The Housing Bubble

Wrong, unless the rules have been changed since the last time I was on that merry-go-round.

They aren’t subject to FICA, because they aren’t earned income, but regular income tax laws apply. If you had withholding taken out of a substantial salary for a number of months before you got laid off, you might have had enough withheld to cover the rest of the year on unemployment, but if you are going to collect unemployment for an entire year and there is other income in the household? You better be making the quarterly payments or you are going to find yourself in the hole come April.

There’s an option to have income taxes taken directly out of the UI check.

You are wrong.

First $2400 is not taxable income. Look at the 2009 form 1040, page 1.

“I think unemployment checks are non-taxable also correct ??”

Regardless of whether they are taxable, presumably someone who was making a good living before and now is subsisting on unemployment checks is paying a lower overall tax rate than previously, thanks to our progressive tax system.

If I loose my job I’m taking a month or two off. Go SCUBA diving, maybe catch up on programming languages. I never take vacations because it’s too difficult with work and life. Need time to decompress.

So how does unemployment have anything to do with it? Your buddy is refusing to get a job because he is taking a calculated risk that he will be better off waiting for the $250K job. Are you saying that he is NOT looking for $250K per year jobs all that hard because of the $400 and something he is getting from unemployment? You just shot down the whole premise of your original post.

Except that there may be no job for $150K and the next offer may be $75K!

As a betting-type, I bet a rude awakening lingers here!

I had always hope the world would be lifted up to our level, but it is now clear we are in a swamp sinking into the mud!

IN a world of endless natural resources globilization might bring up everyones standard of living, but once you put limits on natural resources you see a race to the bottom in terms of labor costs. Then serfdom.

“I had always hope the world would be lifted up to our level, but it is now clear we are in a swamp sinking into the mud!”

Well, that’s the outcome of a socialist/liberal world - everyone’s standard of living suffers. That’s why you can’t vote for people willing to rob Peter to pay Paul (especially for votes).

Well, that’s the outcome of a socialist/liberal world - everyone’s standard of living suffers.

Please explain how that applies to bank bailouts, globalization, outsourcing, falling private wages, people losing healthcare, under-coverage in healthcare and the richest of the rich getting much richer and the middle class getting clobbered.

I’m afraid GH is right. Nobody is going to pay you worth a damn if you’re always willing to settle for less.

I’ve had to go through some hard times (and still am to some extent) but I DON’T have to work for min wage.

Only an idiot works hard at being poor.

You are exactly correct, Rio - and all of what you said reeks of socialism - including paid-off bankers and inaccessibility to marketplace-driven healthcare services.

You know our saying around here - privatize the gains, socialize the risks. That’s what socialism does.

As Maggie Thatcher once said - socialism is great until you run out of someone else’s money. Eventually, the world’s thieves (both private and public) will learn this lesson.

What we need to do (the honorable citizens of various countries) is to cut all these people off at the knees before they bankrupt us.

See: Iceland.

“Another consideration is that if you take a job that doesn’t cover your monthly expenses, you are digging a hole. So, do you take a 2nd job to make up the difference? What are the costs in terms of time with family, time to go to the doctor and exercise and otherwise take care of yourself? And while working full time during the day at a job that doesn’t cover your expenses, will you be able to take time off from your new job to find a better paying one?”

So if you can’t make ends meet with one low-paying job, you’re saying it’s better to sit around all day earning no money whatsoever? When jobs are lost and budgets get tight, there are compromises…one can’t expect to have all the free time, “family time”, and luxuries they had before.

The boom turned lots of people into prima donnas, methinks.

Yep.

I’ve stated that here ever since I started posting.

There LOTS of entitled ninnys out there, including several people on this board.

That’d be the one saving grace of a real, full-blown depression…to see the ninnys suffer.

What I am saying is that it’s better to collect unemployment and continue to look for a high paying job full time than to take the low paying job that takes you out of the hunt for the high paying job - until the UI runs out. Especially if the low paying job pays around the same as the UI.

How do companies nogotiate with prospective employees for pay scale? What did you make at your last job? If you take the low paying job right away, you are locking yourself into a lower salary for years to come.

Negotiate - dang fat fingers!

I think an option that the some people might be overlooking is to accept a similar position with a non-profit where the responsibility would be similar, but the pay might be lower. You could justify accepting a lower salary to the next prospective for-profit employer becuase of the satisfaction of making a difference, but it still risks being stuck at a lower salary in the next job than you might be able to get by waiting out the recession while collecting unemployment.

Getting additional training makes sense - as long as you are not burdened with excessive student loans in the process.

Part time, freelance work makes sense, because you can maintain an hourly rate.

