philosophies of the two parties.

They were basically the same from the end of WW2 but things changed in 1980.

If you like, we can discuss the different philosophies of the two parties.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035626].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Thom,

If you understood how the fed gov works you would not have made that statement.

FYI...

If one party controls the white house, has a 1 vote majority in the house ( that is the congress persons ) and has 60 votes in the senate they can pass whatever legislation they want.

( in certain situations all they need is 51 votes )

Like the dems until recently.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Now when I said above that one party has been a lot badder than the other, I'm not saying that the dems do not share any blame for this mess.

GOOD

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

But, since the repubs at total control of the country from 2000-2006

2006? 2006? Where did I hear that before? oh yeah, 2007-1=2006. Interesting. For more points, compare to tim's chart!

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

...and passed a bunch of legislation that exacerbated our national problems, as far as I'm concerned they deserve 70-80% of the blame.

BTW...

It is a fact that they just happened to be...

...in the drivers seat twice in the last 80 years ( the only two times ) when we faced a mess like the present day one.

Some want to say it's just a coincidence.

I think not.

Yeah, I know it isn't either! THANKS for playing!

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

They were basically the same from the end of WW2 but things changed in 1980.

Well, interesting, I didn't even CARE about this garbage until 1980. Somehow, I think the change happened FAR earlier.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

If you like, we can discuss the different philosophies of the two parties.

Naw, don't bother. It has changed SO much in the past 15 years, and it is likely to be VERY different in the coming years.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035659].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Like the dems until recently.

GOOD

2006? 2006? Where did I hear that before? oh yeah, 2007-1=2006. Interesting. For more points, compare to tim's chart!

Yeah, I know it isn't either! THANKS for playing!

Well, interesting, I didn't even CARE about this garbage until 1980. Somehow, I think the change happened FAR earlier.

Naw, don't bother. It has changed SO much in the past 15 years, and it is likely to be VERY different in the coming years.

Steve

I asked for a discussion of the different philosophies of the two parties and..

You said...

"Naw, don't bother. It has changed SO much in the past 15 years, and it is likely to be VERY different in the coming years."

That's hogwash and you know it.

I must go to pick up the kid from school.

But I'll be back and we can have that discussion.

It should be fun.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035747].message }}

Kay King

14 years ago

I asked for a discussion of the different philosophies of the two parties and..

Then you need to do that elsewhere - it's not allowed here though you don't seem to get that point.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2036177].message }}

Andie 14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Then you need to do that elsewhere - it's not allowed here though you don't seem to get that point.

Kay,
Maybe third time reminding them of that will be a charm?

Your thread has pretty much been thoroughly hi-jacked I'm thinking...

So.........what're you hoping to get for Mother's day this year?

Andie
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

**Warrior KimW needs a kidney & YOUR support**
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2036212].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

Thom,

If you understood how the fed gov works you would not have made that statement.

I do know how the federal govt. works, that's why I made that statement.
Listen I'm 57 years old and have voted in every election since I was 18 only missing one local election.
I've always researched those running to the best of my ability and started studying govt. in high school.
So don't go making flippant statements about what I do or don't know just because I'm not a gung ho dem. or rep.
What I said was the truth and those who don't have their heads up their parties asses can easily see that.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2036217].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

I do know how the federal govt. works, that's why I made that statement.
Listen I'm 57 years old and have voted in every election since I was 18 only missing one local election.
I've always researched those running to the best of my ability and started studying govt. in high school.
So don't go making flippant statements about what I do or don't know just because I'm not a gung ho dem. or rep.
What I said was the truth and those who don't have their heads up their parties asses can easily see that.

Understood.

Your thanks for Kay's "everyone's the blame/the blame is equally shared" and the rest of her well intended but misguided post gave me the impression that you were an ahistorical, political novice "hungry for knowledge" ...

( I think I got you confused with Bill Farham who also gave thanks to Kay, who I believe made some really silly statement about political Czars - in another thread as I have just discovered -not this one)

...but thanks to the quote above - now I know better.

And there's also something to be said for those that won't fess up and see clear historical reality,...

( perhaps because of prior support?? )...

...for example pretending everyone's equally at fault for the mess before us - where are their heads?

I hope you participate in November.

( not that's it's any of my business )

All The Best!!

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2036609].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

for example pretending everyone's equally at fault for the mess before us - where are their heads?

I've never asked for anyone's head and I've voted in the past to elect or re-elect both dems. and repubs. who I thought where doing their job.
Unfortunately that has become increasingly harder to do.

By the way, there's no doubt both sides are responsible for the mess we are in. It's not like there has ever been less then two parties in congress, and if each party would actually put this country above their party after they are elected we wouldn't be in this mess.
But we both know that's not how the system works.
The dems. push their agenda because they think it is best, and the repubs do the same thing.
Neither side likes to compromise and neither side wants to work with the other.
Last summer in NY (which is on the verge of bankruptcy) this was what our elected officials where concerned about. 2009 New York State Senate leadership crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So for a couple of months neither side did anything for the state.
All they did was fight over who was in charge and still collected their pay for it all.
Right now the states budget is a month over due and instead of putting a bill together they are bickering over who's version is best, they can't even combine the two. In fact they are only in session at the most 3 days a week because of their partisan bull.
So you see it's not just on the fed. level but state level as well.
As long as both parties play their partisan games, both parties are to blame.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2036686].message }}

Kay King

14 years ago

The question becomes one of how bad does it have to get before the "leaders" are willing to work together to solve problems? Judging from the past TWO to THREE years - I'd say we could all fall off the cliff and those leaders would be arguing about where the bottom was.

One side would claim there is no bottom to hit while the other side would be claiming they would pass a bill that would allow us to fly. They would both keep up the sound bytes while we all went "splat".:rolleyes:

And then a reporter from a cable channel would be running around asking "how did the fall feel" and the other cable channel reporter would be reporting on who could fly...and who couldn't.

