Joined: Aug 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 536 Karma: 40
Advice From A Retired Husband « Result #1 Today at 6:42pm »
ADVICE FROM A RETIRED HUSBAND
It is important for men to remember that, as women grow older, it becomes harder for them to maintain the same quality of housekeeping as when they were younger. When you notice this, try not to yell at them. Some are oversensitive, and there's nothing worse than an oversensitive woman.
My name is Jim. Let me relate how I handled the situation with my wife, Terri. When I retired a few years ago, it became necessary for Terri to get a full-time job along with her part-time job, both for extra income and for the health benefits that we needed. Shortly after she started working, I noticed she was beginning to show her age. I usually get home from the golf club about the same time she gets home from work.
Although she knows how hungry I am, she almost always says she has to rest for half an hour or so before she starts dinner.. I don't yell at her. Instead, I tell her to take her time and just wake me when she gets dinner on the table. I generally have lunch in the Men's Grill at the club so eating out is not reasonable. I'm ready for some home-cooked grub when I hit that door. She used to do the dishes as soon as we finished eating. But now it's not unusual for them to sit on the table for several hours after dinner.
I do what I can by diplomatically reminding her several times each evening that they won't clean themselves. I know she really appreciates this, as it does seem to motivate her to get them done before she goes to bed.. ; Another symptom of aging is complaining, I think. For example she will say that it is difficult for her to find time to pay the monthly bills during her lunch hour. But, boys, we take 'em for better or worse, so I just smile and offer encouragement. I tell her to stretch it out over two or even three days. That way she won't have to rush so much. I also remind her that missing lunch completely now and then wouldn't hurt her any (if you know what I mean). I like to think tact is one of my strong points.
When doing simple jobs, she seems to think she needs more rest periods. She had to take a break when she was only half-finished mowing the yard. I try not to make a scene. I'm a fair man. I tell her to fix herself a nice, big, cold glass of freshly squeezed lemonade and just sit for a while.. And, as long as she is making one for herself, she may as well make one for me too.
I know that I probably look like a saint in the way I support Terri. I'm not saying that showing this much consideration is easy. Many men will find it difficult. Some will find it impossible! Nobody knows better than I do how frustrating women get as they get older. However, guys, even if you just use a little more tact and less criticism of your aging wife because of this article, I will consider that writing it was well worthwhile After all, we are put on this earth to help each other.
Obama and the Democrats have been bought and belong to the globalists and banking class. Obama and the Democrats will do nothing that would help Americans at the expense of giving more and more taxpayer money to the banking class and the globalists. The Spring jobs program will be just another 'crisis' opportunity to divert fortunes to the banking class and globalists.
The media propaganda continues unabated about how we "had" to bail out the banking class. They're still trying to gin up a credit crunch or shortage as the main problem. The reality is that American consumers' income and buying power continues to collapse as jobs are lost and spending habits are rethought, in anticipation of further job losses and wage declines.
When banks aren't lending it is due to the likelihood of not getting paid back by a business that can't sell enough merchandise or service. It's not because credit is "tight." It's because the credit sought is unjustified by the cause it's being used for--due to anticipated lack of sales of products/services.
No one is going to lend a small business money if they don't think the business will make enough in sales to pay them back. That's not a credit shortage.
It's a credit-worthy borrower shortage.
Well-spoken! Isn't this what happens when capital is drop-kicked off into speculative heaven...instead of re-invested into job-creating business ventures? (business - as in providing real goods and services) - you know.....the kind of schemes and dreams that "businessmen" used to have when they dared to be ambitious enough to yearn for wealth?
it now appears that our problems with capital are so severe that far fewer people will be able to borrow money from banks to buy cars at the rate, and in the way, that the system has been organized to depend on.
Our problem is one of employment - 16% unemployment tends to hammer consumer sales you know and one of income levels - since wages have been flat for decades, the American people have resorted to using their homes to pay for new cars and goods for the last decade or so. And now that's gone and we're seeing what real consumer spending looks like and its not anything like what we've previously seen.
And as Greybeard pointed out buying a new car also means more $$$$ for insurance and when you include that, you're up to $400-500 a month car payment.
That's a lot of money for most middle-class people to shell out every month.
What I do to avoid this trap, I generally go to a auto salvage auction and pick up a drive away used car(3-4 years old and 50k miles) for under $5k. Or I can go to the local auto junk yard and buy a used car for $1k that with a little work makes a decent ride.
Of course the state doesn't get much in the way of revenues when I and others go that route but that's their problem.
I agree with everthing you've said here (as the equity ATM's dry up and blow away) and my car-buying habits are pretty much identical to yours. Beaters that last 5 years without complaints are a thing of beauty.... (even if they won't win Miss Auto USA)
Re: the financial end of automobiles « Result #5 Today at 5:30pm »
I think especially in financially-straitened times... the luxuriance of the new car will stale rather quickly. There have always been a lot of people out there whose esthetic sensibilities were sorely challenged by the idea of purchasing something used - be it a house, car, whatever. Many more will soon have to eschew such standards. Many of those will wake one financially-strapped morning and realize that a new car (depending on the model) just vomited many thousands of dollars of value as it was being backed from its parking space on the lot.
It is a rather cosmetic valuation, enhanced by nothing other than some vague notion of status. Which is all something easily descarded when it comes to watching the bottom line.
(and I can already hear some smart ass asking: "Well, if no-one buys one brand-new, then where will the used cars come from?" To which the answer should be (I wish!) let's all just wait until the dealers get so desperate we'll get them at used prices anyhow.) I know - entirely not fair to the dealers.
But here's what I really wish: That any value-added features designed to help a car go over 65 mph were immediately discarded, along with all the rest of the junk not needed...bring the cost of a new model down by 50%, lower speed limits, raise mpg, (and have someone somewhere sneakily raise the number of seconds in a minute to 61) I know.....raving delusions... but fun to think about.
Joined: Jan 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 6,327 Location: Southern California Karma: 180
Re: Health Care Costs by Age Group « Result #6 Today at 3:43pm »
The numbers used in the original post do seem a little lower than estimates from elsewhere. The Medicare numbers, which are given for 2006, seem to be more consistent with the end of fiscal year 2005. Even then, they're still a little bit lower.
Comparing the Treasury Dept. report for fiscal 2009 with fiscal 2005, total Medicare outlays have increased $164 billion, from ~$340 billion in 2005 to ~$504 billion in 2009. However, $53 billion of this came from the Medicare prescription drug plan. Subtracting that from the 2009 total gives $451 billion.
The consumer price index rose 8.6% from September 2005 to September 2009. Assuming that the Medicare-eligible population increased at the same 1%/year rate as the general population, then the number of Medicare recipients would have increased 4%.
Factoring in inflation and population growth (8.6% + 4%), and multiplying times the 2005 total of $340 billion, gives $382.4 billion.