I think many people make mistakes early in the unemployment cycle by not agressively cutting expenses and exploring all of their options. They think they will be able to land another job quickly and don’t realize they are swimming against the tide. We tend to think that what worked before will work again.

In my last episode of unemployment, I saw a job in the paper on Sunday. When I called on Monday morning, they had already received 400 resumes. They were looking for a skillset that I didn’t have, so I didn’t bother to apply. In a down market, it is more difficult to side step into a new skillset, something that most folks don’t realize immediately.

Eudomon, you must run in different circles than I do. I don’t see a lot of entitled ninnys. I see a lot of people trying to make the best of their situation and sometimes making mistakes in the process. I see people who buckle down, make do, cut expenses, and sacrifice to support their families. The choices are not always cut and dried.

In a full blown depression, a lot of people will suffer and most of them will not be entitled ninnys. Why do you think you will escape?

Julius, are you saying that family time is a luxury? Will you also complain that nobody is watching the children? In any case, when you have a family, it is part of the cost/benefit analysis when deciding whether to take a second job. Maybe the better choice is to get a smaller apartment or move in with family. I think that considering the effect on your family is a responsible thing to do and does not necessarily classify one as an entitled ninny.

Happy2bHeard, it’s good to hear a another voice of experience, reason, practicality and sanity.

Glad you’re here.

Thanks, ecofeco! I don’t often get to join the party, since I am on Pacific time and work during the day.

“Julius, are you saying that family time is a luxury? Will you also complain that nobody is watching the children? In any case, when you have a family, it is part of the cost/benefit analysis when deciding whether to take a second job. Maybe the better choice is to get a smaller apartment or move in with family. I think that considering the effect on your family is a responsible thing to do and does not necessarily classify one as an entitled ninny.”

What I’m saying is that if I had to choose between feeding, clothing, and housing my family and having an abundance of “family time” or some other thing that really is a luxury at the end of the day, I’d be choosing the former.

Priorities, people.

So your choices may be different from someone else’s. That doesn’t make that someone else an entitled ninny. They may simply have different priorities.

Here its just shy of $500 per week. Hardly a replacement for a lost six figure income. I suspect the procrastinators had a very decent severance package.

People covered points that you said (or didn’t realize) that they didn’t cover, especially about “costs”.

Correction:
People did address points that you said that they didn’t cover, especially about “costs. (Maybe you didn’t realize these points were covered.)

Forget the “name-calling” drama and answer the man’s question.

Give me you 500 rubles and I can think of an answer.

I read some of the thread but didn’t see a good bit about cost anywhere.

You implied I made a straw man type argument. Not true. I pointed out that a lot of the widely used claims about Canada or medicare costing less were suspect at best.

My major caution is that this rush with legislation is likely to produce bad results.

Further, I’m trying to figure out solutions but it is a difficult problem especially since, I’m guessing here, 90% of hospitals are privately held or have corporate ownership.

I also have the strong feeling that this debate is distracting us from the real financial reform.

You believe that health care is a right and you want socialized medicine. Fine. I get that. Stop moralizing and beating everyone over the head about it.

Have a plan. Will go back and look at how many people are addressing cost. Should be a short trip.

Forget the “name-calling” drama and answer the man’s question.

I did. He just didn’t like the answer. Just like you wouldn’t either it it shut you down.

Correction: (sorry I’m watching the bb game)

I did. He just didn’t like the answer. Just like you wouldn’t either IF it shut you down.

(which apparently it would)

You believe that health care is a right and you want socialized medicine. Fine. I get that.

I never said I wanted to socialize it like other countries. What I did is compare our system to others. Instead of socializing like other countries, I have said that I would welcome a system like the VA or Medicare that people could buy into or it be supported by taxes with also a private system to compliment it. I don’t care how its done but I want basic healthcare available to all at prices similar to other 1st world countries with EVERYONE able to get coverage.

Others know I’ve said this type thing and many have commented on it.

Have a plan. Will go back and look at how many people are addressing cost. Should be a short trip.

I just mentioned an outline plan again up top which addresses costs because Medicare and the VA address costs better than Blue Cross. And I addressed costs again for about the 7th and 8th time below in response to another of your posts.

And I’m not “moralizing” any more than I am discussing ratios, number and cost comparisons between systems. I believe I have both the moral argument AND the numbers on my side.

And I’ll stop talking about it when nut-balls (present company excluded) quit blathering, “That’s Soshalism” to any idea that can possibly address the problem.

Re: lower medical costs

Why wouldn’t full blown nationalized/socialized medicine (a system where the government decides before the start of the fiscal year how much they will spend), with a coherent rationing of services be less expensive than the current horror?

Instead of paying a surgeon $500 for an 8 minute consultation, he would only get a quarter (or a tenth) of that.

Lots of cost savings to be had.

