The Housing Bubble

Throw in some beer and a pony in a sunbonnet and that sounds like the best party of the year!

And the pony should be named ‘Buttons’. But it should in no case be named ‘Shorty’, because ponies named ‘Shorty’ are usually evil little hairy jerks, in my experience.

The Gold Standard hasn’t existed for 200 years. The “standard” the U.S. was sort of on was bullied into failure by bad government policies. The major recessions during our “Gold Standard” years were caused by often times by the government’s desire to bring forth a federal currency (see 1867).

Considering that gold dollars had a relatively consistent value from 1800 to 1910, and that the paper dollar has tanked 98+% since then, I’d say the gold standard was not found wanting.

So you want our economy to run like it did 200 years ago? Fat. Chance.

What was found wanting about it? Bank failures? Nope, those were caused by fractional reserve lending. Our most prosperous years were on the gold standard.

What planet are you on?

how did it run 200 years ago? kind of an open ended, silly argument, IMO

The first and most important thing the government must do is outlaw issuing more gold deposit notes than an organization has on deposit, thus gold deposit notes must maintain 100% reserve ratios. It is blatant fraud to market and sell gold debt notes as if they were 100% backed gold deposit notes. In this situation no individual can tell the difference between a gold deposit and a gold debt, the first is almost as good as gold while the second is only as good as the credit of the bank.

In the free market the gold debts created through fractional reserve banking would have much less value and acceptance because of the risk of default. If a bank issued too many gold debt notes their value would automatically fall as the credit worthiness of the bank faltered. The only way that fractional reserve lending can gain any real momentum is by making it impossible to tell the difference between real gold deposit note and a gold debt note. If the average man could tell the difference, then upon receiving payment in the from of a gold debt note, he would quickly take the debt note to the bank and exchange it for a gold deposit note. This would greatly limit the average life span of gold debt notes and in turn the average loan term and profitability of the gold debt notes to the issuing bank.

If you want someone to hold on to any of your debt then they usually expect interest. Why would any individual hold a gold debt note from a bank with 0% interest? They would only do this if they knew the debt was 100% backed. Why do banks charge interest when you take out a mortgage on your house? Doesn’t your house back the loan? The answer to this is that your house fluctuates in value relative to gold and so the debt is not 100% secured. The bank expects interest when they lend you money that is not 100% secured so any individual should expect interest when the bank owes them gold that is not 100% backed. The amount of interest expected correlates to the credit risk associated with lending your gold to the bank.

In a way, fractional reserve lending is nothing more than the bank taking on interest free unsecured debt at the expense of their depositors and then taking a gamble by lending that money to others at interest. Reserve requirements are nothing more than a government imposed “credit limit” on the banks where the credit comes from the bank’s customers (aka the general public) which bears the full risk of default with no compensation.

In 1971 fractional reserve lending failed and the banks defaulted. We didn’t leave the gold standard because of its deficiencies for society, we left the gold standard because it was inconvenient to big government which could not run infinite deficits. The banks wanted to leave it because it allows them to steal from society. Remember, inflation doesn’t create nor destroy wealth, it transfers it from the people to the creators of money (banks/government). It is a violation of property rights.

What’s silly about it? You think the current situation is better with fiat currency that depreciates to nothing, high inflation, lower standards of living that require all adults in a household to work and destroys the savings of retirees? You prefer the financial bubbles, malinvestment, wealth transfer from the poor to the rich? Are you enjoying your modern serfdom?

The only silly argument is the one that says a gold standard means going back in time to horse-drawn carts. Society advanced for thousands of years with gold as a currency.

The Gold Standard hasn’t existed for 200 years. Yes, I agree. Of course that means going to the gold standard means switching to an untried and experimental system that hasn’t been used for 200 years. I know I’m dying to live in the 1800 economy.

Of course even this ignores the simple fact that the only way to transition would be for the government to simply repudiate all bank accounts. An instantaneous destruction of ~99% of the money supply would be necessary to bring the amount of dollars in circulation into some kind of proportion to the amount of gold that the government holds. That makes the gradual destruction of wealth via inflation seem like NOTHING by comparison.

” You think the current situation is better with fiat currency that depreciates to nothing, high inflation, lower standards of living that require all adults in a household to work and destroys the savings of retirees?”

Why don’t we bring back the European monarchy’s along with the gold standard. How about the monopolys of Rockerfeller, Astor, Whitney. They treated their serfs rather well, and of course there were depressions and famines on a regular basis for most of recorded history I say your take on the gold standard is revisionist history

An instantaneous destruction of ~99% of the money supply would be necessary to bring the amount of dollars in circulation into some kind of proportion to the amount of gold that the government holds. That makes the gradual destruction of wealth via inflation seem like NOTHING by comparison.”

No it doesn’t. The Fed has depreciated the dollar over 90% since its’ creation and is continuing to do so at an accelerating pace.

http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

Of course even this ignores the simple fact that the only way to transition would be for the government to simply repudiate all bank accounts … That makes the gradual destruction of wealth via inflation seem like NOTHING by comparison.

Yes, I’ve often wondered how a modern government would get itself back on the gold standard. My little brain doesn’t understand all the ins and outs, but any scenario I can dream up seems catastrophic at best.

