What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[mercury14]

That's not what Koala quoted last. Isn't that word of god?

Yeah well if you add up all of Koala's updates the Dow is sitting at -56,000 today.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Scary part is if that number weren't so perfectly round I would have had to ask you if that was a joke or if you got bored and did the math.

 

[koalabear]

Look MORON talking to the voices in it's head.

 

[cebalrai]

Damn them!

Let's look at the states with the lowest GDP per capita and overall shittiest economies despite low-tax red state economics:


50 - Mississippi
49 - Idaho
48 - West Virginia
47 - South Carolina
46 - New Mexico
45 - Alabama
46 - Arkansas
45 - Montana
44 - Kentucky
43 - Michigan
42 - Tennessee
41 - Florida
40 - Arizona
39 - Maine
38 - Missiouri
37 - Indiana
36 - Georgia
35 - Utah
34 - Ohio
33 - Oklahoma


Notice a pattern here?

Oooh! Oooh! I do!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

How come your opinion of well, everything is always exactly that of Fox News talk show hosts? Can you give an a single example where you think for yourself?

pot ----> kettle

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

As you know, minimum wage establishes a baseline. If min wage is dropped back to $5 per hour we'd see a lot of people making $5.25.

And what do you think would happen if we abolished it completely?

More people would work. More people would get training and real wages would go up.

Minimum wage is yet another one of the fallacies of what you can see, but the proponents never consider what the unseen effects are when you begin to micromanage the affairs of another based on your sense of "noble purpose."

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."
Frédéric Bastiat

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You didn't answer my question.

You literally echo every scrap of their narrative here on a daily basis. Why do you do that?

The same reason you daily echo the sentiments of the die-hard Socialist.

Basic undermining philosophy. Vette talks of Liberalism and the founding principles of this country while you adopt the attitudes and the thinking of the French Revolution and its subsequent multiple economic failures. The latter appeals to you for it is wrapped in noble purpose, but we see that wrapping not as shining new clothes, but the transparency of the tyrant...

That is the real divide in this country, the altruists vs the realists, not rich-poor, religious-secular, minority-white, but the desires of those who would eternally torment us with their good intentions.

"It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
CS Lewis

Shit Happens!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And you believe Reagan wasn't really shot. He faked it.

AJ, you support trickle-down economics... and then attack anyone who calls you on your shit with straw man arguments. Nevermind that it's never been shown to work, and even shown not to work.

The problem with trickle-down economics is that it doesn't trickle. It breeds great wealth in the hands of a select few while crushing the middle class and working class. It depresses consumer demand by shifting wealth into the hands of hoarders while moving it away from those who spend. It's a job killer.

That must be an attempt at comedy or ad hominem, for I have never postulate that, ever.

No, it does not. Up until 1930 we had trickle down and it worked with continual expansion albeit with normal business cycles and bubbles as free markets are wont to do. In the mid 19th century, the German school of economics decided that, based on a Historical reading of economics, getting away from the Sociological aspects of economics to try and make it appear more of a Science, they determined that smart men could manage an economy centrally in a much smarter manner than could be done with the voodoo of "invisible hands." To date, that school, the school of the French Revolution and yourself has yet to ever deliver upon its promise, and yet each generation returns to it full of the hubris that says, look at our technology, we are evolved, smarter and have better "models" and real science this time, but alas, they never do which is why Smith, von Humboldt, Bastiat, and Mises are as relevant today as they were when they were in their heydays...

There's this mentality that says, get the rich, there's not enough of them to protect themselves, taxes don't get passed on to the middle-class, and HEY! we need more taxes on the rich because the middle-class is inexplicably shrinking... And after you tax the hell out of your bosses and landlords, how the fuck do you think they make up the tax? Do you think they just take it in the shorts? or is it possible that they just pass the cost of doing business on down the line. It never ceases to amaze me that the people who know for a fucking fact that shit rolls down-hill think trickle down is a load of shit...
A_J, the Stupid

When, I guess I should say if, a rather big one, you decide to abandon the fallacy of false cause and actually begin to determine why the rich get richer in direct proportion to the power and scope of central government at the expense of all the other classes, then maybe we can have a mature conversation. As long as you cling to The Sophisms of the Protectionists your end of the dialog will always be that of a spoiled child being told either that it can not have something, or that it was awarded that which it demanded only to find it a failure, which, of course, cannot be the fault of the juvenile, so there must be some outlandish, cartoonish villain out there in need of vilification and punishment and in this we see exactly why the French Revolution devolved into a Guillotine party...