Every doctor who is also a human being is viewed as “incompetent” by someone…guaranteed. US physicians commit an average of 5 serious medical errors in their professional lifetimes. I don’t know what the numbers are for nurses.

Sixty percent of liability claims against doctors never make it to trial (but cost an average of $18,000 per case), and 90% of malpractice cases that go to trial are victories for the defense (costing about $100,000 per case)…that means that 4% of cases result in a plaintiff verdict (averaging $285,000 per claim). Of that, lawyers command anywhere from 30-50% of the damages.

Conservative estimates of both direct and indirect costs of tort actions amount to 5-10% of medical costs, but many believe it is much higher.

So either American doctors are less competent than in other countries, or the legal system is out of control. I have a harder time believing the former than the latter.

If you have a hard believing that American doctors and hospitals are incompetent, then you need to get out more often, because that 100,000 killed is not a made up number and in fact, may be on the conservative side.

I have many friends and family as well who have been screwed over badly by doctors.

Google “number of people killed by doctors in america per year” Not all the results are from fringe crackpot site.

You managed to neither address nor refute one single point I made.

That 100,000 is FACT.

That wronged patients have no other recourse than to litigate is FACT.

That medical fraud costs $60 BILLION+ per year is FACT.

That the cost for this broken system increases each year is a FACT.

This is not some theoretical debate, but a matter of life and death. Including yours.

The implementation of checklists, of all things, for routine procedures such as line insertion (IVs) has been shown to reduce infection rates by astonishing amounts. The idea is that many modern procedures are as complicated as airplanes, and a checklist keeps you from missing one tiny niggling detail amidst hundreds of other niggling details.

The tests were run at hospitals with dire infection rates, so bad that they were willing to try anything.

The tragedy is that many US hospitals are unwilling to adopt the idea of checklists for anything, even though such procedures have been shown to have dramatic results. Consumer Reports has several articles out about the hospitals that have reduced central-line infections to zero. Think of how many lives could be saved just by one checklist alone.

But no, some places have to have their pride. (I’ve seen that blindness in many industries. Checklists may be annoying, but for complicated procedures they can speed things up.)

Amen FPSS…we really do have and have some cool and wonderfully diversified people on this blog and I surely miss our Utarr gal.

Cheers

I agree FPSS. If there really is a better place in the next plane, Oly will manage to find it.

US has decades and decades to go before things are pillaged beyond return. Stock market 15K.

Just to be clear, student financial aid is less about grant money than ever before in the history of student aid and more about high interest loans.

The other choices? Get the loan or don’t go to school, because that part time job for min wage isn’t EVEN going to pay for one semester.

The only entitlement attitude is from the loan companies.

As usual, spot on HW. I think it has gone on so long that the only way to save the system is to let it collapse under its own weight and rebuild. Revolutions are never painless.

I’d say that the unions who on the receiving end of Reagan’s union busting 30 years ago and the people who lost their job to offshoring were watching pretty damn close.

But they were just serfs up against the kings of capitalism on Wall St. and outgunned, outspent and shouted down.

I rent everything (except my furniture and my car)

Nice and one of my all time favorites.

And the best opening scene to the best and most fitting song “The End,” by The Doors.

Cute, cute, cute Mikey fingers.

worked for Jimmie Rodgers, except for the TB part.

Yes, and the Greeks now want restitution for Nazi war crimes. It’s turning into a stupid pissing match, but both sides stand to lose by doing absolutely nothing.

Either way this country seems to be heading down the same path of social work unions as GSEs. Wealthy US states have long been on the hook for parasitic ones (and I live in one of the parasitic ones).

Ah, the Germans were always so good at diplomany.
I lived there. They think bluntness is a virtue.

“Hallo. Your wife and kids are so ugly..”

Oh, come on! What’s wrong with it?

I love me my Elliott Carter and Pierre Boulez and I’m a sucker for Thelonious Monk too, and I’m the archetype of an elitist if ever the previous name-dropping didn’t tip you off but what on earth inspires “hate”?

It’s schlocky-pop but isn’t that the definition of pop?

Plus, it’s got a catchy beat, no?

C’mon, gimme a smile; I know you are smiling inspite of yourself.

PS :- This board is “elitist”. F, the world! We should be freakin’ elitist!!! It’s the one thing we “deserve”.

was that the reggae version? Loved it.

I like your attitude about music FPSS.

Didn’t UB40 also do a remake of “Here I Am - Come and Take Me”? I remember hearing that song repeatedly on the radio.

Right, forgot about that one. Had a lot of good memories to Red Red Wine. The song and the bottled stuff.

The members met in unemployment line or something IIRC.

they already underestimated the deficit by 1.2T over the next 10 yrs?