David cee,

Enough with the straw men. The gold standard didn’t create financial panics, but a fiat currency system absolutely DOES create inflation. Good luck saving enough ink-stained paper to retire in comfort.

Those of you who think that the gold standard means a return to kings, monopolies, horse drawn carriages, and everything else we had in the past mistake correlation with causation.

Central banking and fiat money are the TOOLS of tyranny and GOLD stands in the way of it (Even Alan Greenspan agrees with that statement!). The gold standard limits the ability of government to borrow and forces them to raise taxes. When they raise taxes the people see what is going on and vote for change. In the days of kings they would blatantly steal from the people, today it is done in secret via inflation.

There is NO way for the american people to control the purse strings of government because they can spend an infinite amount of money! You have to count on voting people in, but these people get voted in by promising to spend your savings via inflation!

ET-Chicago - It is impossible to get back on the gold standard by decree because that would amount to price fixing. In reality the move is very simple, legalize competing gold/silver currencies and start collecting taxes using that currency. Let the Federal Reserve keep devaluing the dollar.

Today our government confiscates competing gold/silver currencies and denies people the right to use what ever medium of exchange we wish.

People could simply buy the new currency like they do Euros etc. It would float relative to the dollar. Eventually the dollar will go to zero when demand for it dries up.

Another evil of inflation when combined with capital gains tax is that you are forced to pay tax on your LOSS! If that isn’t a strong case against the income tax, capital gains tax, and fiat money I don’t know what is.

Actually, for most of those millennia, horse drawn carts were pretty inefficient. Ox carts were what one would use for heavy hauling.

My reply was for tresho. I am in the sound money camp. gold, silver, a basket of commodities, Something to keep our government and banks honest.

VTD, now you’re just being silly. You’re free to buy as many Kugers as you want. You can certainly negotiate to sell your house for a good delivery bar if you so choose. You can mint silver into tokens of whatever weight and purity you wish. You just can’t imply that these are coins issued by the government. Don’t you WANT the government to accept paper of declining value for your taxes? You’re free to deposit double eagles in your bank and use that to pay your taxes, but I wouldn’t recommend it.

I agree with Virginiatechdan (and Ron Paul) completely. Competing currencies are the way to go. given the choice people will choose sound money, even the naysayers. I save all the pre 1982 pennies, and you don’t see to many pre 1965 silver out in circulation.

I agree somewhat. One of the longest running and most successful currecies was the tally stick, a piece of wood. What was its value? It was accepted as a tax payment. (Very simplified explanation) on a lighter note, the dollar stinks http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=amVCFL1X76w0&refer=news

Jim a,

Actually you are not free to do business in metals. The government prosecutes those who try; Google ‘liberty dollar raid’.

Jim A -

They prevent you from using other currencies by charging sales tax and capital gains tax on transactions involving them. If the gold holds its values relative to other goods, but the dollar goes down then the government taxes you on your gain when you “spend” the gold to get more goods than the goods you traded to “buy” the gold.

The Liberty Dollar was a questionable scheme, but in reality there is little difference between putting a $920 sticker on a kuger vs minting a $1000 price tag on a Liberty Dollar gold ounce. So long as it doesn’t claim to be “legal tender” then there is no difference.

Snapfroze,
The tally sticks worked because the supply was “fixed” and they were hard to counterfeit. There was no fractional reserve lending with the tally sticks. It does not matter what system you use so long as the supply does not grow as debt. When money is created via debt, the interest is never created. This starts a cycle that of exponential growth that must end.

It would be far better for our government to simply print money interest free. When they do that prices may rise, but debt doesn’t!

Yes, I’ve often wondered how a modern government would get itself back on the gold standard. My little brain doesn’t understand all the ins and outs, but any scenario I can dream up seems catastrophic at best.

As far as I know, the consensus is that it would be difficult. There was a lecture at the mises university about this very topic that I found interesting. http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/MU2007/61-Reisman.mp3

It can also be found via this link http://www.mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=17

Follow the “Mises University 2007″ and then the second to last link “The Path to Sound Money”.

As I recall, you cannot enforce a contract in terms of gold, right? I’ll have to check on that, but I’m pretty sure if you agreed (lets say it’s a loan) on an amount of gold to be loaned and then repaid with interest, then the borrower could legally repay you with dollars converted at the market price of gold at the time the contract was made.

In fact, I’m pretty sure there was a court case about this very issue. So when the borrower repaid the loan, dollars had dropped in value and he was able to repay in a number of dollars that would no longer purchase the same amount of gold borrowed.

So from that standpoint, the government has effectively made gold a very weak currency to trade in by their unwillingness to uphold what would otherwise considered to be traditional contract law.

I hope your comment was sarcastic. Wall Street is “thriving” based upon cheap credit that comes at the EXPENSE of 90% of america. Cheap money leads to bad investments and the situation we have today. The housing bubble, stock bubble, would never be able to get as big as they do if the banks were not able to steal from your savings (via inflation) in order to gamble!

With 100% reserve gold standard the debt in society is always equal to the savings in society. If demand for mortgages rises then interest rates will rise thus keeping prices in check!

America becomes VERY prosperous at all levels when Wall Street is not able to steal from the average man. Before the federal reserve, most companies were growing based upon accrued capital from the profits of their business. Today most companies grow via debt because the return on capital is so poor.

