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

[mercury14]

More of the same old non sequiturs we've come to know as your rubber duck.

There weren't any non-sequiturs in Sean's post.

 

[Busybody]

There weren't any non-sequiturs in Sean's post.

STFU, NIGGERPOONZANDI!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I said, in a perfect world, what systems would you prefer to live under? Since you seem disgusted with the United States

Notice that every single one of merc's contentions have nothing to do with economics and everything to do with progressive tax ideas the foundation of which is not known economic science, but rather, social justice.

He opened this series of exchanges with a point easily shown fallacious which I tried to discuss with him in the pages before I finally put him on ignore.

He keeps repeating the fallacy of Post hoc ergo propter hoc, if x% has n% of the money (which he conflates with wealth and Capital while ignoring inflation) then it is because they are hoarding it and that is what holds us back when it is economically clear that hoarding is a disaster, especially with the inflation of the money supply according to the basic laws of commodities, when it is clear that uncertainty drives the lack of demand for they would much be better loaning at a premium to someone sure they could secure a better future, but the future in unsecured due to the proclivities of progressive government so people refuse to borrow to gamble.

The real danger is that they would be forced to dump their holdings of inflated cash upon the markets without a corresponding rise in Capital making merc and the Obamanation fell rich, rewarded and noble in their efforts for a day or so until the inflationary pressures of an artificially high, and therefore cheap abundance of the commodity we call money drove the prices of goods and services sharply up according to economic law and the bane of progressive altruism.

They always assume a lack of negative consequence and only see the upside of having more money in their pockets, which is the same Sophism of thought offered by Phrodo when he states that he would rather see a failed government factory built now rather than waiting for a hungry private sector to build a successful factory in the future.

Now let us talk golden geese, parables, and the real greed and folly of man.

Go Go ObamZilla!

With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound
He pulls the spitting Capitalists down!

Go Go MercZilla!

Oh noes, they say he's got to go Go Go Ohio!

Nine more days of this crap and most of you are going on ignore.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

STFU, NIGGERPOONZANDI!

There may be no nonsequestrations in Sean's posts, but between the two of them there are also no offerings of economic sound, just the angry howling of the mob left behind not to the actions of others, but the faults of their own.

 

[mercury14]

My assertion is that when the spending class has too little of the nation's wealth to spend, spending and demand decline - and therefore so do jobs and profit. AJ has never been able to refute this, he just changes the subject.

AJ continues to attack me from behind iggy like the vagina he is.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Nine more days and I will not even see this thread.


We'll be working on a new thread,

The New Age of doom and gloom economic threads

But I will not see most of the complainers.

They have had their run and they made things not one wit better but sure managed to spread a lot of ignorance and negativity as if that were going to help them going "FORWARD."


lol

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Why these fools are going on ignore.

The New Economic Nationalism
The Editors, National Review Online
October 29, 2012

In the most scurrilous ad of a scurrilous campaign, President Obama’s allies at the Democratic super PAC Patriot Majority have released a new ad denouncing Mitt Romney as an “economic traitor” — their actual words — while the president identifies his own policies as the “new economic patriotism.” Of course it is not patriotism but nationalism, albeit nationalism of a funny sort — nationalism for people who do not regard the nation itself as anything particularly remarkable.

At issue is an automotive-sensor plant located in Illinois. The plant had been owned by Honeywell, which in 2011 sold its automotive-sensor operators to Sensata, a worldwide manufacturer that had never intended to keep the Illinois plant open and had made no secret of the fact. The Massachusetts-based Sensata manufactures all over the world, but 75 percent of its automotive business is in Asia, and so it is consolidating the related manufacturing there — hardly an unexpected decision, especially given that Illinois is one of our least competitive and most highly taxed states. Jesse Jackson of course was immediately on the scene, and Sensata employees and other protesters began attempting to occupy the plant, leading to two dozen arrests and causing the company to consider shuttering the facility ahead of schedule. Leave it to Jesse Jackson to conclude that if a particular location is economically uncompetitive, the natural solution is a mini-riot.

Sensata is itself a relatively new firm, having been created by Bain Capital out of the sensors division of the struggling industry giant Texas Instruments, which is offloading some of its non-core businesses in order to concentrate on its most profitable lines. (It is said to be in talks with Amazon to sell its wireless division, which supplies processors for the Kindle.) Which is to say, Sensata represents precisely the sort of good that private-equity firms do in the world: discovering value in troubled enterprises and liberating it from underperforming firms and mediocre managers.