I think your decimal point will need to be moved to the right before this is over.

We are going back to the 1970s whether we like it or not”

1930’s more likely

Natalie, you seem to assume that if it weren’t for Obama, the economy would have continued bubbling on forever.

The “opportunities” and home that you never had and are grieving about would have disappeared no matter who took office.

You say in your original post that the economy should be allowed to reach its natural equilibrium…but it is a big fantasy to think that would have translated into an economic boom for you while others crashed. All the government intervention has done is create a soft landing for now but delayed the inevitable. This country has had an ersatz economy since long before Obama took office.

After reading your x2 posts, I don’t whether you remind of Ronnie Raygun ..or..Joe-the-Plumber…or both.

NoSingleOne - I totally disagree. The increasing debt leverage which culminated in this mess took almost a decade to build up before Obama took office. My position has never been that Obama has been responsible for the debt problem. Hell - I don’t even think he knew we had one until the end. My position has always been that he manipulated the public contempt that the bubble burst to gain power and is working towards an agenda that will lower our quality of life for decades. He is not a financial guru that created the structures. He is just an opportunist using it for his personal advantage as a weapon against the citizens of this Country. His dangerous radical beliefs would have just been a funny joke in different times.

Amen, totally agree Nat. He’s an opportunist of the first magnitude.

“government intervention has done is create a soft landing for now but delayed the inevitable. “

Perhaps, however, who’s going to pay the bill for this “soft landing”? And how do we put an end to too big to fail, their lobbyists and the lack of political will to make meaningful reforms to the system.

I’d much rather face a breadline today versus being an unwilling participant on the perpetual bubble / crisis tread wheel.

I still don’t understand how you blame Obama for your not owning a home this year or starting your own business. Would you have done this through a loan or your savings? If you would have borrowed the money, his policies have made lending easier than if the economy reached equilibrium on its own. If it was from your cash assets and equities, then you benefited from policies that helped reinflate the stock market…unless you had it in a mattress before Spring 2008.

The only people who have been genuinely wronged since the meltdown have been savers and people who lived within their means, because everyone else is getting rewarded for their stupidity and greed.

I agree that Obama’s agenda is in need of a serious rewrite, but to simply criticize him without suggesting a realistic alternative is worse than useless. Bush manipulated the country about terrorism every bit as much as Obama has about the economy, yet both have pursued essentially identical policies that do nothing but leverage more debt.

Do you honestly think Bush, McCain or Romney (or Clinton)would have done anything differently?

I’d much rather face a breadline today versus being an unwilling participant on the perpetual bubble / crisis tread wheel.

So would I, frankly…and I agree 100%. However, you don’t see me whinging about how I would own a house or have started a business this year if that had happened. It is disingenuous to suggest that the current state of economy would actually be better if not for the Obama administration.

Obama is stealing from our children and shoveling the money into the pockets of the boomers every bit as much as the previous 4 presidents did. Very few politicians have had the courage to suggest we live within our means.

Well said. The only thing you neglected to mention was that the American sheeple installed both Bush and Obama in power, as well as their willing accessories in the House and Senate. And millions of our fellow citizens living beyond their means, with an “I’m entitled to it all, now!” mentality is what helped get us into our current mess.

True conservatism is all about dealing honestly and responsibly with today’s problems, today, and not deferring them for future generations to deal with.

Obama is stealing from our children and shoveling the money into the pockets of the boomers every bit as much as the previous 4 presidents did.

True and great point. Obama was also the only President since FDR that entered office during the start of a depression which shows he doesn’t have good timing at all.

I’m not happy with Obama in the least, but he’s no different than the previous 4 presidents even though he does have a funny sounding name and doesn’t eat beets.

The Congress and the President and the previous President were voted in by the people. Agree with Natalie on her post above and also with Sammy.

I’m ready to bail out if SHTF. And it’s not necessarily by staying in LA. I have a residence in Phoenix. I will just have to figure out how to escape out of LA.

Most people will jam the freways. I will use an alternate means.

Escape from La?

Didn’t Snake Pliskin surf the viaduct?

Dude, the viaduct is mine. Keep out.

Viaduct? VianotaCHICKEN?

The Bear lives in Groucho.

What do you consider debt? Is money owed a form of debt? Is promised money the same as money owed and therefore debt?

Social security is promised money thus it is money that is owed and therefore it is debt. So are medicare promises. So are corporate pension promises.

Do away with these promises and you will do away with lot of debt but you will also hose an AWFUL LOT of people.

Old people, people who have a habit of voting in large quantities during elections.

“True there will be a lot of short term pain since someone has to write off the bad debt and take the hit.”

The one who writes off the debt doesn’t take the hit; The one who is owed the money is the one that takes the hit.