It is popular today to blame capitalism for everything that displeases. Indeed, who is still aware of what he would have to forego if there were no "capitalism?" When great dreams do not come true, capitalism is charged immediately. This may be a proper procedure for party politics, but in Scientific discussion, it should be avoided.

...

"The more communal enterprise extends, the more attention is drawn to the bad business results of nationalized and municipalized undertakings. It is impossible to miss the cause of the difficulty: a child could see where something was lacking. So that it cannot be said that this problem has not been tackled. But the way in which it has been tackled has been deplorably inadequate. Its organic connection with the essential nature of socialist enterprise has been regarded as merely a question of better selection of persons. It has not been realized that even exceptionally gifted men of high character cannot solve the problems created by socialist control of industry."
Ludwig Heinrich Elder von Mises

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Name one business in the history of America that couldn't afford to hire enough workers to meet consumer demand because minimum wage was too much compensation.

If you can't answer this question then you have no point.

Nice technique. Every metric here is a subjective one.

Consumer demand is always met, even if it is met in substitute goods.

Also, you ignored what I said before in that no business runs on "minimum wage." That is only a wage for raw, unskilled new workers, usually teens (or illegals). You fall prey to to the fallacy of the "seen." You see, a business forced to hire at a "living wage." You do not see the failure to expand due to labor cost, you do not see the un-hired worker as the recently hired is forced to work at his minimum wage longer to make up the difference instead of being given a raise after a short training time, you fail to see the Capital taken directly from the innovator which drags on future growth, future gains and future hires.

I challenge you, again, to prove that minimum wage does anything other than to make you feel more noble and to give labor unions another metric by which to index their future demands, for if the minimum wage goes up, surely, then they are not less valuable, and thus in their industries we see a gradual wage inflation which is a hidden tax of altruism, as is the minimum wage that becomes built into the goods and services we "demand."

It also makes for an appeal to exploit the illegal, who will contract for a lower wage and who is not at all interested in "assimilating," but stealing Capital to send home...

Shit Happens!

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

More people would work. More people would get training and real wages would go up.

Minimum wage is yet another one of the fallacies of what you can see, but the proponents never consider what the unseen effects are when you begin to micromanage the affairs of another based on your sense of "noble purpose."

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."
Frédéric Bastiat

Not quite, more people would have to work, meaning more than one job, meaning more than 40 hours per week, just to make ends meet as their income stagnated or dropped while the cost of living continually rose.

Explain how someone is supposed to "get training" so that they can improve their position when they are forced to work 50-60 hours per week at an entry level position just to make ends meet. I'm not sure exactly what world it is in which you live, but I've done 80 hours a week in the past. The was no way in hell I could have done any more to improve my situation, there simply were not enough hours in the day to do anything else. Fortunately, I had prior federally funded training from the military that gave me a leg up toward promotion from that situation or I would likely STILL be working 50-60 hours per week for half or less of what I'm making now. But Military service isn't for everyone, nor should it be required.

Given the chance, a business will pay the bare minimum legally possible to it's employees.Those of us living in the Real World™ saw that during the last decade as wages for the working poor and middle class stagnated vs inflation while corporate profits and upper level income earner wages skyrocketed. Real income has gone stagnant and in some cases lost ground for a majority of workers.

Employers prefer a somewhat high unemployment rate, because they can negotiate with a prospective (or current) employee from a position of power. "We're only offering this much for the job (or this small raise in salary). If you dont' like it, there are several other people who will take take the job." (and work an additional 20 hours at another job to make up the difference). Employers are expecting MUCH more output from employees for the same amount of pay.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Nice writing for a change, but you again begin with the same fallacy, that some people are stuck for more than a short period in a minimum wage job.

This is simply not true, once trained then they can become competitive in the labor market.

I am sorry you wasted so much time in an unusual attempt to be reasonable. Thank you for your effort.



Whatever an employer pays when left to his own devices is not a conspiracy of greed or evil intention, but what the market will actually support. When we let the market set the level, then we all win with jobs and more affordable goods. Employment is not bondage but a mutually agreed upon contract. If the wage is too low, you will not get the workers you need. If you pay too much, your competition will eat you alive.

 

[JohnnySavage]

The minimum wage is a philosophical argument. In the real world, a company budgets, say, $10 an hour for labor. The philosophical argument is: Is it better to hire one employee at $10 per hour, or two employees for $5 an hour?