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
"President Obama says he wants to "rebalance" the economic relationship between China and the U.S. as part of his plan to restart the American jobs machine. "We cannot go back," he said in September, "to an era where the Chinese . . . just are selling everything to us, we're taking out a bunch of credit-card debt or home equity loans, but we're not selling anything to them." He hopes that hundreds of millions of Chinese consumers will make up for the inability of American consumers to return to debt-binge spending.
This is wishful thinking. True, the Chinese market is huge and growing fast....
Even as the U.S. government was bailing out General Motors and Chrysler, the two firms' sales in China were soaring; GM's sales there are almost 50% higher this year than last. Proctor & Gamble is so well-established in China that many Chinese think its products (such as green-tea-flavored Crest toothpaste) are Chinese brands. If the Chinese economy continues to grow at or near its current rate and the benefits of that growth trickle down to 1.3 billion Chinese consumers, the country would become the largest shopping bazaar in the history of the world....
So this will mean millions of American export jobs, right? No.
In fact China is heading in the opposite direction of "rebalancing." Its productive capacity keeps soaring, but Chinese consumers are taking home a shrinking proportion of the total economy. Last year, personal consumption in China amounted to only 35% of the Chinese economy; 10 years ago consumption was almost 50%. Capital investment, by contrast, rose to 44% from 35% over the decade.
China's capital spending is on the way to exceeding that of the U.S., but its consumer spending is barely 1/6 as large. Chinese companies are plowing their rising profits back into more productive capacity—additional factories, more equipment, new technologies. China's massive $600 billion stimulus package has been directed at further enlarging China's productive capacity rather than consumption. So where will this productive capacity go if not to Chinese consumers? Net exports to other nations, especially the U.S. and Europe.
Many explanations have been offered for the parsimony of Chinese consumers....
But the larger explanation for Chinese frugality is that the nation is oriented to production, not consumption. China wants to become the world's preeminent producer nation. It also wants to take the lead in the production of advanced technologies. The U.S. would like to retain the lead, but our economy is oriented to consumption rather than production.
Deep down inside the cerebral cortex of our national consciousness we assume that the basic purpose of an economy is to provide more opportunities to consume. We grudgingly support government efforts to rebuild our infrastructure. We want our companies to invest in new equipment and technologies but also want them to pay generous dividends. We approve of government investments in basic research and development, but mainly for the purpose of making the nation more secure through advanced military technologies. (We regard spillovers to the private sector as incidental.)
China's industrial and technological policy is unapologetically direct. It especially wants America's know-how, and the best way to capture knowhow is to get it first hand. So China continues to condition many sales by U.S. and foreign companies on production in China—often in joint ventures with Chinese companies.
American firms are now helping China build a "smart" infrastructure, tackle pollution with clean technologies, develop a new generation of photovoltaics and wind turbines, find new applications for nanotechologies, and build commercial jets and jet engines. GM recently announced it was planning to make a new subcompact in China designed and developed primarily by the Pan-Asia Technical Automotive Center, a joint venture between GM and SAIC Motor in Shanghai. General Electric is producing wind turbine components in China. Earlier this month, Massachusetts-based Evergreen Solar announced it will be moving its solar panel production to China.
The Chinese government also wants to create more jobs in China, and it will continue to rely on exports. Each year, tens of millions of poor Chinese pour into large cities from the countryside in pursuit of better-paying work. If they don't find it, China risks riots and other upheaval. Massive disorder is one of the greatest risks facing China's governing elite. That elite would much rather create export jobs, even at the cost of subsidizing foreign buyers, than allow the yuan to rise and thereby risk job shortages at home.
To this extent, China's export policy is really a social policy, designed to maintain order. Despite the Obama administration's entreaties, China will continue to peg the yuan to the dollar—when the dollar drops, selling yuan in the foreign-exchange market and adding to its pile of foreign assets in order to maintain the yuan's fixed relation to the dollar. This is costly to China, of course, but for the purposes of industrial and social policy, China figures the cost is worth it.
The dirty little secret on both sides of the Pacific is that both America and China are capable of producing far more than their own consumers are capable of buying. In the U.S., the root of the problem is a growing share of total income going to the richest Americans, leaving the middle class with relatively less purchasing power unless they go deep into debt.
Inequality is also widening in China, but the problem there is a declining share of the fruits of economic growth going to average Chinese and an increasing share going to capital investment.
Both societies are threatened by the disconnect between production and consumption. In China, the threat is civil unrest. In the U.S., it's a prolonged jobs and earnings recession that, when combined with widening inequality, could create political backlash."
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
"How can the stock market hit new highs at the same time unemployment is hitting new highs? Simple. The market is up because corporate earnings are up. Corporate earnings are up because companies are cutting costs. And the biggest single cost they’re cutting is their payrolls. So they let people go and, presto, their balance sheets look better and their stock prices rise.
In the old-fashioned kind of recession decades ago, big companies laid off people with the expectation of rehiring them when the economy turned up. Then a few recessions back, companies started laying off people for good, never rehiring them even when the economy recovered.
In the Great Recession of 2008-2009, companies are going a step further. They’re using this sharp downturn to cut payrolls even below where they were when times were good. Outsourcing abroad, setting up shop in China and elsewhere, contracting out, replacing people with software and automated machines – they're doing whatever it takes to get payrolls down so earnings bounce up.
Caterpillar earned $404 million in the 3rd quarter, or 64 cents a share. Analysts had expected only 5 cents. Caterpillar’s stock is up 165% since March. How did Caterpillar do it? Not by selling more bulldozers. It did it by cutting over 37,000 jobs.
The result, overall, is an asset-based recovery, not a Main Street recovery. Yes, the economy is growing again, but the surge in productivity is a mirage. Worker output per hour is skyrocketing because companies are generating almost as much output with fewer workers and fewer hours.
The Fed, meanwhile, has become an enabler to all this, making it as cheap as possible for companies to axe their employees. Money costs so little these days it’s easy to substitute capital for labor. It’s also easy to buy up foreign assets with cheap American money. And it’s now blissfully easy for Wall Street to borrow money almost free and buy all sorts of interests in foreign assets, especially commodities. That's why we're seeing the prices of foreign commodities and other assets go through the roof.
At the same time, the Treasury continues to be fixated on keeping banks afloat. The Administration's mortgage mitigation efforts are lagging. Small businesses are starved of credit....
The Fed and the Teasury have, in effect, placed a huge bet on a recovery driven by asset prices. That’s a bad bet. The great disconnect between the stock market and jobs is pushing stock prices way out of line with the real economy. This isn't sustainable.
No economy can recover without consumers. Yet American consumers, who constitute 70% of the U.S. economy, are facing mounting job losses as well as pay cuts. They’re in no mood to buy and won’t be for some time.
Where is this heading? No place good. Without a major shift in policy -- both at the Fed and in the White House -- the economics point to a big stock-market correction and a double dip. The politics point to substantial losses for Democrats next year."
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Oil investments have always taken the fascination of the investor community. People invest in oil and gas sector as it offers a great deal of return over investments. The ROI from the oil sector is calculated to be more than 650%. As soon as an oil well is hit, it starts producing benefits, way above the cost of initial investment.