The easiest way to see the fundamental flaw with fractional reserve lending is to consider the following situation: Lets suppose that in all of the world there exists a total of 1000 grams of gold. The bank issues IOU’s for 20,000 grams of gold at 5% interest. At the end of the year everyone must pay back their loans, with interest. Interest on the 20,000 grams of IOU gold is 1000 grams of real gold. In other words, if the bank can issue IOUs infinitely then the interest earned on the IOUs can become greater than all of the real gold in existence. It becomes impossible for everyone to pay back their debts and the bank must foreclose upon any property offered as collateral.

Now not everyone’s debt is due at the same time and not all interest needs to be paid in real gold (it can be paid with an IOU that was lent to someone else). As long as the bank keeps issuing more and more IOUs growing at a rate equal to or greater than the average interest due then the game of musical chairs can continue, but if the bank cannot find anyone willing to take on more debt, then the house of cards must fall down and a chain of defaults commences. This is what happened during the great depression.

When banking is private and each bank has its own unique IOUs then individuals can check the bank by redeeming their IOUs for real gold. The value of an IOU depends upon the trust put in a particular bank. It depends upon the belief that the bank will be able to honor the IOU. If one bank fails then only the customers of that bank and those who accepted IOUs from that bank as payments for goods and services are affected.

If you have a central bank and every bank in the nation uses the same IOUs (such as the Federal Reserve Notes) then everyone in the country is in the same boat. If, combined, all of the banks issue too many Federal Reserve Notes then society is in the same situation as the example above: too many IOUs, not enough real gold, and no one borrowing to create the additional IOUs needed to pay off the interest on yesterday’s debt.

The only way to stop the chain of defaults is to motivate society to start taking on enough new debt to cause the money supply to grow faster than the average interest rate. As this happens the supply of money grows relative to the supply of goods and prices rise. Generally speaking, slow and steady inflation is much easier for society to cope with than deflation; however, slow and steady inflation requires slow and steady growth of debt.

There will come a time when society as a whole will be unwilling or unable to take on new debt. This can happen for many reasons, but the most straight forward reason is a fall in creditworthiness as the debt load of the average citizen, company, and state government increases. When society hits this point it will be forced to unwind decades of debt growth over a period of a few years. This is the deflationary scenario where cash is king because everyone wants and needs it to pay of their debts. When this happens prices on everything fall dramatically.

If the government becomes the borrower of last resort in an attempt to bail out businesses and banks as they fail due to deflation then you get hyperinflation. Either way, the average joe loses his savings (bank failure or dollar failure). These economic crisis create a dependent and needy society that results in big government, price controls, rationing, and general loss of liberty.

This is where we are today, everyone has maxed out their debt and the government is trying to bail out the banks. Either way they go the dollar will become worthless and everyone will lose their money. If you are hoping for deflation then you are counting on the vast majority of banks failing.

How come every time someone starts a serious discussion about a topic we care, like pensions vs private accounts, some lunatic goldbug always shows up and kills it?

max, “you’ve tried spraying, and they still keep coming back.”

max…that’s the same thing people were saying about me in 04 in regards to being a housing bear.

if you don’t get the signficance of what vtd just explained, sorry….you’ll regret your ignorance before too long.

fubarrio

I feel naked here with cash — as if people can see it in my pocket.

I only leave the main island — the Brooklyn part of Long Island — to work every weekday on the other island.

Yeah, and you can be sure that restaurants that cheat on taxes aren’t cheating on other things like public health and sanitation.

I wouldn’t eat in a restaurant that doesn’t accept credit cards.

Well maybe they just don’t like the ~4% fee charged them by the credit card companies. I often make a point of paying cash simply to stiff the CC companies of this money. I figure the people providing the good/service are more deserving of the money, even if I don’t see any savings.

There are costs associated with keeping large sums of cash on hand. Business operators have told me it’s a wash concerning the costs associated with cash and the CC transaction fees.

It really depends. The best places to eat are usually small, family-owned, and not marketed at all, only with a couple of people waiting on the guests. For them all-cash is optimal, since everybody is either brother/sister or such.

Exactly, Max!

They’re not marketed to tourists either.

As for the sanitation/taxes link, I see no correlation. You must be a food-phobe or something.

I have started paying in cash even though I would see savings via cash back rewards. I always tip, err give a gift of thanks, in cash. The income tax is dishonest, not paying it 95% of the time is being honest to yourself and true to the letter of the law.

What is the difference between a “gift” and a “tip”. A gift is receipt of something for which nothing was paid. For something to be “paid” there must be an agreement before a trade where each individual owes the other a pre-defined amount of product/service/money. If you are a waiter and perform the service you are paid to perform then no one owes you anything. Without a debt, any money received is a gift, because it was not required! What is the difference between giving you a $5 bill after you bring me my meal vs later that day when I run into you on the street? Clearly this is nothing more than an interpretation of a vague law that a large number of people will consistently disagree with! (See Clarity of Command - the prerequisite for sound law)

They may become more aware of hunger, cold & poverty, then.

If you saw how Indians treat dogs, you might reconsider your romantic attitude. It’s horrifying.

