Some one has to start it, Americas default.

[Frosty]

It all an act, the stock market knows it, CNN and Bloomberg dont get it.

America needs to devalue the dollar to export and try to compete with China.

What better way to achieve a dollar devaluation that this choreographed bull crap.

2 weeks ago it was oh Americas default will crash the world , Even Christine Le guard said it.

It will be settled at the 11th hour, has to be or America will look like monkeys, well I mean bigger monkeys.

But it will only be a token increase to keep the threat and the dollar continues its decline.

[bntii]

It'll all be fine Frosty- have another piece of cake.

[Frosty]

It'll all be fine Frosty- have another piece of cake.

Most Americans think that. May I suggest thats why your in this mess.

[bntii]

You might not have noticed, but the "mess" is not limited to the good old US of A.

We will all soldier on.. dynasties rise and fall etc

[Frosty]

Your mistaking 2 different messes.

England has just recently taken over America as a safer place for an investment.

You are devaluing your dollar at a great cost to your credibility meaning not only do you need to recover from a recession but recover credibility.

It will be ok is what your government is saying today Obama has virtualy thrown the towel in disgust.

What can there be to stop an agreement of this magnitude --testosterone?

And no its not all over the world , the East is marching on, Chinas economy is overheating.

[Poida]

I don't believe the President of America runs the country, its financial institutions do.

When they don't like the President they financialy screw the country around until the people get rid of him. Then things will be back to normal.

[troy2000]

Of course, Frostie. It's all staged. Senators, Congressmen, the President and the Treasurer are all in on the conspiracy, along with their entire staffs. They have acting skills that would put Hollywood to shame, and they're all reading from a script someone revises and edits every night, before handing it out to them all with their morning coffee or orange juice.

How did you figure it out? I thought we were hiding it pretty well....

[troy2000]

I don't believe the President of America runs the country, its financial institutions do.

When they don't like the President they financialy screw the country around until the people get rid of him. Then things will be back to normal.

Kind of hard to figure out why they made things go all to Hell at the end of Bush's two terms, then. If they were looking forward to getting rid of Obama instead, you'd think they would have waited until he took office and actually did something-- so he could take all the blame, instead of so much of it settling on his predecessor.

[bntii]

Your mistaking 2 different messes......

And no its not all over the world , the East is marching on, Chinas economy is overheating.

Hows that one go...
"The exception proves the rule"?:

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&idim=country:CHN&dl=en&hl=en&q=china+gdp+growth#ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:CHN:USA:GBR&ifdim=country&tdim=true&hl=en&dl=en

To be honest with you though I don't really understand economics or world currencies.
Like most men I tend my fields and bring the harvest to that market which exists during my short life.

This is also of interest:

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&idim=country:CHN&dl=en&hl=en&q=china+gdp+growth#ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:CHN:USA:GBR&ifdim=country&tdim=true&hl=en&dl=en

As is this:

http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&idim=country:CHN&dl=en&hl=en&q=china+gdp+growth#ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:CHN:USA:GBR&ifdim=country&tdim=true&hl=en&dl=en

[Frosty]

Not only do you have dollar devaluation with the farce but an increase in gold that investors are running to in the traditional home for nervous investors.

When gold reaches 2000 dollar an ounce --I wonder how much gold US has -- may be able to pay off the debt selling/ flooding the world with a few hundred tons and leave everyone else standing with worthless blobs of metal.

What ever happens things will change and gold will not possibly be able to sustain this level. To reach 2000 gold will have to be considered as a pure investment , its ability to adorn the neck of a woman will have been forgotten about.

Just sayin.

[Landlubber]

"I wonder how much gold US has".....emm, Frosty, it seems that they have sold it all off years ago if you start looking for it......

[hoytedow]

Soros is doing now to USA what he already did to Thailand, or were you too busy with other things to notice things there, Frosty?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Asian_financial_crisis

[Frosty]

All countries have gold it used to back the currency. Ille bet Us has got quite a bit.

Soros has not done anything to Thailand --that was Malaysia and even UK some years ago.

Soros no longer takes investment in his very successful portfolio's any more, he only manages his own 50 billion. This is in retaliation to Americas pending increase in tax for the wealthy.

Since 2008 there is no limit to the depths of depravity that a Banker Politician can get. The level of greed and me me me will I think be marked in the History books.

Perhaps the era of credit and greed!

[Submarine Tom]

"Ah, the times, they are a changing..." In ways we don't even know or realize yet...

Hold onto your seat Ethel!

-Tom

[masalai]

Nothing new, exchange rates will be adjusted.. Those unprepared stand to loose big time.. USA has defaulted on payments before in the 30's when Gold was re-valued after it was confiscated from the citizenry and twice more this will make the fourth time and no-one collapsed more than usual...

The fun will occur when 'Moodys' and 'S&P' et-al change the credit ratings of USA... As all the bonds will have to be sold off by trusts etc., that are limited by law to hold only "AAA rated assets"... and if the Credit rating agencies defer downgrading they could be sued into extinction and suffer at the hands of all the billions and billions of victims whose pension funds got washed away... Nothing more dangerous than someone who has lost everything....

I do not know when CDO's will rear into causing an ugly panic, as USA currently holds more than US$600 trillion somewhere .............. Very TOXIC stuff ..................... :o

The word I am hearing indicates that Australian Home values/prices will have to fall at least 20% in the near term (before end of 2011)... :o

Some of the respected (NON-MAINSTREAM) analysts are suggesting US$8000/oz gold...

I am ready to jump onto my boat and venture forth...

[Frosty]

I heard that boats are selling like hot cakes here to Australians and then taking them back to Aussie , dont make sence to me with all the import tax but thats the word.

Like wise a documentary on the Sydney boat show recently -- (on now maybe) that boats are selling. With a high aus dollar I can understand out side aus sales to auss but inside??

[masalai]

The panic is started and some may be looking for escape machines - Pirate season soon, ? - - to collect the gold bars stored as ballast in the "Gin palaces" screaming North to escape the retribution of the suckers who were robbed... Hoping to make a good escape to build a new live somewhere else?

Boats may help you get to this community in South America...

http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/five-things-you-need-know-about-economy
Five Things You Need to Know About the Economy

[Frosty]

Ah theres gold in them thar hills.

I think this gold thing is a scam --a lot of people are going to get fu --there fingers burnt.

Id rather have rough cut high carrot diamonds,-- Or a Rembrandt I keep mine in the toilet tank,--the diamonds not the Rembrandt.

Any way latets is they are trying (bless em) to figure something out this afternoon --on double time I suppose.

We are not supposed to notice that they are enjoying themselves driving about in big cars with a new suit per day looking studious and working. I mean Obama even rolls his sleeves up and slackens his tie for extra effect.

Must be sooo hard for them to agree on the only one course of action that they can possible take, and all while the dollar is shook out of the tree like figs.

[hoytedow]

A boat is a hole in the water that you throw your stocks and bonds into.

[bntii]

Why all the fuss?"

"The panic has started"

Really??

I for one have the means, talent and the will to make a go of it in spite of where the national dept lies & I live in the US where I am presumably bound by these described looming walls of financial catastrophe..
I am going to use the dip in real estate to buy property, not gold bars .
Now if the land values would fall to the long line I would be pleased- unfortunately they remain above in spite of all this drama...
I say carry on. If not the next generation will- why let them have all the fun?

[Frosty]

Bntii you may have the right attitude to survive and be a politician as well because Im sure most politicians will ecko your thoughts.

(I will take advantage of this, bugger the country and everyone else me me me me) me.

Nothing wrong with that to survive for a man in the street but your politicians think like that all day.

[bntii]

I differ- having means by a long practice of living within my earnings is not selfish.
I don't care to sacrifice myself to the greater good by buying on credit thereby allowing the sales clerk to keep a job...
Having the will to work and struggle is not a summary of self interest- it is a requisite of participation in our societies.

Perhaps it would have been less "selfish" to buy property as the bubble launched off four years ago?
More folks at that party just would have meant a higher peak before the collapse and more injury to those caught.
I've never liked crowds.
Run with them and you will eventually run off a cliff.

[TeddyDiver]

Run with them and you will eventually run off a cliff.
By the way.. we have awfull lot of lemmings this summer...

[CatBuilder]

Comments below... in red

Why all the fuss?"
I am going to use the dip in real estate to buy property, not gold bars .

Smart guy. You're in luck because once the average American can afford the average piece of real estate on the average American salary, we'll be at the right area of the valuation curve on real estate. It has previously been inflated, which is why I never bought any real estate. Didn't like the valuation before the downward revision.

And gold bars?!?!! :D Right again. Yes, compared to the dollar they do seem great, but they are severely over valued, just as real estate was. Gold has little to no intrinsic value, just as a fiat currency has little to no intrinsic value. Much like a fiat currency, you have to have someone on the other side of the deal who places value on that gold to sell it. It's not very useful for any other purpose and not all that different from a fiat currency.

I like your thinking here. Good post.




Now if the land values would fall to the long line I would be pleased- unfortunately they remain above in spite of all this drama...
I say carry on. If not the next generation will- why let them have all the fun?

[Landlubber]

"you have to have someone on the other side of the deal who places value on that gold to sell it."....well, if you care to look to the east, there are 1.3 billion Chinese and 1.2 billion Indians, and 1.2 billion Indonesians that place value on gold.......

[hoytedow]

Catbuilder. value of gold doesn't change, only number of dollars needed to buy the ounce. That is how you measure the value of the dollar, by where it currently stands on the gold scale, in comparison to rands, yen or euros.

[CatBuilder]

Catbuilder. value of gold doesn't change, only number of dollars needed to buy the ounce. That is how you measure the value of the dollar, by where it currently stands on the gold scale, in comparison to rands, yen or euros.

I acknowledged this in the following quote: "Yes, compared to the dollar they do seem great, but they are severely over valued, just as real estate was."

I said "compared to the dollar." Aside from that, gold has had a little run up and it's over valued. Not the time to buy. Time to sell gold.

Landlubber: Not every person in India or China places value on gold, nor may agree with today's spot price on it. My point is, gold is only valuable because people believe it is. Same as any fiat currency. Watch out. It's due for a correction. Overdue, actually.

[hoytedow]

Gold is worthless if there is no food to buy with it.

[Dave Gudeman]

All of this talk about defaulting on the debt is just scare tactics to try to panic the Republicans into giving up on their efforts to reduce the yearly increase in government spending. There is more than enough money coming in every month to pay the interest on the debt. If the debt ceiling is not raised and the US fails to pay interest on the debt then this will be a decision made entirely by the President as he decides what to pay and what not to pay.

Another scare tactic is that Social Security checks will stop, but the truth is that there are billions of dollars of bonds in the treasury dedicated for just this purpose: if the general fund cannot pay social security then the bonds can be cashed in and used to pay it. What happens is that bonds are cashed in, which lowers the total level of debt so the treasury can then sell more bonds and use the money to pay Social Security.

The US has gotten close to the debt limit many times and there was no panic. What is different this time is the Tea Party. The Tea Party is a major political movement that is aimed primarily at reducing government spending. A lot of Republicans in the House ran on a "Tea Party" platform and they are trying to use the debt ceiling as leverage to keep their campaign promises.

The majority of the Republicans are not really Tea Partiers but they are worried about facing primary challenges from Tea Party candidates so they have to at least make gestures at reducing the annual increase in government spending, but if you look at the bills that have come out of the House (which is controlled by Republicans), they are making pretty faint gestures at controlling spending.

The US borrows about 40% of all the money it spends --this is an unsustainable situation that eventually will lead to an actual financial crisis with a depression or hyperinflation and where entitlement programs really will be unable to pay what they owe. Tea-Party Republicans think that it has to be solved now and they are trying to use the budget process and the debt ceiling to pressure everyone else and bring attention to the issue. The Democrats and the majority of the Republicans think that the issue can be kicked down the road a few more years to some poor sucker future government. Maybe so, but the more we put off the adjustment, the more painful it is going to be.

[troy2000]

"I wonder how much gold US has".....emm, Frosty, it seems that they have sold it all off years ago if you start looking for it......

OK, it's been fun. But time for a reality check for Landlubber, Frosty et al.

According to the International Monetary Fund and the World Gold Council, in 2010 the US was holding 8,133.5 metric tons (tonnes) of gold. That converts to 26,149,804 Troy ounces.

http://www.gold.org/investment/statistics/reserve_asset_statistics/

While we're at it: Frosty, how are you going to cover your butt when the debt ceiling does get raised, and the US doesn't default? I can't even imagine you simply admitting you were wrong about dumping on the good old US of A, so I look forward to watching your verbal gymnastics as you flip-flop across my computer monitor. :D

[Frosty]

Its already been agreed but not voted on. I did say that it would be, I suggested that it was all choreographed to rattle the the dollar some more.

I also said that Us held more gold than 'not much' as some suggested.

at 8,133.5 tons and at 1600 dollars a ounce they are making money from it. If it reaches 2000 from the Us shenanigans then the debt is paid, not without catastrophic loss of gold value.

To what am I apologising for, pointing out Americas problems and discussing it is not dumping on America. If you had defaulted ( and there is still a possibility) I would have been involved, do you mind if I am concerned.


As I had predicted Us has saved itself at the 11th hour however its reduction in financial creditability is probable from AAA to AA. Some houses can not by law invest in less than AAA bonds so they MUST be sold off----by law.

This will be the damaging factor to the market, and to Us in the long run.

When oil is no longer traded in dollar,--and that is also a possibility then time to seriously reconsider all finances.

Americas influence on the rest of the world is still of consequence, not as much but still is and as long as Us play silly games and barely manages itself then I will remain interested and to some degree involved.

Oh by the way I can not work out Americas debt to gold stock as I don't have a calculator big enough, do they do 12 digit calculators.

[bntii]

We are a sensitive lot Frosty...

I have to show my ignorance again- Isn't the whole mess caused by lack of revenue from taxes?
That is won't the problem resolve itself to a large degree with a strengthened economy as the world (and US) climbs out of this downturn?

Clinton had a 'balanced budget' a few short years ago.
Whats keeping the same conditions from occurring in the near future?
http://factcheck.org/Images/image/FederalDeficit(1).jpg

edit- I do note that the above abundance mirrors the explosion in tech/internet and the fall off in 2001. Unique/short term wealth generation?

Or... is the tax base declining as wealth in the US becomes more stratified and aggregates in the upper echelons? Presumably a tax bracket which is more resistant to taxation and therefore generates a lower return to the coffers of the government?

[Frosty]

America frowns on taxes, the Rebublicans say that taxes is not good when US needs a stimulous, Well yeah but they are talking taxing Soros , Trump, etc etc who would'nt even notice it not the 50,000 a year man,-- this is the big argument.

They want to raise taxes from 35% to 39%( surtax in Uk is 60%)

The Beatles paid 95% taxes which was in those days 19 shillings and sixpence in the pound.

The richest people in the world live in Us and enjoy ridiculous tax breaks, Ok I reckon I have revealed my side of the equation.

The debt ceiling was put in place after the first world war, only America and Denmark has this system ( in the world) but Denmarks ceiling is so high it never needs adjustment. Since 1960 US has raised the ceiling 78 times,--sounds daft --you bettcha.

No other country has a law limiting debt.

US does not have credability problems -it can still borrow money infact more countries are lending to US than before,--but this can change.

The threat of default is over but the problem is not,-- you have reduced spending by 1 trillion but increased the ceiling by 2 trillion to continue your spending which is more than you earn. It doesnt take much brains to work out it cant continue.

It cost 4.5billion a day to run USA

The politicians bickering is difficult to understand under such circumstances, resulting in less and less investment heading for US. I believe 14 trillion is more dollars than there is in existence, but im not sure about that.

Americas seemingly self destruct programme has influenced the fabrication of the euro.

[Bamby]

Some good points mentioned, but here's a bit more to ponder on...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-r-talbott/launch-third-party_b_905435.html

Called on carpet (gently I should add) for failing to link to source (It's ok my bad) Source: http://www.theonion.com/articles/drunken-ben-bernanke-tells-everyone-at-neighborhoo,21059/

[bntii]

I believe there is a long stride present in the economies of individual countries and the world community.
I don't understand it but I have heard it stated, defined by how wealth is held by communities and the shift into and out of property holdings. Part of this cycle includes boom periods where capital investments in property yield higher than usual returns and lending institutions respond by advancing valuations while decreasing the thresholds imposed on borrowers.
Collapse inevitably occurs.

I believe I am reluctant to find that the institutions involved define the cycle- they respond.
I believe I am reluctant to find the US institutions created what was in this case a fully global stride of this cycle. Faults can be found as the collapse occurs but they are more to my mind weaknesses which can exist in prosperity only, and are not the mechanisms which fully create either the 'boom' or the 'bust'.

A signpost along the way in 2007:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-446908/UKs-personal-wealth-tied-property.html

[Frosty]

I like the bit about the corruption being so rife that it can not be cured within. But starting a new party and having then accepted would be a huge concept and wouold they not, being human fall along the wayside from corruption too.

Pehaps it is as you say but yet I dont think it is organised --it has evoluted into this from whispering in dark corners yes but no one know what the other guy is doing.

I think it can be said that the career of politics is just that,-- a life of corruption and rewards for favours that the position affords.

Poor ole Obama has just come out of this on his knees, yet a sigh of relief amongst the American people is futile--nothing has changed in fact its worse, you can now continue into bankrupcty until december-ish when it all starts again.

Notice only a minuscule temporary jump up on the market from the result of the agreement by immature investors. The decline in the economy continues.

[Dave Gudeman]

We are a sensitive lot Frosty...

I have to show my ignorance again- Isn't the whole mess caused by lack of revenue from taxes?

Well, that's a matter for debate. The government is taking up a larger and larger share of the economy every year. To avoid deficit spending, that means they would have to take a larger and larger share of the wealth every year to pay for it. Every dollar that the government takes away from a tax payers is a tiny loss of freedom for the taxpayer. Before, the taxpayer had the freedom to decide how that dollar would be spent; now the government has the power to decide how that dollar will be spent. Raising taxes and government spending is taking freedom away from the people and giving power to the government. If you don't think that is a problem, then you are going to prefer raising taxes to lowering spending.

Still, what urgent things was the government not doing in 2008 that are so important now that we can't eliminate that trillion-dollar spending increase that Obama got passed as his first act in office, even with the country's debt spiraling out of control and the economy too weak to withstand a tax increase?

[thudpucker]

The Gov takes in less than it spends. That' simple enough to understand.

The American Taxpayer is largly out of work, so the Gov is not getting the Tax revenue it's used to.

Now, we wont get more jobs, because the American Taxpayer bought the Cheap Chinese Junk and the Revenue, jobs and Fatories have moved to China.

The Gov is left with one of two choices. Spend less, or Tax more.

Right now.. write your Delegation and tell them your choice. Dont let up on them till they cut spending and take a cut in pay and benefits themselves.....like we've had to do!

[Poida]

Hi Bamby, USA near Wheeling. I've often wondered where it was.

Don't mention the financial institutions controlling your government, I did that and now I've got the CIA looking for me.

[Dave Gudeman]

America frowns on taxes, the Rebublicans say that taxes is not good when US needs a stimulous, Well yeah but they are talking taxing Soros , Trump, etc etc who would'nt even notice it not the 50,000 a year man,-- this is the big argument.

You have been fooled by propaganda, Frosty. When Obama and other Democrats talk about raising taxes on "the rich", they aren't talking about billionaires; they are talking about individuals making more than 200K and married couples making more than 250K. By and large, these aren't people born with a silver spoon in their mouth; they are people who have worked very hard for many years to build a career or a business and are now in their late middle age and trying to save for retirement. Many of them live in places where an income like that only lets you afford a small house or condo.

Many small business owners fit into this category and taxes on them will directly effect their ability to hire people or to keep people employed.

You know who *really* likes this Democrat version of taxing the rich? Rich people, that's who. Mega-billionaires and rich Hollywood celebrities are always coming out to say how they think they should pay higher income taxes. And why not? Their wealth is in their assets, not their incomes. The people who will be hurt by these taxes are the upper middle class --the people who are trying to *become* rich.

I've got news for you, when rich people see a whole bunch of new people with high incomes threatening to join their exclusive club, they don't say "welcome to the good times", they go drop a big campaign contribution on their friendly neighborhood politician and say, "You know what this country needs? We need higher income taxes on rich folk."

So, if you really want to tax the rich you don't tax income, you tax net worth. Here is my proposal:

For every dollar over $10M of net worth, you pay 1% tax per year.
For every dollar over $100M you pay an additional 1%.
For every dollar over $1B you pay an additional 1%
For every dollar over $10B you pay an additional 1%
For every dollar over $100B you pay an additional 1%

Let Congress propose that tax and see if George Soros announces that it's a great idea because the rich don't pay enough taxes.

[Frosty]

Thats right you are spending more than you earn, if you cant cut back you earn more. If you cant earn more you cut back. you can always cut back.

The president flies in Airforce one , before that takes of a host of aircraft fly first taking cars and hundreds of staff. The Prime minister of England flies 1st Class in a normal aircraft.

Cut that! oh but thats not much in 14 trillion and there lies the problem the debt is so huge that not just one cut back is sufficient.

You need a woman president and your country is too big to be managed by one government and the president does not have enough power as we have just recently seen the downfalls of that. There is democracy and stifled democracy where it doe'snt work due to the need to sway hundred of politicians with bulging bank accounts accepting pay off.

It sounds ridiculous but the whole system is failing.

If a president did not have the right to a second term he would do what he could in the first instead of setting things up to get the second.

If you dont like income tax there is hundreds of other taxes VAT or GST most countries have this, capital gains, advertisment tax , Tv tax, wealth tax ,death tax , gift tax corporate taxes, car tax, engine size tax, flight tax, polution tax (Aussi has just done this and so has Uk on American airlines flying to UK) -- If you want to pollute you got to pay for it.

Increase your fuel its cheap compared to Europe and government lotteries, it needs some thinking about not just stare at it.