In 2011, there was other business occupying Mitt Romney’s time, of course, and he’d long since given up his day-to-day role at Bain. But even if he had not, the Sensata episode is nothing to be ashamed of: While we are sympathetic to the workers in Illinois, the country — the patriot’s supposed object of concern — is not made better off in the long run by maintaining inefficient or uncompetitive economic arrangements. The president of the United States is charged with looking after the national interest, not the interest of specific persons who happen to live in a state that is politically important to him and who are useful as pawns in an embarrassingly low-rent political campaign.

President Obama speaks as though he believes, or does not mind appearing to believe, that there is wealth to be had from preserving underperformance, thus his pride in propping up such moribund corporations as General Motors rather than letting the firms go through a proper restructuring and emerge on the other side more competitive and profitable. This is of a piece with his eagerness to use taxpayer money to enrich unviable enterprises such as Solyndra, on the theory that he knows the power-equipment market better than the people who buy and sell in that market do. As investors go, Mitt Romney was a considerably more adept manager of his shareholders’ money than President Obama has been of the taxpayers’ precious capital.

The theory that we can somehow make ourselves better off by propping up uncompetitive corporations and industries is sometimes known as “economic nationalism,” and is very much in vogue on the left at the moment. Economic nationalism includes a spectrum of policies with the bailouts on the mild end, Hugo Chávez’s regime in the middle, and North Korea as its logically consistent final expression. All of them involve putting politicians in charge of private economic decisions, elevating political expediency over economic reality.

Economic nationalism is a deeply anti-humanistic tendency. The division of labor is what makes human life possible at a level of civilization higher than that enjoyed by Robinson Crusoe, and trade is how labor is divided across communities and across countries. Mitt Romney is too busy engaging in China-hawkery to say so, but trade makes us better off even when the trading partner on the other side of the exchange maintains restrictive economic practices such as manipulating its currency or maintaining an oppressive police state, both of which are true of China. (And trade makes poor Chinese people better off, too, something decent people would be celebrating rather than despairing over.) Comparative advantage and gains from trade are facts of economic life; those who would deny them are the economic equivalent of flat-earthers.

Economic nationalism is catnip to the Obama administration for the same reason that it attracts the small Buchananite faction of the Right: It provides a simplistic master narrative for explaining complex economic challenges to people not intellectually inclined to do the work necessary for understanding them, it is fueled by resentment and anxiety, and, most important, it gives politicians somebody to blame. As economics it is indefensible; as political rhetoric it is, unfortunately, immortal.

The United States and China are the largest manufacturing nations in the world. Among the top ten manufacturers, only two — China and India — are poor, low-wage countries. If there is a race to the bottom on manufacturing wages, somebody forgot to tell Germany, Japan, Italy, the United Kingdom, etc., or the U.S. manufacturing industry for that matter, which produces about 20 percent of world output, vs. about 15 percent for China. Those who would restrict trade for political purposes threaten to hold the entire U.S. economy hostage: The United States is by far the world’s largest trading nation, one of the largest importers and one of the largest exporters. Interfering with that benefits nobody other than politicians and the occasional union boss.

Calling a political rival a “traitor” marks a new low in an election season that has been full of them. The ironic thing is that all of this irresponsible and corrosive talk of “patriotism” and “traitors” suggests only that the Democrats love power more than country. “New Economic Patriotism”? We’ll take the old-fashioned kind of patriotism.

 

[mercury14]

Nine more days and I will not even see this thread.


We'll be working on a new thread,

The New Age of doom and gloom economic threads

But I will not see most of the complainers.

They have had their run and they made things not one wit better but sure managed to spread a lot of ignorance and negativity as if that were going to help them going "FORWARD."


lol

You seem really insecure. First there was that 20-cut-n-paste per day frenzy for a week or so, then the iggys. Something bothering you?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

In Italy, former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi waged a full frontal attack on technocrat prime minister Mario Monti, Germany, Angela Merkel and the EU imposed austerity during a 1.5 hours press conference near Milan.

The problem for Brussels is Berlusconi can force a vote because by withdrawing his support to Monti's government.

Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/#3IDpvo1y0SxfMqtt.99

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I crack me up sometimes...

Obama. You can make bottled water at home by pouring water into bottles. - Yesterday, 05:13 PM by busybody

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=834646

No, it turns out you cannot.

I got a visit from the EPA for putting a drop of chlorine in each bottle of water to purify it. They fined me for environment damage and ordered me to do impact studies, which I have to pay for and submit with application fee within 90 days.

I said, hey, it is just for my own use and it is backed by good science.

They then got snippy and sicced Commerce on me for withholding bottled water from the marketplace and affecting prices. They fined me and confiscated my water. I think they gave it to some poor pilgrims in KANSAS.