Oil and energy investment can be done in two ways. First is in the form of exploration. This is a bit of a risky investment as the new reserves are to be discovered. The invested amount is used in discovering new reserves of oil and gas that may result in profits. But when there is a delay in finding the correct source, it may result in losses. Exploration is ideal for those investors who have the money and are willing to accept such risks.
Another form of investment in oil and energy sector is through buying of company stocks or joining a mutual fund. This form of oil and energy investment carries lesser amounts of risks to the investors.
Joined: Aug 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 536 Karma: 40
on radio this month « Result #10 Today at 4:26am »
Ok, so all this month on the radio there is a commercial telling us that its coming up on the 100th anniversary of the National Parks. But theres a problem.
Because of debt and no money, most parks are closed. They go on to say that little Billy and Lisa cant enjoy the parks like our generation did because they ran out of money.
They further tell us that the National Parks are part of OUR heritage and we have to do something. They ask us to fork over some money so they wont close permanently (I heard there is an option on the table to sell off State Parks in California to private hands because of their mismanagement)
Well go F yourself, I don't have to do a damn thing you idiots up in DC.
Get us out of this illegal war you criminals.
On a truckers radio show they said that ALL of the rest stops in Arizona are closed due to budget cuts.
Sure they can shit all over the tax payer but when its time for us to get relieve we are screwed.
Instead of voting for the traitors, why dont you get off your sunshine ass and run yourself.
your one and only platform would be:
Get Rid of the ILLEGALS and half of all state government.
presto, your budget problems are over
That's a good idea, but it's not quite that easy. I tried to get on the ballot in my Congressional district for the primary. But I didn't get the 40 signatures needed. Fortunately I'm still registered with one of the major political parties gangs, so I could try again.
If you're not a member of any of the major political gangs, however, you need over 9,000 signatures to get on the ballot.
It also costs close to $1,700 to register as a potential candidate, even before you know if you can get the required signatures or not.
(By the way, this is for the US Congress, not the California state congress.)
My own platform would include eliminating TARP immediately before any more money had been lost, put a Federal ban on any taxpayer money ever going to any financial entity other than a FDIC-insured commercial bank, restore capital gains tax rates to the same level as wage income, impose a complete and immediate embargo on everything from China, immediately withdraw from the WTO & NAFTA, make E-verify permanent and mandatory for ALL employers, withdraw all troops from Iraq & Afghanistan as fast as could be safely done, abolish the Fed permanently, re-instate Glass-Steagle, and ban all political contributions from any Corporate entity for any reason (including the practice of bundling), repeal the Patriot Act unconditionally, repeal FISA, and abolish the CIA.
Those are just a few of the things I would advocate for.
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
"While the United States recently reported 3.5% GDP growth in the 3rd quarter, suggesting that the most severe recession since the Great Depression is over, the American economy is actually much weaker than official data suggest. In fact, official measures of GDP may grossly overstate growth in the economy, as they don't capture the fact that business sentiment among small firms is abysmal and their output is still falling sharply. Properly corrected for this, 3rd-quarter GDP may have been 2% rather than 3.5%.
The story of the U.S. is, indeed, one of 2 economies. There is a smaller one that is slowly recovering and a larger one that is still in a deep and persistent downturn.
Consider the following facts. While America's official unemployment rate is already 10.2%, the figure jumps to a whopping 17.5% when discouraged workers and partially employed workers are included. And, while data from firms suggest that job losses in the past 3 months were about 600,000, household surveys, which include self-employed workers and small entrepreneurs, suggest a number above 2 million.
Moreover, the total effect on labor income – the product of jobs times hours worked times average hourly wages – has been more severe than that implied by the job losses alone, because many firms are cutting their workers' hours, placing them on furlough or lowering their wages as a way to share the pain.
Many of the lost jobs – in construction, finance, and outsourced manufacturing and services – are gone forever, and recent studies suggest that a 1/4 of U.S. jobs can be fully outsourced over time to other countries. Thus, a growing proportion of the work force – often below the radar screen of official statistics – is losing hope of finding gainful employment, while the unemployment rate (especially for poor, unskilled workers) will remain high for a much longer period of time than in previous recessions.
Consider also the credit markets. Prime borrowers with good credit scores and investment-grade firms are not experiencing a credit crunch at this point, as the former have access to mortgages and consumer credit while the latter have access to bond and equity markets.
But non-prime borrowers – about 1/3 d of U.S. households – do not have much access to mortgages and credit cards. They live from paycheque to paycheque – often a shrinking paycheque, owing to the decline in hourly wages and hours worked. And the credit crunch for non-investment-grade firms and smaller firms, which rely mostly on access to bank loans rather than capital markets, is still severe.
Or consider bankruptcies and defaults by households and firms. Larger firms – even those with large debt problems – can refinance their excessive liabilities in or out of court, but an unprecedented number of small businesses are going bankrupt. The same holds for households, with millions of weaker and poorer borrowers defaulting on mortgages, credit cards, auto loans, student loans and other consumer credit.
*Consider also what is happening to private consumption and retail sales. Recent monthly figures suggest a rise in retail sales. But, because the official statistics capture mostly sales by larger retailers and exclude the fall by hundreds of thousands of smaller stores and businesses that have failed, consumption looks better than it really is....
Moreover, income and wealth inequality is rising again. Poorer households are at greater risk of unemployment, falling wages or reductions in hours worked, all leading to lower labor income, whereas on Wall Street, outrageous bonuses have returned with a vengeance. With the stock market rising and home prices still falling, the wealthy are becoming richer, while the middle class and the poor – whose main wealth is a house rather than equities – are becoming poorer and being saddled with an unsustainable debt burden.
So, while the United States may technically be close to the end of a severe recession, most of America is facing a near-depression."
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
"The U.S. housing market is sputtering again, adding to doubts about the vigor of the economic recovery.
Just a few months after housing showed signs of leveling off, bad weather and uncertainty over the extension of a home-buyer tax credit sent new-home starts in October tumbling 10.6% from the previous month. They fell to the lowest level since April, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. Starts of single-family houses fell 6.8%....
the latest data portend poorly for the economy overall, and for fourth-quarter growth.
On Wednesday Pulte Homes Inc., the nation's largest home builder, warned investors of a grim outlook. "As we look out to 2010, we are expecting difficult conditions to continue," said chief executive Richard Dugas.
Meanwhile, more Americans who bought homes during the boom are falling into mortgage limbo. About 3.4% of U.S. households [with mortgages] -- or about 1.9 million homeowners -- are 120 days or more overdue on their payments, but not yet in foreclosure....That is up from 1.5% a year earlier.
Many of these people are likely to lose their homes over the next few years. That means more bank-owned homes will hit a market already suffering from oversupply....
millions of homes [are] expected to go through foreclosure over the next few years, adding to supply. Amherst Securities Group in September estimated 7 million homes are headed for foreclosure in the next few years -- more than a year's home sales at the current rate....
For borrowers with strong credit records, 30-year home mortgages are available for fixed rates of just under 5%, near the lowest levels in 50 years. That is helping demand, but many people can't get such loans because they have too much debt or are unemployed.