For those not attached to a party by umbilical cord, the whole process is quite interesting and often good for a laugh (beats crying).

kay

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2036776].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

The question becomes one of how bad does it have to get before the "leaders" are willing to work together to solve problems? Judging from the past TWO to THREE years - I'd say we could all fall off the cliff and those leaders would be arguing about where the bottom was.

One side would claim there is no bottom to hit while the other side would be claiming they would pass a bill that would allow us to fly. They would both keep up the sound bytes while we all went "splat".:rolleyes:

And then a reporter from a cable channel would be running around asking "how did the fall feel" and the other cable channel reporter would be reporting on who could fly...and who couldn't.

For those not attached to a party by umbilical cord, the whole process is quite interesting and often good for a laugh (beats crying).

kay

I have LONG said that people in the government should be treated like NORMAL citizens! NO special treatment, NO PENSIONS, NO special expense funds, NO office allowances, NO off duty use of government property, NO unreal staff allowance, NO special exclusions, like the new one for insurance. Only THEN will they realize that an incorrect decision NOW could affect them for the rest of their lives once the term is up. And the US government is NOT supposed to deal with the US government OR the states! They are supposed to deal with the COUNTRY! So if california gets a concession, the other 49 states should also. And that is 49, NOT 50! Washington DC is NOT a state! It shouldn't have people living in it, and it shouldn't have "representation"! Did you know that Washington DC has TWO police forces? I was SHOCKED to see that! Their cars are even painted differently, and they do the SAME jobs in the SAME area! Some cities FAR larger than DC don't even have their own police force, and Washington DC has TWO!

Right now, for all intents and purposes, there is not a single US citizen in all of the government. They are just TOO isolated. Higher taxes mean they can raise their pay, their pension goes up, etc.... So why should THEY worry if everything else goes bellyup!?

OH, annd I WISH I were so isolated. I WOULD be laughing!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2036968].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

The two parties will get together on bank reform soon although right now the Republicans are voting against even debating it. I'll say in less than a week there will be several GOP Senators who will vote yes to start the process. They are pretty much forced to but maybe after this one there will be some sort of hope for bipartisanship on other issues.

Originally Posted by Kay King

The question becomes one of how bad does it have to get before the "leaders" are willing to work together to solve problems?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2037093].message }}

Kay King

14 years ago

I agree - I think they will work together. My understanding is that part of the work was done in a bi-partisan way (gasp!) before the item became a highly publicized football with test votes meant to rush it through.

After 2 years or more of economic pain - I think it's worth time getting it right. That means stop the speeches and cable news appearances - sit down at the table together and get it done.

kay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2037147].message }}

TimPhelan

14 years ago

I believe one of the things they will change about the bill is to add the Jared Brown amendment that will limit the size of banks and basically break up the larger banks. This will effectively end the too big to fail idea and any future government bailouts. I'm sure we'll hear a lot people call this "socialism" but it's right in line with what Teddy Roosevelt did over 100 years ago.

Originally Posted by Kay King

I agree - I think they will work together. My understanding is that part of the work was done in a bi-partisan way (gasp!) before the item became a highly publicized football with test votes meant to rush it through.

After 2 years or more of economic pain - I think it's worth time getting it right. That means stop the speeches and cable news appearances - sit down at the table together and get it done.

kay

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041047].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I believe one of the things they will change about the bill is to add the Jared Brown amendment that will limit the size of banks and basically break up the larger banks. This will effectively end the too big to fail idea and any future government bailouts. I'm sure we'll hear a lot people call this "socialism" but it's right in line with what Teddy Roosevelt did over 100 years ago.

That would be an very important amendment for this bill.

Another important piece of the legislation is whether we're going to have a new financial agency with powers over I think everything - including the fed or...

... some type of advisory council.

One side wants the first option the other side wants the latter.

Correct me if I'm wrong Tim regarding that first option.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041083].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I believe one of the things they will change about the bill is to add the Jared Brown amendment that will limit the size of banks and basically break up the larger banks. This will effectively end the too big to fail idea and any future government bailouts. I'm sure we'll hear a lot people call this "socialism" but it's right in line with what Teddy Roosevelt did over 100 years ago.

As I said, the too big to fail thing is a MYTH! The 1890 sherman antitrust act made that ILLEGAL! They broke up AT&T and standard oil, etc... They, at least EARLIER, cared about big stores, newspapers, broadcasters, airlines, and YES, even BANKS! as I have often said, we DON'T need new laws! We need better ENFORCEMENT!

And NO, THAT isn't socialism. Socialism is when the government starts making dumb demands, or actually RUNS the companies. Controlling the size of each piece simply keeps things fair. It is also SAFER! What would happen if one company ran 80% of the poultry market, and got contaminated or went bankrupt?

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041086].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

As I said, the too big to fail thing is a MYTH! The 1890 sherman antitrust act made that ILLEGAL! They broke up AT&T and standard oil, etc... They, at least EARLIER, cared about big stores, newspapers, broadcasters, airlines, and YES, even BANKS! as I have often said, we DON'T need new laws! We need better ENFORCEMENT!

And NO, THAT isn't socialism. Socialism is when the government starts making dumb demands, or actually RUNS the companies. Controlling the size of each piece simply keeps things fair. It is also SAFER! What would happen if one company ran 80% of the poultry market, and got contaminated or went bankrupt?

Steve

I hear the top 6 banks comprise 63% of national deposits.

And 15 years ago they only comprised 15%.

They must be broken up as that's a threat to national financial security.

We need to break them up asap.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041112].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I hear the top 6 banks comprise 63% of national deposits.

And 15 years ago they only comprised 15%.

They must be broken up as that's a threat to national financial security.

We need to break them up asap.

TL

RIGHT, but my point is that they should NOT have been allowed to get so big.

Do you know HOW they got so big?

1. Small bank fails...
2. Larger bank applies to FDIC/FSLIC to BUY it!
3. FDIC/FSLIC approves, and large bank gets LARGER!