I don’t think talking about specific buckets in isolation is helpful. Whether the US is on sound financial footing for the long-term has a tremendous impact on the filling up, and the need and dependence on, other buckets, especially when you are talking about government money. If the US doesn’t get back on track, it will lose market share period. In addition, intelligent risk, innovation, efficiency and productivity increase the size of the pie. I take the view that current actions are causing the US to lose market share and decrease the size of the pie for years to come, thus, have a net negative effect. Thus, there is less to fill the buckets no matter what buckets you want to identify. I do agree that it comes down to voting. They are just trying to push the bulk of the problem onto someone else.

Wrong term: I should have written “is relieved of the debt” rather than “writes off the debt”. They are two different things.

But you get the idea (I hope): One person’s debt is another person’s money.

“The one who writes off the debt doesn’t take the hit; The one who is owed the money is the one that takes the hit.”

The term write-off describes a reduction in recognized value. In accounting terminology, it refers to recognition of the reduced or zero value of an asset. Do you have a financial background?

“I don’t think talking about specific buckets in isolation is helpful.”

I don’t know what you mean. What specific buckets are you referring to? What buckets?

If you are using the term “buckets” in place of another term then please don’t do that, it just adds confusion.

“But you get the idea (I hope): One person’s debt is another person’s money.” If someone doesnt pay a debt, it has to be written off or someone else has to cover it. The administration is using other people’s money through a variety of techniques to cover bad debt losses. I believe there are better uses for my money than covering else someone’s bad debt on transactions that should have never occured (some techniques more indirect than others but same result). If the person that made the bad loan took a $10k hit, and my $10k went toward more productive activies the pie can actually get bigger. Quality of life is not a zero sum game.

“I do not believe the decisions being made are remotely equitable or well thought out with an understanding of the long-term implications.”

I do believe the decisions being made are extremely inequitable and poorly thought out with only an understanding of short-term political expedience.

“Buckets” or “pots” is a common term to refer to the place where money is transferred at various stops along a cashflow chain. It is the most appropriate term when the actual transfers are not known or are merely theoretical (e.g., money siphoned off to be allocated toward SS, medical care, return on pension investments, etc. would be deemed deposited into such “buckets” or “pots”). The point being that if the current government actions lessen the value of the cash available to distribute such concerns are distinct from the concern as to where the cash will ultimately end up. I have problems at both levels (i.e., where it ultimately ends up, and the lessening value thereof).

It is always possible to inflate away the debt. That way everyone gets a share of what is left. The other some get hosed others get to keep the loot.

I really think we just need to decide if we are willing to share the pain or want to dump it onto those owed the money which will not be repaid. That would be pensioners, bond holders etc. At this time, while I would have speculated this would be viewed as unacceptable, and that inflation would be chosen, I no longer hold this view. As it stands now, I only see our economy collapsing under the weight of an ever larger tsunami of defaults. Given downward wage pressure, I don’t see how money could be put in the hands of wage earners to effect inflation anyway, so it goes…

“The point being that if the current government actions lessen the value of the cash available to distribute such concerns are distinct from the concerns as to where the cash will ultimately end up.”

From what I see the problem isn’t that the government will lessen the VALUE of the cash available to distribute, the problem is the government will lessen the AMOUNT of cash available to distribute.

A lot of people are going to be doing without a lot of money they were promised.

“I agree that this debt is a huge burden, but it just can’t be whisked away. There’s no easy solution.”

Inflation can be created without wage inflation. The Fed can print the money to buy Treasuries and Congress can spend it on projects all over the country. In addition, Zombie institutions can be given newly minted moneys via TARP and other subsidies to speculate in a wide variety of asset classes like commodities and securities.

Manufacturers don’t just sell to consumers. They also sell to organizations like other business and governments. Consumer may buy less with less wages but governments can buy more with newly minted moneys.

I still love you Combo. We were both slightly grumpy this morning.

“I still love you Combo.”

Ummm, was it good for you too?

In terms of value or amount?

Clearly, Natalie was looking for an inflationary environment but was saddened to find only deflation.

What is valued the most, the pen or the penmanship?

It’s sadly clear on this board who isn’t getting any.

It’s not the size of the pen that matters, it’s the manner of how the squiggles and curlycues come out.

Sammy,
You owe me a new keyboard.

I’d much rather be accused of owing you 12.1 trillion dollar than accused of cheating you out of 12.1 trillion dollars.

Nah…on second thought, who cares what you think.

Sheesh…I’m potential Wall Street or government material here !

“It’s sadly clear on this board who isn’t getting any.”

I have personally noticed an inverse relationship between the length and frequency of my posts here and how much I am ‘getting.’ If you ever notice a day when I am not posting, it probably means I just had a good night’s ’sleep.’