Ask the minorities who are regularly slaughtered for at the altar of “democracy” (winning elections). Google Narendra Modi, babri masjid. Lot of turbulence under the calm surface.

Spike: point taken. It’s like that all over Asia.

Hey spike an tx you should how the Indians in my old building would react to my rottweiler and shephard

they do not like dogs especailly large ones

so i really did not like them and was not shy about it either. if you mistreat an animal or abuse it you are
dirt im my book no exceptions

Add India’s still-rigid caste system. WSJ had an article a while back about an “untouchable” who was stoned to death for trying to open a business instead of performing his caste-level job of removing human waste.

TIME had a report on the untouchables. I clearly remember the photo: a small kid sleeps on the floor of a very shabby apartment. You want to reach in and hug the poor bastard, feed him, or something. He has his life laid out for him - menial labor, early death. Really sad.

About the dog thing, you shouldn’t assume that your values are universal.

Go to Italy or France. They view the human-dog relationship as master-servant. The American idea that a dog can sleep with them is considered absurd.

And they eat horse-meat too!

“TIME had a report on the untouchables. ”

If I recall correctly, this group of people are also called “pariahs”. These social outcasts are the source of the word and its meaning worldwide. Considering that the word “pariah” has been around in the English language for ~400 years you get the idea that India has had and will have the issue for a while. It is a sucky situation, to say the least.

About the dog thing, you shouldn’t assume that your values are universal.

“Go to Italy or France. They view the human-dog relationship as master-servant. The American idea that a dog can sleep with them is considered absurd.”

You know nothing about the subject. Few people are as dog crazy as the French…they welcome dogs on trains, in restaurants, cafes, etc. But the Germans may have them beat…even Germans concede dogs are welcomed in more places than children.
How one treats animals is a measure of one’s civilized values…those that display barbaric cruelty to dogs cannot be described as “civilized’. Not by any measure.
Find a society that treats dogs badly, and you will find a society that doesn’t value human rights, that tramples on women and children and exploits the poor. See Asia for multiple examples.

My brother says, “Pay peanuts, and you’ll get monkeys.”

“Keep it up. The backlash against globlalization is coming.”

The backlash against globalization has been around a long time. Hasn’t worked though because closing borders to trade means closing borders to oil and other resources.

You want Jack Bauer at (almost) minimum wage. Like almost every other freaking employer in the States.

No, I want an employee who makes me a profit for the risk I take to train them, build infrastructure for them, and find work for them. Some of the people I interviewed figured they’d be worth $50 per hour including overhead and training costs. $100,000 per year. For an assistant. Who fields phone calls, runs some basic errands, and keeps track of schedules and basic cash flow. No thanks.

There is NO talent shortage if you are willing to PAY a decent wage. Or don’t you believe in Free Markets? Mr. Free Market whines and then moves his business overseas when he finds that slavery here in the states was revoked.

There is no slavery here that is instilled by capitalism. The only slavery we have is government-forced. Try to start a business today that is competitive — you can’t do it easily because the red tape is terrible. Money supply inflation causes malinvestments, and makes it difficult to figure if you’re really making money or not. Business regulation at all levels of government makes it impossible for businesses to offer realistic compensation rather than regulation-effected compensation. Look at health care, which should be paid for by individuals and households. Instead of having direct control over how you spend on your medical care, employers are forced to cover it as a FOURTH party, which removes incentive for healthy living and competitive shopping for care. Thank the IRS for that.

The 1099 versus W2 eligibility standards change every year, so I have to review my contractors to the tune of almost $2500 of their pay annually just to stay in compliance. Even worse, I put myself at risk for hiring 1099 short-term contractors because Illinois, and the Federal government, has repeatedly harmed companies for falling just shy of eligibility requirements that are impossible to discern reality in.

Firing people can be a nightmare, depending on what State you operate out of.

I have to steal nearly 9% of W2 paychecks to pay for “medicare” and “unemployment” — money that EMPLOYEES could use to protect against future impairment. The old adage — save 10% of your income for a rainy day — is ruined because the government already steals 17% of your paycheck,and returns less than 3% of it for those rainy days. They also prevent you from competitively shopping for unemployment insurance or shop the medical market.

Most of my employees make 20-30% more than others in the same industry because of my profit-sharing and open-books standards. I don’t hide anything, it’s all there for them to look over. More than once a year I hear EMPLOYEES ask me why I bother once they look at the actual costs of doing business. The risks (bad years) can outweigh the rewards (good years).

Thankfully, the tax code still does give me an advantage over getting a job for someone else. I’d probably gross double, but I’d net far, far less. But I’m against that advantage because it impairs others over their entire lives.

good assistants in the US earn $16-$25+ per hour. if you aren’t willing to pay that, you won’t get a decent assistant. period. full stop. end of sentence.

No kidding. 300 people? That’s hard to believe.

He got 300 emails from Craigslist… he means.

Well sure. To this day I see job ads in the IT market for companies that want to hire an entire IT dept in a one-body-package. And they want to pay $35k/yr.

No one asks someone to run their entire finance dept, with the requisite certifications and education, for a pittance, but somehow non-glitzy jobs (but nonetheless essential) should be happy with the offer?

This guy is probably the same. He wants an assistant to run his life so he can glad-hand/wheel-and-deal, but he only wants to pay them $30k/yr.