THAT is how WAMU got SO big! It kept buying up other banks! CHASE is suddenly FAR larger because it bought WAMU! That is ILLEGAL!!!!!! But the agencies DON'T CARE anymore, so the laws WEREN'T ENFORCED!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041159].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

... some type of advisory council.

Don't they have something like that now?
I think they all just got busted for watching and downloading porn all day.
Even though I didn't like the way Sal worded her last line, I do agree with the fact that we allowed all this to happen.
The vote is a very powerful tool if used properly.
When any elected official does something that goes against the will of the people they should be voted out, not reelected because their party has control of their district. That is one reason why I am so against belonging to one party and always following the party line.
It seems that more and more citizens expect the govt. and their party to take care of them and to protect them from themselves.
We really have become sheep in this country and when those who won't follow the heard step out of line to alert the flock, the heard tells them to be quiet and not rock the boat. Both parties know that as long as they continue to tell the people what they want to hear (that they will take care of you) they can do whatever they want.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041183].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Don't they have something like that now?
I think they all just got busted for watching and downloading porn all day.
Even though I didn't like the way Sal worded her last line, I do agree with the fact that we allowed all this to happen.

The vote is a very powerful tool if used properly.

When any elected official does something that goes against the will of the people they should be voted out, not reelected because their party has control of their district. That is one reason why I am so against belonging to one party and always following the party line.
It seems that more and more citizens expect the govt. and their party to take care of them and to protect them from themselves.

We really have become sheep in this country and when those who won't follow the heard step out of line to alert the flock, the heard tells them to be quiet and not rock the boat. Both parties know that as long as they continue to tell the people what they want to hear (that they will take care of you) they can do whatever they want.

I think the SEC/Porn dogs ( securities & exchange commission ) is only designed to watch stocks, bonds etc.

The pornfest happened in 2005 of 2006 I believe.

But this new proposal, I believe will have serious powers - even over the fed.

I'll do a bit of research on it.

I agree we are at fault and abdicated our responsibilities to the nation and our kids.

We had a really good thing going but we must stay forever vigilant and on top if issues.

But we can learn and we can do better.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041222].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I think the SEC/Porn dogs ( securities & exchange commission ) is only designed to watch stocks, bonds etc.

The pornfest happened in 2005 of 2006 I believe.

But this new proposal, I believe will have serious powers - even over the fed.

I'll do a bit of research on it.

I agree we are at fault and abdicated our responsibilities to the nation and our kids.

We had a really good thing going but we must stay forever vigilant and on top if issues.

But we can learn and we can do better.

TL

In doesn't matter when the porn thing happened or what they where watching, the point I forgot to make clear was they where citizens, in other words they where us being part of the problem and not the solution.

You are right we can learn and we can do better.
Unfortunately that will take the voting age adults in this country, those who vote and those who don't to admit it is their own fault and stop blaming it on everyone else. We the people put ourselves into this mess and we the people have to step up and take responsibility for our actions and inaction's.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041309].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

In doesn't matter when the porn thing happened or what they where watching, the point I forgot to make clear was they where citizens, in other words they where us being part of the problem and not the solution.

You are right we can learn and we can do better.
Unfortunately that will take the voting age adults in this country, those who vote and those who don't to admit it is their own fault and stop blaming it on everyone else. We the people put ourselves into this mess and we the people have to step up and take responsibility for our actions and inaction's.

OK, TELL US WHAT TO DO!!!!! Voting probably won't work, since near 50% LOVE this setup! And many will literally KILL to keep it! I mean KILL! Heck, they are even attacking POLICE in front of the press! Talk about BLATENT!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041437].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

OK, TELL US WHAT TO DO!!!!! Voting probably won't work, since near 50% LOVE this setup! And many will literally KILL to keep it! I mean KILL! Heck, they are even attacking POLICE in front of the press! Talk about BLATENT!

Steve

I thought I did:confused:
Man up (or woman up) and take responsibility for your actions and stop depending on the govt. to take care of you. Also speak with your vote and not just in the "important" elections, but all of them. Also vote for who you believe is the best candidate and not because they are from your party. If they don't do the job you elected them to do, vote them out in the next election. After a while politicians will get the idea and go back to work for us and not big banks or big business.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2042021].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

I thought I did:confused:
Man up (or woman up) and take responsibility for your actions and stop depending on the govt. to take care of you. Also speak with your vote and not just in the "important" elections, but all of them. Also vote for who you believe is the best candidate and not because they are from your party. If they don't do the job you elected them to do, vote them out in the next election. After a while politicians will get the idea and go back to work for us and not big banks or big business.

A talk show host recently put it SO well......

I JUST WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I NEVER vote for the party! You CAN'T vote them out for 2+ years! THEY DON'T CARE! If they get in for ONE DAY, they acheived their goal and don't care if you vote them out the next. They are ISOLATED!!!!!!!!!

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2042673].message }}

myob

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

.. You CAN'T vote them out for 2+ years! THEY DON'T CARE! If they get in for ONE DAY, they acheived their goal and don't care if you vote them out the next. They are ISOLATED!!!!!!!!!

Steve

Just WHO are "them" and "they"? If it's tweedle dee and tweedle dum, you should know what to do.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2042743].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

A talk show host recently put it SO well......

I JUST WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I NEVER vote for the party! You CAN'T vote them out for 2+ years! THEY DON'T CARE! If they get in for ONE DAY, they acheived their goal and don't care if you vote them out the next. They are ISOLATED!!!!!!!!!

Steve

Sure they care.
For one it's a cushy job (on any level) as far as the pay and benefits go.
Not to mention it would be harder to push a bad agenda through if they all knew there jobs where on the line.
In NY for example our legislators work 6 months out of the year and only three days a week because they need time to travel home for the weekend:confused: All but one of them make on average around $85,000 a year.
Now one, gives all the money he makes from being an elected representative to charity, he tried giving it back to the state but they wouldn't take it. I can't remember his name, but he is one of the few if only politician I would call an honest man.
Maybe if politicians knew that they where really accountable to the American people we would see more like him running for office.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2042789].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

WHAT PAY!?!?!? WHAT BENEFITS!?!?!?!? They get a SPECIAL pension and TONS of benefits EVEN with only ONE term! AND, when they "retire", they can write a book, milk relationships, etc...