PB, I was referring to sex with a partner. Sorry if you misunderstood.

[Oh, snap!]

ZING!

Inflation can be created without wage inflation. The Fed can print the money to buy Treasuries and Congress can spend it on projects all over the country. In addition, Zombie institutions can be given newly minted moneys via TARP and other subsidies to speculate in a wide variety of asset classes like commodities and securities.”

yes like Venezuela

“How much foreign assets did we grab with the trillions W&W Inc. printed?”

Oh, do you mean the trillion or so dollars that were borrowed into existence and sent over to China and India? Did we really grab foreign assets with these dollars or did we instead transfer claims on American assets to these foreigners?

And are these dollars held by these foreign countries really losing buying power or are they gaining buying power? The answer may lie in what is happening to wages in the U.S. And to various tax receipts.

If the dollars-per-hour wages in the U.S. is falling then one must conclude the dollar is gaining in value as compared to wages.

And if there is a shortage of tax receipts then the dollar must be gaining in value due to supply/demand issues in various towns, cities, counties, states, and the U.S. in general.

And if a lot of promised dollars are not forthcoming to those who are expecting them then there is going to be a shortage of dollars circulating throughout the economy.

As shortage of circulating dollars increases the buying power of those dollars that do circulate.

Ah, the miracle of fiat. If the Fed can print new moneys to help pay down existing debt or buy new GSE debt, what’s stopping us banks from buying foreign assets? Fiats are fungible, after all.

I just don’t like it that standing law at the time didn’t determine who the bag-holders would be . This picking and choosing who the bag-holders ,or the money losers ,will be by government policy ,bail-outs ,interventions and applying new law retroactive
is the rub. This way of handling it doesn’t follow the Constitution
and its just a pick and choose type of obstruction of Justice .On top of everything else these bail-outs prevented meaningful
discovery of corruption and liability in the meltdown . Later on we could of figured out where restitution was needed . So,as it stands all faulty systems in place and the TBTF in a blackmailers
position ,along with the potential loan defaulters .

+1, NSO. I share your pain and point out this hypocrisy to my D and R loving friends early and often.

“Grand Leader for Life” terrifying thought!

“…It is easier to blame it all on that idiot Bush”

“Heheheeheehheeehhehe…anyone want a pretzel?”

Speaking of ‘out of control’, I don’t know were you guys stand on this upcoming push to help the poor illegals on becoming citizens. This is were I stand. They are criminals who should be repatriated to their home s-hole. The politicos don’t want to alienate this future voting bloc. It’s a dem’s dream. 30++ million dem. votes forever. You long timers should know were I stand on both parties.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2010/mar/wh-meeting-legalize-illegal-aliens

Faced with his loss of popularity among the dupes who voted for him in the last election, Obama is fast-tracking an amnesty as a way of pander to 11 million illegal who will undoubtedly show the Democrats their appreciation during the next election.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gf_NuUKux5IdoINS4Ug3ZXatiJVgD9E64ET00

Mexican drug cartels are stepping up their pot growing operations on U.S. public land, using illegals. By all means, let’s give them amnesty! Potheads and illegals who can now register for welfare benefits - that’s a lot of Democratic votes!

If there’s ONE thing that really burns me up, it’s the Mexican druglords taking over our public lands, and using them for meth labs and large scale marijuana grow operations. George Bush was preaching “Homeland Security” while these guys were freely entering our country, setting up shop, and exploiting our national parks and forests to fund their own dangerous, criminal enterprises.

As someone who is happiest when outdoors exploring, I find it insulting that I have to worry that my life may come to an end by inadvertently stumbling upon a Mexican drug cartel and their stash because I just wanted to go hiking, or ride my motorcycle in remote wilderness areas. I have contemplated getting a concealed carry permit for my own protection, but that almost goes against the very reason I embrace the outdoors- to get away from the ills of society. Furthermore, I don’t like my odds as a single person in a gun battle with a drug cartel.

The fact that the Obama administration continues this blind eye policy towards this extremely dangerous situation is troubling at best. I have no idea what has transpired in the law enforcement community to allow such blatant drug activities, but anyone can easily go out into the forests of CA, OR, and WA and stumble upon a number of these operations. It’s absolutely despicable. I am saddened, and completely disgusted that this is what has become of our once great America.

Der Fatherland Security is nothing but tyranny of the law abiding when they selectively enforce our borders.

Come now. Subjecting senior citizens and toddlers to full-body scanners at airports makes us all safer.

Not all of Illinois is clueless. Just the northeast quarter of that fair land is out to lunch.

The rest of the state is more like an amalgam of “show-me-the-proof” Missouri and Hoosier Indiana…with attitudes to match. Understandable.