With that parameter, I can see why it took 300 interviews.

Given the type of person he sounds like I would be surprised if 1 out of 10,000 would take the job.

Smug, pompous, entitled to have someone at his beck and call, have them drop everything and go whenever and wherever he wants (all that ‘travel’ stuff),….

Individuals pay for healthcare? When less than 24 hours in a cardiac unit is $35,000?? What an ass.

Another neocon greed-is-good type with that “it is the government’s fault that employer’s provide health insurance.” No it is not. That benefit was designed and created by corporations. Private business did it all by themselves and now that employees must depend upon it because of the exorbitant costs charged by private insurers, the same group that created the benefit want to drop it.

Freedom is not what you decide it is. You advocate free speech but say that you would like to restrict global trade freedom. You want to be the equivalents of a business HOA telling other people how to do things. Hint: That’s not freedom.

It is one thing to encourage people to not buy from China and educate them why. it is another to propose that people they can not return to their home country and to revoke their citizenship.

Nothing in my Constitution about “global trade freedom.” Nothing.

There is nothing anywhere that ever suggest ‘global free trade’ should be considered a fundamental right.

Not in the Magna Carta

Not in the US Constitution

Not in the political philospohy statements of the Big 5 as they were creating the concept of the UN in themid-1940s.

Trade barriers have long been accepted as means of protecting a national economy.

More unthinking verbiage by the uneducated who do not have the right (no have ever had the right) to make money at the expense of the overall well-being of the nation to which they belong.

Do trot on over an move your business to China before you start whining about your ‘right’ to global free trade and to run a business without restriction.

The constitution does not define freedom, it limits the power of government. Government is only there to provide justice when your life, liberty, or property is in jeopardy. If all men are created equal, then it does not matter what country you are from. Trading and traveling with/to all nations is a freedom that belongs to the PEOPLE, not to the government. To say otherwise is to make the United States a prison.

Respect for property rights and the rule of law where the just powers of government come from the CONSENT of the governed is what makes a country rich and prosperous. I don’t know about you, but who would CONSENT to being told where they may and may not travel? Or who they may or may not do business with?

If all men are created equal and no man can have authority over another without his consent, then all governments must abide by the same moral limitations of the individuals who give the government authority.

You go, Dan! Right on!

In the 19th century the US had very high trade barriers.

Ann Scott: Trade barriers have long been accepted as means of protecting a national economy.

That sentence needs to be rewritten to be accurate. Here is the accurate version:

Trade barriers have been instituted by special interests to protect their position at the expense of everyone else, under the guise of “protecting the national interest.”

Ann Scott: More unthinking verbiage by the uneducated who do not have the right (no have ever had the right) to make money at the expense of the overall well-being of the nation to which they belong.

And when you’ve successfully run a large-scale business, that employs large numbers of people, and must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations, let me know. Then I’ll take your criticisms seriously.

Looking at opening up a bed-and-breakfast doesn’t count.

“Trade barriers have been instituted by special interests to protect their position at the expense of everyone else…”
————————
If by “special interests” you mean the citizens of a country, then you are correct.

Those who are “victimized” according to you, are the businesses who would like to make the spread between slave labor in third-world countries and high prices in developed nations.

Unfortunately for the “supply-siders,” they forgot about the demand-side. At some point, as you drive wages down (without commensurate reduction in prices), your customers (formerly high-paid people now forced to compete with slave labor overseas) begin to lose purchasing power. You guys left that part out of your calculations.

Given the fact that they’ve been around for about 4000 years, I wouldn’t bet against them.

True, but they also haven’t always been in as good a condition or shape as they are now. The fortunes of nations ebb and flow. Only time can tell how China will handle the 21st century.

Agree that Americans have done this to themselves.

But the real reason Globalism is failing on America’s side and acceleratings the destruction of the middle class is the blatant disregard for Copyright Law. The effects from this are just disturbing. Lose in international court on Patent infringement, just move to another province or Vietnam, take the die sets with ya. Badabing, back in business.

Sorry Globalist, until this gets fixed someone has to pay. America currently is receiving a mojority of the inequity, just because Europe has some semblance of trade regulation. Remember all those containers that sat off-shore last year in France, until America stands up for herself the problems are going to get much worse.

Middle class is a portion of the bell curve. It is still there. It simply moved.

These debates merely point to the obvious: America is losing its #1 position in the world. When the US was the clear-cut economic leader in the world we went to great lengths to pressure other countries to open up to our trade, often to the point of political and military interference. Now that that situation is changing and America’s continued #1 status is in doubt, these same people are critical about the loss of American jobs and other effects of globalization. Where were you all before? I don’t quite remember these voices during the Reagan or Clinton years, except for a small minority on the far left. We created this and now we’re angry about it. America is acting like the little boy who brings the ball to play some pick-up, once he starts losing he takes his ball and runs home. We need to do like the rest of the world and buck up, accept reality and try to out-compete the rest of the world. Yes, that means HARD work, that means not everyone can have an Escalade and plasma TV. Thats reality. If America completely closes off to trade, closes its borders and strips people who move their businesses out of the country of citizenship, it will be the biggest act of economic suicide in history.