Guys in new suits and government supplied Lincolns are not going to care are they, They will fly the world first class visiting the most expensive hotels, ---Clinton does --never stops and charges 100,000 dollars for 20 minute speech.

There is only so much care a man can give, and when he has to convince another 300 politicians who want his job --well it just too hard.

[masalai]

Arrrrgh, - - Just Nationalise the assets of the wealthy, as the proceeds were probably derived from criminal activity, or morally corrupt activity, or something simlar...

About 18 months ago I got some volume data of movements of gold and silver ETF in USA and bullion on LBMA when "da-boyz" played a US$5 drop in gold, JPMChase netted 50 billion and others made similar marks for every $5 movement... They were doing that at least every week and often 2 or three times a week - whenever there was a "newsworthy" event that might spook the COMEX players...

Frosty,
You are forgetting the US$600+ trillion in TOXIC CDO's still floating around in USA looking for a sucker... That is the invisible elephant in all the toilet cubicles...

[ancient kayaker]

It was rather sad watching all those Nero's fiddling while Rome - I mean Washington - burns. The current crop of politicians will be content to preside over the relegation of the USA from a first class outfit to something a little closer to a banana republic. So I'll take this opportunity to thank the US for all you have done: you are not going to be able to do it for much longer. As for my country, Canada, the high-flying loony (cdn$) does me no favors as my pensions from overseas are now paying about 80% of what they did. Canada has managed its economy and banking system in a reasonably responsible way and is reaping the benefit, but Canada is a trading nation and will eventually be dragged down by the rest of you. If I could I would vote for isolationism.



Eventually you in the US are going to have to do some or all of the following:

- change your political system to something that doesn't change its ideological underwear before your "leaders" have time to act
- force the Chinese to value their currency appropriately and pay fair wages (good luck with that!)
- stick the trade barriers back up
- pull back your troops and downsize your military manufacturing support system to something you can afford

I don't think your leaders have the stomach to do the first two and the last two will change the World in ways I won't like.



Economics is a lot simpler than the experts make it sound. It's really all about confidence, which determines how fast money circulates. That's it. The price of gold and oil, the national debt, the balance of trade are all consequences, not causes. People are scared of spending what they may have desperate need of later. Watching the antics in the Washington Zoo, reading about multi-million payoffs to CEO's who have run their companies into the ground, listening to experts paraded by the media (intent only on feathering their own nest) each of whom has a different opinion than the last, reading off their convincing scripts written by highly paid wordsmiths - who believe not a word of what they write - does nothing for the confidence of your people. Or anyone else's.

The message from Washington is, it's a mess, none of us knows what to do, we don't give a damn so long as we win the next election, we just go along according to our doctrine like the Soviets used to do, ideology is king because the voters in some states are too ignorant to understand anything sensible, and it's getting worse with every passing day. The "government" of the US has strained for months to produce a gnat, the bold new plan is the outcome of conceptual constipation - no ideas just beliefs or greed - and it has produced a tiny piece of hard $hit.

When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. That is the order of the day.

Here it is in a nutshell: when someone is scared they hang on to their money, so it does not buy anything, so the guy who made what it might have bought is out of work, he pays no taxes and goes on pogey, less taxes and more payments from the national treasure chest, and the national debt starts to zoom. Not a huge surprise but a lot of people think the debt is the real problem instead of a by-product of a stagnant economy, so they promptly vote in a bunch of newbie politicians to officially represent their ignorance. Now a small minority controls the decision-making center of the country and because they are ignorant of how things really work they bollix things up by insisting on their theoretical, untried and ludicrously inappropriate theories as the solution to the wrong problem. Red Soviet, Blue US, same destination.


Here endeth the lesson. Suggested reading: "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire"

[Bamby]

So True ancient kayaker do you happen to like parodies... I sort of enjoyed this read on the topic...

Yes, this is from the Onion. But in this surreal, centrally planned by none other than Ben Bernanke reality, the mirror in mirror effect is extremely disturbing.

Drunken Ben Bernanke Tells Everyone At Neighborhood Bar How Screwed U.S. Economy Really Is (http://www.theonion.com/articles/drunken-ben-bernanke-tells-everyone-at-neighborhoo,21059/)

[Frosty]

There is some clever posts been written here, particularly the last 2.

[masalai]

Political change may have to take a similar path to those seeking to overthrow despotic regimes in the Middle East...

I hope the US police/military/home-guard do not start by shooting etc their own peacefully protesting citizens....

Economic change will see total mistrust of all fiat currencies, leading to HYPERINFLATION and the Greatest Depression as Doug Casey calls it... http://www.caseyresearch.com/cwc/economic-crisis-part-ii

Got your escape machine ready ? - - - Go get your boat sorted, ship-shape and ready NOW...

[kroberts]

Personally as an American, I'm infinitely disgusted at the whole situation in Washington, D.C.

I was cheering for a perfect storm combining a standoff, a national default, a collapse of the U.S. economy due to a lack of confidence, and a subsequent collapse of the entire global economy that makes what happened in the 30's in the USA look like a picnic. And most importantly, a clear path of evidence leading back to the ****** that run my country, that it was their fault and no other. With blame spread equally among all parties that it was clearly the two branches of the U.S. government which were involved in this debacle that caused the entire global economy to turn to ****.

The single biggest flaw of Democracy is that anyone inclined to run for office is by definition unqualified to hold it.

Rather than the current method of selecting candidates, I think there should be a way for people to choose who gets on the ballot, with a checklist of qualifications including a psychological profile by several different people, and then only if the candidate campaigns down to their last penny against himself/herself.

[masalai]

A perfect world? - Not in our lifetime :D :o - - - or the next..............

The decay and eventual collapse will be drawn out as long as can be:
- as for the politicians, "...do not want it on my watch."
- As for the banksters who set up this whole mess for their self-interested profit "... still more money to extract from the suckers."
- As for the 'good citizens' - - still in denial...
- As for the 'don't know masses' - - filled with too much b***s*** to know which is what...

[Frosty]

China has said enough is enough and speaking quite loudly with its disapproval of how America is handling its affairs. Through a translator a Chinese financial expert said America is not triple A and it is a lie and a sham to call itself that.

America has not done anything like enough to curb its spending yet debt continues as I type.

There can be only one conclusion--they don't know what to do and a bit of 'too big to fail' attitude.

The balance of budget is a simple equation any housewife understands it. Yet if obama sat down this day and took out his pen and wiped off this and that he would not get it passed,--not a chance. So what do we do now?

What your doing in Afganistan I dont know,--and Iraq, you have air bases everywhere Japan Europe ,--cut back for Petes sake, its over, America is not the world leader.

As I briefly mentioned before, the demise of America has been known for some time --the Euro is meant to take over and its a bit surprising as to the speed of which it is doing so. Yes the Greeks have sucked a lot out of it but the Euro will I think survive yet Greece owes nothing like USA.

Its Gonna get nasty, all you can do is try to protect yourself from anything American or dollar related.

[kroberts]

I share angst over some of the same things as you do Frosty, but not necessarily in the same way.

First, if it were as simple as voting the Republicans in it would have worked over a decade ago when Bush Sr got in. Didn't happen. Nor when his son got in after Clinton. And Clinton's budget, while it was getting closer to the black, that was still a bit of hocus pocus because even though the deficit was getting smaller it was because the taxes were raised even faster than they were being spent.

Even if you divide American politics into 3 major parties (Democrat, Repulican, Tea) none of the sides has the right of it if for no other reason than their stupid insistence on zero compromise. Even if you eliminate that fault none of the groups has a viable model. Each is to concentrated on protecting one niche at the expense of all others, and claiming that they speak for the "silent majority" or whatever horse tripe term they want to call it now.

On to what economy is up and coming: The only reason the USA is still the world's strongest economy is because China is still a socialist republic. If their communist/socialist government were overthrown and a capitalism took over, it would be the end of the USA and the EU both in a matter of a couple decades, and there's not a thing anybody over here could do about it.

[kroberts]

One thing that burns me to no end is the partisan crap that is aimed at damaging the constituency of members of an opposing party. For example this FAA thing.

If I were running the FAA, the airports actually shut down would be the airports where the authors and supporters of that piece of junk were going to land when they left for vacation.

[masalai]

On topic, and I promised someone I would post some links to reliable GEC news blogs... Most have a free subscription service as well as a pay for advanced information option sent regularly by email...

This timely information will hopefully help you keep abreast of global concerns and events and keep you sailing in the best seas and breezes that can be found to suit your needs and aspirations... Good sailing...

http://rt.com/programs/keiser-report/ - cheeky but reliable
http://inflation.us/about.html - dedicated
http://www.gata.org/ - best quality research in the business
http://www.caseyresearch.com/free-publications/caseys-daily-dispatch - Casey Research
http://www.caseyresearch.com/gsd/home Ed Steer's Gold and Silver daily
http://www.kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/King_World_News.html - access to the most knowledgable people
http://www.shadowstats.com/ Statistics as would be reported in PRE CLINTON DAYS
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Number crunching to scare you totally
http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/department39.cfm - a personal view of Bix Weir, who seems to get it right often
http://www.moneymorning.com.au/ Australian economic discourse
http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/ Australian economic discourse
http://www.chrismartenson.com/
http://goldsilver.com/
http://www.infowars.com/
http://tv.globalresearch.ca/
http://www.trendsresearch.com/gerald.php?referredBy= Good listening and wise advice (love the Jewish/Brooklyn accent)
http://www.capitolconnection.net/capcon/cftc/032510/CFTCwebcast.htm
http://mises.org/ - The Austrian School of Economic Thought
http://www.economy.com/dismal/?refresh=1
http://www.kereport.com/
http://www.aljazeera.com/ - Do not "kick it" because it is the view from the 'Middle East' - It gives another valid perspective
http://www.sbs.com.au/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/asia_pacific/
http://www.abc.net.au/news/justin/
http://www.thecoastalpassage.com/ - views a bit strongly put from around the Whitsundays, Queensland for boaters...
http://distrowatch.com/ - Alternate computer operating systems that ARE ROBUST (as used by many ISP's and also on the CRAY supercomputers...
http://yachthub.com/ for the boating scene for the Australian and NZ region

[Frosty]

I just had a thought while painting eurothane, I think its done my brain in.

I was thinking perhaps the politicians know what we've been talking about and lets face it they must. Maybe just maybe they were trying to get the country to default on purpose. This way the Government is out and perhaps a new type would be brought in . In other words lets get it over with an rebuild without drawing it out any longer.

When you at the bottom there is only one way from there.

The Republicans finally voted almost unanimously, just one guy held back, he said it was madness and did not cure anything, we are following the identical steps to the crash of the 30's.

I don't get it, I don't understand the complacency, the stupidity, the self destruction, I guess I must'nt understand the situation properly,--but hang on a minute maybe they want me to think that.

When do you think there will be demonstrations in the street?---Wall street.

[masalai]

When they wake up from their comatose state?

Its - - Time for an adventure... http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/sailboats/time-adventure-39088.html

[Boston]

the scam was pretty transparent from the start. Bail out the few who invented the failure in the first place. That means the banksters and crooks on Wallstreet got paid coming and going, on borrowed money. They had to have known that the politicians they bribed/campaign contributed into orifice wouldn't give up there cash cow even if it meant throwing the country into financial ruin. The ( choke hack spit ) politicians are in it for themselves and obviously foisting off the bill on the public was in the plan from the beginning.

So now we can all see by the latest republitard antics its ( as if no one could see it already ) even more clearly that the take from the poor and give to the rich plan is working out just fine. What the new debt deal really does is foist off the federal gubments responsibilities to the state level, which the states will handle exactly as the republitards wanted, by cutting social services and raising taxes on the lowest of income brackets/people least able to pay. By demolishing the middle class and now going after the lower class what the republitards are really doing is recreating the two class system that seems so fundamental to there overall plan, which is anyones guess unless its something like sell the country to China.

The democraps are really not much different although there methodology is. they'd have simply spent so much money that we'd all end up using dollars as TP. A second stimulus package, are you bloody serious? News flash, that first stimulus farce did nothing to stimulate the economy and by most measures actually placed it in worse position that it was at the beginning. The numbers are staggering 1.7 million foreclosed homes are owned by banks in this country, and about 2~3 million are awaiting foreclosure. So many that the banksters are "donating" them to be bulldozed and taking the write off rather than letting the unfortunate "former" owners stay on and make what payments they can. Sorry but the recovery is a crock. Nothing recovered and now we are only farther in debt than ever before.

brilliant eh
just shows what can be done when 500 of the top corporations all act independently in there own best interests buying off the politicians and screw everyone one else. Ah yah gotta love the corporate oligarchy hard at work. Reminds me of Upton StClairs "The Jungle"

Saddest part is they did it right when the environmental crisis was at that critical moment of "do something now or forever kiss your ass goodbye". My recent articles over on the Nasa supposedly says bla bla bla thread clearly indicate the severity of the environmental crisis and the desperate situation our ecosystem is in. Last thing we needed was to be wasting trillions on these fools.

kinda a perfect storm if you ask me. Except this time we are all on board.

[Poida]

Frosty wrote:

"America has not done anything like enough to curb its spending yet debt continues as I type."

Stop bloody typing Frosty!!

I don't understand the International Monetary System, I think a country is far better concentrating on its domestic market. This somewhat insulates it from what is happening overseas.

Somehow in my ignorant little way, I think that is Americas problem. As Americas population grew it had a large demand within its domestic market, selling its population cars and domestic appliances.

Now it's full of people, that's the end of the domestic market and they don't really have much to supply to the rest of the world.

Elvis is dead, there's nothing left.

[hoytedow]

USA saved England; ergo Frosty. USA saved Australia; ergo Masalai.

[hoytedow]

That said, it is time to quit spending like drunks in port.

[CatBuilder]

I'm not really a pro-USA guy, but anyone notice what killed the markets today? (Hint, it's on the Eastern side of the Atlantic Ocean).

Plenty of bad political / economic decisions all around.

[troy2000]

Personally as an American, I'm infinitely disgusted at the whole situation in Washington, D.C.

I was cheering for a perfect storm combining a standoff, a national default, a collapse of the U.S. economy due to a lack of confidence, and a subsequent collapse of the entire global economy that makes what happened in the 30's in the USA look like a picnic. And most importantly, a clear path of evidence leading back to the ****** that run my country, that it was their fault and no other. With blame spread equally among all parties that it was clearly the two branches of the U.S. government which were involved in this debacle that caused the entire global economy to turn to ****.This is what you were cheering for? You were hoping the entire global economy would turn to ****, and that it would be blamed on the US?

Talk about cutting our nose off to spite our face... that makes about as much sense as that guy in the news who tried to shoot a wart off his finger with his handgun. What have you been putting in your tea lately?:confused:

The single biggest flaw of Democracy is that anyone inclined to run for office is by definition unqualified to hold it."It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."
--Winston ChurchillRather than the current method of selecting candidates, I think there should be a way for people to choose who gets on the ballot, with a checklist of qualifications including a psychological profile by several different people, and then only if the candidate campaigns down to their last penny against himself/herself.There's already a way for people to choose who gets on the ballot. It's called a primary. If you think turning the selection of candidates over to some elite group instead is the way to go, you'd have been really, really happy in Soviet Russia. And you'd be ecstatic in Iran today, where no one can run unless they're OK'd by the Ayatollah and his merry band of mullahs.

You'd like to see candidates for office chosen based on their 'psychological profiles'?!? You must be kidding.:p

I wouldn't trust the average social scientist's judgment on what color socks I should wear tomorrow, much less on who should be in charge of the country.

[ancient kayaker]

Wall Street's downturn was more modest than I expected today - of course tomorrow is another day - although it still managed to wipe out all the gains of this year according to media reports. All that tells us is the people with money to invest are nervous but not actually panicky. It also tells me they aren't very informed or alert: I started got my investments out of of the markets shortly after Bush jr was elected.

OK, here's my advice America, it's always worked in the past, just start a quick war with somebody you can be sure to beat . . . oh wait, that's already been done and you didn't beat them yet, did you? Well, there's your problem, one of them anyway. OK, back to classic international politics - thing to do when you lose a war is let the winners sort it out for you. Serve the ba$tard$ right. If only we knew who they were . . .

Don't worry, it's not going to be China. If we can't buy, they don't sell . . . and whatever parts of the USA they think they own they can't take it home and it's rapidly becoming worthless anyway. Did I just stumble on some vast secret plan? This might be my last post . . .

[masalai]

Ancient, you are fairly close to the correct course (well for you as you see it)

Bix weir, in part offered this in a recent email...
"If you think this volatility is wild...just wait a couple weeks! - - August 11th is the next GOP Presidential debate so expect everything to continue to breakdown leading into that debate. Ron Paul will emerge much stronger than ever before if everything goes to plan. - - I know times are difficult but now is the time we have prepared for. Help explain it to others. Have them read the free archives:
http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/department36.cfm "

and this link? America's Economic Chaos: Don't Panic, Get Informed! - - Know where to turn for the truth www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25897

And I wish you all good and safe sailing in the sea of life...

[Dave Gudeman]

the scam was pretty transparent from the start. Bail out the few who invented the failure in the first place. That means the banksters and crooks on Wallstreet got paid coming and going, on borrowed money.
That's exactly what got the Tea Party started. People forget that the real outrage started when Bush bailed out the banks and it only transferred to Obama when he doubled down on the bailouts and then increased the budget by trillions of dollars.

So now we can all see by the latest republitard antics its ( as if no one could see it already ) even more clearly that the take from the poor and give to the rich plan is working out just fine. What the new debt deal really does is foist off the federal gubments responsibilities to the state level,
Whatever you're smoking must be dynamite ****. The budget deal changes the budget by only a few billion dollars --less than 1% of total spending. The Tea Partiers didn't even get any decreases, all they did was slow down the increases by a very small amount. Don't let anyone fool you that the debt-ceiling showdown was caused by "Republicans". The showdown was forced by the 80 or so Tea-Party Republicans and the fear that the other Republicans have of Tea-Party challengers. Most Republicans don't really care about balancing the budget, only about getting re-elected.

which the states will handle exactly as the republitards wanted, by cutting social services and raising taxes on the lowest of income brackets/people least able to pay.
Since the lower 50% of wage earners pay no income taxes at all, I would have a hard time working up any sympathy if Republicans wanted to raise taxes on them (I think everyone should pay a proportional share of taxes), but the Republicans have not proposed any tax increases at all. Zero. Zilch. The only people who have been fighting for tax increases are Democrats who think a couple making a combined income of $250,000 per year is rich. One thing is sure, though, raise taxes on them enough and they never will become rich. It's almost like that is exactly what the Democrats want.

By demolishing the middle class and now going after the lower class what the republitards are really doing is recreating the two class system that seems so fundamental to there overall plan, which is anyones guess unless its something like sell the country to China.
OK, I'm not a Republican and I was not at all happy about the way that Bush and his Republican legislature handled the economy, but you have got to be kidding here.

You can't blame the Republicans for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the various Democrat-oriented special interest groups that both created the housing bubble and caused the default crisis by forcing lenders to give millions of mortgages to unqualified buyers. That was the cause of the American middle class loosing about half of its net assets. Under Bush, the Republicans tried (very weakly) to get Fannie and Freddie under control against the strong objections of the Democrats, especially Barney Frank. Barney Frank is probably the one person most responsible for the current economic trouble --and the idiots in his district re-elected him.

It also wasn't Republicans who created a huge, expensive new medical bureaucracy that is making small businesses afraid to hire. It wasn't Republicans who raised the price of energy and killed all of the the oil jobs on the southern coast by refusing to grant new off-shore drilling licenses (that was Obama, in case you haven't read about it in the Democrat-controlled press). It wasn't Republicans who took water away from small farmers in California, causing them to go bankrupt, in order to improve life for some random fish that no one ever heard of. It sure wasn't Republicans who shut down the logging industry in this country. It wasn't Republicans who gave the unions monopoly labor power so that they were able to price themselves out of jobs, drive manufacturing and mining out of the country, and destroy the economy of the midwest. It wasn't Republicans who taxed the hell out of the middle class to pay outrageous wages to government employees (well, OK, Republicans aren't completely innocent on this one). It wasn't Republicans who wrote thousands of pages of environmental, safety, and other regulations to drive up the costs of doing business, force car makers to build more expensive cars, force builders to build more expensive houses, and make it too complicated for an average guy to start his own business. etc.

Other than military buildups, practically everything economic in the Republican platform is something that will help small businesses and the middle class. Republicans are the *party* of the middle class. Do you think the rich are against abortion and in favor of gun rights for the masses? Do you think the rich care about higher income taxes on working people? Do you think the rich care about traditional marriage or care if middle-class kids are tied down to failing public schools? Do you think the rich love Sarah Palin? Contrary to popular mythology, most rich people vote Democrat. So do most poor people. The Republicans are the party of the people in the middle. Why in the world would the Republicans want to destroy their own base?

[troy2000]

Since the lower 50% of wage earners pay no income taxes at all, I would have a hard time working up any sympathy if Republicans wanted to raise taxes on them (I think everyone should pay a proportional share of taxes), but the Republicans have not proposed any tax increases at all. Zero. Zilch. The only people who have been fighting for tax increases are Democrats who think a couple making a combined income of $250,000 per year is rich. One thing is sure, though, raise taxes on them enough and they never will become rich. It's almost like that is exactly what the Democrats want.
So you think everyone should pay taxes, do you? I'm willing to bet you also think we should get rid of the minimum wage laws, so the working poor can get properly squeezed from both ends....

You're forgetting that there are other taxes besides payroll taxes. Aside from direct ones like sales tax and gasoline taxes, the poor pay a lot of taxes indirectly. For example, landlords pay property taxes out of the rent they collect from tenants. And the price of just about everything they buy includes the hidden cost of taxes that are paid by suppliers, manufacturers, distributors and retailers. That cost gets passed on down the line, until the buyer eats them.