One measure of the role of housing in the economy earlier this decade: During the boom, residential investment peaked to make up 6.3% of gross domestic product. That number fell to 2.5% in the 3rd quarter, according to Macroeconomic Advisers.
The average U.S. home price nearly doubled between January 2000 and April 2006, according to the First American LoanPerformance index. Since then, the average has dropped about 30%....
Wednesday's data prompted some economists to revise their fourth-quarter forecasts down slightly....
the latest data highlight the fragility of the housing market, which has been propped up by the tax credit and the Fed's efforts to push down mortgage rates.
With the tax credit set to expire in April and the Fed scheduled to wind down its purchases of mortgage-backed securities by the end of March, housing faces a test of its ability to sustain a recovery without as much government aid.
Potential homebuyers are frustrated by the complications of a market dominated by distressed sellers. Tim Kolstad, a financial consultant renting in Scottsdale, Ariz., has been trying to buy a home for more than a year. But the homes he likes are all either foreclosed or being offered for less than the loan balance due -- which means any offer from a potential buyer must be cleared by the lender, and lenders often are slow to respond.
"The offers just sit out there forever," Mr. Kolstad said.
Credit standards are "definitely tighter than they were" in previous years, said Bryan Mitchell, an agent Re/Max Associates in Las Vegas....
Single family home-building is still 10.9% below year-ago levels. New homebuilding fell to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 529,000 units, the lowest since April. And apartment-complex construction fell as high vacancy rates, declining rents and borrowing difficulties have deterred builders. Building permits, a sign of future construction, also decreased 4%....
The number of people awaiting foreclosure action has ballooned partly because the government has prodded lenders to consider reducing payments for many distressed borrowers in an effort to avert foreclosures. At the same time, loan-servicing companies, the firms that collect mortgage payments and handle foreclosures, are overwhelmed by the millions of distressed borrowers. "There is only so much volume that can be processed by the servicers each month," said Herb Blecher, a vice president at LPS.
Overall, about 12.4% of American households with mortgages in October were 30 days or more overdue or in the foreclosure process, according to LPS. That's up from 12.3% in September and 8.6% in October 2008. In the latest month, about 6.9 million households fell into this category."
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Here's the actual link to this information from CMS: Link
If there were 300 million Americans in 2006, and the average cost was $3443 per person, that gives a health care spending total of $1.0329 trillion (or $1,032.9 billion).
If the over-64 group cost $8,776 each, and there were 45 million in that group, that would give a total of $394 billion annually. (That's fairly close to the Treasury Dept's published total for Medicare spending.)
If $394.9 billion is subtracted from $1,032.9 billion, it totals $638 billion. Thus it costs $638 billion to take care of the under-65 population.
If the 45 million over-64 population is subtracted from the 300 million total population, it gives 255 million.
Thus the cost of taking care of 255 million under-65 Americans is $638 billion, or $2,500/person/year.
The cost of covering 45 million Americans (assumed not currently insured), would be $112 billion/year, or $1.12 trillion over 10 years.
This would be the entire TOTAL cost of taxpayers paying 100% of the for 45 million Americans. With a 20% deductible, and with taxpayers paying ALL of the remaining 80%, the cost would be $900 billion to taxpayers over 10 years. ($90 billion/year)
Any additional amount that enrollees paid in premiums would subtract further from that amount. If enrollees also paid a $1,000/year premium (along with the standard 20% deductible used by Medicare), the taxpayer cost would be only $540 billion over 10 years--- and only $54 billion/year!
This is one hell of a lot cheaper than the proposed $900 billion insurance company welfare package being proposed in Congress.
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Joined: Jan 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 6,327 Location: Southern California Karma: 180
Re: Big Pharma Sleazeballs « Result #16 Yesterday at 12:05pm »
Here's an interesting chart from the Kaiser Family Foundation showing the relative profit margins of Pharmaceutical companies vs. the rest of the economy.
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
that was an enlightening piece of history, as much as i hate the mises site, I admit it's a necessary stop on the path to enlightenment. i particularly took issue with this sentence:
"Of course, this was no more beneficence than Wal-Mart is a charity—the East India Company was badly overstocked with tea, and held a monopoly on legitimately imported tea granted, as all monopolies are, by the government in England."
Mises argues for free trade by sanctifying government enforced monopoly? That part of the article feels a little... "glossed over"
That's because regressives think there is nothing wrong with monopolies, like OPEC.
Joined: Jan 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 6,327 Location: Southern California Karma: 180
Re: Big Pharma Sleazeballs « Result #20 on Nov 18, 2009, 11:54pm »
The net income of the Big Pharma cartel is incredible.
Johnson & Johnson: $12.95 billion
Pfizer: $8.1 billion
Novartis: $8.2 billion
Merck: $7.81 billion
AstraZeneca: $6.1 billion
Bristol-Myers-Squib: $5.25 billion
Abbott $4.88 billion
GlaxoWellcome: $4.60 billion
Amgen: $4.20 billion
Just the above companies alone have a combined net income of $62.09 billion. Over a 10-year period (the same time from used to measure the cost of health care reform), is $620.9 billion. Compare that to the $850-950 billion estimated cost of health care reform.
Big Pharma is making out like bandits under the current legislative regime, especially with the Medicare Prescription Drug bill. The handouts will be even greater with the current health care reform legislation.
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Joined: Jan 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 6,327 Location: Southern California Karma: 180
Re: The real Boston Tea Party « Result #21 on Nov 18, 2009, 11:31pm »
The anti-American, anti-protectionist screed by Joseph Potts was truly disgusting. This is typical of the mentality of many of the globalist, profits-at-all cost thinking of Libertarians.
I don't think all libertarians would agree with this, but many would. It's all about their need to be free to profiteer at their own countrymen's expense, regardless of how many Americans it hurts.
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Re: Americans' ignorance is astounding.... « Result #22 on Nov 18, 2009, 9:05pm »
Sarah P has confused the TARP with the Economic Stimulus.
Technically she was correct, it was a economic stimulus for the ultra rich who own Congress and the President. The other so-called economic stimulus package was mostly pork and money for state government workers(not private sector).
That said, Xtra nailed it with this: maybe so, but remember that we have elite, criminal, traitorous, immoral, evil scum running the game and protecting their criminal family like the mafia does....
Yep and even with a large informed citizenry(which we don't not have in any appreciable numbers) fighting such a kleptocratic cartel takes almost a act of rebellion or a insurgency against the rich and powerful. Because these people control all the levers of power from the news media to who gets the needed funding to make a successful run for the senate, etc. This makes it very hard if not impossible to use the system they control to our own ends.
Not to mention owning both political parties, who also make sure those congressmen who are trouble makers don't get any real authority to do much of anything.