Commerce got in touch with their FOO over at Coke and now Coke is suing me for unfair trade practices and they alerted INS that someone selling water at the price I was had to be using undocumented labor, so, guess who got fined again for not being in compliance with labor law. They turned me over to homeland security who is investigating me for possible human rights violations including trafficking since their search warrant and subsequent kicking in of my front door and ransacking of my home produced no illegal workers.

Now the IRS has a lien on my home while waiting for me to prove that I do not owe them taxes on the profit I made from the water I did not sell and the taxes on the wages I did not pay. They are currently compounding interest on the fines they have levied on me.

People, do not try this at home.



And we wonder why job creation is just a tad bit slow...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The law's critics also chimed in. There are, in fact, many aspects of Dodd-Frank that entrench too-big-to-fail status for big banks. As former White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray and attorney Adam White outline them in a Weekly Standard cover story, the new regulatory burdens imposed by the law will place smaller banks at a disadvantage relative to the bigger banks that can better absorb the compliance costs. In fact, some smaller banks may have to merge to deal with the costs effectively, creating yet more big banks in the process.

There's an even more troubling aspect of Dodd-Frank, which Gray and White do not mention. The act designates the too-big-to-fail institutions as SIFIs -- Systemically Important Financial Institutions. SIFIs are subject to additional regulations and eligible for OLA. Most importantly, they have to pay staggeringly large fees to help clean up the mess when a peer SIFI fails. That's right -- Dodd-Frank requires some financial institutions to pay to fix problems created by others.

This means that there are two classes of SIFIs -- 1) the high-rolling institutions that may be tempted to take unreasonable risks with the money people have entrusted to them, and 2) the large stable firms that actually have the money (again, entrusted to them by clients) that can be expropriated by government to pay for the mistakes of the first class. In effect, Dodd-Frank turns responsible institutions into cash cows to pay for the "orderly liquidation" of the irresponsible.

The moral hazard involved in this situation should be obvious. In fact, the OLA and bailout fees together represent an opportunity for regulators to nationalize SIFIs, turning them into new versions of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, with all that entails. The idea that Dodd-Frank provides a "meaningful answer to too-big-to-fail" turns out to be a fiction -- and not a very believable one.

This is why responsible institutions have been resisting Dodd-Frank. It's also why state attorneys general are very worried about the damage that this process could do to holdings in state pension funds, which are already under great stress.

Furthermore, the law designates other firms besides banks as SIFIs, including large insurance firms. There is no good reason for this. As State Farm points out, "insurance companies in general, and mutual insurers in particular, do not engage in the types of unregulated, highly leveraged and interconnected activities that threaten the financial stability of the United States (e.g. speculative participation in credit default swaps)." This raises the possibility that regulators could try to broaden the category still further, and designate, say, large retailers and even manufacturers as SIFIs.

It is all so unnecessary. Chapter 11 bankruptcy could provide a perfectly acceptable method for liquidating a bank, as former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan noted at the SIFMA meeting last week. However, until Dodd-Frank is repealed or replaced, that will not happen.

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/29/dodd-franks-mystery-sifi-theat

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

Nine more days and I will not even see this thread.


We'll be working on a new thread,

The New Age of doom and gloom economic threads

But I will not see most of the complainers.

They have had their run and they made things not one wit better but sure managed to spread a lot of ignorance and negativity as if that were going to help them going "FORWARD."


lol

Indeed, in 2992, the economy GREW 4.2% and the DUMZ said it was a catastrophe

in 2004, unemployment was 5% and it was the worst economy since H Hoover.........


3 Seconds after Romney wins, TRAGEDY will hit

Yes, a new

Gloom n Doom and Dark Age of Mormonisn thread should be started


What a FUCKING JOKE, NIGGERPOONZANDI talking about IGGY!

HA!


TurnerLeaf is DEAD

Re-TURNERLEAF is BORN!

Fuck the NIGGERZ, we want our country back

 

[fuckwaffle]

What has Obama done to destroy jobs in America? Be specific.

If you're capable of pulling it off (I have sincere doubts), I can be specific about what Romney has done to destroy jobs in America.

Good for you...but with 15% of the work force out of work or underemployed, I only need to point to the empty suit in the WH whose policies have demonstrated a hatred of the American non-union worker. Does Delphi ring a bell.

Also his failed stimulus policies on green energy...Solyndra comes to mind immediately.

The biggest roadblock to jobs in America is of course ObamaCare, where the new full time job is now 30 hours a week so that employers don't have to provide health insurance coverage and unless you live under a rock, you couldn't have missed all the stories on the jobs(positions) lost due to ObamaCare.