[hoytedow]

Taxes should be linked to spending, not income. A national sales tax and NO income tax is the way to go. I was amazed to see a woman with a really nice Bmer buy articles with food stamps while I, a taxpayer, drove a 20 year old car with plywood floors.

[Boston]

the total tax burden on every dollar earned used to be something like 45~50%, roughly half, if you earned it and spent it, you payed it. between property tax school tax (kids or not) luxury tax sales tax income tax gas tax alcohol tax parking meters the list is endless. In the end all tax gets charged to the consumer.

Rediculous as it seems I'm with Hoyt on this one, we need a flat tax, although I'm not convinced the fools in Washington deserve any money at all. Once upon a time there were no taxes and the gubment survived on tariffs and lotteries.

Sorry Dave no time to address your response, gotta go to work. Speaking of which even if I cant seem to catch up enough to actually start the runabout I am still pretty lucky. There's an article in yesterdays news about the disparity between Black Mexican and White recovery from the crash. Black and Mexican average family net worth is something like 6K while White average family net worth is about 110K. Owing to the issues of home ownership VS stock ownership. Who'd have guessed I didn't qualify as poor. Which means just one of my paychecks these days is worth almost as much as some peoples entire net worth. Kinda frightening given how I'm struggling along, trying to prepare for life after work.

http://brotherpeacemaker.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/wealth-gap-widens-along-racial-lines/

[CatBuilder]

Taxes should be linked to spending, not income. A national sales tax and NO income tax is the way to go. I was amazed to see a woman with a really nice Bmer buy articles with food stamps while I, a taxpayer, drove a 20 year old car with plywood floors.

I'm in agreement with Hoyt too.

At first glance, it seems like a national sales tax would be a huge drag on our economy, considering a vast majority of our GDP comes from consumer spending. However, if the income tax was eliminated (and the sales tax was an appropriate rate), it could be done without affecting consumer spending. Why? The consumer would have about 30%-40% more money to begin with as they aren't paying income tax.

[Boston]

Debt deal is definitely going to effect state funding. Basically as the feds tighten there belt they are going to cut grants to states, as well they should.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/fewer-cops-more-potholes-debt-deal-could-hit-230956499.html

Personally I think a flat sales tax is the way to go although if I really had my way the gubment would get nothing but import taxes and lottery earnings. I say those fools deserve not one dime of my money.

[Manie B]

Hi guys

here is some very clever artwork
it's drawings of piles of dollars - but it gives an amazing insight and perspective
scary stuff
the joke of course is that it not just America in the pooooo
just about everywhere else too
Africa of course is a joke, a very sick joke

http://usdebt.kleptocracy.us/

enjoy
and as I said before - America, charity begins at home, stop spreading money around nations that will never pay back, look after your own first

[hoytedow]

We finally found one sliver of agreement, Boston. We need to replace the establishment demotards and republitards with statesmen who care about the health of the nation's economy. Global warming is a sham.

[Boston]

ah, you'll come around eventually ;-)

nice visuals Manie
I particularly liked the unfunded entitlements

[masalai]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-06/us-credit-rating-cut/2827294

Oh bugger...... "The United States' credit rating has been cut for the first time ever, with Standard & Poor's lowering it from AAA to AA+, citing the country's looming debt and deficit burden."

Take care, and prepare your boat for a looooooong voyage...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-06/market-slide-sparks-super-fears/2827284 Australia is also in a bad way..."Fears of another global downturn wiped more than $50 billion off the value of the Australian share market yesterday - a slide that would have been particularly worrying for retirees and people planning to give up work soon."

[Dave Gudeman]

So you think everyone should pay taxes, do you? I'm willing to bet you also think we should get rid of the minimum wage laws, so the working poor can get properly squeezed from both ends....
Why can't Democrats just have policy disagreements without demonizing the people on the other side of the debate? Yes, I would like to see the minimum wage eliminated, but it's not because I want to see "the working poor get properly squeezed from both ends", it's because I think government meddling in the economy is bad for everyone.

There are lots of desperate people looking for work right now who would love to get a job at $5 per hour, and there are plenty of struggling businesses that could use a few people at $5 per hour but just can't afford $7.25. In an unregulated economy this would lead to more people being hired, the economy improving, businesses growing and having to raise wages to keep their experienced workers from going elsewhere and everyone would be better off. Instead, if you desperately need a job and I have a job I need done but can't afford to pay more than $5 dollars per hour, it is a federal crime for us get together and solve each others problems by a mutually beneficial agreement.

The minimum wage turns the low-end job market from a market to a lottery. Instead of everyone who is willing to work being able to find a job for $5 per hour, a lucky few get jobs for $7.25 per hour and the rest get to survive on food stamps.

Now, I don't expect you to agree with this --you probably think that businesses don't let payroll costs influence how many people they hire-- but at least I have the courtesy to accept that we merely have different opinions about the economics. I don't feel the need to turn you into a devil who wants to stop low-end workers from getting jobs. Why do you feel the need to turn me into a devil that actually *wants* poor people to make low wages?

[Frosty]

Good post Dave, well said. I could not agree more with you.

[kroberts]

This is what you were cheering for? You were hoping the entire global economy would turn to ****, and that it would be blamed on the US?


Not the US in general, just the jerks in Washington. They seem to be completely unaware that there's a difference between a high school play and what they were elected to do. They seem more concerned about their public image than with a working economy. That's been consistent for a couple decades now, and all parties are guilty.


"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."
--Winston Churchill


And back when he said that, democracy worked a lot better than it does now. Back then, people used politics to get into office and then they voted their conscience with an ear toward the entire constituency, not just some ideal of their party line.
[/QUOTE]

[masalai]

In reply to Dave and Frosty,
Sadly there are too many unscrupulous people, (employers), who would not blink at slavery - so I support a minimum wage to protect the "weak" - ... - from the 'greedy-exploitative-bastards' ... who, because they could not have their way - exported the jobs offshore to exploit others even more vulnerable... By so doing - effectively screw their own country...

An illustration that could benefit from an expansion of everyone else's ideas:-
... If you bought a new computer recently, regardless of "brand/badge engineering", it was likely built in one of 4 places... ALL IN ASIA... (China, Taiwan, Korea? & Malaysia)...
... In Australia, the domestic vehicle manufacturing is loosing market share to FAR CHEAPER (and in many ways better?), imported cars and $x$ (4x4 monstrosities used as suburban taxies)...


Price is not necessarily the determinant in consumer purchase, for example:-
- Microsoft Windows, Mackintosh or - Have you heard of Linux? very robust, (core is used by most ISP's - The commercial "Red Hat" version, - and also in all Cray supercomputers), - and is FREE for non-commercial-use by 'home-consumers', - Linux will read and write most Windows stuff as well as Mac stuff, being capable of importing and exporting, wherever, as well as its own file systems / operating-system ... I use http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=mint Linux Mint, so I am somewhat biased...

[Frosty]

There will always be exploitation mas, we are all exploited in one way or another but the benefits of freedom out weigh restriction.

But as said by Dave its up to the individual to decide if they are being exploited and may be just great full for the opportunity.

Putting laws on it wont stop it anyway. If laws stopped anything we would live in a perfect world. The more laws are made the more are broken.

[masalai]

Hi Frosty,
I have to cede to your point...

[Mr Efficiency]

What is the nett private debt in the US ? I understand the total private and public debt is around 50 trillion, surely the debt owed to overseas, private and public, is what saps an economy. A lot of the public debt is owed to Americans, which has to be better than shovelling it out the door to China or Japan. The private debt, I don't know where the debt is owed to. If it is mainly OS, will be a hard road back.

[masalai]

What is the nett private debt in the US ? I understand the total private and public debt is around 50 trillion, surely the debt owed to overseas, private and public, is what saps an economy. A lot of the public debt is owed to Americans, which has to be better than shovelling it out the door to China or Japan. The private debt, I don't know where the debt is owed to. If it is mainly OS, will be a hard road back.

Have a look here http://www.usdebtclock.org/

and for statistics as reported pre Clinton here http://www.shadowstats.com/ with unemployment at around 22.5%... Heaven only knows for Australia... :o

For me the killer worry is CDS's at more than 600 trillion in USA :o (Credit Default Swap) - something really twisted there...

[Frosty]

I dont understand, banks are being told to lend more to customers and interest rates are on the floor in most countries and was'nt it cheap money and debt that got us into this in the first place. The world has too much money, we need deflation and loss of jobs we need shocking out of our comfortable credit card existance.

Its time for some exploitation and be thank full to be so.

Its time for bread and dripping, shoe repairs and walking to work like life was in the 30's.

Printing more money is not the answer, there is already too much money.

Respect is what required, respect it and confidence will follow.

Bank of New york is now charging for cash deposits, Thats to deter the rich from dumping large amounts from the stock market, and you say don't tax the rich. Theve more money than they know what to do with.

Respect? I mean million dollar bonuses , and 15 million for knocking a golf ball, or 10 million to make a movie then asking the man in the street to pay 15 dollars to buy a CD of it.

[Mr Efficiency]

Spending other people's money seems to be the problem. The buggers want it back, plus that damned interest !

[Boston]

Why can't Democrats just have policy disagreements without demonizing the people on the other side of the debate? Yes, I would like to see the minimum wage eliminated, but it's not because I want to see "the working poor get properly squeezed from both ends", it's because I think government meddling in the economy is bad for everyone.

There are lots of desperate people looking for work right now who would love to get a job at $5 per hour, and there are plenty of struggling businesses that could use a few people at $5 per hour but just can't afford $7.25. In an unregulated economy this would lead to more people being hired, the economy improving, businesses growing and having to raise wages to keep their experienced workers from going elsewhere and everyone would be better off. Instead, if you desperately need a job and I have a job I need done but can't afford to pay more than $5 dollars per hour, it is a federal crime for us get together and solve each others problems by a mutually beneficial agreement.

The minimum wage turns the low-end job market from a market to a lottery. Instead of everyone who is willing to work being able to find a job for $5 per hour, a lucky few get jobs for $7.25 per hour and the rest get to survive on food stamps.

at $7.25 your on food stamps already, companies like Target and Walmart hold there people to less then full hours so they don't have to pay benefits, so that minimum wage job doesn't pay a survivable wage anyway. And the only one who ends up benefiting it the huge multinational who squoze out ole mom and pop long ago.

Now, I don't expect you to agree with this --you probably think that businesses don't let payroll costs influence how many people they hire-- but at least I have the courtesy to accept that we merely have different opinions about the economics. I don't feel the need to turn you into a devil who wants to stop low-end workers from getting jobs. Why do you feel the need to turn me into a devil that actually *wants* poor people to make low wages?

just cause you've got horns and a tail Dave, doesn't mean I'm going to label you ;-)


I think you'd be surprised at what exactly I think we should do with this gubment but in the interim cutting the wages of people already on food stamps is simply ridiculous, What aught to be illegal is the corporate oligarchy and the huge multinationals who have bled the country dry.

[masalai]

Here, Frosty, is the answer - - (well part of the answer you seek.)... http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/too-much-good-thing

[Frosty]

I think you'd be surprised at what exactly I think we should do with this gubment but in the interim cutting the wages of people already on food stamps is simply ridiculous, What aught to be illegal is the corporate oligarchy and the huge multinationals who have bled the country dry.

No one is suggesting cutting wages just a free market of employment.

If you force people to be paid more than they are worth who is exploiting who, then no one will want to employ anyone.

You can get another job if you don't like it and at that stage if you are worth more you will be paid more.

In Aussie stupid Unions exploit employers and close businesses down increasing unemployment, and the social security bill . They have this strange notion that all employees should have a Jaguar and 8 weeks paid holiday like the boss has who mortgaged his family 25 years ago and worked night and day to develop the business.
That small point seems to go un noticed.

[Poida]

You obviously haven't worked in Australia Frosty. I've got 2 Jaguars and get 16 weeks holiday.

Maybe other countries should adopt this. The more people have to spend the more they spend keeping the economy going.

That is why China is booming they realise that, and have built a middle class of people buying up fashion, computers etc.

[hoytedow]

Masalai, industry went offshore not only for allegedly cheaper labor, but mainly because punitive double taxation drove them there. In order to stay viable(out of reach of hostile tax policy) they had to go.

[hoytedow]

And let us not forget about unfair practices by organized labor(work slow downs, etc).

http://reason.com/blog/2011/02/23/whitewashing-the-history-of-or

[whitepointer23]

You obviously haven't worked in Australia Frosty. I've got 2 Jaguars and get 16 weeks holiday.

Maybe other countries should adopt this. The more people have to spend the more they spend keeping the economy going.

That is why China is booming they realise that, and have built a middle class of people buying up fashion, computers etc.

i agree poida, we have terrific conditions here but we also work more hours per year than most country's. i have never had anything to with unions so i think frosty must get his facts reading about the water front workers troubles that made the head lines a few years ago. .

[Dave Gudeman]

at $7.25 your on food stamps already, companies like Target and Walmart hold there people to less then full hours so they don't have to pay benefits, so that minimum wage job doesn't pay a survivable wage anyway. And the only one who ends up benefiting it the huge multinational who squoze out ole mom and pop long ago.
Companies like Walmart and Target offer lots of great stuff that poor people can buy cheap because they keep their costs down. When they have job openings, people line up around the block to apply for the job. Don't you think those people lining up around the block to get the job are in a better position to decide if the job is good for them than you are?

What always makes me crazy in these discussions is people talking about an employer as if he's a bad guy for offering low wages. In a free economy, that makes no sense at all. If anyone wants to work for those wages, then by definition the person who wants the job at those wages thinks that he is better off with the job than without. Yes, it's true that he would be even better off with bigger pay, but that job with bigger pay is not available to him. What is available is what the employer has to offer.

You guys seem to think that the employer just has a job to offer, period, and the pay is random. That's not how the world works. The employer is a person who is also trying to make money, just like the employee. The employer has some idea of: "I can sell X product and make P profit. If I hire someone for W wages I can sell X2 product and make P2-W profits. If P2-W is not enough bigger than P to justify the hassle of hiring someone then the employer just won't hire them. A minimum wage does not change that equation; all it does is eliminate jobs where the W that the employer would be willing to spend is less than the minimum wage.

There are lots of people out there who would love to have pay that you don't think is "survivable". Who do you think you are deciding for other people what pay they have a right to accept?

I managed to survive for years at 1/2 of what was then considered a "survivable wage" (grad-school students are not considered real people so normal minimum wage laws do not apply). I was single, which helped, and I drove a used motorcycle instead of a car. I wore old jeans and flannel shirts so I could afford good hiking boots and a leather jacket for my bike. For vacations I would go hiking in the mountains or just ride my motorcycle to somewhere that I knew people who would put me up for a few days. When I ate out it was cheap hamburgers or pizza. I shared a small, ratty apartment with another guy. Had to use duct tape on the cracks in the walls to keep the crickets out (the crickets ate right through the masking tape that I tried first). My roommate bought a couch for $5 and I got an old recliner and a mattress and box springs free from my parents. No bed frame, but when you're young that extra 8 inches getting out of bed is no big deal. I never once felt oppressed or victimized. I lived on what I had and life was great.

The point is that you should let people make their own economic decisions rather than trying to artificially enforce certain standards of what you would consider acceptable. Those sorts of laws always distort the economy in ways that is bad for everyone except for the few lottery winners who benefit from the laws.

[Boston]

oh have you ever not studied the Wallmart issue

lets do a little background work before going into the evil that is Walmart, cause if you think there doing anyone any favors except themselves your just not paying attention
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6AgKG-f4Tw

Walmart, Homedebot and a whole bunch of big box stores are basically just open veins bleeding the country dry and COSTING taxpayers millions in the process. Lowering property values, raising crime, driving the mom and pop places which USED TO buy american products to sell in american stores out of biz and replacing them with nearly 100% imported low quality crap

[Frosty]

Bos --why do you think they import low quality crap, because it sells and it sells well. Maybe you don't but many do.

If it was'nt sold it would not be imported.

Its often the case that Americans blame china for an un level playing field and blames cheap labour etc etc , but if you made something you could export you may find people would buy it.

For instance 110 V appliances are not a bit of good to any country.

[Boston]

Frosty one of the main issues with China is that its pegged the value of its money to run at an artificially favorable trade rate with the US dollar. Hardly something that can be called fair trade. Combine that with a complete lack of worker safety standards, health benefits and a economy which allows for its workers to be paid $2 a day and still eat means that the playing field was never fair to begin with. What product you produce in such an environment is virtually irrelevant. Without some form of world standards there will never be fair and equitable trade. Essentially this so called "free trade" is another crock foisted off on the people by the corporate oligarchy. Works out great for them but you end up with marginally similar goods being produced at 1/10 the labor cost. By people who can't afford to buy them for people who are fast running out of money. So how does that benefit anyone but some few at the top? It actually means that not only have you shipped jobs overseas but you have eliminated an entire spending class of people and left them out in the cold telling them to go work at McDonalds when there simply aren't enough ultra low paying jobs to go around. So your solution is to lower wages even more? Thats nuts

The simply solution is to eliminate the free trade agreements, bring back import tariffs, decrease the size of gubment and reduce regulations to a manageable and enforceable level. Legalize and regulate all drugs and quit screwing around with foreign countries. Go in, beat the crap out of them, and leave em to clean up there own mess.

the solutions are pretty obvious, its just some few *******s are making billions off a failing system, and simply don't care about anyone but themselves

watch the video series and get back to me on the walmart thing

cheers
B

PS
china's version of a middle class is a lot like India's. Certainly a step above abject poverty but hardly something I would consider anything better than the working poor.

[CatBuilder]

The simply solution is to eliminate the free trade agreements, bring back import tariffs, decrease the size of gubment and reduce regulations to a manageable and enforceable level. Legalize and regulate all drugs and quit screwing around with foreign countries. Go in, beat the crap out of them, and leave em to clean up there own mess.
B


Or... even more simple would be that consumption tax, in the form of a VAT tax.

If you try to sell an American product in say, Europe, for instance, you have to pay an enormous VAT tax (19%?) before you take your product to market. If a European tries to sell a product in the states, they pay no such tax. Nearly every other country in the WTO has a VAT tax and these are balances to trade.

Because we do not have a VAT tax in the States, it is cheaper for other countries to sell their goods in here in the States than it is for us to sell them overseas. Why? Because we pay a VAT selling in their country, while they pay nothing to sell here.

You could kill two birds with one stone: A nice, fair tax in place of the income tax we have now, plus... as a bonus, a fair global/US trade environment which levels the playing field.

[troy2000]

Why can't Democrats just have policy disagreements without demonizing the people on the other side of the debate? Yes, I would like to s ee the minimum wage eliminated, but it's not because I want to see "the working poor get properly squeezed from both ends", it's because I think government meddling in the economy is bad for everyone.
Not demonizing you; just identifying you. That's what would actually happen to the working poor if you had your way. They'd be getting squeezed from both ends: more taxes, less pay.

It wouldn't surprise me to hear you're 'pro-life' too, while at the same time being pro-death penalty. And I'll take another reasonable guess that you oppose welfare -- especially for the women you'd force to bear children they can't afford.:) There are lots of desperate people looking for work right now who would love to get a job at $5 per hour, and there are plenty of struggling businesses that could use a few people at $5 per hour but just can't afford $7.25. In an unregulated economy this would lead to more people being hired, the economy improving, businesses growing and having to raise wages to keep their experienced workers from going elsewhere and everyone would be better off. Instead, if you desperately need a job and I have a job I need done but can't afford to pay more than $5 dollars per hour, it is a federal crime for us get together and solve each others problems by a mutually beneficial agreement.Begging your pardon, but that's an over-filled honey wagon you're pulling there. Careful you don't hit a bump, and start sloshing....:D

No One is "desperate" for a job that won't pay them enough to live on. And a full-time job at five dollars an hour wouldn't even cover rent and utilities for a cheap apartment in most housing markets today -- much less also put food on the table, and clothes on the children's backs.The minimum wage turns the low-end job market from a market to a lottery. Instead of everyone who is willing to work being able to find a job for $5 per hour, a lucky few get jobs for $7.25 per hour and the rest get to survive on food stamps.I repeat: pure horse apples. When I was growing up most of my friend's dads were farm workers who made minimum wage, and they managed to support their families on minimum wage.

They didn't live fancy. But they provided their families with food, clothing and shelter, along with owning a car they could keep running. And they did it with their wives staying home to take care of the house and the kids (try doing that on today's minimum wages).

And you know what? Their employers got along just fine, and so did the economy. It was lobbyists for the McDonald's Corporation who suckered Richard Nixon into believing big corporations would be driven out of business, if they actually had to keep paying a living wage.

They convinced him and an ignorant Congress that only teenaged burger-flippers still living at home made minimum wage, anyway. Which wasn't true then, and isn't true now.Now, I don't expect you to agree with this --you probably think that businesses don't let payroll costs influence how many people they hire-- but at least I have the courtesy to accept that we merely have different opinions about the economics. I don't feel the need to turn you into a devil who wants to stop low-end workers from getting jobs. Why do you feel the need to turn me into a devil that actually *wants* poor people to make low wages?

Don't try condescending to me, son; it won't work. I'm not some idealistic ignoramus who blindly resents people in charge. I spent more of my life hiring than I did hiring myself out -- up until ten years ago, when I decided I was getting too damned old and tired to keep surfing the ups and downs of the construction industry. So I sold out, and grabbed a stable job with a big corporation. But I didn't sell them my brain along with my soul....;)

I don't 'feel the need' to peg you as someone who wants the poor to make low wages; you've flat-out said that's what you want. You strongly advocate getting rid of the minimum wage, because apparently you believe that people are 'desperate' enough to want jobs that won't pay them enough to live on -- and that companies which can't make a profit after paying their workers a liveable wage have some sort of right to stay in business anyway.