A business would probably want two employees, but any individual would probably rather make $10 then $5. From the economy's perspective it doesn't matter because the labor cost is the same.

You can raise the minimum wage to $75 per hour, and the labor budget of the company won't change. What will change are the number of employees sharing that budget.

A minimum wage is set arbitrarily based on political competing interests, not economics. Why $7.25 and not $15?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The minimum wage is a philosophical argument. In the real world, a company budgets, say, $10 an hour for labor. The philosophical argument is: Is it better to hire one employee at $10 per hour, or two employees for $5 an hour?

A business would probably want two employees, but any individual would probably rather make $10 then $5. From the economy's perspective it doesn't matter because the labor cost is the same.

You can raise the minimum wage to $75 per hour, and the labor budget of the company won't change. What will change are the number of employees sharing that budget.

A minimum wage is set arbitrarily based on political competing interests, not economics. Why $7.25 and not $15?

Nice post.

If we're really concerned about the mythical "family" trying to live on minimum wage, why be niggardly?

Why not $25 an hour?

 

[JohnnySavage]

And in other news; the Democratic governor of Maryland is raising the gas tax 15 cents (it's already 38 cents a gallon). That's going to clobber the low income families who spend a larger proportion of their income on gas than the wealthy.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And in other news; the Democratic governor of Maryland is raising the gas tax 15 cents (it's already 38 cents a gallon). That's going to clobber the low income families who spend a larger proportion of their income on gas than the wealthy.

It's all about forcing them on to government subsidized transportation, and, it's for their own good.

Plus, it will help get Perg's auto safety stats closer to the side of government intervention, so that he can argue for more positive interference...

:nods:

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Nice post.

If we're really concerned about the mythical "family" trying to live on minimum wage, why be niggardly?

Why not $25 an hour?

There's nothing mythical about families trying to get by on entry level, minimum wage jobs. There's nothing mythical about people being trapped in those entry level jobs either. Just because you choose to ignore those facts doesn't mean that those people cease to exist.

It's easier for some to blame people as if they have no ambition or willingness to improve than to blame the system they hold so near and dear. It's not employers exploiting the workers in pursuit of ever higher profits.. It's the workers own fault for not getting the necessary training to improve their position while simultaneously working 50+ hours at $10 per hour (more than minimum wage) to pay the bills, child care, travel expenses, etc.

 

[JohnnySavage]

There's nothing mythical about families trying to get by on entry level, minimum wage jobs. There's nothing mythical about people being trapped in those entry level jobs either. Just because you choose to ignore those facts doesn't mean that those people cease to exist.

It's easier for some to blame people as if they have no ambition or willingness to improve than to blame the system they hold so near and dear. It's not employers exploiting the workers in pursuit of ever higher profits.. It's the workers own fault for not getting the necessary training to improve their position while simultaneously working 50+ hours at $10 per hour (more than minimum wage) to pay the bills, child care, travel expenses, etc.

Then we should raise the minimum wage to $25 per hour. That's 50k a year and... livable.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

There may be a few, but it is not a normative event, however, I will concede this, that if we continue to intervene in free markets with the positive influence of government, then we will trend to that normality and as we do so, those who empower government to good works will look to the top of the pyramid and scream about greed and evil...



... the middle class is disappearing!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Then we should raise the minimum wage to $25 per hour. That's 50k a year and... livable.

Good lord man, you are a hater!

You want them to live a good life, I say, I am better than you, for I demand $40 and hour!



There will be no medieval magic when one turns to government to be their champion. Government is not a shining knight on a strong horse; it is a night mare.
A_J, the Stupid

 

[JohnnySavage]

Good lord man, you are a hater!

You want them to live a good life, I say, I am better than you, for I demand $40 and hour!



There will be no medieval magic when one turns to government to be their champion. Government is not a shining knight on a strong horse; it is a night mare.
A_J, the Stupid

The whole "living wage" argument is such a bunch of bunk. Here in MoCo, a certain percentage of apartments in a given complex have to be set aside for low income tenants and the rent adjusted. A standard 2-bedroom "low income" apartment is $1500 a month (without utilities). $7.50 an hour doesn't even pay the rent, let alone pay for food, electricity, and transportation to work.

The minimum wage is nothing but feel good legislation to make the rich feel good about patting the poor on the head and has no practical value.