“Goods produced under conditions which do not meet a rudimentary standard to decency should be regarded as contraband and not allowed to pollute the channels of international commerce.” -Franklin Delano Roosevelt
“Goods produced under conditions which do not meet a rudimentary standard to decency should be regarded as contraband and not allowed to pollute the channels of international commerce.” -Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Joined: Dec 2006 Gender: Female Posts: 622 Karma: 96
Re: The real Boston Tea Party « Result #25 on Nov 18, 2009, 7:08pm »
ummm that article was enlightening, count me among the ones who misunderstood the full story behind the Boston tea party. If that article is correct as to it's true nature, I now love what the tea party represents even more, and can only conclude the current tea party crowd is made up of mostly the wrong type of party goers for the original party theme. The person who wrote that article is sorely misguided though, because all the proof over the years since then backs the tea party's original protectionist measures as working and helping to build America up to a great industrial nation. All one needs to do is look at what eliminating such protectionist measures has brought us today and our current sorry state totally dependent on foreigners for everything and massive unemployment. And I agree agito, they defend free trade with the East India Company which was an abusive power, granted monopolistic privileges through the government, how absurd to base your proof of the benefits of free trade on this. pfft
“Goods produced under conditions which do not meet a rudimentary standard to decency should be regarded as contraband and not allowed to pollute the channels of international commerce.” -Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Everyday people lack basic economic, government, and financial knowledge.
maybe so, but remember that we have elite, criminal, traitorous, immoral, evil scum running the game and protecting their criminal family like the mafia does....
most people I know, may be dumb or lack knowledge, but there not evil or greedy bastards, do you really feel all that better throwing stones at them cuzz there not as sophisticated as you?
I believe the Bible says it best
All three synoptics recount an episode during the Perean ministry of the Saviour where a rich young man (called a “ruler” in Luke) approaches Jesus and asks what he can do to have eternal life. Jesus tells him to keep the commandments, and in response to a request for clarification refers to the Ten Commandments. The young man replies that he has kept these from his youth, and then asks what yet he lacks. The reply is to sell all he has, give the proceeds to the poor, and follow Jesus. The young man then walks away sadly, because he had great possessions.
Following this story is a section where Jesus utters the now famous proverb, which I will quote below as it is given in each gospel:
“And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” (Mt. 19:24)
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” (Mk. 10:25)
“For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” (Lk. 18:25)
“Goods produced under conditions which do not meet a rudimentary standard to decency should be regarded as contraband and not allowed to pollute the channels of international commerce.” -Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Re: Americans' ignorance is astounding.... « Result #29 on Nov 18, 2009, 1:41pm »
Heck I'm a bit of a gold bug and even I would think someone trying to sell me a 1oz Maple Leaf for $50 was running a scam.
As for Leno's Jay Walking, it speaks for itself as to general ignorance of many Americans, which BTW isn't limited to high school graduates but Ivy League ones as well if certain polls are to be believed. Sadly much of the ignorance IMO was inculcated into these adults as children by our school system that managed to make learning as horrible as possible, then we have TV which nothing more than a medium for mind rot and venality.
The only way I see to fix voting is requiring all participants to take a simple civics test composed of three questions which would filter out probably half of the mouth breathers that show up. Others would be too terrified to show up.
The thing that gets me the most, is that I now see people claiming to be ayn rand followers who make claims that contradict what I got from reading her books.
The problem with cults is that their young followers can easily be re-directed to nefarious purposes that are completely at odds with why the kids joined up in the first place.
For example, when Charles Manson was picking up young girls in city parks, he didn’t say, “Hi! I’m a mass murderer. Want to come and help me kill people?” No. He spoke of peace and love and similar sixties-type themes. It was only after they had transferred their loyalty to him that he gradually shifted his focus from peace and love to murder and mayhem.
This is what I see happening with the Mises cult. Their legions of teenage followers joined up because they were attracted by all the talk of freedom and liberty. But now their leaders are gradually shifting the focus towards socialism and slavery. Anybody who questions this new definition of what “Austrian economics” means is quietly banned.
How else can you explain why this post was banned?
How else can you explain this quotation from the Review of Austrian Economics?
Quote:
Socialist objectives can be achieved in a market context with the rule of law if market socialism were to take the form of competitive worker-owned and self-managed enterprises, supplemented by universally available welfare redistributions, which could include a basic income, universal capital grants, or education and health insurance vouchers.
How else can you explain this quotation from the Austrian Economist Blog?
Quote:
Labor-managed firms themselves are not antagonistic to the market economy. Even if other forms of employment contract are not legally permitted, such firms still exist in a market context where competition and profit and loss determine their success or failure.
Of course, if other forms of employment are not legally permitted, then one is a slave. What else does the word mean?
"When reminiscing about the almost forgotten post 2007 decline, many - with a feeling of relief and nostalgia - consider the 2008 decline to have been the perfect storm - emphasis on 'have been.'
Aside from a few bad memories and lessons to be learned, that storm left fertile grounds for tons of green shoots to sprout and propel the major indexes a la S&P 500 (SNP: ^GSPC), Dow Jones (DJI: ^DJI), and Nasdaq (Nasdaq: ^IXIC) higher.
To the dismay of Main Street, the green shoots seen on Wall Street haven't really carried over to the average consumer just yet. Looking at averages, and based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) real number of jobless workers (called U-6), almost 1 out of 5 (17.5%) Americans are without job.
Even though it's not visible on Wall Street, at least not yet, there are repercussions. In fact, you don't even have to look too hard to find them.
Today's top story is that housing starts in October unexpectedly fell to their lowest level in six months. Keep in mind this is despite the tax credit for first-time home buyers. But that's not all.
Nicolas Cage forecloses 2 homes
As CNNMoney points out, even Academy Award winners are suffering from financial woes. Actor Nicolas Cage lost two homes in New Orleans worth a total of $6.8 million in a foreclosure auction Thursday. Unlike the average working man, Nicolas Cage has five new movies slated for 2010. This should help heal his bruised ego and real estate portfolio.
Goldman Sachs sells Miami condos for a 66% loss
Bloomberg reports that Goldman Sachs sold 158 condominiums in a foreclosed project outside Miami for about $113,000 each, roughly the cost of land and construction. Condo prices in Miami fell close to 40% compared to a year ago.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - in trouble again
This is not widely publicized, but Fannie Mae is asking for an additional $15 billion in government aid after posting a $19.8 billion loss. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac own or guarantee almost 31 million home loans worth about $5.5 trillion, or about half of all mortgages.
The Federal Housing Administration (FHA), another government agency, is heading for the same kind of financial trouble. The FHA has insured about 1 out of 4 new loans made this year. 17% of FHA borrowers are at least one payment behind, or in foreclosure.
Keep in mind that Fannie, Freddie, and the FHA are struggling despite the third quarter being the best quarter for real estate prices in quite a while.
Of course, large housing agencies are just reflecting what's happening throughout the country. Median home sales prices declined in 123 out of 153 metropolitan areas year-over year, or 11%.