I must be one of the few than. In the mid 90’s when delivering parts to one of my customers they were walking thru a supposed Business Partner Company showing them their whole operation. About 15 Asian guys with cameras, taking pictures the whole enchilada. They bought 1 unit and the partnership fell through. 12 Months later they had their biggest conmpetitor which eventually overwhelmed them.

I run a manufacturing facility and have been in the business for 27 years. Not for one second have I thought that Globalization was going to benefit America in the long run. Sure some Wall Street firms and MBA’s for hire make out but the majority of the rest are walking willingly to the sacrificial alter.

The point I was trying to make is that Globalism looks good on paper and all but the flaws that are their are fairly insurmountable.

Without respect for patents and functional international copyright laws, Globalism for America was doomed for failure fron the beginning.

Been there….I was working at one of the aerospace manufacturers in the early 90s when they started (trying) to sell aircraft to the Chicoms……A bunch of guys showed up in their Mao suits with cameras, were given carte blanche to copy and photograph EVERYTHING…..including our “cheat sheets” which (for the lack of a better phrase) was our “institutional memory” on how maintenance and rigging procedures could be completed the most efficient way.

Fortunately, we weren’t as dumb as we looked……..we stopped writing stuff down, and started keeping info in our heads, or personal notes.

That, or describing procedures in “farm boy language” that we knew would be difficult to translate.

Last I heard, the company in question was selling some airplanes in China…..but was also setting up a “joint venture” to build airplanes in China with their new “partners”.

Another story……..a major avionics manufacturer wanted a bunch of their retiring engineers to help them develop an “Expert System” (which undoubtedly, would be opened up in Bangalore, or somewhere like that).

Engineers (reportedly) said “Screw you…….you guys aren’t screwing up my future consulting job!”

Us americuns look like a bunch of dumb-asses, but we figure it out quick.

You really think so? Ask those losing their jobs and receiving lower wages if luck!

I think that like the status of globalism prior to WWI, alot of people felt the same way as you.

Free Trade agreements have as much to do with Free Trade as the PATRIOT Act has to do with patriotism. The only thing a country needs to allow for *free trade* is to remove all taxes on imports and exports. The taxes only harm the citizens of the country because they are the ones who ultimately pay them.

Our country is hurt due to manipulated trade agreements that favor big companies and stifle competition.

That said, I think that the fairest and most just tax that a country can have is a tax on imports. A tax on imports makes foreign countries “pay” for the privilege of doing business in the USA. But it also gives Citizens of the US the ability to avoid the tax by producing things cheaper here at home than foreigners can. If the government sets the tax too high, then they lose revenue. It is a natural and self-regulating system.

If you want energy independence the only thing the government needs to do is tax the importation of oil until the free market discovers the best alternative. All of the other ideas are wasted efforts designed to enrich special interests.

Amen, BP.

The clock will not go backwards. You can scream, you can yell you can stomp your feet but free trade is here to stay.

Laugh.

Anyone who actually believes that “free trade” exists is living in Fantasyland.

Perhaps you mean “Less Overtly Protectionist Trade Rigged To Maximize Profits For The Corporate Elite.”

We are in a global economy and the only way to get ahead is to accept it and try to figure out how your skills can fit into reality. Until people do they will be stuck wishing for yesterday.
——————————————————————-
I guess they figured to become home speculators and stiff banks if it doesn’t work out

Notice who keeps running around saying “No, Africa should not develop! It would kill the presine place!”. “No, China should not develop! It would kill presine place”

No I don’t notice. I don’t think anyone else does either so shoot. Give us another.

“the presine place!”

What is “presine” ??

“What is “presine” ?? ”

Yeah. That ones in the teenager street dictionary.

EC,

I think those of us who are against “free trade” and “globalism” would rather see those in Africa or China pull themselves (with our help, if need be) up to our level rather than us moving down to theirs.

What I find hillarious is that those who try to villify us “anti-globalization” types are NOT willing to lower their standard of living! So many “free traders” are the very ones who benefit from the demise of the American middle class — they do not intend to go down with the ship, but instead plan to profit from the wreckage.

I have no problem with global trade, but we should only trade with other countries who have our same standards WRT labor laws, wages, healthcare, standard of living, etc.

Not saying that we shouldn’t help poorer nations…we should! But exploiting the poor in other countries is hardly the way to do it, IMHO.

lol

Ben, you nailed it.Government uses 3 things to inspire the sheeples:
1. The Flag
2. The Bible/and or God
3. The Children -
And it works everytime (for now). Do you want frosting on that cake?

No I’ll just bank the proceeds of any check for my own kids. And continue to advocate defaulting on the national, state and local debts.

I volunteer @ a local museum and raising the flag is one of my duties, and once in awhile I fly it upside down…

Nobody’s ever noticed, yet.

1. Love this country, think it’s a great place to live, although I am not willing to kill/be killed for it, I am constantly thankful that other people are.

2. Religion is the opiate of the masses. Doing anything in the name of “God”, imho, is just playing into the hands/desires of others. Also, religion has been the cause of more wars/death then just about anything else ever developed by man. That’s not going to inspire this sheeple to do notin.

3. I work from home, and live in a “Agrestic” type community. The kids run around all day long and scream and yell with total impunity. I hate kids, but more then that, I really hate the parents. Once again, “do it for the the kids” is one of those things designed to get people to do really, really stupid things that’s not in anyone’s (even the kids) self interest.