But, I guess because of you overwhelming worship of the failure in the WH, you will have ignored all of these.

 

[mercury14]

Good for you...but with 15% of the work force out of work or underemployed, I only need to point to the empty suit in the WH whose policies have demonstrated a hatred of the American non-union worker. Does Delphi ring a bell.

Also his failed stimulus policies on green energy...Solyndra comes to mind immediately.

The biggest roadblock to jobs in America is of course ObamaCare, where the new full time job is now 30 hours a week so that employers don't have to provide health insurance coverage and unless you live under a rock, you couldn't have missed all the stories on the jobs(positions) lost due to ObamaCare.

But, I guess because of you overwhelming worship of the failure in the WH, you will have ignored all of these.

So you can't name any ways Obama has destroyed jobs.

 

[fuckwaffle]

So you can't name any ways Obama has destroyed jobs.

You know I have refrained from using the liberal methods of name calling, but in this one instance I shall make an exception.

Merc is the biggest Moron that has ever roamed the grassy plains, dragging his knuckles in the dirt as he wanders through the grass in his never ending search for that elusive place called Utopia that has been promised to him by his one and only true love, that empty suit or empty chair in the oval office of the White House.

Of course I'm more elegant at calling someone names. And I don't spit while I do.

 

[mercury14]

You know I have refrained from using the liberal methods of name calling...

No you haven't. And you never have. But here you are saying you're taking the rhetorical high ground anyway, hypocrite.

Merc is the biggest Moron that has ever roamed the grassy plains, dragging his knuckles in the dirt as he wanders through the grass in his never ending search for that elusive place called Utopia that has been promised to him by his one and only true love, that empty suit or empty chair in the oval office of the White House.

Of course I'm more elegant at calling someone names. And I don't spit while I do.

You're even less elegant at 5th grade name-calling than you are at articulating anything substantive. You can't name a single way Obama has destroyed jobs except "Obamacare" because "everybody knows it has". I expect more from someone who has lived for 65 years but all we hear from you is pissy rhetoric.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

You know I have refrained from using the liberal methods of name calling, but in this one instance I shall make an exception.

Merc is the biggest Moron that has ever roamed the grassy plains, dragging his knuckles in the dirt as he wanders through the grass in his never ending search for that elusive place called Utopia that has been promised to him by his one and only true love, that empty suit or empty chair in the oval office of the White House.

Of course I'm more elegant at calling someone names. And I don't spit while I do.

Unresponsive.

Funny that you resort to namecalling rather than prove your assertion.

 

[mercury14]

Unresponsive.

Funny that you resort to namecalling rather than prove your assertion.

Fuckwaffle doesn't have to prove his assertions. "Everybody knows" his assertions are correct "unless they've been living under a rock".

 

[fuckwaffle]

Unresponsive.

Funny that you resort to namecalling rather than prove your assertion.

Fuckwaffle doesn't have to prove his assertions. "Everybody knows" his assertions are correct "unless they've been living under a rock".

Non sequitur response.

 

[mercury14]

Non sequitur response.

No it's not. A non-sequitur response would be if I countered your assertion by bemoaning Watergate corruption. Basically an AJ response.

What I did was highlight your faulty logic; now you're just falling in a hole.

 

[koalabear]

Unresponsive.

Funny that you resort to namecalling rather than prove your assertion.

^^^^^^^^http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/haha4.gif

That from the MOTroll.

 

[richard_daily]

You seem really insecure. First there was that 20-cut-n-paste per day frenzy for a week or so, then the iggys. Something bothering you?

His failure as a human being is bothering him.

 

[richard_daily]

Good for you...but with 15% of the work force out of work or underemployed, I only need to point to the empty suit in the WH whose policies have demonstrated a hatred of the American non-union worker. Does Delphi ring a bell.

Also his failed stimulus policies on green energy...Solyndra comes to mind immediately.

The biggest roadblock to jobs in America is of course ObamaCare, where the new full time job is now 30 hours a week so that employers don't have to provide health insurance coverage and unless you live under a rock, you couldn't have missed all the stories on the jobs(positions) lost due to ObamaCare.

But, I guess because of you overwhelming worship of the failure in the WH, you will have ignored all of these.

None of those things are specific things about what Obama has done to cost america jobs. Solyndra didn't cause any jobs to be lost. Obama care didn't cause any jobs to be lost.

Making up numbers about unemployment isn't cuting it either.

Let's talk policy. Get specific... unless of course your handlers haven't given you the information that you need to enter into an informed debate.

 

[koalabear]

Hurricane shuts down Wall Street