As for giving the money to "CHARITY", WATCH IT! There are S many ways they can get more than the "give". and WHO got the tax deduction if he "gave it back"?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2042805].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

Steve all I'm trying to say is our system of government worked before and it can work again. But we all have to take an active part and do our part to make it work.
My father told me many years ago that in our type of democracy the government is a reflection of the people.
I think that statement is as true today as it was the 45 years or so ago when he said that. The people of this country think they are entitled to everything and we shouldn't have to pay for it. Sound like our elected officials?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2042880].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Steve all I'm trying to say is our system of government worked before and it can work again. But we all have to take an active part and do our part to make it work.
My father told me many years ago that in our type of democracy the government is a reflection of the people.
I think that statement is as true today as it was the 45 years or so ago when he said that. The people of this country think they are entitled to everything and we shouldn't have to pay for it. Sound like our elected officials?

Your father was right, but NOW the people have changed too. HECK, one guy is getting some guff because he said that he wants alabama to have only ENGLISH language tests for driving. The #$%^&* interviewing him asked "WHAT about those that just want to get a license and drive legally?"! Well, the fact is that you CAN'T drive legally without knowing English. There are signs that say no loitering, no parking after, no left turn after, use next right for all turns, etc.... HOW can you learn all those signs when there is NO standard and NO icon, etc....? So why have the test in dozens of languages when NOBODY can truly decipher them all(if there is a question), nobody can provide standard help, and the person can't read a sign and failing to do so may lead to a death? And you can't have the signs in a dozen languages for TONS of reasons, not the least of which is reaction time. HECK, every day I have to make a left turn onto a streeet, but the left turn is illegal. Half a block before that you have to take a slight right to make a left or a U turn. What if things aren't too busy and someone decides to make a RIGHT on the outlet of that turn area?

And when you call the hospital here, it is BAD ENOUGH that they say "If this is an emergency, dial 911"(and they say it SO SLOOOOOOWLY) Having it in Spanish is LUDICROUS! Oh well, at least they don't have it in the other 40 or so languages they cover. And their "nuclear engineer" speaks POOR english, and is VERY hard to listen to, much less understand.

Anyway, you can bet people will vote against him SIMPLY because he wants to have the driving test in English. HEY, ever see the Carol Burnett skit where she ends up in the spanish DMV(Vehicle licensing bureau) area!?!?!?

The politicians are as they are because so many people are. SAD, but true.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2043140].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

The two parties will get together on bank reform soon although right now the Republicans are voting against even debating it. I'll say in less than a week there will be several GOP Senators who will vote yes to start the process. They are pretty much forced to but maybe after this one there will be some sort of hope for bipartisanship on other issues.

Good prediction Tim.

Looks like the threat of an all-nighter brought some people who wanted to negotiate in private to their senses.

The process now moves forward and becomes public.

Maybe they both should...

YouTube- Michael Jackson's Beat It

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2039280].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Hey, lets do what Kay said and start our own thread and then I'll be happy to debate you point by point. I originally was just trying to correct you on that one claim you kept making out of the kindness of my heart.

OH HOW MAGNANIMOUS! And we never spoke of who REALLY drove things since 1/4/2007, which, coincidently, is JUST about the time of the last major upswing in unemployment, which covers most of this depression. BTW they are STILL in control.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032741].message }}

TimPhelan 14 years ago

I believe you meant MAGNANIMOUS. Have you tried spell check? When the red line is under a word it isn't another way to add emphasis.

Originally Posted by seasoned

OH HOW MAGNANAMUS!
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032768].message }}
- seasoned 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  I believe you meant MAGNANIMOUS. Have you tried spell check? When the red line is under a word it isn't another way to add emphasis.
  
  OK, believe it or not, I came back because I realized I made the mistake. ALAS, the browser I have tended to use lately, isn't setup with a spell check. OH WELL.
  
  Maybe that is part of your problem, that you are myopic and believe all fit into your own special world. I ALSO sometimes mkae a mistake like that, or have a doouble stroke like that, etc... Sorry. Still, the idea was properly conveyed. C'est la vie.
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032800].message }}
  
  Kay King 14 years ago
  
  It's OK Steve - I just thought you were spelling it phonetically
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2033071].message }}
  
  seasoned 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  It's OK Steve - I just thought you were spelling it phonetically
  
  Sometimes I don't think enough about that, and it IS a word I don't spell very often. I NEVER mean it, so it is meant as a sort of sarcastic insult. I USUALLY don't go THAT far.
  
  And my browser really DOESN'T do spell checking. I probably should just disable it so I will go to another, etc... 8-(
  
  But you show me a person that NEVER misspells, and I will show you a person that never writes. as I said, sometimess(<<<ACTUAL UNINTENTIONAL KEYBOUNCE) I do it because my hands don't keep up, or a key bounces. HECK, I haven't been using this netbook THAT long, and deal with TWO keyboards everyday. You're lucky I don't make MORE mistakes. 8-(
  
  Thanks for understanding though, assuming you mean it. 8-) If you DON'T, well I WOULD put a happy face doing a raspberry here, but I don't have one at the moment. 8-(
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2034084].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Hey, lets do what Kay said and start our own thread and then I'll be happy to debate you point by point. I originally was just trying to correct you on that one claim you kept making out of the kindness of my heart.

I agree, and thank you for the kindness - however ill-conceived it is. lol

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2032749].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

TL,

Why do people keep bringing up "nobel prize winner". You might as well auction off a diamond ring saying you found it in a box of cracker jack! Nobel did NOT want it to end up as it has, and letting just ANYONE into the club does NOT lend them credibility, it FANTASTICALLY devalues the prestige of the award. It WAS something that meant CREDIBLE, SMART, ETC.... NOW It means they have a few friends(FAIR WEATHER ONES), a cash prize, and publicity. WHOOPIE!