I lived in Illinois for 31 years, so I know this stuff.

Not picking on any one state. Just meant the clueless sheeple in general.

Pick away - it’s all good.

Perhaps they don’t know how.

Where did I say it did?

- NYCityBoy

—Cancer treatments for 8 year olds make sense. New kidneys for 80 year olds do not. —

In the context of discussion of Kidney… Cancer… not of kidney failure etc.

Deny if you wish, but then suffer for having made a poor linkage

-evil

Brilliant!

See a trend?

But I got 20 other countries I could put in their place.

See a trend?

“What works in Holland would probably work in Vermont.”

Does Vermont get colder than 50-degrees-F in winter?

For the past 65-75 years, Canadians and Europeans alike have counted on our military to cover their @sses if somebody threatened them.

It’s been this way since the enslavery of Eastern Europe by the Soviets (1946-1948).

Just because we aren’t there physically hardly means that our “allies” haven’t been freed up to spend their money on other things domestic.

Imagine the opposite - that Canada was the military superpower of the world. Their citizens would bear the cost of that status, not us.

For the past 65-75 years, Canadians and Europeans alike have counted on our military to cover their @sses if somebody threatened them.

The implication that absent the US military industrial complex canada (or europe) would have been invaded is absurd.

There’s no doubt that we have put ourselves in hock up to our eyeballs updating our war machine every 7 years and periodically testing it out. That has been our own doing (or undoing.)

I didn’t imply anything.

But I did say that numerous other countries rely on the United States to cover their behinds from outside threats. And that it’s been that way for a long, long time.

“Could you provide a short essay on how “they” did that?”

I thought I did. Or did you create that marvelous post before reading anything else?

Rene Zellweger: “…you had me at: “That is the way it is.”

Who the hell do you think you are talking to? I don’t borrow. I think this government is completely out of control. I have grown up. I don’t trust any of these clowns to implement a medical system that isn’t going to be looted by special interests. I don’t trust Obama, Pelosi, Reed, Frank, Boehner, Shelby or any of these clowns.

I’m all for a new way of doing healthcare if it is not riddled by one crook after another.

You Canucks are blowing some massive bubbles of your own. You just won’t admit it. Let’s see how smart you are when those blow up.

You all admit, on a regular basis, that your nation is controlled by the banks, insurance companies and special interest groups. You don’t seem to get anywhere with your political system. We do have a housing and credit bubble that is going to blow. But we will still have health care that is affordable compared to what you think you have. Maybe the tea-party crowd are on the right track, something has to give.

Hey, look at that, a good post. I agree. Personally, I believe many special interest groups are sowing the seeds of their own demise. We will have to see if they take us all with them. It is scary.

Hospice workers provided comfort for me and my family that got us through the practical and emotional issues of taking a family member home to die.

They gave us much more of themselves than any of the hospital workers did. (Not to dis the hospital staff, they were very professional.)

Someone who literally lets you cry on their shoulder every day as you struggle to cope and helps you to keep your priorities straight in one of the hardest situations you’ll ever face will always be a hero to me.

Pretty much everyone in the medical field, from doctors to janitorial staff have had to provide emotional comfort to patients and families that goes beyond their job descriptions.

Some people are obviously better at it than others, and they tend to gravitate towards the more emotionally demanding fields like hospice, ethics and pastoral care.

I’m glad you found some of them. Not everyone does.

CHF does have a higher mortality than many cancers, but unlike most cancer it is much more easily and cheaply screened for in its early stages, and much more preventable with the proper identification of risk factors. ACE-Is, ARBs, beta blockers, etc. are very cheap interventions that more than double life expectancy if instituted at the right time for a given NYHA classification, compared with cancer treatment.

I see your point though, and I take issue with people who expect heroic medical interventions when the inevitable catches up with them for a preventable disease with easily identifiable risk factors. I see no difference between that and bailing out banks for risky behaviors…do it with private insurance, not with public money.

Society has to have the intestinal fortitude to make hard choices and focus public money on diseases whose treatment provides a greater marginal benefit, then allow the private system to rescue the remainder for costs and risks above and beyond what we all agree is reasonable with limited resources. It is a much more fair approach with public money.

They had the patent until 1917

I see. Maybe laudenum was cheaper than Bayer’s aspirin. LOL.

In fact “Aspirin” was Bayer’s trade name for acetylsalicylic acid - as was “Heroin” for the opiate diacetylmorphine.

They both became as synonymous with their namesake products as Kleenex and Xerox.

Golly gee, thanks for explaining my post for me. I guess I needn’t have even bothered with the attempt, since you pretty much figured the whole thing out and then some…

Actually, I think Bear goes out of his way to make up pretend sets of laws in his own mind and then apply them to situations and ask why they aren’t really the case. It is his most obnoxious trait.