Stupid, stupid people.

If religion is the opiate of the masses, then TV is the methamphedamine of the masses.

We gave up TV 12 years ago. You truly live a better life without it.

What, and live w/o “Jeopardy”?

Warren Buffett didn’t raise spoiled kids, and taught them responsibility and consequences for their actions at an early age. I saw him interviewed, and a segment was on raising children, who become good adults. His kids aren’t getting a lot. They’ve made it on their own, by good training (work ethic and hard work). Entitlement is destructive.

“(work ethic and hard work)”
sorry for the redundancy- I meant to say good ethics and hard work.

Not sure anyone heard about WB’s story on loan. His sister was asking to borrow some money from him during the 1987 crash. His response “go to the bank”. LOL.

I agree.

My BIL was telling me that as part of his divorce settlement from his first marriage, he has topay for their daughters college education….WTF?
My parents had 11 kids. They told us that if we wanted to go to college, get a job and start looking at scholarships. Out of the 11, 9 of us have a college education that was worked for. We appreciate the costs and use the education to the best of our ability.
I have told my kids that if they’re hungry I’ll give them food and if they need a place to stay in order to pay for college, their bedroom will be there but they have to work for their education.

It’s easy to say that, but there is also a class structure. I have friends that come from homes where their parents have a good amount of money (and I imagine others in the community look up to them). That opens *ALOT* of doors that wouldn’t be open to others. I feel the same would happen to WB’s kids. As would Bill Gates.

So true, VB!

IIRC (too lazy to look it up), Warren Buffett helped his kids into their current positions — either directly or indirectly. Also, while not leaving everything to them, he is leaving them a few million each (again, going from memory).

It may be chump change to him, but to most of us, what his kids get would set us up for life, if handled well (and I’m sure he’s helped them out there, too).

OTOH, I also worked my way through college and am very grateful for the experience. Was able to graduate and made decent money right out of the gate (actually, stayed with the company I worked for while in college — they tripled my pay).

By what authority do you steal from one man because he is rich to give to another?

The only just taxes are those that are placed upon government granted privileges. Anything else and the secret ballot process becomes nothing more than a den of thieves attempting to hide behind a veil of anonaminity by nominating another to steal in their name. The actual thief (government official) shifts the blame to an anonymous “majority”, but cannot prove that even one individual delegated authority to him to steal.

So Dan. Let me understand this…. You propose zero taxes for everyone?

Exeter,
The government grants many privileges based upon the property that it owns. If we give the government ownership over the air waves, they can tax the use of the airwaves. If we give them ownership over the borders then they can tax the use of the borders (import/export taxes). If we give them ownership of our lives then they can tax our wages and draft us. If they own the land then they can tax the property use.

At some point the government crosses the line from protecting our property to claiming ownership of all of our property.

The government can raise money without denying anyone else freedom nor their property rights.

Let me pose the following situation. You are walking down the street and you notice a mugging and then decide to intervene to prevent that thief from stealing the other guys wallet and possibly killing him. After you run off the thief you say, “well, I saved your life and wallet so you owe your life and wallet to me.” Did you really help the poor guy who was being mugged or did you just become a stronger mugger?

So it is with our government.

If you accept that the government can redistribute wealth arbitrarily then you have a communist country.

Nice blurb but you never answered the question. You don’t need to at this point but you do need to answer how the US military is funded, roadways are built, water supplies are established, bridges repaired, laws are promulgated and passed, schools are run, teachers are paid, etc etc….

Yeah… I think you left out a few things.

If just powers come from the CONSENT of the governed then the governed need to *give* the government some initial property upon its formation at which time the founders CONSENT to the government (under restrictions defined by the constitution) by paying for the services they charter the government to provide.

Once the government *owns* the property *given* then it can raise revenue like any other corporation. If it buys property and builds roads then they can charge a fee for the use of those roads.

Schools should not be run by the government.

To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical”, said Thomas Jefferson. If we don’t want others deciding the curriculum for our children, then we should not attempt to mandate the curriculum for others. Read this article for “proof” that welfare schools are incapable of promoting the general principles of personal responsibly and critical thinking this board promotes.

No one (but communists) would consent to giving all of their property to the government in the name of protecting their property. As such there must be property that IS NOT the governments or else you have an unjust government. If there is property that is not the governments (your body, labor) then it cannot be taxed.

Dan… you’re forgetting a few things. How is national defense paid for??

Not only that, but many would say that companies/corporations “steal” the value of labor from their employees.

Who decides what their profit margin should be? Where do you think this profit comes from? Some would argue that the profit belongs to those who created the goods/services sold.

One way to look at it is that taxes are a way to distribute those profits to those who truly earned them (take from the “rich” and give to the “poor”).

There’s obviously a lot more to it, but just wanted to point out that how one defines “theft” depends on which side of the class divide he/she sits on.

Personally, I gladly pay my taxes, and even when I’ve had the “easy” opportunity to “cheat,” I changed the numbers (from what accountant had) to reflect the truth and paid more.

I talk the talk, so have to walk the walk.

I agree. Those not in trouble won’t have their consumption effected one bit (I’ll just bank whatever I get). Those in trouble will keep the sheriff from the door for another few weeks.