The curious case of real estate ETFs
Even though real estate prices have never really recovered, real estate ETFs - or REIT ETFs - have done quite well. From their March lows to their respective recovery highs, the major U.S. real estate ETFs, such as the iShares Cohen & Steers Realty Majors (NYSEArca: ICF - News), SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF (NYSEArca: RWR - News), Vanguard REIT ETF (NYSEArca: VNQ - News), iShares Dow Jones US Real Estate (NYSEArca: IYR - News), and SPDR S&P Homebuilders (NYSEArca: XHB - News) have gained more than 100%.
Any homeowner in the country will tell you that there is a huge discrepancy between the performance of ETFs and 'real life' real estate prices. If home prices had doubled since March, there would be very few foreclosures....
Real estate - more than just a sector
The troubles in real estate are truly alarming. Real estate is more than just a plain U.S. industry sector - it's the cradle of the post 2007 financial meltdown. As real estate goes, so go the banks and the economy.
The unemployment rate of 10.2% has already gone beyond the worst-case scenario projections of the banks' stress test. This worst-case scenario assumed unemployment of 8.9% for 2009 and 10.3% for 2010.
Unemployment has a direct impact on real estate prices. There are very few jobless Americans who can afford to support their family and home on a fraction of their income, via unemployment checks. This means big losses for big banks.
What's ahead for real estate?
The direction for real estate as an asset class seems harder to predict than stocks. In general, real estate data doesn't go back as far as data for the Dow Jones. At times, there is a correlation between real estate and equities which allows formulating a fairly high probability forecast.
The last time we've seen a real estate bubble followed by a stock bubble was in 1926, when real estate topped and in 1929 when stocks topped. We've seen the same correlation just recently when real estate peaked in 2005, followed by stocks in 2007.
The Great Depression was ruled by deflationary forces. All asset classes, aside from the price of gold, which was fixed, lost value. The decline made no exception for real estate.
Appropriately, there is no other bear market other than the Great Depression, that measures up to the post 2007 bear market. Even this rally mirrors the Great Depression. Until today, the 1929 - 1930 rally was the mother of all sucker rallies. It is quite possible that the current rally may actually eclipse the prior record.
Hand in hand to lower prices
A few months ago, the ETF Profit Strategy Newsletter pointed out that the Great Depression bear market rally retraced just about 50% of the points lost during the initial decline.
Today's equivalent of the 50% retracement for the Dow is right around 10,500 (NYSEArca: DIA - News), 1,125 for the S&P 500 (NYSEArca: SPY - News). Those levels have either been reached (Dow), or are very close (S&P).
If the parallels remain intact, a significant decline is about to happen - for stocks, commodities, (NYSEArca: DBC - News) and real estate...."
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Re: Banks Buying Gold « Result #33 on Nov 18, 2009, 12:06pm »
The WSJ article is not quite as enthusiatic as is Richard Russel. The WSJ article states in part...
"While China has become an obvious buyer, some analysts say the country is likely to buy production from Chinese mines rather than buy from the IMF. China, the world's largest gold producer, has $2.3 trillion in foreign reserve, with the majority in U.S. Treasury securities.
.Even a tiny shift in China's reserves toward gold could have big ramifications, says Andy Smith, a senior metals strategist at Bache Commodities, a subsidiary of Prudential Financial. That makes it likely China probably won't make any big moves, he said."
Joined: Jan 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 6,327 Location: Southern California Karma: 180
Gold Reserves & Holdings « Result #34 on Nov 18, 2009, 10:04am »
It's interesting to track the sales and purchases of gold by Central Banks over the last 5-6 years.
Since July 2003, China's central bank has purchased 454 tons of gold, while Russia's has 179 tons. Indonesia has purchased 23 tons and Kazakhstan purchase 19 tons.
The US, Japan, Germany, and Great Britain have reported an amount of Gold held by their central banks.
Most other countries and international organizations (i.e., the BIS and ECB) have been net sellers.
Over the same period of time, Switzerland has sold 740 tons, France 579 tons, the ECB 265 tons, Spain 242 tons, Portugal 235 tons, the Netherlands 230 tons, the Philippines 118 tons, the BIS (Bank of International Settlements) 72 tons, Sweden 54 tons, Austria 37 tons, & Belgium 30 tons.
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Joined: Jan 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 6,327 Location: Southern California Karma: 180
Banks Buying Gold « Result #35 on Nov 18, 2009, 9:51am »
Here's another article on why gold prices are rising. The specific information given in the article on gold reserves comes directly from the Sept. 2009 report from the World Gold Council.
"There are a number of items favoring higher gold now. Interest rates are at zero, which means the "opportunity cost" of owning gold now is highly favorable. You sacrifice no yield in owning gold vs. Treasury bills. T-bills pay you nothing, so you might as well have your money in gold.
The Bernanke Fed will evidently stop at nothing in its all-out attempt to "jump start"" the wobbly U.S. economy. This means spending and building debt at a never-seen-before rate. This will result in inflation. The Fed can create fiat money -- any quantity at will, but it cannot direct where that money will go. So far, the money is not going into the economy, banks remain reluctant to lend and consumers are reluctant to spend.
The newly created money has been going into bank reserves and into the stock market. Stocks have been rising on an ocean of liquidity. The sinking dollar has been a huge help to the big Dow-type stocks, which benefit from their ability to export. This is resulting in worldwide central bank inflation as the banks seek to devalue their money in an effort to keep the dollar strong.
The world's central banks are now seeking to protect themselves from a falling dollar by buying gold. After years of selling gold, ironically, the central banks are now buying gold. In today's WSJ we see the headline, "Central Banks Join a New Gold Rush." Russell Comment -- This is indeed ironic. In swapping their own paper for gold, many central banks are admitting that gold is superior to the very paper they are creating out of thin air. Many nations are now seeking to boost the ratio of gold to paper in their reserves. The U.S. has the largest ratio of gold to junk fiat paper, 77.4%. But the U.S. stupidly only places the value of our gold at $42.22 an ounce. If the U.S. marked our gold to market, it would be a tremendous help to our government's balance sheet. But the U.S. prefers to live in a fantasy world where gold is worth less than $50 an ounce!
Germany has 69.2% of its reserves in gold.
Italy has 66.6%.
France has 70.6%.
The U.K. has 17.6% (after idiotically selling most of its gold near the low below $300 an ounce).
Japan has 2.3% of its reserves in gold.
India has 4.0%.
Russia has 4.3%.
China has 1.9%.
It's easy to see that Russia, India and China are low on gold. All three would like to at least double the percentage of gold in their reserves. The race is on for these central banks to accumulate gold without running the price of gold sky-high.
In the U.S., literally no one owns gold. Rather, U.S. citizens are selling their gold (jewelry) to companies who are advertising that they'll buy "your overpriced" gold for cash.
A few nations are actively promoting the ownership of gold. China, the world's biggest miner of gold, has been encouraging its people to buy gold. In London, Harrod's department store is now selling gold coins and bars to anyone who has the paper to buy gold. Within a year or so, I expect public buying of gold to reach a crescendo. Interestingly, most Americans have never seen a gold coin."