You guys really make no sense. You claim everyone, but us, has rights to something. Recently, one person, rather than asking for help from AMERICANS said that basically whites, Asians, and American indians need not apply UNLESS they happen to be female!
And THAT from well....

Sooner or later, MORE people will here what you are REALLY saying, and your whole whatever could VANISH!

It is TRULY outstanding how people desire something, etc... without EVER considering HOW it became something WORTH desiring.

BTW I think I would listen to KAY on financial matters before I would listen to ANY economist whose ONLY claim to fame seems to be something like the nobel prize!

BTW I WOULD tell you EXACTLY who is responsible, and how, but YOU won't like the answer, and Tims graph all but PROVES I am right. But that would be politics. 8-(

BTW for those that don't know, crackerjack is a carmel corn with peanuts snack, and comes with a prize. http://www.crackerjack.com/home.htm http://members.cox.net/jeepers/archives.html They are often CHEAP prizes!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035496].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

TL,

Why do people keep bringing up "nobel prize winner". You might as well auction off a diamond ring saying you found it in a box of cracker jack! Nobel did NOT want it to end up as it has, and letting just ANYONE into the club does NOT lend them credibility, it FANTASTICALLY devalues the prestige of the award. It WAS something that meant CREDIBLE, SMART, ETC.... NOW It means they have a few friends(FAIR WEATHER ONES), a cash prize, and publicity. WHOOPIE!

You guys really make no sense. You claim everyone, but us, has rights to something. Recently, one person, rather than asking for help from AMERICANS said that basically whites, Asians, and American indians need not apply UNLESS they happen to be female!
And THAT from well....

Sooner or later, MORE people will here what you are REALLY saying, and your whole whatever could VANISH!

It is TRULY outstanding how people desire something, etc... without EVER considering HOW it became something WORTH desiring.

BTW I think I would listen to KAY on financial matters before I would listen to ANY economist whose ONLY claim to fame seems to be something like the nobel prize!

BTW I WOULD tell you EXACTLY who is responsible, and how, but YOU won't like the answer, and Tims graph all but PROVES I am right. But that would be politics. 8-(

BTW for those that don't know, crackerjack is a carmel corn with peanuts snack, and comes with a prize. Welcome to Cracker Jack.com Cracker Jack Prize Archives They are often CHEAP prizes!

Steve

You said...

"You claim everyone, but us, has rights to something. Recently, one person, rather than asking for help from AMERICANS said that basically whites, Asians, and American indians need not apply UNLESS they happen to be female!
And THAT from well...."

Who is this us you speak of?

If you're talking the pres in his call for the 2010 midterms, he was simply calling on the coalition that won him the White House to get active again for the midterms.

Are you suggesting he was racist as Rush Limbaugh has??

If so, where is the outcry from someone other than Rush and I'm sure Glenn is just around the corner.

You can talk to me.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035678].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Thom,

I agree with kay. Heck, I registered as I did ONLY to vote in the primary. And the parties HAVE, sadly, changed. So NEITHER is as they were originally. It is like something ELSE was labeled the same so, like I said about the nobel prize, the label doesn't mean that much.

SOME have likened this whole thing to a three ring circus. We have congress that makes laws on a WHIM and, addicted to money and bribery, will change laws, to collect taxes, etc.... We have the president that, to get what he wants, must take the garbage that congress gives him. We have the supreme court that, for the most part, EVENTUALLY reviews congresses laws to determine if they are constitutional, but they were hired by the president and congress.

BOTH parties have members addicted, etc... in congress. Some people vote a split ticket to slow things down!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2035577].message }}

sezerb

14 years ago

Inflation is one of the perks of the federal reserve keeping a zero interest rate policy for so long.

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2036857].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

I can't believe what I am reading here. People - the US has been pwned.

Every day more lies and corruption, more purposeful manipulation, more top level fraud is being exposed and people still can't get their heads around what is happening.

The average person still thinks that macro-economics is the same thing as a household budget. World Bank does not operate on metal backed currency - and the debt incurred via the fiat money system at the macro-economical level CAN NOT decrease - it can only increase. They didn't know that? LOL. Whatever.

People are still arguing political parties. Politicians, who are incidentally now CAREER politicians and mostly members of an elite class with nothing in common with the average citizen. They are actually passing laws now that THEY are not subject to themselves. That is not "WE the people" any way you look at it -- either party.

Now - do you think they CARE? Would voting themselves a healthy raise right now with so much of their own country declining into third world status be a good indication that they CARE what is going on?

Who is at fault? Is it the World bank maybe? Corporate criminality? Maybe Bush, Obama, Clinton, FDR?

How bout putting the Damned blame where it belongs?

YOU - the average joe blow on the streets.

We know the FED is illegally installed, but have not forced them to dump this institution off and return to REAL money. We have accepted their fiat system.

We knew that corporations were committing violations of all sorts......yet we never quit working for them or buying from them. A corporation wants to take your jobs overseas and you bitch about talking to foreigners in CS that can't understand your problems yet you do not withdraw your patronage of the company. How long would some of those self indulgent traitors have lasted if when they went overseas we just stopped buying their products? They want to pay people 50 cents an hour to work for them, let them depend on people making 50 cents an hour to buy the damned products.

Politicians lie through their teeth and everyone is ready to forgive them for it "ohhhh...but they all lie." Um....excuse me - when they are lying in ways that it is making it hard for us to live, it might be time to stop being so damned forgiving and to start kicking them to the curb for it. You have 10 politicians (of both parties) lining their pockets with kickbacks from the oil companies to help keep their prices artificially inflated - but it's okay everyone lies. So what happens if it's not okay and you kick them out of office for it? Your oil prices go down is what happens.

What should have been the reaction to that little bail out scam where they were told "no way" by a LARGE majority of the population and they decided that they now rule and what we said didn't matter? Impeachments should have happened. But they didn't - a lot of idol threats about not voting them back in "next election". Now we have a very communistic health care program being installed in top of us and it's the same crap "next election". Yeah whatever - I believe that as much as they do. LOL. I don't think enough people will even KNOW if their own reps voted for it to do anything about it.