If you think my shining a light on what you believe makes you look like some sort of demon, maybe it's time you did some soul-searching instead of shooting the messenger.No man can be a good citizen unless he has a wage more than sufficient to cover the bare cost of living, and hours of labor short enough so that after his day's work is done he will have time and energy to bear his share in the management of the community, to help in carrying the general load. We keep countless men from being good citizens by the conditions of life with which we surround them.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)

The vast individual and corporate fortunes, the vast combinations of capital which have marked the development of our industrial system, create new conditions, and necessitate a change from the old attitude of the state and the nation toward property... More and more it is evident that the State and if necessary the nation, has got to possess the right of supervision and control as regards the great corporations which are its creatures.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at the Minnesota State Fair, 1901, two weeks before becoming president. Quoted in his biography Theodore Rex by Edmund Morris (2001)

[hoytedow]

It's funny how the same ones who want to save killers favor abortion.

[Boston]

I didn't hear Troy taking a position on the mater, merely suggesting his suspicions

it is an interesting subject tho, cause I find that often those who are extremely strongly opinionated concerning the death penalty are often opposed to the right of free choice.

[troy2000]

It's funny how the same ones who want to save killers favor abortion.What's funnier is that the same folks who want to force a woman to have a child won't lift a finger to help her raise him, but are totally ready to fry his ass as soon as he's done growing up with no sense of community, no moral support, no education and no hope for the future.

Conservatives believe that from the standpoint of the federal government, life begins at conception and ends at birth.
--Barney Frank

[Dave Gudeman]

I don't 'feel the need' to peg you as someone who wants the poor to make low wages; you've flat-out said that's what you want.
That's a straight-out lie, Troy, and shame on you for saying it. If I were as dishonest as you I would say that you have flat-out said that you don't want the lowest-skilled peopled to be allowed to have jobs.

What I want is for everyone --rich, poor, and middle-class-- to make enough money to live a good life. In my ideal world there would be no poor people. There would also be no war or strife or envy. Medicines would all taste like honey and every thing that tastes good would be good for you. There would be chocolate mountains (which would be good for you) and everyone could just tap their heels and fly to wherever they want to go except that restaurants and concerts and sporting events would never get too crowded to enjoy. However, in the real world, not everyone who wants to work is worth minimum wage to anyone in the area where they want to work. Forcing employers to give minimum wage does not get these people higher wages, it prevents them from working at all. Sure, some people get higher wages as a result of the minimum wage, but lots of other people get moved from a lower-paying job to no job at all. Meanwhile, prices go up for everyone, including those making minimum wage and those who can't get a job because of the new minimum wage. The poorest people are hurt the most.

You seem to have this fantasy that if not for minimum wage, poor people would be slaving away 20 hours per day while slowly starving to death because the wages aren't enough to live on. Meanwhile, 97% of the poor people in the US own a refrigerator and 24% own a gaming console (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkebmhTQN-4&sns=em).

And what about people who don't want a "living wage" because they already have enough to live on? What about people who just want a bit of extra cash to buy some small luxuries? Can't do that --it's illegal in the US because our Congress knows better than we do what jobs are worthwhile for us to have.

[troy2000]

That's a straight-out lie, Troy, and shame on you for saying it. If I were as dishonest as you I would say that you have flat-out said that you don't want the lowest-skilled peopled to be allowed to have jobs.

What I want is for everyone --rich, poor, and middle-class-- to make enough money to live a good life. In my ideal world there would be no poor people. There would also be no war or strife or envy. Medicines would all taste like honey and every thing that tastes good would be good for you. There would be chocolate mountains (which would be good for you) and everyone could just tap their heels and fly to wherever they want to go except that restaurants and concerts and sporting events would never get too crowded to enjoy. However, in the real world, not everyone who wants to work is worth minimum wage to anyone in the area where they want to work. Forcing employers to give minimum wage does not get these people higher wages, it prevents them from working at all. Sure, some people get higher wages as a result of the minimum wage, but lots of other people get moved from a lower-paying job to no job at all. Meanwhile, prices go up for everyone, including those making minimum wage and those who can't get a job because of the new minimum wage. The poorest people are hurt the most.

You seem to have this fantasy that if not for minimum wage, poor people would be slaving away 20 hours per day while slowly starving to death because the wages aren't enough to live on. Meanwhile, 97% of the poor people in the US own a refrigerator and 24% own a gaming console (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkebmhTQN-4&sns=em).

And what about people who don't want a "living wage" because they already have enough to live on? What about people who just want a bit of extra cash to buy some small luxuries? Can't do that --it's illegal in the US because our Congress knows better than we do what jobs are worthwhile for us to have.

Typical response, and exactly what I expected.

I'm sorry.... point out to me where the lie is. After stating that low-income people should have to pay income taxes, you said quite clearly that you'd like to get rid of minimum wage laws -- to fulfill your fantasy that minimum-wage laws are keeping employers from hiring people they need. Reality check: if they can't make a profit after paying their workers enough to live on, maybe they shouldn't be in business to begin with. Y'think?

Screwing the employees to make a profit isn't my idea of a viable business mode....

I repeat: why the !@#$ would anyone 'desperately' want a job that doesn't even pay them enough to live on? Hell... they can stay home and starve, instead of working 40 hours a week to do it.

Don't try to sidetrack the issue, by bringing up people who want to have their cake and eat it too. That would be the folks who are whining because the government won't let them supposedly 'retire' early and start collecting Social Security -- while in reality, they're still working and bringing home a paycheck.

Here's yet another reality check: it's called the 'Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Program,' not the 'Guaranteed Retirement Pension Program.' It was neither crafted nor intended as a universal replacement for other retirement plans.

[Dave Gudeman]

What's funnier is that the same folks who want to force a woman to have a child won't lift a finger to help her raising him, but are totally ready to fry his ass as soon as he's done growing up with no sense of community, no moral support, no education and no hope for the future.

There are lots of pro-life groups who give their own money to help poor women support their children rather than have abortions. But since you are a Democrat that doesn't count, right? To you "helping" poor people means taking tax money away from other people at gunpoint and giving it to the poor people. Giving your own money doesn't count because Democrats are afraid of either falling behind on the "keeping up with the Joneses" contest if they are giving more than their neighbors or looking bad if they are giving less. Better income redistribution at gunpoint than charity that requires tough personal decisions.

As to this supposed contradiction between being against abortion and for capital punishment, it is the same as the contradiction between being against Democrat-advocated plans to "draft" all young people into a public works project between the ages of 18 and 20 but being for requiring prisoners to work. Well, am I against forced labor or for it? Quite a contradiction there.

This may seem like a subtle distinction, but I have this old concept of innocent/guilty. I'm not going to go into a lot of details here, but I view this as a real and important distinction between people that effects how we should treat them. For example, we ought not to put innocent people in prison, but we ought to put guilty people in prison.

I apply this to a few other cases as well. For example, we ought not to force innocent people to pick up trash along the roads but in some cases we ought to force guilty people to pick up trash along the roads. The same thing applies to abortion: we ought not to kill innocent babies, but we ought to kill guilty serial killers.

I can understand why you think this stance is contradictory if you don't grasp the subtle difference between being innocent and being guilty.

[masalai]

Bos --why do you think they import low quality crap, because it sells and it sells well. Maybe you don't but many do.

For instance 110 V appliances are not a bit of good to any country.

(Except Japan, which is a subsidiary state of USA for many years post WW11).....?

[masalai]

Frosty one of the main issues with China is that its pegged the value of its money to run at an artificially favorable trade rate with the US dollar. Hardly something that can be called fair trade.

One could point the same bony finger at USA for the similar manipulation in currency and other commodity values like Australian Oils are based on TAPIS which is $125 a barrel... WTC is not available internationally as it is a figment of USA's price fixing... as is most precious metals and a host of other commodities controlled by the NY / USA markets... Globally, that is a political fact - mainly for internal domestic political reasons....

[Dave Gudeman]

I'm sorry.... point out to me where the lie is. You said quite clearly that you want low-end wages to be even lower, to fulfill your fantasy that minimum-wage laws are keeping employers from hiring people they need.
No, I did not say that I want wages to be lower I said that if wages *are* lower then people should be able to decide for themselves if they want to take a job at those wages and the government should butt out.

Maybe you really are misunderstanding me because you are working from the false assumption that minimum wage laws can set wages. This is not true. Wages are based on economic laws and you can no more turn low wages into high wages with a law than you can nullify gravity with a law.

Wages are what they are. If there are natural wages that are below the legal minimum wage then this does not raise those natural wages. All it does is eliminate those jobs, which distorts the economy and may (or may not) produce more minimum-wage jobs by causing employers to raise prices. The employers can get away with raising prices because everyone in the industry has the minimum-wage laws so they all have to raise prices. But this doesn't give the consumers more money to pay the increased prices (since most consumers are already above minimum wage) so volume of sales will go down and the employers will not be able to employ as many people as they did before. The law can't create a many minimum-wage laws as the lower-wage jobs that it destroys.

I repeat: why the !@#$ would anyone 'desperately' want a job that doesn't pay them enough to live on? Hell... they can stay home and starve, instead of working 40 hours to do it.
Exactly! I'm glad that you are beginning to see the point. Obviously if someone chooses to work at a specific wage, then that wage must be enough for that person to live on or he wouldn't take the job. You don't need minimum-wage laws to prevent people from working at a wages that are too low for them to live on-- the laws of economics will prevent that.

Don't try to sidetrack the issue, by bringing up people who want to have their cake and eat it too. That would be the folks who are whining because the government won't let them 'retire' and start collecting Social Security, but keep working and bringing in a paycheck anyway.It's not just retired people. It's also young people living with their parents, spouses of people who already make enough to live on, street people who only want to make enough money for food and wine for the day, anyone who doesn't need the money to pay rent and bills but wants to work anyway. Not allowed. Federal regulations say that if you don't have the qualifications or don't want to spend the time for a job good enough to support a family then you can't work at all.

It is amazing to me that anyone at all supports this assault on freedom.

[troy2000]

There are lots of pro-life groups who give their own money to help poor women support their children rather than have abortions. But since you are a Democrat that doesn't count, right? To you "helping" poor people means taking tax money away from other people at gunpoint and giving it to the poor people. Giving your own money doesn't count because Democrats are afraid of either falling behind on the "keeping up with the Joneses" contest if they are giving more than their neighbors or looking bad if they are giving less. Better income redistribution at gunpoint than charity that requires tough personal decisions.

As to this supposed contradiction between being against abortion and for capital punishment, it is the same as the contradiction between being against Democrat-advocated plans to "draft" all young people into a public works project between the ages of 18 and 20 but being for requiring prisoners to work. Well, am I against forced labor or for it? Quite a contradiction there.

This may seem like a subtle distinction, but I have this old concept of innocent/guilty. I'm not going to go into a lot of details here, but I view this as a real and important distinction between people that effects how we should treat them. For example, we ought not to put innocent people in prison, but we ought to put guilty people in prison.

I apply this to a few other cases as well. For example, we ought not to force innocent people to pick up trash along the roads but in some cases we ought to force guilty people to pick up trash along the roads. The same thing applies to abortion: we ought not to kill innocent babies, but we ought to kill guilty serial killers.

I can understand why you think this stance is contradictory if you don't grasp the subtle difference between being innocent and being guilty.

Well, I can certainly understand your insistence that people living under the most democratic political system in the world have no moral obligation whatsoever to turn around and give anything in return.

I don't agree, mind you... I just understand.

[masalai]

Instead of slagging off at each other, what thinkest thou of the content here? from Bix Weir, a renown stirrer... http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/655.cfm?awt_l=J859B&awt_m=3csp100Yg_AZ85B with the heading "Behavioral Finance Is Alive n 'Fr**kin' Well
Bix Weir"....

[Ad Hoc]

Well, I can certainly understand your insistence that people living under the most democratic political system in the world have no moral obligation whatsoever to turn around and give anything in return..

Sorry, but i think you need to get out more.

For the most democratic "political" system in the world, it is Switzerland:
http://www.democracy-building.info/switzerlands-political-system.html

For the most democractic country in the world, its Norway after knocking Sweden off the no.1 spot which it occupied for many years. (US ranks 17th):
http://graphics.eiu.com/PDF/Democracy_Index_2010_web.pdf

[hoytedow]

Every year the Democrats are in power, we become less democratic and more under the tyrant's heel.

[masalai]

In a two political party system, (and even those such as Australia where there are some independent and minority parties), the two majors are a choice between Tweedledum or Tweedledumber, as "left and Right" political positions are readily interchangeable - I fail to see the reason for the strengths in opinion/support as the "public perception" of the differences offered or presented... Bu*l*h*t baffles brains seems to me the only explanation...

Most politicians are 'run' by vested interests, or polls, - which are biased at best, to meet preconceived responses from the polled respondents, by the pollsters...

JUST IN... This, if it is correct could really explode in the GEC... http://www.gata.org/node/10223 "'As many as 20 owners for each bullion bank gold bar, Rickards tells King World News"' and Rickards is a respected and knowledgable global 'player'...

[Boston]

there are no parties, its all a sham, the only difference between the republitards and the democraps is what pretend agenda the corporate oligarchy thinks will benefit them in the present economic environment.

Cheers

[Frosty]

You know a dictatorship don't sound too bad right now --if we could only get the right dictator. At least we would get decisions and get stuff done.

Allowing people( the common man) in the street to vote for what he thinks is best does'nt seem to work --(see posts here) Thing is one is right and one is wrong--thats for sure but who.

America is no longer triple A it has a 1.3 trillion defacit,-that means it spends 1.3 trillion more than it earns per year, now how dumb is that. The fact that they have any credit rating all all surprises me, the utter farce in the government show something is wrong --I don't know what but i'lle bet you get a reduction again soon.

Another shocker is the Australian PM said "Oh its all right its just some ones opinion"!!

It is just an opinion but a very important indicator,- Fiche and Moody's will have to agree or the whole rating system will be pointless.

Until the situation gets the attention is deserves this will not go away and US has been down graded not only for having a deficit but for not handling it properly. it has grown over the last what--10 years and no sign of slowing down even.

Thing is we all know that in less that one days time billions will be wiped off the stock markets around the world and theres not a damn thing you can do about it.

[masalai]

Thing is we all know that in less that one days time billions will be wiped off the stock markets around the world and theres not a damn thing you can do about it.

Oh yes there is, - - Lots... - - But none of "it" you do, will do you anything beneficial in the big picture of things :o :o :P :D

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/executive-style/slim-pickings-worlds-richest-man-loses-67-billion-in-stockmarket-rout-20110807-1ih7n.html
"'Slim pickings: World's richest man loses $6.7 billion in stockmarket rout..."'

[IMP-ish]

America is no longer triple A it has a 1.3 trillion defacit,-that means it spends 1.3 trillion more than it earns per year, now how dumb is that. The fact that they have any credit rating all all surprises me, the utter farce in the government show something is wrong --I don't know what but i'lle bet you get a reduction again soon.
Like young joe shmoe on the street who buys a new house, lakeside cottage, new car after new car, business or boats... on mortgage and loan. How many stick to what they can pay with cash now?

[Frosty]

No mas,--if you have money in the stock market you wont be able to get on the phone fast enough, it will be put in the computer to sell and it will be in a queue. And what would be the benefit of saving your money --who cares, they are all saving there own, they will not be selling they will be dumping.

You will receive an SMS --shares sold 11-14 AM thank you for dealing with us--

Joes shmo in a situation like that would be bankrupt and never allowed to borrow money again. How he could get that far into dept is not possible.
But if we must,-- his assets would be taken away and auctioned, his credibility would be none existant.

[Mr Efficiency]

You know a dictatorship don't sound too bad right now --if we could only get the right dictator. At least we would get decisions and get stuff done.

Allowing people( the common man) in the street to vote for what he thinks is best does'nt seem to work --(see posts here) Thing is one is right and one is wrong--thats for sure but who.

America is no longer triple A it has a 1.3 trillion defacit,-that means it spends 1.3 trillion more than it earns per year, now how dumb is that. The fact that they have any credit rating all all surprises me, the utter farce in the government show something is wrong --I don't know what but i'lle bet you get a reduction again soon.

Another shocker is the Australian PM said "Oh its all right its just some ones opinion"!!

It is just an opinion but a very important indicator,- Fiche and Moody's will have to agree or the whole rating system will be pointless.

Until the situation gets the attention is deserves this will not go away and US has been down graded not only for having a deficit but for not handling it properly. it has grown over the last what--10 years and no sign of slowing down even.

Thing is we all know that in less that one days time billions will be wiped off the stock markets around the world and theres not a damn thing you can do about it.

Any historical candidates you can nominate for the 'right dictator' ? :(

[ancient kayaker]

You know a dictatorship don't sound too bad right now. . .

- do you know a country with a AAA rating that has a dictator? Not even the Middle East countries that are soaked with oil have that.


Any historical candidates you can nominate for the 'right dictator' ? :(

Franco is about the closest but I am not an admirer. Credit where due though, he hauled Spain out of a mess and kept it out of WW2 - more than you can say for a lot of so-called democracies and handed it back to a more representative government in reasonably good condition, although that government and its bankers haven't done any better a job than in the USA.

[rasorinc]

There were so many benign loveable ones going way back to really old history such as Gengus Kahn. Frosty--no dictator is ever missed by those he controlled. Good dictators
are only in Hollywood writers imagination.

[IMP-ish]

Joes shmo in a situation like that would be bankrupt and never allowed to borrow money again. How he could get that far into dept is not possible.
But if we must,-- his assets would be taken away and auctioned, his credibility would be none existant.
Look how much people have on their mortgages compared to their annual income :!:

Even bankruptcy doesn't ruin credit as long as you'd think. 5 years and many are borrowing again.

[Frosty]

Rome had a few good ones and the Sheik of Dubai does'nt do too badly. Don't get me wrong but if comparable with the terrible mess on Capital hill anything must be looked at.

Normally I coul'dt give a flying fart about a country going down because of its own stupidity and complacency but your taking me down with you, and I think that thought eckoes all round the world.

If it was'nt for the financial implications I would like to sit back with a beer and watch.

And if you want to bring in the war well thanks --how many times do I have to say thanks and thanks again.

And yes im a bit peeved today, I stand to loose a lot of money tomorrow gentlemen.

Ive no pension no health insurance just me and my money. God bless America.

If you could have just made this very very simple decision a few months back you could have avoided all this, I know smarter 7 year olds.

[Frosty]

Look how much people have on their mortgages compared to their annual income :!:

Even bankruptcy doesn't ruin credit as long as you'd think. 5 years and many are borrowing again.

I think youve found the problem!!

[Mr Efficiency]

So what kind of stock market carnage are you predicting Monday, Frosty ? Surely this rating stuff is pretty well fa ctored in already ?

[troy2000]

In a two political party system, (and even those such as Australia where there are some independent and minority parties), the two majors are a choice between Tweedledum or Tweedledumber, as "left and Right" political positions are readily interchangeable - I fail to see the reason for the strengths in opinion/support as the "public perception" of the differences offered or presented... Bu*l*h*t baffles brains seems to me the only explanation...

Most politicians are 'run' by vested interests, or polls, - which are biased at best, to meet preconceived responses from the polled respondents, by the pollsters...

JUST IN... This, if it is correct could really explode in the GEC... http://www.gata.org/node/10223 "'As many as 20 owners for each bullion bank gold bar, Rickards tells King World News"' and Rickards is a respected and knowledgable global 'player'...

In a viable two-party system, each party represents a broad spectrum of the voters. And that used to be the case in this country. When Moby Dick was a minnow and I first registered to vote, there was an overlap between the Democrats and the Republicans.

Both parties had a moderate center, with 'left' and 'right' wings. Overall, the center of the Republican Party was to the right of the Democratic Party's center -- but a liberal Republican was more liberal than a conservative Democrat. That means that a candidate or a policy that survived being vetted by either party generally had a political appeal broad-based enough to be palatable to the country as a whole. Any candidate who won his position by appealing only to one wing of his own party risked going down spectacularly in flames (think Barry Goldwater and Eugene McCarthy).

But beginning with the rise of Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh as spokesmen for Republicans and conservatives, Republicans have been increasingly indoctrinated with the idea that anyone who doesn't agree with them politically is not only wrong, but evil. The Party's political base has been on a witch hunt for years now, purging the membership of voters or candidates who don't meet various litmus tests.

Today, the most liberal Republicans in the House and the Senate are still far to the right of their Democratic brethren. Rockefeller Republicans are extinct, and there are no nationally-known Republican politicians anywhere left of center. In fact, only a tiny handful of them can even be viewed as centrist.

The Democratic Party, on the other hand, still has a broad center and a right wing of sorts (think Blue Dog Democrats), although it has gone through a fair amount of the same sort of polarization. That means that in the long run, it's more likely to come up with policies and politics that are palatable to the general public. In response, the Republican Party will have to become more inclusive, or risk becoming irrelevant.

But unfortunately, it seems that right now the Tea Party tail is wagging the Republican dog instead. Republican leaders are misinterpreting negative feelings about Obama and the economy as positive support for them instead, and in my opinion are thereby stumbling their way into political disaster.

Look at the field of Republican candidates for President this time around. How many normal, non-politicized voters are actually going to believe a Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin or Herbert Cain could run the country? The only one in the pack so far who's even remotely electable is Mitt Romney, and he'll have his political throat cut by his own party members if he wins the nomination. An alarming number of conservative Republicans will either sit out the election, or vote for a third-party candidate who has no chance of winning.

I predict an Obama win in the next election -- not because he's popular, but because a polarized, irrational Republican base will be unable to field a viable candidate against him. Despite desperate attempts to paint him as some sort of left-wing communist loon, Obama will scare the average voter less than anyone the Teabaggers want....

re: the oversold gold, I'm not surprised. I've never understood the rationalse behind 'owning' gold that isn't actually in one's physical possession, as a hedge against a catastrophic collapse of our economic system. Hello? if the banks all go belly-up, who's going to deliver that gold to your door so you can use it?

[Frosty]

If anything has come out of all this mess its that the man in the street now knows that Obama has no more clout than the Whitehouse cook asking what everyone wants for supper. This means even more complacency when it come to 'renew' him because it does'nt matter who is the figure head,--maybe not even bother with one next time eh?