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
Joined: Jun 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 593 Karma: 60
Re: The real Boston Tea Party « Result #36 on Nov 18, 2009, 9:49am »
that was an enlightening piece of history, as much as i hate the mises site, I admit it's a necessary stop on the path to enlightenment. i particularly took issue with this sentence:
"Of course, this was no more beneficence than Wal-Mart is a charity—the East India Company was badly overstocked with tea, and held a monopoly on legitimately imported tea granted, as all monopolies are, by the government in England."
Mises argues for free trade by sanctifying government enforced monopoly? That part of the article feels a little... "glossed over"
Re: Americans' ignorance is astounding.... « Result #37 on Nov 18, 2009, 9:34am »
Americans are passive and inattentive to politics. The average American enjoys the politics and economics that has not motivated Americans to fear politics and economics. This may or may not change, I do not know. Americans ignorance is due in large part to the stability and bliss that comes from American politics. Politics and economics in America are not good right now but Americans still are not motivated to act and change our passive, inattentive behavior. Americans have faith in its politics and economics even as Americans suffer.
Open Letter To President Obama Yesterday you undoubtedly saw my letter to The Chinese Premier. Today, it's your turn.
You could have made quite a splash over there in China - and made a difference for all Americans. But instead, you did nothing of the sort - you simply continued the sell-out that has been going on for the last two decades in the so-called "strong relationship" between China and America.
That "strength" has included selling China advanced radar technology allowing them to shortcut 20 years of development time off their ICBM targeting, making their nuclear weapons far more lethal to potential targets - including targets in the United States. It has included turning a blind eye to the blatant and outrageous technology rip-offs that go on over in that nation every day. You won't see them because your Presidential Motorcade will never be allowed in the street markets found all over the nation, but if you were, you'd see literal millions of unlawfully-made copies of US-created software and music sold openly while the cops stand by to protect the vendors instead of enforcing internationally-agreed to laws that the Chinese pay only lip service to. And it has included granting virtually tariff-free "trading" status to a nation that forces poor farmers off their land and into sweatshop factories, away from their families where they are paid a buck a day in US equivalent wages, turning out products for sale in the US.
And let's not forget who these companies are. They're the WalMarts, Apples and Nikes of the world - many of them huge American firms. Oh not directly - that would bring these firms under US labor and regulatory stricture. No, they're "independent companies" owned by Chinese slave-drivers who instruct their employees to lie when the "auditors" from WalMart and Apple show up, telling them to a single employee that they're "complying" with reasonable wage and hour laws under penalty of losing their job, being blacklisted forever and literally starving to death. Since there are no whistleblower protections in China (it is, after all, a Communist government) the big US companies can claim to be "responsible" while in the background you hear the slave-driver's whip crack - and everyone smiles (except the Chinese worker who is being outrageously exploited.)
You ought to know something about this, given your heritage. Kenya featured prominently in the global slave trade until the British put a stop to it. There's nothing like a bit of history to screw up the revisionism that finds its way into American Politics, is there?
You ran on a populist platform and won on the basis of "hope and change." But hope and change is not working at WalMart while offshoring the production of our various consumer goods to China where the replacement for our US workers are paid a buck a day. Indeed, many of the 8 million American jobs lost since the top of the employment market in mid-2007 will never come back, simply because the small and mid-sized businesses that once dotted the landscape have been destroyed by this "offshoring" activity. It is clearly not possible for a US supplier or vendor to compete with $1/day wages or anything approaching it, yet this is the "competitive supplier" environment over in China and elsewhere.
The Truth is that America and China are locked in a deadly embrace. They're not buying our Treasury Debt to be nice or "support" us. They're buying because we have exported our inflation to them for more than two decades, and they're desperately trying to prevent it from destroying them. See, when you make $1/day (or $2/day) inflation is the difference between eating and not eating, and hungry people have a habit of reaching for pitchforks. Since there are about 1 billion of them (ordinary Chinese) and a much smaller number of military and leadership, well.... you do the math.
But that "buying" of our Treasury Debt has fueled your (and your Republican cronies) desire to spend beyond all reason. This distortion has allowed the government to blow money it does not have for more than a decade without watching interest rates ratchet inexorably upward, as happened to Bill Clinton and those before him.
The problem is whatever can't continue forever won't, and if you've been induced to borrow "interest only" (as our government always has) and the interest rates start to rise you can be bankrupted even if you stop borrowing. Your refusal to recognize that nobody can survive for long when you take in only half of what you spend, borrowing the rest, is an outrage and insult to anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size.
Speaking of outrages, let's go down the list of current ones. We can start with the SIGTARP report on AIG and their counterparties. While AIG might have been free (under the law) to sell "insurance-like contracts" with no capital behind them, there is nothing that forced The NY Fed (and The Federal Reserve generally) to allow regulated bank-like entities to purchase those swaps and count them as "money good hedges." Yet the very boob who apparently did that, along with intentionally overpaying counterparties, was appointed by you to head the Treasury. I suppose none of us should be surprised at this revelation by Mr. Barofsky, given that one of Timmy's qualifications to head the Internal Revenue Service was that he didn't even bother paying his own taxes. You do realize the example this set for other Americans, right? Is that wise, given that the government is undoubtedly going to try to extract more and more tax money from the rest of us in the years to come?
Then there are people like Lloyd Blankfein, who yesterday "apologized" for "participating in things that were clearly wrong." I know you created a "government-wide task force" as of yesterday to "fight financial fraud", but somehow I doubt we'll see the person who made a public admission yesterday of "participating in things that were clearly wrong" in the dock. Indeed, yesterday we were treated to a revelation that Sacramento is suing a bunch of banks for bid-rigging and kickbacks - suspiciously similar to what apparently happened in Jefferson County Alabama, in which JP Morgan/Chase agreed to a fine and "foregone profits" of nearly three quarters of a billion dollars - while "not admitting guilt." Pardon my cynicism, but I've yet to see anyone willingly hand over nearly 3/4 of a billion dollars unless they're concerned that they might lose a lawsuit or worse, be found guilty in a criminal trial. It would seem to me that this "task force", if it really is intended to do something productive, would start at the top - with Racketeering prosecutions aimed at our largest financial firms. But that's not going to happen, is it?
Speaking of "OCCE" (operating a continuing criminal enterprise), what about drug companies? There's a bit of a problem there too, no? Are not the drug companies one of the beneficiaries of your alleged "Health Care Reform"? After all, you're not going to strip them of their re-importation protection, are you? Why not?
Far more important however is where a "gentlemen" (Kindler) wound up after not one but two criminal guilty pleas by Pfizer for the same crime. He was elected to the board of the NY Fed. Are you as proud of Pfizer's record as is Mr. Kindler is as their former CEO and General Counsel? It appears so - not only does your "health care" proposal not bar deals with drug companies that have twice pled guilty to the same felony, not only is Pfizer still operating as a corporation (where any "natural person" who did the same sort of thing would be sitting in the hoosegow) but in addition you've sat back silently while their CEO is appointed to one of the chief banking regulatory positions in The United States!
Here's the problem at the end of the day Mr. President.