Face it folks. You have been pwned and for the most part of you - won't do a damned thing about any of it but come to forums and bitch.

Maybe the next time someone gets caught acting against the best interests of this country if people would get off of their drooling butts and do something about it we could save this country. But you won't. You'll sit on hold to the next corporation that has outsourced because you will accept any bullsh** they decide to cram down your throats to have the latest convenience or the "in" product of the month. And you will vote for complete scum rather than protesting their campaign on the basis that you won't accept the most palatable of two crooks. You will just vote Dem or Rep - because third parties might not win even if it's the only way to remove the ruling class from office and get things back on track again. You will vote for the elite class whether knowingly or because they were able to lie to you or keep their more unpalatable associations under wraps. Those who do the legwork to find out will be called "nutcases".

It's really all that simple. YOU screwed up. So either get over it and live with it or do something about it.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2040444].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I can't believe what I am reading here. People - the US has been pwned.

Every day more lies and corruption, more purposeful manipulation, more top level fraud is being exposed and people still can't get their heads around what is happening.

The average person still thinks that macro-economics is the same thing as a household budget. World Bank does not operate on metal backed currency - and the debt incurred via the fiat money system at the macro-economical level CAN NOT decrease - it can only increase. They didn't know that? LOL. Whatever.

People are still arguing political parties. Politicians, who are incidentally now CAREER politicians and mostly members of an elite class with nothing in common with the average citizen. They are actually passing laws now that THEY are not subject to themselves. That is not "WE the people" any way you look at it -- either party.

Now - do you think they CARE? Would voting themselves a healthy raise right now with so much of their own country declining into third world status be a good indication that they CARE what is going on?

Who is at fault? Is it the World bank maybe? Corporate criminality? Maybe Bush, Obama, Clinton, FDR?

How bout putting the Damned blame where it belongs?

YOU - the average joe blow on the streets.

We know the FED is illegally installed, but have not forced them to dump this institution off and return to REAL money. We have accepted their fiat system.

We knew that corporations were committing violations of all sorts......yet we never quit working for them or buying from them. A corporation wants to take your jobs overseas and you bitch about talking to foreigners in CS that can't understand your problems yet you do not withdraw your patronage of the company. How long would some of those self indulgent traitors have lasted if when they went overseas we just stopped buying their products? They want to pay people 50 cents an hour to work for them, let them depend on people making 50 cents an hour to buy the damned products.

Politicians lie through their teeth and everyone is ready to forgive them for it "ohhhh...but they all lie." Um....excuse me - when they are lying in ways that it is making it hard for us to live, it might be time to stop being so damned forgiving and to start kicking them to the curb for it. You have 10 politicians (of both parties) lining their pockets with kickbacks from the oil companies to help keep their prices artificially inflated - but it's okay everyone lies. So what happens if it's not okay and you kick them out of office for it? Your oil prices go down is what happens.

What should have been the reaction to that little bail out scam where they were told "no way" by a LARGE majority of the population and they decided that they now rule and what we said didn't matter? Impeachments should have happened. But they didn't - a lot of idol threats about not voting them back in "next election". Now we have a very communistic health care program being installed in top of us and it's the same crap "next election". Yeah whatever - I believe that as much as they do. LOL. I don't think enough people will even KNOW if their own reps voted for it to do anything about it.

Face it folks. You have been pwned and for the most part of you - won't do a damned thing about any of it but come to forums and bitch.

Maybe the next time someone gets caught acting against the best interests of this country if people would get off of their drooling butts and do something about it we could save this country. But you won't. You'll sit on hold to the next corporation that has outsourced because you will accept any bullsh** they decide to cram down your throats to have the latest convenience or the "in" product of the month. And you will vote for complete scum rather than protesting their campaign on the basis that you won't accept the most palatable of two crooks. You will just vote Dem or Rep - because third parties might not win even if it's the only way to remove the ruling class from office and get things back on track again. You will vote for the elite class whether knowingly or because they were able to lie to you or keep their more unpalatable associations under wraps. Those who do the legwork to find out will be called "nutcases".

It's really all that simple. YOU screwed up. So either get over it and live with it or do something about it.

Look at post #131. I agree in SPIRIT, and in a somewhat tangible way with all that you said. But I am one person. YOU are one person. *I* am no more responsible for it than you! HECK, there is a bill in congress RIGHT NOW that will effectively increase the population of the US by 3.6 Million! Apparently, some of them aren't US citizens yet. THAT is surprising to me. It IS a US possession, and treated like part of the US, but is not a state and they have complained that they can't vote. They were given the choice 4 times to join the US as a state, and declined. Well, NOW they are likely going to be given the choice AGAIN! If they chose yes, I believe all legal residents will be automatically US citizens. And are they counted in the 330Million? Probably not.

Which way do you think THEY will vote? And MANY have lived off the "public teat". These 3.6 million are, apparently, among them. ALL of those LOVE the fiat system. They don't understand it, and chose not to. all that they know is that it is FREE MONEY for them.

And nobody seems to understand securities. Let me make it SIMPLE!!!!!!!!

1. STOCKS! The purpose is to create papers representing a SHARE of ownership in the company, and the initial investment, or future releases helps FINANCE THE COMPANY without them incurring debt. The problem is that the majority holder CAN declare themselves to be the CEO of the company! Such a move, without other shareholders approval, is called a HOSTILE TAKEOVER!

2. BONDS! The purpose is to create papers representing a PROMISE of profit in the venture or company. They incur debt! The bonds can be called, which reduces profit, or the venture or company can go bankrupt, whcih(<<<BTW actual sequence error) means the bond holders get a portion of the outstanding money, if they are lucky.

3. FUTURES! The purpose is to pay a set price NOW for something in the future. If the cost goes up, you make money. If the cost goes down, you LOSE money.