Just use the monkeys in the pit throwing food at each other.

[troy2000]

Rome had a few good ones and the Sheik of Dubai does'nt do too badly. Don't get me wrong but if comparable with the terrible mess on Capital hill anything must be looked at.

Normally I coul'dt give a flying fart about a country going down because of its own stupidity and complacency but your taking me down with you, and I think that thought eckoes all round the world.

If it was'nt for the financial implications I would like to sit back with a beer and watch.

And if you want to bring in the war well thanks --how many times do I have to say thanks and thanks again.

And yes im a bit peeved today, I stand to loose a lot of money tomorrow gentlemen.

Ive no pension no health insurance just me and my money. God bless America.

If you could have just made this very very simple decision a few months back you could have avoided all this, I know smarter 7 year olds.

Oh, stop it.:)

You have a long track record of blaming America for anything that goes wrong anywhere in the world, while giving it no credit whatsoever for anything that goes right.

In case you hadn't noticed, we aren't exactly the only country in the world with financial woes right now because of the stupid short-sightedness of political leaders. Look at your own country... are you really trying to set it up as some sort of good example?

The UK national debt is the total amount of money the British government owes to the private sector and other purchasers of UK gilts.

•UK public sector net debt was £920.9 billion (equivalent to 60.6 per cent of GDP of National GDP) – (note this excludes financial sector intervention.)

•Source: Office National Statistics [1] (page updated July 18th, 2011)

If all financial sector intervention is included (e.g. Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds) , the Net debt was £2252.9 billion or 148.9% per cent. This is known as the unadjusted measure of public sector net debt.

The Public sector net borrowing PSNB (annual government borrowing) for 2010/11 was £143.2 billion or 11.7% of GDP.

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/

[masalai]

Well I am led to believe that in the last election in USA that the politicians got in with less than 25% even bothering to vote... If so, I guess the USA got what it deserves APATHY and m?????s...

I am also bothered by the system in USA of Lobbyists... With their supposedly HUGE 'brown-paper-bag' expense accounts and the perception that corruption and bribery is rife, and an intrinsic part of "normal" life. ???

On another matter, in Australia....
Australia has a nationwide Census on 9th of August 2011... The analysis could be quite interesting, as the plea for accurate and honest data is logical and reasonable as a future planning tool...
Australia is a small insignificant country with lots of ARID, (Most of the useful topsoil has been washed away over the eons of this, one of the oldest landmasses...) and WATERLESS, (Drowned in a torrent every 7th or so year, and DROUGHT for the other 6 years...), land and a population that is about maximum, (21million), to continue "self-sustain-ably" into the future.... The sleeping, ignorant, ill-advised, wankers who hold political office, and leadership rolls in industry, - would happily sell this country down the drain to whom-so-ever was stupid enough to invest here-in...

[Frosty]

Troy although direct communication with you has not worked in the past im'e willing to say to you, tell me what you think America needs applauding for and I will indeed applaud.

Fighting abortion perhaps or refusing permission for stem cell research pollution, handling the depletion of fossil fuels all on your own.

GPS yes,-- now thats very handy thank you very much, anything else?

I know you give a lot to Isreal and Pakistan, thats very kind of you but I have no idea why.

Err --thats about it is'nt it.

UK? a **** hole and has been for 50 years destroyed by rampant immigration and social hand outs, I will not go there.

We have a lot in common but Im not waving a big foam "we are number one finger".

[troy2000]

Well I am led to believe that in the last election in USA that the politicians got in with less than 25% even bothering to vote... If so, I guess the USA got what it deserves APATHY and m?????s...You've been seriously misled, then. The voter turnout for the last election was 38% of the total adult population -- roughly two thirds of eligible, registered voters.

That's fine with me. I really see no point in pushing apathetic and uninformed folks into casting ballots; let them stay home and not confuse things even more.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/voting/cb09-110.html

[Dave Gudeman]

Well, I can certainly understand your insistence that people living under the most democratic political system in the world have no moral obligation whatsoever to turn around and give anything in return.

I don't agree, mind you... I just understand.

Putting words in my mouth, again, Troy. Do you seriously not see a difference between believing that people have an obligation and believing that the government should enforce those obligations at gunpoint?

Don't you see the inherent danger in this position? Look, there are two possibilities, either you can trust people to do the right thing or you can't. If you can trust people to do the right thing then there is no need for the government to enforce it. If you can't trust people to do the right thing then you can't trust the government to force people to do the right thing because the government is made up of people who are just as selfish and self-serving as anyone else. All you are doing is giving great power to a particular subset of people (the government) to force everyone else to do the right thing, but also giving them the power to loot and pillage and abuse their power. Which is exactly what they've been doing for the last 80 years since government first started taking on the job of forcing people to do the right thing.

[troy2000]

Troy although direct communication with you has not worked in the past im'e willing to say to you, tell me what you think America needs applauding for and I will indeed applaud.

Fighting abortion perhaps or refusing permission for stem cell research pollution, handling the depletion of fossil fuels all on your own.

GPS yes,-- now thats very handy thank you very much, anything else?

I know you give a lot to Isreal and Pakistan, thats very kind of you but I have no idea why.

Err --thats about it is'nt it.

UK? a **** hole and has been for 50 years destroyed by rampant immigration and social hand outs, I will not go there.

We have a lot in common but Im not waving a big foam "we are number one finger".

How about the fact that without the US, you probably wouldn't be sitting on an internet today -- where you can bitch to the whole world about the US.

[troy2000]

Putting words in my mouth, again, Troy. Do you seriously not see a difference between believing that people have an obligation and believing that the government should enforce those obligations at gunpoint?

Don't you see the inherent danger in this position? Look, there are two possibilities, either you can trust people to do the right thing or you can't. If you can trust people to do the right thing then there is no need for the government to enforce it. If you can't trust people to do the right thing then you can't trust the government to force people to do the right thing because the government is made up of people who are just as selfish and self-serving as anyone else. All you are doing is giving great power to a particular subset of people (the government) to force everyone else to do the right thing, but also giving them the power to loot and pillage and abuse their power. Which is exactly what they've been doing for the last 80 years since government first started taking on the job of forcing people to do the right thing.

So I take it you think paying taxes should be voluntary, and we shouldn't have drafted 10 million men to fight World War II?

[Dave Gudeman]

So I take it you think paying taxes should be voluntary, and we shouldn't have drafted 10 million men to fight World War II?

You just can't stop putting words in my mouth, can you? It's like a compulsion.

[Mr Efficiency]

No government intervention in the economy=deregulation=unfettered movements of capital=GFC=incipient GFC Mk.2

[Ad Hoc]

How about the fact that without the US, you probably wouldn't be sitting on an internet today -- .

I don't follow?

The internet was created by Sir Tim Berners-Lee in 1989-90 while at CERN.

[CatBuilder]

This post is way, way off.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET


I don't follow?

The internet was created by Sir Tim Berners-Lee in 1989-90 while at CERN.

[Frosty]

How about the fact that without the US, you probably wouldn't be sitting on an internet today -- where you can bitch to the whole world about the US.

The thread is Americas default, We can do China and Uk next if you like.

Maybe you wont like what I have to say about Uk either.

Why do you insist on this my dads bigger than you dad thing.

Surely we are more intelligent than your government and can talk without walking out or pointless mud slinging about the war 65 years ago or internet shops,--may be not!! I have just thanked you for GPS what else do you want thanking for.

Half the problem is disbelief that you are in such deep crap.

[Frosty]

I don't follow?

The internet was created by Sir Tim Berners-Lee in 1989-90 while at CERN.

Your wasting you time, to Troy America invented everything, he doesnt even look it up first. America is the biggest best ever in the history of the whole world and very shortly will be needing assistance from Mexico who I am told is building a fence to keep Americans out looking for work.

Well done Obama he has cured illegal immigration.

(Jay Lenno)

[IMP-ish]

Your wasting you time, to Troy America invented everything, he doesnt even look it up first. America is the biggest best ever in the history of the whole world and very shortly will be needing assistance from Mexico who I am told is building a fence to keep Americans out looking for work.

Well done Obama he has cured illegal immigration.

(Jay Lenno)

Searched... could be wikipedia is USA-biased, but it agrees with Troy on this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_inventions_(1946–1991)
1983 Internet

Not to be confused with a separate application known as the World wide web which was invented much later in the early 1990s (see article on the English inventor Tim Berners-Lee), the Internet is the global system of overall interconnected computer networks that use the standardized Internet Protocol Suite (TCP/IP) to serve billions of users worldwide. It is a network of networks that consists of millions of private and public, academic, business, and government networks of local to global scope that are linked by copper wires, fiber-optic cables, wireless connections, and other technologies. The concept of packet switching of a network was first explored by Paul Baran in the early 1960s,[246] and the mathematical formulations behind packet switching were later devised by Leonard Kleinrock.[247] On October 29, 1969, the world's first electronic computer network, the ARPANET, was established between nodes at Leonard Kleinrock's lab at UCLA and Douglas Engelbart's lab at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI).[248] Another milestone occurred in 1973 when Bob Kahn and Vinton Cerf co-invented Internet Protocol and Transmission Control Protocol while working on ARPANET at the United States Department of Defense.[12] The first TCP/IP-wide area network was operational on January 1, 1983, when the United States' National Science Foundation (NSF) constructed the university network backbone that would later become the NSFNet. This date is held as the "birth" of the Internet.

[masalai]

IMP-ish is on a reasonable course, to keep the discourse somewhat in the maratime vein...
I was studying at WAIT (now Curtin University in 1977), and the "internet" protocols were available then and regularly used in academic arenas - particularly in what I was studying "Business Communications" which was computing and applications in business...

I would borrow an 'intelligent terminal' and log in to live computers such as a DEC PDP1135, on the campus, from home via telephone line... Text only and a green screen, and about as fast as a fax in those days with a modem bigger than the computer I use now ... about the size of a ream of A4 paper... I still use UNIX like operating systems... Most activity was on hosts that ran "Bulletin Boards" similar to this website but without any graphics or colour...

[Frosty]

Searched... could be wikipedia is USA-biased, but it agrees with Troy on this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_inventions_(1946–1991)

Ok I looked it up, you invented internet and hair spray too, transistor and a jumbo jet ,--- thank you very much for that,--------and where does that get us.

Will the stock market not crash now then?

My wife is good at this stuff,shoulda done this, shoulda done that, you said this and you drank washing up liquid, bla bla bla. Pointless conversation.

Tomorrow my American friends is the begining of your down fall and I hope im wrong,---- Black monday is coming and the devil rides with him.

I predict 8% fall and another similar day tuesday, after that its no point in selling you have to stick.

I also believe that Moodys and fiche will follow in the credit down grade around Wed and away we go again.

[masalai]

Hi Frosty,
Very Courageous words lad...

What did I suggest that you consider about a year or more ago? - - - buy and take delivery of gold bullion or silver bullion from the Perth Mint.... Have you at least bought some?

The Poms had the first Jet powered passenger airlines and (along with the Frogs), the worlds first supersonic passenger jet... They also invented TV, The steam Engine, Steam Train and lots of other stuff...

[Frosty]

Ive been wrong before and il'le be wrong again . If I was smart I would'nt be in the ****.

Actually Im not in the **** really but affected in the long run? --very much so. As long as I keep far out of America and anything dollar related as I think the rest of the world will do tomorrow.

[masalai]

I fear that your courageous prophesy may have something in it if not tomorrow, then before this year is out (as Hanrahan declared in the poem) http://warrenfahey.com/bush_poetry-hard-yakka-5.htm

[Ad Hoc]

Searched... could be wikipedia is USA-biased, but...

Which is one reason why wiki is ok for a "hmm..what does this mean"..type of search. But anything deeper, is highly subjective, and treated with extreme caution. Certainly not for authorative research. If most "editors/contributors" are US based, what will the slant be??...

That posting in Wiki contracdicts the Bio on TB-L:
http://www.ibiblio.org/pioneers/lee.html

It is all about definitions....When you turn your PC on..do you say to the missus, Im on the "Internet"..or "I'm on the WorldWideWeb"..???

Hardware is no good without software to "drive" it. :o

But as Frosty so eloquantly put it....so what, will it save the economy tomorrow??....don't need wiki for that!

[Leo Lazauskas]

... That means that a candidate or a policy that survived being vetted by either party generally had a political appeal broad-based enough to be palatable to the country as a whole.


Is it realistically possible for an atheist to become President of the USA nowadays? Or would they not survive the "vetting" by both parties?

[bntii]

Will the stock market not crash now then?

Tomorrow my American friends is the begining of your down fall and I hope im wrong,---- Black monday is coming and the devil rides with him.

I predict 8% fall and another similar day tuesday, after that its no point in selling you have to stick.



If you really think this is the case- make your trade then.
Such prescience makes fortunes.

Is this really your whole gripe- the theatrics in the US are going to effect your holdings?

And Mas- back in the day your grumbling and mumblings were limited to the bath you were going to take on some property you owned.
Now you seem to blame it all on the US.

If you don't know what to do when you see this:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Qh5svI3Dd2A/THHKPwClGXI/AAAAAAAAAVI/QIG9ci_Aa1M/s1600/house+value+to+income.JPG
http://ckmurray.blogspot.com/2010/08/living-in-bubble.html

Blame yourself

[Mr Efficiency]

If you really think this is the case- make your trade then.
Such prescience makes fortunes.

This is true. I chuckle at media pundits predicting future stock market and forex movements and wonder why they don't pack in their job and become traders. They just prefer talking about it, so much less nerve-wracking than putting their money up.

[troy2000]

The thread is Americas default, We can do China and Uk next if you like.

Maybe you wont like what I have to say about Uk either.

Why do you insist on this my dads bigger than you dad thing.

Surely we are more intelligent than your government and can talk without walking out or pointless mud slinging about the war 65 years ago or internet shops,--may be not!! I have just thanked you for GPS what else do you want thanking for.

Half the problem is disbelief that you are in such deep crap.

Excuse me? I don't think I'm the one slinging mud here.

You're the one who goes on endlessly and pointlessly about what a pile of crap the US is. You're the one who highjacked a thread about Pearl Harbor, so you could rant about Americans killing women and children instead. It gets old, Frosty.

[troy2000]

Your wasting you time, to Troy America invented everything, he doesnt even look it up first. America is the biggest best ever in the history of the whole world and very shortly will be needing assistance from Mexico who I am told is building a fence to keep Americans out looking for work.

Well done Obama he has cured illegal immigration.

(Jay Lenno)

Who "invented" the internet is really a rather meaningless question. It didn't spring fully-grown and clad in armor from anyone's forehead, as Athena did from Zeus' thighbone. Instead it developed over a period of time, with input from a lot of people.

And I didn't claim it was invented by an American, anyway. What I said is that it probably wouldn't be around in its present stage of development, had it not been for the US. And I'll stand by that.

Where did this come from, Frosty? I don't believe I've ever posted anything at all about what was and wasn't invented by Americans...

[troy2000]

There are lots of pro-life groups who give their own money to help poor women support their children rather than have abortions. But since you are a Democrat that doesn't count, right? To you "helping" poor people means taking tax money away from other people at gunpoint and giving it to the poor people. Giving your own money doesn't count because Democrats are afraid of either falling behind on the "keeping up with the Joneses" contest if they are giving more than their neighbors or looking bad if they are giving less. Better income redistribution at gunpoint than charity that requires tough personal decisions.That's a rather remarkable rant, especially from a man who just finished whining that Democrats can't have a debate without demonizing their opponents. Might I suggest a "One Way" road sign as your new avatar for the forum? Pointing to the right and down, of course....As to this supposed contradiction between being against abortion and for capital punishment, it is the same as the contradiction between being against Democrat-advocated plans to "draft" all young people into a public works project between the ages of 18 and 20 but being for requiring prisoners to work. Well, am I against forced labor or for it? Quite a contradiction there.The most common argument I've heard in personal conversations with opponents of abortion is that human life is sacred: it is God's place to bestow life or take it, not man's. If that's so, then executing someone is sacrilege. If it isn't so, a whole lot of abortion opponents need a new rationalization.

Why are you trying to pin the idea of universal service on Democrats? Actually, that's a rhetorical question. I know why ... it's so you can 'demonize' Democrats, thereby doing unto them before they do unto you. The best defense is a good offense, and all that.:D

But Melvin Laird, a longtime Republican Congressman who was also Nixon's Secretary of Defense when I was in the service, argued strongly for Universal service. As a matter of fact, Rear Admiral Alan Fiske, the inventor of the rangefinder and the aerial torpedo, was giving speeches advocating universal service clear back in 1917 -- at Republican Club meetings, no less.

Like a lot of other ideas, I guess it didn't become evil until a Democrat advocated it.:p
...Understandably, some youths do not feel that military service is the best way to express their desire to give something back. The military does not need all of them, nor should the Defense Department be saddled with another unwanted draft. But every department of government could benefit from universal service, as would many other institutions. Our schools are crying out for teacher assistants; our immigrant programs need additional staff; Head Start, the Peace Corps and special education programs need helpers, as do hospitals and nursing facilities. Young people could serve one or two years in a much-needed civilian universal service program run by the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Health and Human Services, or the State Department. Such service would foster a culture of responsibility for our democracy and, as such, would surely have the side benefit of increasing military enlistments. And those volunteering for the military would be exempt from the required civilian universal service.
--Melvin Laird

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/27/AR2007052700931.html This may seem like a subtle distinction, but I have this old concept of innocent/guilty. I'm not going to go into a lot of details here, but I view this as a real and important distinction between people that effects how we should treat them. For example, we ought not to put innocent people in prison, but we ought to put guilty people in prison.

I apply this to a few other cases as well. For example, we ought not to force innocent people to pick up trash along the roads but in some cases we ought to force guilty people to pick up trash along the roads. The same thing applies to abortion: we ought not to kill innocent babies, but we ought to kill guilty serial killers.

I can understand why you think this stance is contradictory if you don't grasp the subtle difference between being innocent and being guilty.Well, there seem to be a lot of not-so-subtle things you don't grasp. One of them is that there's a wide gulf between universal service and slavery. I brought up taxes and the draft in another post to show how absurd your arguments are, not to put words in your mouth.

For example: last year my wages for 375 hours of work went directly to the federal government as income taxes. If you equate involuntary work for the government with slavery, I was a slave for about 2 1/2 months -- without even counting Social Security and disability withholding, state income taxes, etc. How do you condone that, since you don't believe in forced labor?

Now, regarding the draft... if you believe the government has a legal and moral right to conscript our children and send them off to be killed in foreign lands, it's hard to understand your objections to seeing them drafted to repair hiking trails or become hospital candy stripers instead.

Switzerland, which was held up as a paragon of democracy by someone here in this thread, requires universal service from its male citizens. Those who are conscientious objectors or otherwise unqualified for the military perform alternative public service instead. Does that make the government of Switzerland a slave owner? Or a beneficiary of forced or involuntary labor, if you'd rather be mealymouthed about it....

[troy2000]

Is it realistically possible for an atheist to become President of the USA nowadays? Or would they not survive the "vetting" by both parties?
That's an interesting question, Leo. I'm sorry I didn't see it earlier, when I was focusing in on some other posts.

Short answer? I don't think an admitted atheist would stand the chance of a snowball in Hell of being elected President next time around.

But that doesn't mean things won't change. Before John F. Kennedy fifty years ago, Catholics weren't considered Presidential material because of the old 'split loyalties' canard.

Before Reagan thirty years ago, a divorce was considered the kiss of doom for someone who wanted to become President. The funny thing about that proscription is how fast it disappeared over the horizon when Reagan ran, and how strong his support from the Bible Belt was.

Five years ago, I'd have laughed at the notion that a black man with a Muslim name could be elected President.

This year, we have two Mormons seriously contending for the Republican nomination -- which would have been unthinkable only a few years ago.

So stay tuned. It wouldn't shock me to see a Jewish President or a woman President in my lifetime. But a professed Atheist? I dunno. A whole lot of Americans like to think of themselves as religious -- even the ones who haven't stepped foot in a church since their parents stopped sending them to Sunday School.

[Leo Lazauskas]

That's an interesting question, Leo. I'm sorry I didn't see it earlier, when I was focusing in on some other posts.

Short answer? I don't think an admitted atheist would stand the chance of a snowball in Hell of being elected President next time around.

But that doesn't mean things won't change. Before John F. Kennedy fifty years ago, Catholics weren't considered Presidential material because of the old 'split loyalties' canard.

Before Reagan thirty years ago, a divorce was considered the kiss of doom for someone who wanted to become President. The funny thing about that proscription is how fast it disappeared over the horizon when Reagan ran, and how strong his support from the Bible Belt was.

Five years ago, I'd have laughed at the notion that a black man with a Muslim name could be elected President.

This year, we have two Mormons seriously contending for the Republican nomination -- which would have been unthinkable only a few years ago.

So stay tuned. It wouldn't shock me to see a Jewish President or a woman President in my lifetime. But a professed Atheist? I dunno. A whole lot of Americans like to think of themselves as religious -- even the ones who haven't stepped foot in a church since their parents stopped sending them to Sunday School.

Thanks for the considered, calm reply, Troy. I suspected the same.
I'm not suggesting atheists would be better economic managers than theists. I'm interested in how atheists are considered by fundamentalist states. When I raised the issue in an Israeli group, it opened a very sore wound because some ultra-orthodox Jews are exempt from military service. They get to continue running businesses etc while others have to put their lives on hold.

Just to keep it relevant to the discussion, the last GFC made absolutely no difference to me, or my family's life. We don't own property, shares or cars, and live extremely comfortable high-tech, but simple, lives. I have no super, no retirement plan (I hope to work until I drop), and I can exist on the smell of an oily rag.

I wonder whether Masalai and others worry too much about the possible ramifications of any further economic collapses. They seem to live like flounders - always in fear of a possible spear in the back of the neck. :)

All the best,
Leo.

[masalai]

http://www.goldmoney.com/video/sinclair-turk-interview.html is an important analysis of the situation now...