You were elected on a platform of "Hope and Change." In point of fact the only change we got is the change at the bottom of our pockets - all the rest of our money has been siphoned off by the very same robber barons and banksters that have corrupted our nation for decades. You've done exactly nothing to prosecute them for their previous actions or prevent them from doing the same things in the future. Nearly a year after your election Citibank served upon the American people a 29.9% "rate jack" on their credit cards - an "atomic bird" served up by one of the largest financial firms in The United States, and one that the government now owns a large stake in. This was a slap in the face of Americans by THE GOVERNMENT - that is, YOUR ADMINISTRATION.
You claim to be for the working class people in this country, yet you bow down to China paying people $1/day to assemble junk products, from capacitors that explode (found in literally millions of pieces of electronics) to melamine-laced "food products" to poisonous toothpaste to corrosive drywall that destroys wiring, plumbing, and, allegedly, the lungs of US Citizens.
We continue to hear that we "must reform health care" yet just recently Pfizer pled guilty to a criminal felony that it previously, years ago, pled guilty to before. Nobody went to prison, and the fine levied was less than 1% of the firm's market capitalization. A mere cost of doing business. These are the "engines" of Americans' health you wish to protect with laws that force we the people to pay for the development of drugs and medical devices that are then used worldwide - without the rest of the world paying "their fair share" for the developments that save their lives. We're a generous people but don't you think such charity should be by choice rather than extracted at gunpoint?
You refuse to step in and force The Fed to be audited, even though you could get behind Representative Paul and demand it happen. Why? Is it because you're protecting the very people who ripped us all off? There are those who believe the true purpose of your Chinese trip is to find a way to pry open the doors in China so our Banksters can loot them, since the blood all seems to be gone from Americans - the vampires simply drank too much and killed us all. There's one small problem with that plan, if indeed it is your intention - in China they shoot people for the sorts of things that the banksters did over here. Call it a "feature" of Communism if you'd like.
Let's face it: America may need some protectionism. Americans can't be expected to compete with $1/day - or $2/day - in wages. While this "looks good" for a little while as prices come down just as business profits look good when you fire people in the quarter you do it (witness the last two quarters of "earnings") those employees who lost their jobs can't buy anything in the future, as their income has evaporated! They wind up on the dole, and this drives our budget deficit from 20% of our Federal Budget to roughly 50%. The pegs and forced buying of Treasuries that have allowed this to happen won't last forever, and when (not if) they snap they will force a Federal Government default. Thus, my statement in the open letter to China's Premier - we're not going to pay you.
Some have claimed in comments I received that my views in that letter are some sort of jingoistic orgasm. Nothing could be further from the truth; my views are simply an expression of mathematical fact. Math is the only true science.
Speaking of the math, I'm sure you're aware that about half the nation loved you at the time of your election and the other half hated you. That's a "feature" of American politics, of course. But I would be concerned for your job security down the road if you don't change course. After all, the SEUI and UAW both were strong supporters, as were the "ordinary people" who bought into your "hope and change" mantra.
The problem is that you haven't kept any of those promises. Your "stimulus" didn't, your "Recovery Czar" has refused to certify the jobs "saved or gained" numbers (that's because they're flat lies, as is obvious from the employment situation report's household survey) and a huge stock market rally aside, there hasn't been any real turn in the economy. Instead Wall Street is feasting on the destruction of the dollar, which is a direct consequence of your policies - spending more than one makes eventually destroys confidence in the strength of your balance sheet, and the puerile acts of a Fed Chairman who you claim to support for re-appointment in his futile attempt to keep the musical chairs game going isn't helping matters. You could stop this tomorrow by demanding that Bernanke raise rates to a mere 2% immediately or you'll replace him with someone who will - after all, his reconfirmation has not yet occurred, and your nomination can be withdrawn. You could fire Timmy and direct Mr. Holder to prosecute all of the crooks on Wall Street that stole the hopes and dreams of millions of Americans, then looted their retirement accounts on top of it. While your admission of the obvious this morning - that "too much debt could lead to a double-dip" sounds good, the fact of the matter is that it is your administration that has piled on most of this debt - and continues to do so. Are you admitting - in advance - to what's to come next year?
Best of luck to you Mr. President - from where this commentator sits, given the underlying realities of the economy and exploitation of our working class and your willful blindness to the mathematical realities of our fiscal and economic situation, you're going to need it.
Joined: Jan 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 6,327 Location: Southern California Karma: 180
Re: Americans' ignorance is astounding.... « Result #39 on Nov 18, 2009, 8:50am »
In the 1st video (with the Canadian Maple Leaf), it was a combination of people thinking both that they might be getting scammed, but also not really knowing what the coin was worth. If it was me, and if it looked like a Canadian Maple Leaf, and felt as heavy as one, I'd have paid the $50. Though it could have been part Tungsten, there'd have still been enough gold in it (at $1,100/oz.) to make it worth over $50.
The 2nd video was the more telling. Jay Leno does a lot of these on-the-street surveys, and it really is amazing how little some of his interviewees know--about anything. And it certainly does make the case as to how we got into the mess we're in, and why we continue to elect anti-populist politicians to office.
Unlike all the voter-registration advocates, I'd rather see less people vote who don't know what they're voting for. Rather than having voter registration drives, I'd rather see voter education drives--focusing on people already registered to vote.
Obama: "I wish I could vote [for] CAFTA....Amer. workers are afraid of globalization" "We need more trade....We shouldn't try to stop [globalization]""I don't accept...that illegal immigration suppresses wages";US Employment / Real Weekly Wages
economics of California « Result #40 on Nov 18, 2009, 7:02am »
The politics and economics of California suck.
I have long advocated the idea that politics and economics are two sides of the same coin.
On the bright side, the Sunshine in California creates great and moderate wheather.
It does not matter what I advocate for the economics and politics in California because I have just 6 votes. I pursuade my family usually to vote as I vote. My family votes in almost every election anyways. The most recent election here resulted in just a 13% voter turnout. Americans and especially the local voters are passive and inattentive to politics.
Less than four months after California leaders stitched together a patchwork budget, a projected deficit of nearly $21 billion already looms, according to a report to be released Wednesday by the state's chief budget analyst.
The new figure -- the nonpartisan analyst's first projection for the coming budget year -- threatens to send Sacramento back into budgetary gridlock and force more across-the-board cuts in state programs.
The projected deficit includes $6.3 billion for the remainder of the current fiscal year (ends June 30th), and $14.4 billion for the next fiscal year.
![[Home]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif)
![[Help]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif)
![[Search]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif)
![[Login]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif)
![[Register]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif)
![[Search This Thread]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/search2.gif)
![[Reply]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/reply.gif)
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/sendtopic.gif)
![[Print]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif)
Author
![[Quote]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/quote.gif)
Logged
![[avatar]](http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c190/unlawflcombatnt/Mc.gif)
![[homepage]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif)
![[image]](http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c190/unlawflcombatnt/11-19-09grphHlthCSpndAge2bcW-X.gif)
![[image]](http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c190/unlawflcombatnt/11-19-09grphBigPharmaProf2W-X.gif)
Author