4. OPTIONS! The purpose is to create papers representing a PROMISE to buy/sell a certain number of futures. They are good for 3 months. If they expire, they are WORTHLESS, and you lose 100%! If they become less valuable, you can sell at a loss. If they become more valuable, you can become filthy rich. It HAS to happen in 3 months though!

5. MUTUAL FUNDS! The purposed is to create a share that represents a portion of the previous 4 in various areas to diversify risk.

6. CMOs are effectively a special device, or derivative to finance a collection of mortgages from banks. They are somewhat diversified, like mutual funds, and work like bonds.

7. DERIVATIVES! The purpose is to create some variant using the above pieces.

8. TBILLS, SAVINGS BONDS! Special bonds to finance the US government.

9. Money Market! A special mutual fund investing in VERY SHORT term obligations for banks and large corporations.

10. IRA, SEPP, KEOGH, 401K, 403B, Pension plan! Special funds investing in the above.

So what is goldman sachs accused of? They didn't tell people that a person buying an OPTION to sell FUTURES at a HIGH price also had a hand in selecting the component products for. The future happened to be on a derivative based on CMOs! That were made of high interest loans. The high interest loans HAPPENED to be, DUH, the ones most likely to fail. When the prices dropped, he could fill the order.

As you can see, things are FAR more complicated than merely a gamble that can be stopped. Investing makes everything go around!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2040623].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I can't believe what I am reading here. People - the US has been pwned.

Every day more lies and corruption, more purposeful manipulation, more top level fraud is being exposed and people still can't get their heads around what is happening.

The average person still thinks that macro-economics is the same thing as a household budget. World Bank does not operate on metal backed currency - and the debt incurred via the fiat money system at the macro-economical level CAN NOT decrease - it can only increase. They didn't know that? LOL. Whatever.

People are still arguing political parties. Politicians, who are incidentally now CAREER politicians and mostly members of an elite class with nothing in common with the average citizen. They are actually passing laws now that THEY are not subject to themselves. That is not "WE the people" any way you look at it -- either party.

Now - do you think they CARE? Would voting themselves a healthy raise right now with so much of their own country declining into third world status be a good indication that they CARE what is going on?

Who is at fault? Is it the World bank maybe? Corporate criminality? Maybe Bush, Obama, Clinton, FDR?

How bout putting the Damned blame where it belongs?

YOU - the average joe blow on the streets.

We know the FED is illegally installed, but have not forced them to dump this institution off and return to REAL money. We have accepted their fiat system.

We knew that corporations were committing violations of all sorts......yet we never quit working for them or buying from them. A corporation wants to take your jobs overseas and you bitch about talking to foreigners in CS that can't understand your problems yet you do not withdraw your patronage of the company. How long would some of those self indulgent traitors have lasted if when they went overseas we just stopped buying their products? They want to pay people 50 cents an hour to work for them, let them depend on people making 50 cents an hour to buy the damned products.

Politicians lie through their teeth and everyone is ready to forgive them for it "ohhhh...but they all lie." Um....excuse me - when they are lying in ways that it is making it hard for us to live, it might be time to stop being so damned forgiving and to start kicking them to the curb for it. You have 10 politicians (of both parties) lining their pockets with kickbacks from the oil companies to help keep their prices artificially inflated - but it's okay everyone lies. So what happens if it's not okay and you kick them out of office for it? Your oil prices go down is what happens.

What should have been the reaction to that little bail out scam where they were told "no way" by a LARGE majority of the population and they decided that they now rule and what we said didn't matter? Impeachments should have happened. But they didn't - a lot of idol threats about not voting them back in "next election". Now we have a very communistic health care program being installed in top of us and it's the same crap "next election". Yeah whatever - I believe that as much as they do. LOL. I don't think enough people will even KNOW if their own reps voted for it to do anything about it.

Face it folks. You have been pwned and for the most part of you - won't do a damned thing about any of it but come to forums and bitch.

Maybe the next time someone gets caught acting against the best interests of this country if people would get off of their drooling butts and do something about it we could save this country. But you won't. You'll sit on hold to the next corporation that has outsourced because you will accept any bullsh** they decide to cram down your throats to have the latest convenience or the "in" product of the month. And you will vote for complete scum rather than protesting their campaign on the basis that you won't accept the most palatable of two crooks. You will just vote Dem or Rep - because third parties might not win even if it's the only way to remove the ruling class from office and get things back on track again. You will vote for the elite class whether knowingly or because they were able to lie to you or keep their more unpalatable associations under wraps. Those who do the legwork to find out will be called "nutcases".

It's really all that simple. YOU screwed up. So either get over it and live with it or do something about it.

Sorry ThomM, but I have to take a stab at this one.

OK HeySal...

Are you saying that we are done as a nation unless we elect third party people???

I for one, do understand all the stuff about the super conspiracy to steal the wealth of the nation and reduce damn near everyone of us to slavery and a 1984 type of society.

Big time manipulators have been chomping at the bit ever since this nation was created.

And...

The nation got ripped off big time in the crash of 1929 and it took us quite some time to recover from it.

( I think you count FDR as one of the major conspirators and if you do I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on that point )

WW2 happened and...

- Since we saved the world during WW2 it followed that the people of the country should be rewarded.

I believe we were.

- I believe we were as a nation had the highest standard of living that any nation has ever seen - somewhere between the end of WW2 up until circa 1980-1990.

( seasoned and I seriously disagree on this point - so there no need for seasoned to hammer in here on this one OK? )

* Our national debt once it was clean up from WW2 was never a problem as it was only about 300 bill in 1980.

So...

... as far as I'm concerned the federal reserve and it's minions, and other bad guys were held at bay and the nation enjoyed a very high standard of living from about the end of WW2 until 1980-90.

But...

5 events accelerated our decline.

#1: We went off the gold standard in 1973 under Nixon. ( I think it was 1973 )

( this is the beginning of the fiat money you speak of )

Mr. inflation started to pick up stream... since the dollars were no longer tied to actual gold.