The government should save postage and send the money directly to the banks on behalf of the FBs.

Explain how driving the dollar down (along with the exchange-adjusted value of U.S. assets from the perspective of our foreign creditors) is tantamount to “obeying their chinese masters”?

Actually I was kind of thinking that Paulson’s words show that WE are the real masters. They are clearly admitting that they need us to spend money and buy garbage - his words make that crystal clear.

Now is the time to remember that our dollars are our real votes. Scrutinize every purchase - make sure you really need something and that you will extract every shred of use value from it - especially when spending our $250 table scrap.

“…$250 table scrap.”

Now the talk is $500. (Brings to mind the sinking Superfund SIV proposal: $100 bn, $75 bn, $60 bn, going, going, $0…)

You don’t inherit income, only wealth. We don’t tax wealth, only income.

And most of the wealthy people I know earned it hard way, over a long time.

Yeah right…..Jacqueline Mars “earned” every penny by picking the right sperm to be her daddy (Mars Candy).

What you call ‘wealthy’ and what it really takes to be in the top 1-5% in income and assests are probably two very very different things.

We tax income, not wealth…hence, the super rich, including liberals like Teresa Heinz Kerry ,can get away with a very small tax bill.

Why? Because, following the advice of her accountants, she structures her investments and income streatm to avoid or minimize taxes. Newsflash - this is what most of the super rich do, which is why the “tax the rich” schemes always end up hitting the upper-middle class, or, even worse, the middle class in high-cost areas (as they need higher incomes just to live there).

This hurts the middle-class and upper-middle class, who depend on income to live.

Incidentally, the old “the rich inherited their wealth” is out of date…a major shift has occurred over the last 25 years. Most wealthy people have, in fact, earned their money. They may not have been “dirt poor” (most likely they came from middle-class or upper-middle class homes), but they were not “born rich” by any means.

Well we DO tax SOME forms of wealth at SOME times. We tax REALLY LARGE estates when people die. We tax real property annually in most states. In VA thre is a tax on personal property. But for the most part, wealth is much more concentrated than income. And yet, most taxes are on income. That is WHY the richest 1%, who earn 17% of income are paying 28% of the taxes. They can AFFORD it.

“The KoolAid you’re drinking must be spiked with some really good stuff, because what you’re saying is beyond comprehension, and like all conspiracy theories convienently without any references.”

Still waiting for Ben to shut down the spam operation.

Exeter, what is your problem and why did you call me an “ass wipe” for suggesting that cheaper homes will sell faster than more expensive ones?

Read this guys “reference” and tell me how facts from an obscure and politically partisan talk show host is a reliable “reference”.

Get a life, or get lost.

Dude relax. I’m in agreement with you. I apologize for the Asswipe comment.

What makes you think anything in that rant is worth believing? Reminds me of the folks who post LaRouche website articles on this blog — I never take the time to read them, no matter how truthy they seem.

Laugh.

Oh, Lyndon, you crazy kook — truthiness personified.

IRS would never be against -you- paying more money. As the tax time comes, I’m sure you would not mind including a few grand more? Afterall, it is just a few less handbags.

I’ll never understand why a wage earner panders for a tax shift from the wealthy elite to himself.

Always said that happiness is being in the 50% bracket for income tax purposes.

If you handed me $500,000 and told me to go shopping at the mall, I might - if I tried real real hard - be able to spend $1,000 (and that would mean buying things I do not NEED)

April 15 is around the corner. Since you can only spend $1000 a the mall when you try really hard, do help us fight the deficit - simply cut an IRS check for extra thousand bucks, even better, cut them the check for all the money you made that year - the Big Government definitely knows better than you how to take care of you.

Nope. We’re gonna depend on the feds to correct that little problem called the budget gap.

It was the law.

Crap, I got a form from the IRS regarding a [failed] business venture. I read the instructions and, for me, all I had to do was check a box that said I owe nothing, sign it, and mail it back. Perhaps I’ll do that when I get home.

Debt load matters from the perspective that if you have $100 you can take a $50 loss and still live. If you owe $100 and lose $50 then you set off a chain of defaults. First you, then your lender and their lender, etc.

So the underlying asset of a homeowner who owes nothing is somehow different than one that owes something?

You’re losing it.

The only thing that matters is ability of borrower to maintain payments.

So you’re saying that any house where the borrows ability to pay hasn’t been handicapped to pay won’t decline.

How does that work?

No, he’s just saying that someone who owns their house outright will be ok, as opposed to the FBs who are in debt up to their eyeballs and will have one heck of a time over the next few years.

When can I catch those on the USA channel? Before or after the WWF? I would pay to see TXChick in leather bra headlocking the IRS commisioner Linda Stiff (also in leather bra).

LOL

interesting … in the Netherlands you can overpay; many companies do, as the tax office pays 5.25% interest rates on the money you overpaid (until the date they officially know what your tax is going to be, then you get back the overpaid tax plus interest). That 5.25% is 1-1.5% more than you get from the bank, plus the government is a more reliable creditor

It works this way because they charge you interest for the amount/time that you underestimate your taxes …

I listed my house when the UT stated if you own a home in san diego your making $2300 a day.. may of 04.. a little early but never to late!