Hi Leo,
My interest in macro-economics was motivated by a need to recover some asset value lost by 'mismanagement' of my mothers nest egg to cover her funeral expenses, and thereafter the exercise became a "mental stimulation activity" to ward off the impact of my mental degeneration, as it seems to have a genetic / hereditary impact... I have lost interest in trying to warn people of the risks and dangers inherent in nearly all markets globally as the consequences of the GEC take effect...

As a newbie in matters economic, I was full of fire and the dire consequences that I perceived to be on the horizon and approaching FAST... Now I understand that the powers-that-be were desperately manipulating everything they could to slow down the consequences and feed from the trough of ill-gotten-gains and undeserved-rewards-of-theft-and-corruption....

I expect at least a 20% fall in Australian real estate (domestic housing) and your case for such appears to be on the mark... The fallout from the USA loss in credit rating may impact adversely on pension funds and state authorities who receive tranche payments every 6 months and usually invest in short term "treasury" and other "AAA rated assets" as their investment discretion is usually limited by law...

The above link to the "sinclair-turk-interview" identifies a potential trigger point - 'Gold at US$1764/ounce and thereafter will go EXPONENTIAL' - more as a mark in the decline of the US$ not the rapid rise in the value of gold... - if you can understand the difference in perspective...

Watch the markets as they open as the work day Monday follows the suns progress around the globe... It will reflect a position that was expected/anticipated, a loss of confidence, fear or panic...

[CatBuilder]

Watch the markets as they open as the work day Monday follows the suns progress around the globe... It will reflect a position that was expected/anticipated, a loss of confidence, fear or panic...

I'm predicting a light selloff Monday. Nothing too intense. It will be interesting to see what happens. Luckily, I'm investing in a boat at this time. :D

[Mr Efficiency]

Australian market down about 1%. Hardly panic selling.

[Frosty]

My cunning plan seems to be working, as I predicted an 8% fall I knew that what ever I predicted the opposite would be the case.

However Shhhhh the European markets are still 5-6 hours off yet.

Really, this is good news as if this does'nt shake it then It may be more stable that we -I think.

[Boston]

no but the asian markets were down considerably more than 1%, more like 4~5% in some cases. Mas pretty well pegged it unless of course the news came out before he posted and he keeps up as closely as I do.

In any case I suspect the bailout will only end up going down in history as one of the biggest financial blunders ever. As usual the US tax payer will be the one to end up paying for the errors of the corporate oligarchy.

I just wonder if in any of all this fiat currency manufactured crisis anyone is paying attention to how fast the environment is deteriorating these days, which is far more a tangible than the financial crisis.

[masalai]

I do not have live access to the stock exchange as that measures "buyer confidence in shares/businesses" - I like the big picture, and am old fashioned, in that I consider shares or equity in a company as a long term hold type of investment, not 'morally good' to "day-trade"... (anyway I have none.) ???

Besides, all my money is in my boat (incomplete as it is)... TV news may have some figures but I am not really interested, as I expected Australia to show another 5% down today... - What will be the response during the NY sessions ? over the next week .......... That is the BIG question...

Will gold go above US$1764? - - and will that precipitate a US$ collapse?

Watch out for stormy weather and be ready to hove-too for a while... I would liken the coming event to a Tsunami, rather than a severe storm... Head for deep waters to minimise the adverse consequences of this "pressure-wave"...

[Boston]

the US dollar won't collapse, but you did peg a loss in the market pretty well, at least in the eastern markets. The 1% drop elsewhere I wouldn't call pegging the market motion. I'm kinda really looking forward to the day tomorrow. Should kinda set a pace for what the general reaction in the markets might be. Granted early knee jerk reactions combined with amateur hour won't mean much, but end of the day numbers should be interesting.

[Mr Efficiency]

Aussie market starting to head south, down about 1.4%.

[Frosty]

As previously pointed out to me many times,-- like I need reminding Europe is also in a mess but In my opinion better managed and seemingly in credit rating officials eyes too.

However this being the American default thread one at a time please.

I have to comment however on Americas squealing like pig at its down grade in credit rating. Once America puts behind it the roaring 50's and sees itself for what it really is, it may just do something.

Ive heard nothing about any cuts in spending now that the ceiling has been increased, Oh so its Ok now is it?--- and on we go further down the toilet as the politicians pile onto the golf course this summer and camp David get fresh paint for Obamas visit.

What if Obama was Al-Qa'ida and his intention was to totally bring down the US. If you squint at it a bit it could be a credible conspiracy.

Ok --as you can see Im clutching at straws trying to understand the complacency of all this un believable mis management.

[Mr Efficiency]

The rot only set in from the 90's on, borrowing from OS to fund deficits, unproductive consumerism or speculative asset bubbles was always gonna end in tears, just a matter of paying it back now plus interest. Simple arithmetic really.

[Frosty]

I beg to differ, the damage became obvious in the 90 but the mind set of living in constant debt being the American way was what done you in!!

Debt does not seem serious to USA such as your comment above,--just a matter of paying back now. Its 14 trillion!! or 14 thousand billion. At 3 % thats 420 billion per year. You don't earn that much in a year you spend 1.3 trillion more than you earn already AARRGGGHHH.

Get Obama to ring Suzie Orman show.



Well ok get paying,-- it is 50,000 dollars for every man woman and child.

EDIT Oh sorry I was thinking you were a Septic.

[Mr Efficiency]

I'm more concerned about the level of private debt than that govt. deficit, if there is a massive nett outflow of repatriated principal and interest, it is money that just disappears out of the American economy and keeps the brakes on domestic economic activity, till it is all paid down. In my lifetime, allowing massive accumulation of private debt just to inflate housing prices is the worst government mis-management I've seen. The problem emerged in the 90's after the collapse of the Japanese bubble economy, the Japanese became mad savers, and those savings were lent to other countries for unproductive purposes. It was open slather.

[masalai]

Sorry Mr Efficiency the rot started Long looooong ago, but that is history and definitely not my forte... Nor am I interested in analysing every bit of minutiae in who did what when and why etc...
Have you had a good look at this ... http://www.usdebtclock.org/ in particular the US$600 trillion PLUS amount reflecting toxic debt in the form of CDS used to raise money...

How about what MUST be done to recover as expeditiously as possible with a MINIMUM of additional ECONOMIC pain... The US Constitution has most of the answers...

Aside from that think about this - - - -
- The too big to fail MUST be let to fail ASAP ... The thieves and charlatans must be punished...
- all loans and mortgages MUST be always paid in full (none of this handing back the keys of the house for a new start with no debts from that bad decision)...
- assemble all the resources within the borders of USA and sort out the domestic issues... - - - "terrorism" from outside USA is NOT one of the issues that need to be sorted just yet
- repair all infrastructure... roads, railways, refineries, ports...
- water supplies for drinking, as separate from re-used water for flushing sewerage, industrial operations etc.
- electricity grid fixed...
- transport systems via the rail network...
- fibre-optic communications...
- food production that delivers fresh and wholesome food that is ripe and ready for domestic cooking/use...
- gray and black water waste is processed for re-use, and the by-products are recycled...
- sustainable energy generation which does not rely on the use of agricultural land...
- encourage 'mom & pop' (family) business...

Things along this vein will set USA up for a prosperous long term future...

or - - - - - - follow what is happening in GB / Europe and bleat very loudly... http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/total-revolt/2011/08/08/

[Mr Efficiency]

Australian market down over 2% now. If you're in superannuation funds heavily exposed to stocks you have the joy of seeing your nest egg shrink while paying fund fees at the same time.

[masalai]

I am with Leo L on that... :D ...

[Mr Efficiency]

The interesting career of Bernie Madoff illustrates that regulation and oversight was virtually non-existent, when the foxes take charge of the fowl-yard, you ain't gonna be collecting any eggs.

[Frosty]

Bersculini( spelling) has announced that he will clear his defacit by 2013. Hes the Italian prime minister by the way.

HE--is changing laws to liberalize the labour market!!! and increase taxes and in his words anything not necessary is the devil. Thats what I call doing something.

Can America take advice,--not on your nelly they will. Interesting that Italy is doing what the republicans would be 100% against raise tax and liberalize labour.

Liberalize the labour market will I assume cancel all minimum wages, low earning taxes, necessary government insurance and compulsory benefits etc etc what ever --just get the people in jobs -- thats done by making it easy to employ. Those who have employed and I mean paid for labour out of their own pocket know what I mean. Its the baggage that comes with it, and the inability to fire him if he or she is usless.

The Italian bond market is the 3rd largest in the world (yes it surprised me too).

Rock on Bersculini.

I said 8% fall today for USA ,----Im not retracting that, HK is now 4%

[Mr Efficiency]

I don't know whether you can bet online in Thailand, Frosty, but I'd suggest a one-day fall of 8% would be long odds with betting agencies that put up markets about share index movements.

[Frosty]

America reminds me of King Canute, he placed his throne on the pebbly beaches of south England, placed his crown on his head and sat and stared at the tide insisting the tide stop and return to the sea.

He sat there not listening to sound advice because he was after all the king and no one could tell him anything he was in any case far more intelligent than anyone else.
So there he sat with the tide round his waist slowly but surely increasing in height whilst commanding and waiving his sword at the tide.

Yeah --he drowned.

[rwatson]

America reminds me of King Canute, he placed his throne on the pebbly beaches of south England, ..... he was in any case far more intelligent than anyone else.
So there he sat with the tide round his waist slowly but surely increasing in height whilst commanding and waiving his sword at the tide.

Yeah --he drowned.

No, he didnt

You got the story all wrong - check out

http://inspirationalstories.com/0/91.html

[Leo Lazauskas]

I just wonder if in any of all this fiat currency manufactured crisis anyone is paying attention to how fast the environment is deteriorating these days, which is far more a tangible than the financial crisis.

I think that a far scarier scenario is a "Year Without Summer" which last happened in about 1816. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

Given that the food supply chain is very fragile in many parts of the world, it would have more serious consequences than man-made climate perturbations or the current financial shenanigans.

[Boston]

its virtually inevitable that soon enough the various trophic cascade events combine and reaches a sufficient level that it permanently effects food production, at which point you have a more or less continuous "year without summer" event. Long story short the financial crisis is far from our greatest concern, its just that its what the mass media is willing to report on. The oceans are well into the collapse, extinctions rates are ten times what they were in any previous mass extinction event, the atmospheric chemistry is changing faster than ever before and yet all we get from the corporate news entities is, fiat currency BS. Sure its going to effect world markets but its nothing compared to the environmental crisis that is basically being ignored.

The difference between artificially manipulated financial markets and a disrupted environmental process will be abundantly clear soon as enough species are lost and the oceans stop producing x amount of oxygen. The real crime isn't the politicians being sold out to the corporate oligarchy, but the failure of nearly every element of gubment or science to recognize the imediate need of change lest the basic biological action of our ecosystem break down to the point where it basically fails to function any longer. At which point its simply to late to make any effective change.

Point being that we are once again simply not focussing on the real issue.

speaking of real issues I'm listening to a lot of gunfire in the neighborhood. Not sure whats up but a lot of sirens and what sounds like automatic fire going on. My bet is the news won't even cover it in the morning. Oh well eh. Something else I can't do **** about.

[Frosty]

No, he didnt

You got the story all wrong - check out

http://inspirationalstories.com/0/91.html

Do you google everything I say.

[masalai]

I guess he was King Kanute's biographer ?

You do NOT have to believe everything or even anything on the net... Someone typed or scanned it in but was it the authentic version or the "edited version"?

[Landlubber]

Frosty, What we need in Australia, is a benevolent dictator, someone like Dick Smith, a man that has made money by working hard and saving wisely, he would be a great leader, but unfortunately I would reckon he is too smart to put up his hand......

[IMP-ish]

Politics and finance are both wildly perverse. People love to focus on this or that politician or party as their savior or demon. If all that attention and air time went to working on the long term problems instead we might get somewhere. 15 minutes of fame is up until the next election whenever the next 'big crisis' act comes along. Everyone is glued to the arrow up or down today. Maybe this is the twitter generation's future micro trading trends totally unconcerned what they're actually investing in. Someone said if the economy only grows by 2% a year it's a failure. How often do you see people talking about how they can make everyone's life 2% better each and every year.

[Leo Lazauskas]

Frosty, What we need in Australia, is a benevolent dictator, someone like Dick Smith, a man that has made money by working hard and saving wisely, he would be a great leader, but unfortunately I would reckon he is too smart to put up his hand......

One person "rule" is a completely ridiculous concept. No one person can comprehend the intricacies of an entire country and the needs of groups in different regions.

And exactly what is so noble about "working hard"? Why is working casually and enjoying the extra leisure time not a valid criterion for being a good economic manager?

I think some people here have drunk the Kool-Aid from the Protestant Work Ethic fountain! :P

[IMP-ish]

Yea, each election people act as if a new president alone is going to make all the difference and change everything. It's ridiculous how much time and attention is focused on campaigns with their vague buzz word promises instead of the real issues that go back a long ways. Heck, if I had the answers I'd have a bigger boat :D But it's frustrating the amount of whining politicians do about the superficial while you know the real issue is buried under the surface.

And exactly what is so noble about "working hard"? Why is working casually and enjoying the extra leisure time not a valid criterion for being a good economic manager?
I say there is a perversion of the market when investors make their money through computerized micro trading and trends and fluctuations devoid of any connection to the actual "work". It's like a futurist movie. What's real?

Debt does not seem serious to USA such as your comment above,--just a matter of paying back now. Its 14 trillion!! or 14 thousand billion. At 3 % thats 420 billion per year. You don't earn that much in a year you spend 1.3 trillion more than you earn already AARRGGGHHH.
That's a real eye opener that each one of us now owes a full year of work to ... something or someone...
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[Boston]

actually IMP trading is basic investing at its finest. If no one invested the vast majority of these companies simply wouldn't exist. Granted it wouldn't bother me much to go back to the way biz was run say 200 years ago but if you look at the corruption in the first of the multinationals say the Hudson Bay company or the Dutch East India company its pretty obvious that although things today are fraught with bribery and corruption its nothing like as bad as it used to be.

Trading is as viable a method of work as any of the more labor oriented jobs. Thing is you run a much higher risk and so the potential benefit had to also be higher. I think people confuse banking and trading. I'll give you that there is a lot of corruption at the top but for the vast majority of traders its a hard won fight.

Personally I prefer working but in my off time between jobs trading is a great way to pass the time.

[Ad Hoc]

I think some people here have drunk the Kool-Aid from the Protestant Work Ethic fountain! :P

Amen to that.

I work to live, not live to work! :p

[sailingdaniel]

Sorry for cutting in to this wonderful thread..

Ad Hoc , i tried to send u a mail a while ago, dont know if u got it.. I saw u are in the phillipines and i have a frend there who is interested in building a CAT. email me if that something that u would be interested in..

I dont have much to say about politics but its always interesting to read what u all say..

Ill add a link of my favorite president: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnyrCVwGyK4&playnext=1&list=PL0FF7FECB5CFD1260

That has nothing to do whit what u are talking about sens u are in to politic it might be fun to watch..

Sorry to bother , keep on posting and ill wacth from the "side" .

Cheers

[troy2000]

I guess he was King Kanute's biographer ?

You do NOT have to believe everything or even anything on the net... Someone typed or scanned it in but was it the authentic version or the "edited version"?"Henry of Huntingdon, the 12th-century chronicler, tells how Cnut set his throne by the sea shore and commanded the tide to halt and not wet his feet and robes. Yet "continuing to rise as usual [the tide] dashed over his feet and legs without respect to his royal person. Then the king leapt backwards, saying: "Let all men know how empty and worthless is the power of kings, for there is none worthy of the name, but He whom heaven, earth, and sea obey by eternal laws." He then hung his gold crown on a crucifix, and never wore it again "to the honour of God the almighty King". This incident is usually misrepresented by popular commentators and politicians as an example of Cnut's arrogance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cnut_the_Great

You also don't have to automatically disbelieve something, just because it's on the internet.

The story of Canute trying to command the tides is almost a thousand years old. I first read it myself as a child over fifty years ago, in one of my father's antique books -- long before there was an internet or a Wikipedia. That book, published in the 1800's, also explained Canute's action as a demonstration for his kiss-ass court followers, to put an end to their flattery about what a great and all-powerful king he was.

[masalai]

Hi Landlubber,
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Landlubber again." - I agree with your postulation relating to Dick Smith...
Hi Leo,
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Leo Lazauskas again." Except for the fact of human-limitations and capabilities as pointed out by Leo...
I think some people here have drunk the Kool-Aid from the Protestant Work Ethic fountain!
and imbibed the "postulation of Peters Principle", to the extent so often found in bureaucracies in Australia, where people tend to rise to the LEVEL ABOVE their competencies, and thereafter proceed to 'white-ant' and 'stab others in the back' to guard and shore up their position/status... This activity effectively inhibits the delivery of any productive work... The Queensland Government and the Australian Government bureaucracies would make an excellent case study for a 'doctoral research thesis' by someone who is VERY COURAGEOUS......

[masalai]

Thank you Troy for the version in its fullness ....... but ....... "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to troy2000 again."

[Landlubber]

Leo, seems that my message was lost on you mate, as I only work myself to get money when needed again, what I meant to say, but obviously not enough words were written to do so, was that we need someone that understands economies, has a heart for people above all rest, cares about those that are not as fortunate as others etc etc etc.

Leo, no matter what you say, you still use money basically every day to live the lives we do, I hardly use any...about $2k in the last three months, so I do live without working every day, being a boatbuilder, we can please ourselves when we do and do not work, I would have only done one week in the last four, spend the rest of my time helping boatie mates and restoring BMW motorcycles...keeps me out of sight of the pollies and happy every day.

[Boston]

Mas, just got home and checked the charts, looks like you nailed it. Nice prediction, I think everyone knew it was going to be an off day but also a lot expected a rally towards the end. Finished 5~6% down across the board and it aint over till the fat lady sings.

[masalai]

Hi Boston,
Bloody luck of the draw and carefully wording - - ambiguously... ?

Those that pontificate on TV (mass hysteria) are declaring all sorts of rubbish
- I like Obummer's on TV the best... :o :P :D
- Some were suggesting in the range 'Oh Ship! :o', 'further volatility', 'Sorted and settled', 'a beat-up by the disgruntled', etc, etc....

Gold at US$1721.86 as I type is close to the "sinclair-turk-interview" identified potential trigger point - 'Gold at US$1764/ounce and thereafter will go EXPONENTIAL' - One can sit with a beer and watch what happens on Wednesday after Tuesdays activity in NY.... http://www.goldmoney.com/video/sinclair-turk-interview.html and the three other youtube videos if you scroll down on that page...

The ongoing civil unrest in England is VERY WORRYING... In Australia I get the feeling that violence is on the increase... The disease of societal collapse is spreading...

[masalai]

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25940 is a gloomy prospect that is looming large...

Time for me to make haste and get my boat organised with new propellers and good fuel supply and a 'R-O-watermaker', as an urgent project...

http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/you-ll-be-buying-gold-2000oz-and-higher Jeff Clark of Casey Research wrote:
- - I was recently asked in an interview if I thought gold was going to $5,000 an ounce. "No," I said bluntly. "I think it's going higher."

- - "You're that optimistic?"

- - "No," I replied. "I'm that pessimistic."



Attached is a graph of what once was.... Global GDP per Capita in 1980... Those were the days :o

[Poida]

Landlubber, Dick Smith would make a typical politician. Only to serve his own benefit.

I've seen him on TV proudly sprouting we should all buy Australian made goods, why? Because he has a business promoting and marketing Australian made goods. Before that he owned Dick Smith Electronics, where I would estimate that 99.9% of the goods he was selling came from Taiwan.

I didn't hear him sprouting about buying Australian made goods then.

What we need is someone to clean the scum out of the country and send it back from where it came or lock it up, before we end up having the England riots and us having to pay for wasters who do nothing.

[CatBuilder]

Time to buy soon! I bought in right after the 2008 collapse and did pretty well. I wouldn't be building a boat right now if I hadn't.

Just when everybody thinks the world will end... that's when you buy. :)

[hoytedow]

Buy buy buy!

[Mr Efficiency]

At the moment people seem to think that is a recipe to say bye, bye, bye to your money, but being a contrarian seems not have been a bad strategy over time. A wise, very rich man once said, if you see a bandwagon, don't get on it, it's too late.

[masalai]

Hi Hoyt,
Not Yet, unless it is taking delivery of gold, silver bullion and other readily transportable similar asset classes...
- Not diamonds as they can now be manufactured quite cheaply... and
- Not Artworks as they can be destroyed too easily and are difficult to carry / transport...

It is now 11am in Queensland and the discussion is nothing but the further fall on the Australian Stock exchange...

Gold is at US$1726.81 and fast approaching the "magic trigger" of US$1764.00 for an exponential lift-off...

[Frosty]

Mas did'nt you post recently a link to news of gold being over sold the point of 20 people owning the same ounce. Thats a safe investment?

Any one watching the news Aus is falling like a brick,--what did I say?

Taiwan has intervened and closed down the markets computer to stop panic pre set selling and brokers have been told to re advise customers to stick.

Obama say USA should be quadruple A,-- should he not be working instead of spouting ****.

If USA is triple A then every country is triple A.

[masalai]

Hi frosty - not "oversold" in the trading jargon sense...

The thieving bastards in LBMA and other bullion trading houses are up to their usual tricks by selling the same bar of gold more than 20 times... When the innocent/stupid/dumb/bunney who thought he/she/it had bought some bullion go to take delivery, the dumb-ass will be told "READ YOUR CONTRACT", and something like "Tough tittties, there ain't no gold bars left ... all you got is some fiat money - Zimbabwe trillion dollar bills do? We have a spare truck load ready for collection..."

I know where you can still buy and take delivery of bars of 99.99% pure gold or silver or platinum - are you interested?

[Frosty]

How much, I gotta come and get it remember.

Cant do it mass --you know when some one has the Midas touch or green fingers --well what ever is the opposite, I have it.