 

[MeeMie]

Obama Questions Republican’s “Sincerity” to Solve Real Problems


This coming from a guy who wrecked the US economy in three years of wreckless spending and over-regulating:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/obama-deficit-2011.jpg

 

[trysail]

Interest rates: 0.0%
less inflation..: 3.9
......................... 3.9% = Amount government is stealing from savers annually

Trailing 12-month rate of inflation ( CPI):

http://bloomberg.econoday.com/showimage.asp?imageid=21528


​

 

[trysail]

You do not want to own U.S. Treasury securities. They are an accident waiting to happen.

There is virtually no way you can reasonably expect to make money ( after taxes and inflation ) by lending to anybody for

5 years @ 1.07 % or
10 years @ 2.19 % or
30 years @ 3.20 %.


__________________

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...all-most-on-record-in-august-3-1-percent.html



China Reduced Its Holdings of U.S. Treasuries by Most on Record in August
By Daniel Kruger
October 18, 2011

China, the largest-foreign lender to the U.S., reduced its holdings of Treasuries in August by the most in at least a decade as the stripping of America’s AAA credit rating by Standard & Poor’s sent yields to record lows.

The world’s second-largest economy cut its position in U.S. government securities by $36.5 billion, or 3.1 percent, to $1.14 trillion, according to Treasury Department data released yesterday in Washington. At the same time, the data showed total foreign ownership increased 2 percent to a record $4.57 trillion as global investors sought a refuge from the financial market turmoil that followed the downgrade.

Treasuries beat stocks and commodities in August as the combination of the downgrade to AA+, slowing U.S. growth and Europe’s debt crisis drove investors into the world’s biggest and most-liquid debt market. The Treasury data also showed that holdings of Treasuries increased in the U.K. and Caribbean, where other nations often conduct purchases through.

The move in China’s figure “is not a question of people disinvesting in the U.S. because there’s a negative macro outlook,” said James Caron, head of U.S. interest-rate strategy at Morgan Stanley in New York, one of 22 primary dealers that trade Treasuries with the Federal Reserve. “This is a lot more technical in nature that has to do with dollar strengthening and opportunistic selling, given how low yields went.”

Treasuries returned 2.8 percent in August, while the global bond market gained 1.99 percent, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch index data. The MSCI All-Country World Index of stocks fell 7 percent the same month, the biggest slump since May 2010, and the Standard & Poor’s GSCI Total Return Index of commodities lost 1.8 percent. Since August, the U.S. Treasury Master Index has gained 0.76 percent through Oct. 17.

‘The Safe Haven’
Foreign holdings of U.S. Treasuries have risen 3.1 percent this year through August, the smallest increase since 2006. International ownership of U.S. government debt rose 20 percent annually the prior two years, and at a compound rate of 17 percent since 2001, or as far back as the data is available.

“The safe haven quality of U.S. Treasuries was clearly not threatened as we got downgraded in early August,” Priya Misra, head of U.S. rates strategy in New York at primary dealer Bank of America Corp. said in a telephone interview yesterday. “If there were concerns AA+ was not safe enough, you don’t see it in the flows.”

The rise in U.K. holdings likely reflects acquisitions of Treasuries by investors making their purchases from that country, Misra said. U.K. holdings climbed 12 percent to $397.2 billion in August.

Report Revisions
The Treasury’s initial reports on international purchases are based on the location where the transaction occurs, while revisions are based on location of the beneficial owner.

“China buying tends to happen through the U.K.,” Misra said. At the end of 2010 China’s holdings were revised up by more than $200 billion, while the U.K.’s were lowered by a similar amount, she said.

The data show Chinese investors’ position in U.S. notes and bonds fell to $1.12 trillion, the least since August 2010. China’s U.S. bills position rose 39 percent to $14 billion.


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...all-most-on-record-in-august-3-1-percent.html

 

[koalabear]

Stocks waver on Europe talks, Apple earnings
Europe is reportedly expanding its rescue fund. Moody's downgrades Spain's bond rating. Apple shares slump on disappointing quarterly results. Housing starts spike. Gold rises.

http://data.moneycentral.msn.com/scripts/chrtsrv.dll?symbol=%24US%3AINDU&width=298&height=160&c1=3&ce=0&cf=0&d2=0&d3=0&d4=1&d5=0&e8=1&legend=0&banner=5&af=2&palette=2

 

[JohnnySavage]

In Orlando, a city that trades in upbeat fantasies, the housing crash has been particularly painful. The total value of area homes has fallen below the total mortgage debt on those homes, according to the real estate analytics firm CoreLogic. In the parlance of the real estate world, Orlando is underwater, a distinction matched by Las Vegas.