Here's some conspiracy stuff for ya...

Nixon via an executive order, I believe, actually froze all wages and prices in an attempt to slow Mr. Inflation down.

We all know what happened to him right? ( I never said he was an angel either )

anyways...

#2: Since 1980 the nation embarked on a policy of running of the national debt which allowed the fed to create even more debt etc.

We went from about 300 bill in national debt in 1980 to about 4 1/2 in 1992 and as far as I'm concerned it was for no good reason.

( I could see if we went on a massive infrastructure building binge etc. but we didn't )

#3: The legislation that lead to the savings & loan crisis/ripoff opened the floodgates to an assault on other legislation designed to prevent huge financial shenanigans.

#4: The repeal of Glass Stegall

which prohibited a bank holding company from owning other financial companies was repealed on November 12, 1999, by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act

#5: The introduction of a new financial instrument named derivatives...

... which lead to a new round of wild speculation that when combined with the repeal of the legislation...

.. designed to stop wild speculation from harming the economy lead to the big bust in our economy since 1929 times - where we are today.

- I agree we are the ultimate blame for what has happened to us as a nation.

I agree...

- We have to give these corps hell when they want to go overseas and it doesn't help if legislation is passed that gives them tax breaks to leave the country instead of tax breaks to stay in the county.

- 90% of us have no clue as to what a policy or legislation can do in a society and have been lazy in taking the time to understand those basic things.

- Most of us vote for people we like instead of what attitudes and policies they will endorse and push.

- Most of us are emotional voter instead of policy voters.

- And of course you I disagree on the newest president and what his intentions are etc.

Has there ever been a president since the fed was created that did not suck out loud in your book?

Yes, we as a nation got ripped off again...

But does it mean that we're done as a nation?

My answer is no.

We'll be back.

also...

Are you saying that we are done as a nation unless we elect third party people to national office???

What does done mean in your book???

All The Best!

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2040888].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

<<<<STATEMENTS WITHHELD BY STEVE!

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2040920].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

<<<<STATEMENTS WITHHELD BY STEVE!

LOL

That's all I wanted to say in response but the software that runs this forum wouldn't allow me to simply say LOL.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2040952].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

LOL

That's all I wanted to say in response but the software that runs this forum wouldn't allow me to simply say LOL.

TL

Yeah, I have had the SAME problem with some "responses" to your posts. Many a time, I simply wanted to say 8-)!

I could say a lot but, I figure I won't bother. I said my piece in a non political way, and know how you will follow up if I respond to what you said. It is sad really but, oh well...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2040988].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Yeah, I have had the SAME problem with some "responses" to your posts. Many a time, I simply wanted to say 8-)!

I could say a lot but, I figure I won't bother. I said my piece in a non political way, and know how you will follow up if I respond to what you said. It is sad really but, oh well...

You're more than welcome to comment on my response to Hey Sal...

but all I was saying ( when I mentioned you )...

...was that you didn't have to rebut my contention that the nation had a golden age between say the end of WW2 and 1980-1990...

...since we've already been round and round on it.

But the rest of the post is all yours.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041042].message }}

ThomM

14 years ago

Sorry ThomM, but I have to take a stab at this one.

No apology needed here TL.
I was going to take a stab at it myself, but decided not to because of my friendship with Sal. She knows when she says something like "YOU screwed up" I take it personal, and I should know by now that it wasn't ment that way.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2040976].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

No apology needed here TL.
I was going to take a stab at it myself, but decided not to because of my friendship with Sal. She knows when she says something like "YOU screwed up" I take it personal, and I should know by now that it wasn't ment that way.

I think she is simply FRUSTRATED! I am ALSO! The FACT is that the people that REALLY messed up were in about 1910. AND, and SOME of you might see this as political, but it is the TRUTH! I am SORRY if this is how all goes, but it IS!!!!!!

The currency was NOT 100% PURE fiat originally. It was a replacement for gold and silver ONE FOR ONE! It was SECURE! EVENTUALLY, they changed the rules and now there is only a ONE WAY relationship. The price of gold FROM the public is FIXED! The price of gold TO the public is NOT! That means the government is "legally" allowed to STEAL gold, BY LAW! SURE, they must "pay" you! With a FIXED price that is worth FAR less than gold has EVER sold for in my lifetime! It is the old proverbial frog in hot water. They turned the heat up REAL slow. By the time the frog realizes what is happening, it is as good as cooked!

Anyway, ***WE*** were all brought up not really knowing what money is, or what it REALLY is supposed to represent. We LATER must learn words that merely refer to rules of "the feds" GAME! So we didn't really know any better. And what else can we pay with? IRONICALLY, some DID start barter clubs, and acted like banks USED to, but the IRS created new laws that all must have a real price set to it in DOLLARS and differences in value must be added up and any surplus is taxed! Any deficit, as I recall, can be used only to offset gains.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041055].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Scratch everything I said about that super agency.

Here's info on 2 proposals for a major part of the bill...

The Senate bill, authored by the banking committee's chairman, Christopher Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, calls for a consumer entity to be housed inside the Federal Reserve.

The particulars...

- a chief appointed by the president,

- an independent source of funding,

- the authority to write consumer rules and the ability to enforce them against unscrupulous lenders.

The Republicans' counter-proposal, released this week...

It calls for a council led by the heads of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Federal Reserve.

They'd issue rules, supervise "our nation's largest financial institutions, large non-bank mortgage originators, and other financial services providers who have violated the consumer protection statutes," and enforce the rules.

Note: Dylan Ratigan says both parties' proposals suck and don't go far enough.

I suspect a lot could be done but we may have to take what we can get until we can amend the bill.

TL

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2041298].message }}

Hint of a new problem coming soon?

Trending Topics

How do I effectively build and nurture an email list for affiliate marketing purposes?

Are Solo ADs the Most Cost Effective Way to Promote your Product?

Are billboards still effective in driving customers?

Been a while! Any of you Old Timers here?

How much does the rebranding affect CR ?