Playing on a brokers computer at virtual stock market I lost 20,000 pounds in 2 weeks,---twice, and i honestly was playing blue chip stuff or things I had heard of.

Sorry too dumb to buy. If I bought gold the whole gold market would tumble around the world in days --is that what you want.

[masalai]

The idea is not to trade but when the global fiat currencies are no longer trusted, platinum & gold, is the big notes and silver is the 'pocket money', to buy that tank full of fuel... Coconut oil will probably have to do... Lucky you have a pair of toyota engines and live in the tropics where the water temperature is near 30 degrees Celsius...

[sabahcat]

A wise, very rich man once said, if you see a bandwagon, don't get on it, it's too late.
Hi Hoyt,
Not Yet, unless it is taking delivery of gold, silver bullion and other readily transportable similar asset classes...

Gold is at US$1726.81 and fast approaching the "magic trigger" of US$1764.00 for an exponential lift-off...

Did someone mention bandwagon and bubble?

It seems the big money called a bubble and got out
Gold is now "the ultimate bubble", billionaire investor George Soros has declared, sparking fears that prices for the precious metal may soon suffer a tumble. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/davos/7085504/Davos-2010-George-Soros-warns-gold-is-now-the-ultimate-bubble.html)

George Soros, the hedge fund investor who called gold "the ultimate bubble", has SOLD almost his entire holding of the precious metal, leading to fears that the price is about to fall. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/gold/8524535/George-Soros-sells-his-gold.html)

[Mr Efficiency]

Yeah, I was going to buy into gold when it was around 700-800 dollars, but was vetoed by the lady of the house. Sure ain't coming in now !

[Leo Lazauskas]

Leo, seems that my message was lost on you mate, as I only work myself to get money when needed again, what I meant to say, but obviously not enough words were written to do so, was that we need someone that understands economies, has a heart for people above all rest, cares about those that are not as fortunate as others etc etc etc.

Leo, no matter what you say, you still use money basically every day to live the lives we do, I hardly use any...about $2k in the last three months, so I do live without working every day, being a boatbuilder, we can please ourselves when we do and do not work, I would have only done one week in the last four, spend the rest of my time helping boatie mates and restoring BMW motorcycles...keeps me out of sight of the pollies and happy every day.

And I am a complete hypocrite! I work 12-16 hours per day, 7 days a week.
Luckily, everything I do is like a computer game and I work from my lounge room surrounded by my family while watching videos and talking crap all day.

All the best,
Leo.

[hoytedow]

Talking crap all day is what brings us all together on this thread.

[bntii]

I suppose that I don't get the attraction to gold...
Gold bugs get in during downturns in the belief that poor market conditions will further deteriorate.
They are betting on collapse as our Mas so frequently postulates and sound like short sellers though are 'selling short' the prospects of a market which has already corrected down...

The whole angle seems to be one based on fear and is counter to logic when trying to determine the best return on a investment.

But go ahead you all- buy gold now while it is high, and disdain securities (though they can be had at bargain prices..)

The time to get in is NOW :)...

http://www.kitco.com/LFgif/au75-pres.gif


The markets were literally overflowing with stocks that yielded far higher returns than the couple of hundred percent offered by a gold buy during this downturn BTW. With any luck enough investors will "flee to gold" that another buying opportunity will develop for stocks.

[Boston]

seems reasonable that when something is at an all time high it probably a good time to get out.

not sure about gold going viral so to speak but if its the safe haven people want it to be then prices will be up for as long as thats the prevailing attitude, then what?

[CatBuilder]

Exactly!

(Notice society and the markets did not crumble. Just a moderate sell off in a market that had been due for a correction for a while now, having bounced way back from 2008 lows without the economy to support the speculation.)

I suppose that I don't get the attraction to gold...
Gold bugs get in during downturns in the belief that poor market conditions will further deteriorate.
They are betting on collapse as our Mas so frequently postulates and sound like short sellers though are 'selling short' the prospects of a market which has already corrected down...

The whole angle seems to be one based on fear and is counter to logic when trying to determine the best return on a investment.

But go ahead you all- buy gold now while it is high, and disdain securities (though they can be had at bargain prices..)

The time to get in is NOW :)...

http://www.kitco.com/LFgif/au75-pres.gif


The markets were literally overflowing with stocks that yielded far higher returns than the couple of hundred percent offered by a gold buy during this downturn BTW. With any luck enough investors will "flee to gold" that another buying opportunity will develop for stocks.

[CatBuilder]

Now what happened to this thread? ha ha ha :)

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wall-Street-roars-back-in-rb-2330604806.html?x=0

Yesterday was indeed a great day to buy. I often wish I had a large capital fund for placing these bets, so I could make better profits than using my meager savings.

4% in a day is a pretty good return.

We aren't out of the woods yet at all though in the capital markets. It's going to be a bit choppy with lots of ups and downs for quite some time.

[Dave Gudeman]

That's a rather remarkable rant, especially from a man who just finished whining that Democrats can't have a debate without demonizing their opponents.I hate it when you're right, Troy, but you are right on this one. I apologize. Luckily it doesn't happen very often :).

The most common argument I've heard in personal conversations with opponents of abortion is that human life is sacred: it is God's place to bestow life or take it, not man's. If that's so, then executing someone is sacrilege. If it isn't so, a whole lot of abortion opponents need a new rationalization.
I've never heard an abortion opponent use language like that. I've heard similar things from Catholic opponents of capital punishment or non-Christians trying to appeal to Christians on capital punishment, but not from anyone who was against abortion but for capital punishment. I think you are confusing your anti-capital-punishment friends with your anti-abortion friends. Many anti-abortion people believe that life is sacred, but it does not follow that only God can bestow life or take it. The Christian view is that God gives human beings responsibility for sacred things, not that sacred things are reserved to God. Marriage is a sacred thing. So is the gift of children. Within this belief system, pre-meditated murder is a violation of sacred duty so awful as to require the forfeiture of the murderer's life, and it is the sacred duty of kings or governors to enforce that rule with all due respect to the seriousness of the obligation. There is nothing inconsistent in this.

Why are you trying to pin the idea of universal service on Democrats? ... But Melvin Laird, ... Rear Admiral Alan Fiske.
Never heard of either one of them. But I did hear it from John Kerry and various other Democrat candidates when John Kerry was running. That's why I "tried to pin it on Democrats", because when a Democrat candidate for president makes something a part of his platform, you tend to associate that thing with Democrats.

Like a lot of other ideas, I guess it didn't become evil until a Democrat advocated it.:pI didn't say it was evil. But I do note that by defending this idea you kind of damage your argument that it is a Republican plan, given the way that you despise Republicans.

Well, there seem to be a lot of not-so-subtle things you don't grasp. One of them is that there's a wide gulf between universal service and slavery.

I didn't use the word "slavery", I used the phrase "forced labor" which was meant to be an accurate, value-neutral description.

I brought up taxes and the draft in another post to show how absurd your arguments are, not to put words in your mouth.

For example: last year my wages for 375 hours of work went directly to the federal government as income taxes. If you equate involuntary work for the government with slavery, I was a slave for about 2 1/2 months -- without even counting Social Security and disability withholding, state income taxes, etc. How do you condone that, since you don't believe in forced labor?I don't condone it. It is a horrible violation of your ownership of your own labor that this money was taken from you. But it's not slavery, it's extortion. The difference is that a slave is forced to work, while you could have simply not worked and had the government to support you. But since you did work, they extorted the fruits of your labor to pass on to their political supporters and cronies. This doesn't mean that I'm against taxes entirely, but that the spenders of tax money have a moral obligation to use that money only on the necessary functions of government. The necessary functions of government account for less than 30% of total federal spending these days. The bulk of what the Feds spend are for graft and political payoffs for votes.

Now, regarding the draft... if you believe the government has a legal and moral right to conscript our children and send them off to be killed in foreign lands, it's hard to understand your objections to seeing them drafted to repair hiking trails or become hospital candy stripers instead.I don't think the government has a legal and moral right to conscript our children and send them off to be killed in foreign lands. I do believe that very able-bodied man has an obligation to defend his country from invaders and that every resident has an obligation to help fund that defense, and that government has an obligation to use the draft and taxes to enforce those obligations. This does not mean that every time there is a draft or a war the the government is acting properly --merely that the government has to have those powers in order to do its job. The government can and has abused those powers just as it can and has abused its powers of taxation for other purposes.

Switzerland, which was held up as a paragon of democracy by someone here in this thread, requires universal service from its male citizens. Those who are conscientious objectors or otherwise unqualified for the military perform alternative public service instead. Does that make the government of Switzerland a slave owner? Or a beneficiary of forced or involuntary labor, if you'd rather be mealymouthed about it....First, it is not "mealymouthed" to make a distinction between forced labor and slavery. Prisoners are subject to forced labor, but that is not the same as slavery. If a fire chief grabs a bunch of bystanders and forces them to help out in a bucket brigade, that would be forced labor but not slavery. The word "forced labor" is just an accurate description, it does not contain the idea that the forcing is illegitimate or that the labor is cruel the way that the word "slavery" does.

Second, I cannot be held responsible for what other people in this thread hold up as paragons of democracy.

Third, alternative service of the sort you describe is certainly forced labor but is not slavery, and if the enforced service itself is justified, then the issue isn't whether it is OK to force people who won't fight to do other things, but whether it is OK to allow people who won't fight to do other things rather than be thrown in the stockade. I don't have a problem with giving them that choice.

None of this means that I am justifying Switzerland's universal service. I haven't given an opinion on it one way or the other.

[Frosty]

Dave QUOTE, I don't think the government has a legal and moral right to conscript our children and send them off to be killed in foreign lands.QUOTE

Would it not be better if a war was avoided in the first place like sensible human beings. I know you think God loves America but he loves Afganistan too ,--one of you is wrong.

But forget all that bull crap, wars are stupid along with human being that give reason to start it or finish it.

The dumbest people are the ones that say God bless....

When the president says God bless America he might as well say liar liar pants on fire.

So the stock market seems stable again --well kinda,-- my cunning plan worked.

[masalai]

Well all is presently rosy with all the market indices rising...
- But . . . What of the fundamentals . . . Who are the businesses going to sell their products to?
- Europe is looking like the "new basket case" and UK is having an "arabic style revolt"...
- China is purportedly hanging midstream on a non-too-secure-rope...
- Australia has an overvalued housing market and stalled new home building...

Now with all that gloom think of the USA unemployment levels as expressed in terms PRE CLINTON (before all the number-fudging really got out of hand),

- According to http://www.shadowstats.com/ it is around 22.5% not the bull-shine 9% oft quoted by denialist-optimists, mass-media (hysteria) and other over-paid talking-heads that long ago sold their honesty for a counterfeit dollar...

- Also, according to http://www.usdebtclock.org/ the situation is NOT improving anywhere I can find, that is,,,
- Except from the markets in stock, shares and empty-paper-promises where lies, fraud, deception and graft are dispensed to the stupid, in stunning displays of slight-of-hand by the shysters...
When they have finished, having bought on the low and are now selling on an upward "correction", what has to happen will inevitably continue, - to decline, - as has been planned...

This sea-saw behaviour will continue, as,,, when there is far too much bad debt floating around (more than 600 trillion in one item relating to "money creation in the USA" that has to be accounted and effectively disposed,,, as well as the ACKNOWLEDGED debt AND the UNFUNDED liabilities, before any thought of economic recovery can be considered or may become effective...

Special, for Frosty... http://www.gata.org/node/10237
"Think gold is high? Wait till dollar bonds are dumped, Davies says"

[Frosty]

Obama is reported to be refusing responsibility saying he inherited this problem and Europe is dragging down USA.

The only thing he forgot to say was --so there!!

[masalai]

http://w3.newsmax.com/a/aftershockb/video.cfm?s=al&promo_code=CBAD-1 "'Scared the Hell Out of Me. It Was a Great Wake-Up Call (Although I Wasn't Really Asleep)'
— Russell H., from Wichita, Kansas"

[Mr Efficiency]

Private debt is way over 250% of GDP in the U.S., that is more important than the gummint debt so far as economic recovery is concerned. But there's no political points in it, that just grew like topsy with nary a whimper from any side of politics.

[masalai]

I can only see a recovery after total collapse as there is just too much toxic stuff hidden and ready to pounce on the unsuspecting... This feeling of bad things coming, applies to the WHOLE WORLD... sorry to say...

As Gerald Cilente (trends research Inc.), said, "" - when the people realise they have nothing left to loose, they will "loose-it" and times will become very dangerous with the anger at realisation that they have been "HAD" by those that they thought they could trust... ""

[IMP-ish]

Most people who are complaining the loudest still have a pretty easy comfortable life compared to their parents or grandparents.

[Mr Efficiency]

People used to say, "I bought it on the never-never", thinking presumably the accumulation of debt will only become a problem in the future, but the future kinda crept up.

[Frosty]

All this stuff going on and Impish --still- thinks its OK.

I love optimism, its a wonderful trait but in the face of--well this mess all I can do is pat you on the back and say there there.

Who was was it said ' when all around you is panic while you stay calm is probably because you dont understand the situation" --

[masalai]

Even in Australia some are predicting volatility, most of these folk are from USA and seem to get it correct more often than most suspect else they would be a MANDATORY read...
http://www.moneymorning.com.au/ click on the essay title to go to that page...

[troy2000]

I hate it when you're right, Troy, but you are right on this one. I apologize. Luckily it doesn't happen very often :).

I've never heard an abortion opponent use language like that. I've heard similar things from Catholic opponents of capital punishment or non-Christians trying to appeal to Christians on capital punishment, but not from anyone who was against abortion but for capital punishment. I think you are confusing your anti-capital-punishment friends with your anti-abortion friends. Many anti-abortion people believe that life is sacred, but it does not follow that only God can bestow life or take it. The Christian view is that God gives human beings responsibility for sacred things, not that sacred things are reserved to God. Marriage is a sacred thing. So is the gift of children. Within this belief system, pre-meditated murder is a violation of sacred duty so awful as to require the forfeiture of the murderer's life, and it is the sacred duty of kings or governors to enforce that rule with all due respect to the seriousness of the obligation. There is nothing inconsistent in this.Regardless of what you may have heard or may believe yourself, I repeat: it's the argument I've personally heard most often in casual conversation. And you can take my word for it that I'm not so addled I confuse abortion opponents with capital punishment opponents -- although I agree the two groups use remarkably similar arguments sometimes.

As a side bar: if you want a fascinating exercise, try tracking the tactics and strategies of anti-abortion activists, and comparing them to those of anti-gun activists. They've both been reading from the same playbook for years, when it comes to manipulating people's emotions while bypassing their brains.

For example, they've both realized that they have to get what they want in small bites. They do so by focusing in on on one thing at a time, and demonizing it. The first step is to rename whatever you're focusing on, so it becomes something horrific in the eyes of the public. For example, intact dilation and extraction became 'partial birth abortion.'

And Teflon-coated bullets, developed for police agencies to reduce barrel wear from steel-core or brass bullets designed for penetration of hard targets like cars, became 'cop killer bullets' -- even although they weren't available to the public, and there was no record of a policeman ever having been killed by a handgun bullet going through his vest.

And don't get me started on 'assault weapons'....

Getting back to the subject, it might also shock you to find that I don't have any anti-capital punishment friends as such -- although I have a couple who think it's unfairly administered, and others who think it's no longer worth the trouble and expense.

You really need to stop thinking in stereotypes, and stuffing people into little boxes fabricated from labels and preconceived notions....Never heard of either one of them.Then you should bone up on both your political and naval history. You can't understand the end of the Vietnam War without understanding Melvin Laird, and Admiral Fiske played a very important part in developing modern naval warfare -- especially in the air. But I did hear it from John Kerry and various other Democrat candidates when John Kerry was running. That's why I "tried to pin it on Democrats", because when a Democrat candidate for president makes something a part of his platform, you tend to associate that thing with Democrats.That's very strange. I was around for John Kerry's campaign too, and the only universal service I ever heard him mention was universal internet service -- you know, like universal electrical service or telephone service? He was really big on that.

He did suggest some mandatory hours of community service for high school students, which is no more shocking than mandatory gym class; it's part of preparing students for real life. The state of Maryland had such a program already at the time, and so did numerous school districts across the country.

Kerry also proposed a voluntary program of service for young folks after high school:

Four Years of College Tuition for Two Years of Service: As President, John Kerry will call on young people to help strengthen America’s security and address unmet community needs. In return, Kerry believes that we should offer young Americans and their family’s peace of mind that they will be able to afford a college education. Under Kerry’s proposal America will pick up the tab for college tuition for every young person who serves the nation. Young people who serve for two years will receive the equivalent of four years of college tuition, or two years of college tuition in exchange for one year of service. The amount of the award will be based on the average tuition cost of attending a four-year public college.

Giving Young People Tools to Succeed in the 21st Century: Kerry’s plan will also allow national service members to take classes to make sure they have the skills they need to succeed in college. If service members decide not to go to college, their award can be used for job training, to help start a business, or to make a down payment on the purchase of a home. Anyone who elects to serve after they have already completed college can use their award for loan repayment.

http://www.mcgath.com/kerryslavery.html

I didn't say it was evil. But I do note that by defending this idea you kind of damage your argument that it is a Republican plan, given the way that you despise Republicans.And I didn't say it was a Republican plan. I simply pointed out that it's ridiculous to label it a Democratic plan because some Democrats advocated it, when some Republicans have also been advocating it -- for several generations.

Nor do I despise Republicans, as such. I was a Republican my whole life, right up until they started trying to stuff a flag-burning amendment into the Constitution -- at which time I realized it was no longer the party I had grown up in.

What I do despise is the unholy alliance which has been forged in the Republican Party between fundamentalist Christians, big business and the wealthy, during the last twenty years. Somehow, I doubt Jesus would suggest cutting Social Security and Medicare while extending Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, in the name of 'no new taxes on the American people.'

Funny thing. None of the Republicans suggested keeping Obama's tax credits for the middle and lower classes, while proclaiming 'no new taxes for the American people.

As regards slavery vs. forced labor, you're trying to split semantic hairs.

slave la·bor
noun
Labor that is coerced and inadequately rewarded, or the people who perform such labor
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=slave+labor&tbs=dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=KhJCTsm9NeTjiALf28muBQ&sqi=2&ved=0CBkQkQ4&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=b7ae9c78318186a&biw=1323&bih=650

The 1926 Slavery Convention's definition of slavery was broadened to include forced or compulsory labor in 1930 in the ILO Convention (No. 29) concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour (article 2.1):

"...all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily."
http://www.hrea.org/index.php?doc_id=430
I don't condone it. It is a horrible violation of your ownership of your own labor that this money was taken from you. But it's not slavery, it's extortion. The difference is that a slave is forced to work, while you could have simply not worked and had the government to support you. But since you did work, they extorted the fruits of your labor to pass on to their political supporters and cronies. This doesn't mean that I'm against taxes entirely, but that the spenders of tax money have a moral obligation to use that money only on the necessary functions of government. Don't be absurd. I'm not complaining about what I pay; I think I'm damned lucky to be making enough money to put me in the tax bracket I'm in.

And unlike folks who think the government is a magic box, whereby you stick smaller taxes in one one side and more revenue comes out the other side when you turn the crank, I understand that governing a modern, complex country takes money.

No... you missed my point entirely; I guess I wasn't clear. I don't think I pay too much; I think the richest people in the country are shirking, because they won't even keep up with me.The necessary functions of government account for less than 30% of total federal spending these days. The bulk of what the Feds spend are for graft and political payoffs for votes.I don't know where or how you came up with that figure, but I suspect it's derived through some pretty colorful and creative accounting.

(1) I don't think the government has a legal and moral right to conscript our children and send them off to be killed in foreign lands.

(2) I do believe that very able-bodied man has an obligation to defend his country from invaders and that every resident has an obligation to help fund that defense, and that government has an obligation to use the draft and taxes to enforce those obligations.

This does not mean that every time there is a draft or a war the the government is acting properly --merely that the government has to have those powers in order to do its job. The government can and has abused those powers just as it can and has abused its powers of taxation for other purposes.[I suppose you haven't even noticed that those first two statements totally contradict each other? The first one says the government has no legal right to draft our children, and the second one says it has not only the legal right, but an obligation to do so.First, it is not "mealymouthed" to make a distinction between forced labor and slavery. Prisoners are subject to forced labor, but that is not the same as slavery. If a fire chief grabs a bunch of bystanders and forces them to help out in a bucket brigade, that would be forced labor but not slavery. The word "forced labor" is just an accurate description, it does not contain the idea that the forcing is illegitimate or that the labor is cruel the way that the word "slavery" does. Second, I cannot be held responsible for what other people in this thread hold up as paragons of democracy.

Third, alternative service of the sort you describe is certainly forced labor but is not slavery, and if the enforced service itself is justified, then the issue isn't whether it is OK to force people who won't fight to do other things, but whether it is OK to allow people who won't fight to do other things rather than be thrown in the stockade. I don't have a problem with giving them that choice.

None of this means that I am justifying Switzerland's universal service. I haven't given an opinion on it one way or the other.I've already addressed this one; you're splitting semantic hairs, playing word games, drawing arbitrary distinctions, and basically using your own definitions.

[hoytedow]

College isn't for everybody. We need trade schools so we won't lose our manufacturing base. Ivy League will destroy us, given the opportunity.

[troy2000]

College isn't for everybody. We need trade schools so we won't lose our manufacturing base. Ivy League will destroy us, given the opportunity.

Hence the last paragraph concerning Kerry's proposal : "Giving Young People Tools to Succeed in the 21st Century: Kerry’s plan will also allow national service members to take classes to make sure they have the skills they need to succeed in college. If service members decide not to go to college, their award can be used for job training, to help start a business, or to make a down payment on the purchase of a home. Anyone who elects to serve after they have already completed college can use their award for loan repayment."

[troy2000]

A little perspective on the ratings dance.

Was S&P downgrade an act of revenge?

You might think Standard & Poor’s has something against the U.S. government, the way the ratings firm treated the nation's credit rating on Friday.

In fact, it does.

It's hard to view the monumental ratings downgrade in context without understanding the long-running feud between the government and ratings agencies. In April, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., issued a scathing 650-page report contending that malfeasance at ratings bureaus like Standard & Poor’s was as much to blame for the housing bubble as any bank, and included a series of smoking gun e-mails that suggested that the firms knew they were profiting from unethical behavior. A little-known section of the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill also hits the rating agencies with new limits destined to undercut their lucrative business; the Securities and Exchange Commission is discussing right now just how to implement the new rules. The public comment period on new rules ended Monday.

Is the timing a coincidence? Or could the ratings downgrade from Standard & Poor’s be viewed as a shot back at a government that's been taking plenty of shots at the ratings industry lately?

The rest of the article is here: http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/08/09/7321296-was-sp-downgrade-an-act-of-revenge

I personally think it's quite possible that S & P was firing a shot across the bow of the government -- in essence telling them, "if you don't back off, maybe we'll find out what happens when we knock you down another step."

Yes, I believe they're capable of attempting extortion on such a scale. Anyone who looks at the ratings given all those sub-prime mortgage packages before the crash understands that ratings agencies have no integrity. They're out to make a buck.

[masalai]

http://www.caseyresearch.com/gsd/edition/everything-gold-bulls-predicted-coming-true I found some interesting stuff here...

For example see attached "Year-to-date.jpg"

[Boston]

thing didn't let me sign it Troy.

[Dave Gudeman]

Regardless of what you may have heard or may believe yourself, I repeat: it's the argument I've personally heard most often in casual conversation. And you can take my word for it that I'm not so addled I confuse abortion opponents with capital punishment opponents -- although I agree the two groups use remarkably similar arguments sometimes.
I didn't say that they use similar arguments; I just suggested that you were confusing them. It just doesn't make any sense as an anti-abortion argument; it reads more like a caricature of an anti-abortion argument by someone who does not really grasp the anti-abortion position. The anti-abortion position is that abortion is murder, infanticide. You don't need to appeal to the sacredness of life to convince most people that murder is wrong. What you have to do is convince them that abortion is murder, and the sacredness-of-life thing does nothing in that direction.
As a side bar: if you want a fascinating exercise, try tracking the tactics and strategies of anti-abortion activists, and comparing them to those of anti-gun activists. They've both been reading from the same playbook for years, when it comes to manipulating people's emotions while bypassing their brains.
All political movements work that way.

For example, they've both realized that they have to get what they want in small bites. They do so by focusing in on on one thing at a time, and demonizing it. The first step is to rename whatever you're focusing on, so it becomes something horrific in the eyes of the public. For example, intact dilation and extraction became 'partial birth abortion.'
Ah, yes. You are talking about the procedure used on babies who are nearly ready to be born. If you just pull them out, they become real babies as soon as their head leaves the body of the mother and then you have to take care of them. To save the parents from this unpleasantness, the doctor pulls the baby partly out of the mother, leaving the head inside. While the baby's little hands and feet are wiggling with the first feeling of freedom, the doctor reaches back inside the mother with some sharp instrument, pierces the the little skull and scrambles the baby's brain to kill him. I imagine that the the little hands and feet spasm at that point. Once the baby stops moving, the doctor pulls him the rest of the way out and throws him in the trash.

Obviously no one is going to have a problem with this procedure if you just call it by the right name. But calling it "partial birth abortion", well, that just makes it seem like a cruel and barbaric murder of a helpless little baby. Darn those political word choices.

He did suggest some mandatory hours of community service for high school students, which is no more shocking than mandatory gym class;I didn't call it shocking any more than I called it slavery. All I said is that I was opposed to it. I don't know why you insist on exaggerating my opposition to this plan.

And I didn't say it was a Republican plan. I simply pointed out that it's ridiculous to label it a Democratic plan because some Democrats advocated it, when some Republicans have also been advocating it -- for several generations.
There is a difference between a plan being advocated by a couple of people, decades apart, who happen to be Republicans and a plan being "advocated by Republicans", which implies at the very least that there was a significant movement within the Republican party to take up the plan. According to your way of thinking, there are no Democrat plans at all because there are no plans that have not been endorsed at some time or another by a few Republicans.

Nor do I despise Republicans, as such. I was a Republican my whole life, right up until they started trying to stuff a flag-burning amendment into the Constitution -- at which time I realized it was no longer the party I had grown up in.
You've got to be kidding. You left the party that thinks you shouldn't have a right to burn a flag in a symbolic gesture of contempt for your own country for the party that thinks you should not have the right to keeps and bear arms to defend yourself? That strikes me as rather poor set of priorities.

What I do despise is the unholy alliance which has been forged in the Republican Party between fundamentalist Christians, big business and the wealthy, during the last twenty years.
Pure Democrat propaganda. Democrats receive just as much money from big business and support crony capitalism just as much as Republicans do. And the wealthy support the Democrats by a wide margin.

Somehow, I doubt Jesus would suggest cutting Social Security and Medicare while extending Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, in the name of 'no new taxes on the American people.'
Somehow I doubt that you have any idea what Jesus would suggest.

And as to the "wealthy" that you want to tax --why is it that Democrat plans to tax the "wealthy" always end up hitting the upper middle class harder than they hit the actually wealthy? And why has no Democrat ever shown any interest in my plan (which I explained earlier in this thread) to actually tax the wealthy?

As regards slavery vs. forced labor, you're trying to split semantic hairs.

slave la·bor
noun
Labor that is coerced and inadequately rewarded, or the people who perform such labor
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=slave+labor&tbs=dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=KhJCTsm9NeTjiALf28muBQ&sqi=2&ved=0CBkQkQ4&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=b7ae9c78318186a&biw=1323&bih=650

The 1926 Slavery Convention's definition of slavery was broadened to include forced or compulsory labor in 1930 in the ILO Convention (No. 29) concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour (article 2.1):

"...all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily."
Oh, so you are arguing that that John Kerry's plan should be called slavery. I'm afraid that I still can't agree. Words are defined by usage, not by official proclamations, and the word "slavery" is just not applied to programs like the one that John Kerry proposed. According to that official proclamation, the snotty 12-year-old who accuses his mother of slavery for making him take out the garbage would be literally accurate.

And unlike folks who think the government is a magic box, whereby you stick smaller taxes in one one side and more revenue comes out the other side when you turn the crank, I understand that governing a modern, complex country takes money.
Governing any country takes money, but the reason that governing our country takes so much money is because government thinks that they have to control every aspect of our lives because we are too stupid to make our own decisions. It takes a lot of money to be a nosy, nagging old school marm to 250 million people.

I suppose you haven't even noticed that those first two statements totally contradict each other? The first one says the government has no legal right to draft our children, and the second one says it has not only the legal right, but an obligation to do so.
There was no contradiction. I rejected the notion that the government has a "right" to draft people and send them off to "foreign wars". There are two points here: the legitimacy of a draft is not based on any right of the government but on the obligations of the citizens. This is an important difference because when deciding whether any particular draft is legitimate or not you don't ask "does the government have a right to draft people for this conflict?" Instead, you ask "do the people have an obligation to fight in this conflict?" I hope you can see the difference.

Second, the phrase "foreign wars" is ambiguous, but the overall way that you phrased it suggested to me that you were asking if the government can legitimately draft people for any wars that it wants to, and I answer "no" to that. The government has an obligation to only draft people for wars that the people have an obligation to fight.

[Boston]

Liz was peaking over my shoulder and snickered, why is it always a bunch of guys debating what I have to do. Thought I'd pass that along. I'm 100% pro choice, but then again its not a choice I'm going to have to make. Also 100% for complete legalization but then again I don't do drugs. Deal is if the anti choice crowd wants to dictate choices so badly then maybe abortion should be mandatory for a few weeks or months and we'll see how long it takes them to want a choice. Something tells me the value of following ones own convictions would appear abundantly clear to them if it was they who's choice was being denied.

Cheers
B

[Frosty]

I think Liz is 100% correct. We as guys don't know what we are talking about. We have not the right to talk or even think about abortion.

Dave ,--far too long, cant read that much but I noticed it got real messy in the middle bit, starting with,-- Ah yes. Was that necessary.

Personally? --me? if the woman wants it its up to her at any time.

Im a little stronger and I don't mean to start a riot but life is when 'it' knows it is and survival instinct kicks in..

But --you know its a womans thing.

Its Love, motherly, homones, pain , birth we don't know about any of those things.

[Dave Gudeman]

Liz was peaking over my shoulder and snickered, why is it always a bunch of guys debating what I have to do. Thought I'd pass that along. I'm 100% pro choice, but then again its not a choice I'm going to have to make. Also 100% for complete legalization but then again I don't do drugs. Deal is if the anti choice crowd wants to dictate choices so badly then maybe abortion should be mandatory for a few weeks or months and we'll see how long it takes them to want a choice. Something tells me the value of following ones own convictions would appear abundantly clear to them if it was they who's choice was being denied.

Cheers
B
Ask Liz if she snickers when someone suggests that we need to prevent husbands from beating their wives, "Why is it always a bunch of outsiders debating how I control my own wife?" Southern slave owners had the same attitude, "Who do those religious nuts think they are, trying to tell us slave owners how do deal with our own subhuman property?

That's always the way in these sorts of arguments. You want to do something evil to another human being for your own self interest, so to justify it you rationalize that the other human being isn't really a full human being and that means that it's no one else's business what you do to this other person.

In a way, this is an advance in civilization, that people who beat or enslave or kill other human beings feel a need to pretend that the victim isn't human. The ancient Greeks didn't bother with that, they just said "The strong do what they will and the the weak suffer what they must."

[masalai]

That is still subjugation by belittling and marking as of lesser consequence...

[Dave Gudeman]

Dave ,--far too long, cant read that much but I noticed it got real messy in the middle bit, starting with,-- Ah yes. Was that necessary.

What exactly is your object to that description, Frosty? Troy claimed that people are turning against partial-birth abortion because of the name so I described the procedure to let the readers decide for themselves if the name is the only thing that is disturbing about the procedure.

If the doctor were to let the baby's head pop out before scrambling the brain, then the baby would suddenly become a full human being. He would begin breathing, and soon would start to cry for the comfort of his mother's breast. Killing the baby after the head pops out would legally be murder. But as long as that little head is still stuck inside the mother, the baby is just a bit of tissue that can be safely destroyed and thrown away like a diseased gall bladder.

No one seriously believes that. No one. Early abortion is debatable and reasonable people can disagree on exactly when a fetus becomes a human being, but one position is that is not reasonable is that the baby becomes a human being when the head pops out.

Partial-birth abortion is infanticide, plain and simple.

[Boston]

Ask Liz if she snickers when someone suggests that we need to prevent husbands from beating their wives, "Why is it always a bunch of outsiders debating how I control my own wife?"

Well she's not here this evening, but I can just hear it now, something like "I Control my own wife", "someone is delusional on the other end of your computer Boston, if he thinks he's married and in control".


Southern slave owners had the same attitude, "Who do those religious nuts think they are, trying to tell us slave owners how do deal with our own subhuman property?

hmmmm, no its got nothing to do with slavery or wife beating, or any other buz topics some folks would like to associate choice with. Your still arguing a zygote is a person, its not, its a collection of cells, kinda like a hang nail.

That's always the way in these sorts of arguments. You want to do something evil to another human being for your own self interest, so to justify it you rationalize that the other human being isn't really a full human being and that means that it's no one else's business what you do to this other person.

]No, no one wants to do anything evil to another human being. Choice is not an evil that we do to one another. choice is something we decide for ourselves and don't foist off on anyone else. For instance, I chose to get fixed that way some spectacular young lady doesn't have to wonder about this ridiculous debate about a few cells being a person or not.


In a way, this is an advance in civilization, that people who beat or enslave or kill other human beings feel a need to pretend that the victim isn't human. The ancient Greeks didn't bother with that, they just said "The strong do what they will and the the weak suffer what they must."

actually an advanced civilization would not have ended up 7 billion strong on a dying planet and no way off. Its not going to mater how strong you are once the atmospheric oxygen levels begin to fall because the oceans phytoplankton have died off




It would seem your on a crusade Dave and although your entitled, Jebus knows I've got a few of my own, the argument was settled and thankfully abortion is safe and legal. Kinda like drugs should be. People die when there choices are limited because not everyone is going to make the kinds of choices you or I might agree with. But its there right to disagree and so its there Choice.

I seem to remember something about freedom for all in a history class somewhere. Kinda comes to mind when we are talking about restricting personal freedoms like this.

PS
according to NPR partial birth abortions have been illegal since 2003 so your kinda fighting a windmill on this one.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5168163

[Leo Lazauskas]

... pain... we don't know about any of those things.
Rubbish. We sometimes experience pain far worse than child birth.
If I gave you a crippling kick in the balls, it's unlikely you'll ask for another one in a year. :P

[Frosty]

Rubbish. We sometimes experience pain far worse than child birth.
If I gave you a crippling kick in the balls, it's unlikely you'll ask for another one in a year. :P

I have read your post.

[masalai]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Leo Lazauskas again.

I can think of other situations like when I broke my pelvis... 4 weeks on morphine, as the break was vertical from my left leg join and near the width of my little finger at the top and the crack extended down at about 45 degrees ... I was horizontal for 16 weeks... When has a labour effort lasted that long?

But ALSO, - - I would NEVER ask, or concent to 'carry a baby for 9 months till birth'... even if it were possible...

[masalai]

http://www.gata.org/node/10251
Chris Powell: It's the dollar, not S&P
Submitted by cpowell on Fri, 2011-08-12 01:27. Section: Daily Dispatches

Standard & Poor's is catching hell for cutting the credit rating of the U.S. government and threatening to cut the credit rating of other governments. People are blaming the agency for the stock market declines that have followed all over the world. With Italy's penchant for comic opera, prosecutors in Milan have even raided S&P's office there in pursuit of evidence for a "charge" of unfairly criticizing the country's financial system.

Yes, S&P long awarded spotless credit ratings to what were essentially frauds, so the agency's credibility is less "standard" than "poor." But the company's mistakes are no rationale for continuing them.

And yes, having the ability to pay its bills in currency it prints by itself, the U.S. government is unlike ordinary businesses and need never default on its debts, at least in a technical sense. But in a practical sense, the government long has been defaulting on its debts, as the value of the dollar, the currency in which those bonds are repaid, has fallen 30 percent in the last 20 years, and about 14 percent in the last year alone, as measured against other major currencies. Going back to the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the dollar's value has diminished by more than 90 percent. The other day the Fed promised to keep interest rates at virtually zero for another two years, which is to say that interest rates will remain negative, below the inflation rate, the rate of the dollar's debasement. So practical default on the U.S. government's debt seems likely to continue.

... Dispatch continues ... http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2011/08/11/chris_powell/doc4e43e9afe9548159527231.txt

[masalai]

Actually there is an error, The Private bank called (The Federal Reserve Bank of USA) issues and produces the money for the USA and loans it to Treasury in return for treasury bills... I am not absolutely sure of the process but that is the essence of it...

[Frosty]

What is all this fuss, S&P Fiche and Moodies give ratings for countries ability to borrow from ,pay back etc.

It starts at AAA for a perfect situation with the host being in perfect health and is a state of harmony and able to balance its budget etc etc.

USAA+ can not do this it has astronomical debts that amount to billions per day it can not balance its budget to the tune if 1.3 trillion.

It was also unable to make decisions on its financial plans that were critical to its control of its financial debt. The currency has been falling in value for years.

USAA+ has been reduced from perfect to just slightly less, infact the tiniest bit less that you can get. What the hell is wrong with that.

Im surprised they have any credit rating at all.

[Frosty]

Ha ha France has banned short selling, at last some sense in this stupid market.

No short selling no short buying, no immature investors.

The market was never meant for short selling.

[CatBuilder]

But in a practical sense, the government long has been defaulting on its debts, as the value of the dollar, the currency in which those bonds are repaid, has fallen 30 percent in the last 20 years, and about 14 percent in the last year alone, as measured against other major currencies. Going back to the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the dollar's value has diminished by more than 90 percent. The other day the Fed promised to keep interest rates at virtually zero for another two years, which is to say that interest rates will remain negative, below the inflation rate, the rate of the dollar's debasement. So practical default on the U.S. government's debt seems likely to continue.


Exactly. You didn't think Americans were stupid when planning fiscal policy did you? :D

They are not the leader of the world financial markets and default currency because they are stupid.

Despite some pains, there are a lot of advantages to this:

*Debt costs 30% less to pay off in comparison to 20 years ago
*US Exports become bargains in non-US countries
*Imports to the US become too expensive, sales of them fall, replaced by domestic goods
*China gets screwed
*Stock market gains and looks good (politically) despite no real value being created
*Should help free up our lenders some more

[Boston]

banning short selling is a knee jerk reaction to a poorly understood trading strategy. Basically from I've learned thus far it won't help stabilize the markets any and will probably drive the decline even faster. Shorting is after all just renting a stock out on the owners/managers end ( which makes him money ) and seeing what can be done with it on the lease holders end. Most market analysis in markets that have banned shorting show that the ban led to greater stagnation or greater declines but seldom did it result in steady upward motion.

[Frosty]

Banning shorts is trying to gain stagnation and rid itself of volatility and stop it tumbling and frightening the crap out of everyone. Some stability will help those genuine investors.

A knee jerk reaction to a poorly understood trading policy?

Well --its been appluaded by most as the right thing to do.

Im opinion it all these little instruments like shorting, credit default swaps that F it all up. You can jugle 3 balls thats easy 4 is difficult 5-6 is damn near impossible and time to go home. So,-- 9 to 5 investments is safe.

No one knows whats going on Bloomberg and Cnn is on all day trying to make sense of it, because it has evolute'd into mayhem.

In times of turmoil it becomes obvious.

[Boston]

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/20/news/international/germany.naked.short.ban.consequences.fortune/

that article might explain the historic response of the markets to bans on short selling or at least naked short trades, traditional shorting is a more stable practice ( and the only type of shorting thats even legal in the US as far as I know ) here's another one from Bloomberg this time which might explain it in a bit more detail

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-08/greek-short-ban-won-t-aid-stocks-history-says-chart-o

this one I haven't read yet but skimmed over looking for something that might explain it better than I.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/ban-naked-short-selling-won’t-save-euro

[rwatson]

Do you google everything I say.

No, only when I know something is not right, and I need to look up the evidence.

Heaven forbid there is anything wrong on the internet :D

[Frosty]

No, only when I know something is not right, and I need to look up the evidence.

Heaven forbid there is anything wrong on the internet :D


Was I right? I don't see a link to anything. Nice to Know some one is paying attention to what I say.

[masalai]

right at least twice today .......
if I trolled on one engine at 750 RPM 171 liters would be 350 miles possibly more meaning power is directly relative to HP used.

I cant do 5 Knots-slowest is 6.

[masalai]

Speaking of trolling, I trolled the www and found this alarming piece from Global Research in Canada... www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25967 "Over 1 Million Deaths Annually, 62 Million People With Zero Net Worth, As the Economic Elite Make Off With $46 Trillion" - Is it all about money and the havs and have-not's, as Casey Research in USA follows a similar line... "Is There Enough Money on Earth to Save the Banks?: Jonathan Weil" http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-11/is-there-enough-money-to-save-world-s-banks-commentary-by-jonathan-weil.html and "It's the dollar, not S&P; and all must have prizes: Chris Powell" at http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2011/08/11/chris_powell/doc4e43e9afe9548159527231.txt

[troy2000]

I think Liz is 100% correct. We as guys don't know what we are talking about. We have not the right to talk or even think about abortion.

Dave ,--far too long, cant read that much but I noticed it got real messy in the middle bit, starting with,-- Ah yes. Was that necessary.

Personally? --me? if the woman wants it its up to her at any time.

Im a little stronger and I don't mean to start a riot but life is when 'it' knows it is and survival instinct kicks in..

But --you know its a womans thing.

Its Love, motherly, homones, pain , birth we don't know about any of those things.

"if men could become pregnant, abortion would be a Sacrament."

[troy2000]

Ask Liz if she snickers when someone suggests that we need to prevent husbands from beating their wives, "Why is it always a bunch of outsiders debating how I control my own wife?" Southern slave owners had the same attitude, "Who do those religious nuts think they are, trying to tell us slave owners how do deal with our own subhuman property?

That's always the way in these sorts of arguments. You want to do something evil to another human being for your own self interest, so to justify it you rationalize that the other human being isn't really a full human being and that means that it's no one else's business what you do to this other person.

In a way, this is an advance in civilization, that people who beat or enslave or kill other human beings feel a need to pretend that the victim isn't human. The ancient Greeks didn't bother with that, they just said "The strong do what they will and the the weak suffer what they must."

i was going to give you some positive rep for this one, but apparently I haven't given enough out to other people since I slammed you for something else.

Or maybe since I complimented you. But I doubt that....:D

[Leo Lazauskas]

"if men could become pregnant, abortion would be a Sacrament."

And if societies were fair, nurses would earn more than bankers.

[hoytedow]

and politicians.

[masalai]

So the consensus is, That bankers, bureaucrats and politicians should earn LESS than Nurses and Teachers, - but you expected that from me, ... no?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-11/high-frequency-firms-tripled-trading-as-s-p-500-plunged-13-wedbush-says.html - it appears that "high-frequency trading" determines 75% of the action not "legitimate investors" so the collapse and recovery was a fraud of manipulation...

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Goldmans-new-money-machine-rb-3582752116.html?x=0&.v=2 shows more fraudulent market manipulation at the expense of productive enterprises inside USA...

also from Ed Steers email - here http://www.caseyresearch.com/gsd/edition/gold-us-dollarand-greater-depression-doug-casey lots more links to interesting essays and stuff ...
is this from Doug Casey http://talkdigitalnetwork.com/2011/08/gold-dollar-greater-depression/