Bear,

For a bank, a debt is an asset. It is something that generates money for them. If you die owing more than you own, your heirs don’t get to keep your stuff. It has to be sold so the people you owe can get part of what they are owed. If a corporation goes bankrupt, it is the same thing. Their assets are sold off so the people they owe can get some of what they are owed back. In this case, the asset is a debt. You are not so stupid that you can pretend not to understand this just because you think the world would be more fun if it didn’t happen. Grow up.

“For a bank, a debt is an asset.”

Please don’t insult my intelligence. Do I have to point out to a Goldman Sachs alum that some assets have a value of $0? A
loan of $600,000 to a couple of foreign nationals which they clearly have no hope of ever being able to repay seems to me like a blatant attempt to throw away money. Why should it be honored in the aftermath of the lender’s debt?

Moreover, why should our federal government assume responsibility for propping up the value of the collateral on loans which should never have been made? I don’t believe this is legal, either, but then I am not an attorney like Polly is.

debt? death? (my Freudian slip is slipping…)

“I suppose the next thing you’ll be telling me is that if I loan somebody money and then I die, this person doesn’t have to repay any money to my family or estate.”

Thank you for reminding me of an amusing family story.

During the early years of my marriage, I often heard through the family grapevine about my FIL’s Wealthy Uncle. It seems the man had somehow piled up millions of dollars, which he grudgingly and sporadically would share with favored relatives. For instance, my SIL, herself a talented musician and a budding composer, received a stipend and a car from Wealthy (great) Uncle. Younger relatives who did not rate as promising prospects for future fame and fortune received nothing.

Wealthy Uncle eventually reached the end of his long and presumptively prosperous life. The burden of settling his estate fell on my FIL, who as good fortune would have it, happens to be an attorney. Much to FIL’s surprise, upon sifting through wealthy uncle’s affairs, the unfortunate realization came to light that Wealthy Uncle had quite a beer drinking habit. Moreover, there quite a few debts had been rung up over the years to fund the acquisition a modest real estate investing empire plus the largess bestowed upon favored relatives. Through settling Wealthy Uncle’s estate, a small loss was realized which was borne by surviving family members.

The moral of the story: There is always a bagholder when unrepayable debt is incurred; if you are not sure who the bagholder is, there is a good chance it could be you.

“Actually, I think Bear goes out of his way to make up pretend sets of laws in his own mind and then apply them to situations and ask why they aren’t really the case. It is his most obnoxious trait.”

Actually I never make up laws in my head or otherwise; I simply point out when existing laws either make no sense, or are unfairly enforced or unenforced, as the case may be.

If that is my most obnoxious trait, then I am downright proud of it, particularly if my efforts to point out cases where the law is an ass succeed in annoying attorneys. This is what I would consider to be a wildly successful effort.

P.S.

Q. How is a law suit like a viola solo?

A. Everyone is happiest when the case is closed.

“The FDIC is reducing balances on loans it holds after closing failed banks.”

Polly,

Since you are having such fun today excoriating me for my abysmal failure to understand contract law as it applies to toxic mortgage debt, riddle me this: If the FDIC can reduce loan balances on failed banks after they close, why couldn’t my friends have simply had their mortgage debt reduced to a level commensurate with their prospective earnings after Countryslide died, but before foreclosure?

Why is it that the debt owed can be reduced once it is in the hands of the FDIC, but not when it is owed by a household which never had the prospect of being able to repay it? Is there some esoteric legal principle at work here, or does whether contract laws governing mortgage debt are enforced depend on who holds the asset and who owes the debt?

Frankly, I don’t think the law matters too much any more, any way. So far as I can tell, we are in a never-ending financial crisis, which makes the rules somewhat irrelevant, no?

“The only people who would ever make loans again are the ones who work entirely outside the legal system - and they would break your legs if you decided not to pay.”

I never realized Uncle Sam took such a hard line on people who don’t repay loans. Playing the Devil’s advocate, why would a lender hesitate to make a mortgage loan if they knew the full faith and credit of the U.S. government would make them whole in case of default?

So far as I can tell, we are in a never-ending financial crisis, which makes the rules somewhat irrelevant, no?

An oldie but goodie….

Wall Street’s ‘Disaster Capitalism for Dummies’
14 reasons Main Street loses big while Wall Street sabotages democracy 12/07/08 (MarketWatch) –

Yes, we’re dummies. You. Me. All 300 million of us. Clueless. We should be ashamed. We’re obsessed about the slogans and rituals of “democracy,” distracted by the campaign, polls, debates, rhetoric, half-truths and outright lies. McCain? Obama? Sorry to pop your bubble folks, but it no longer matters who’s president.

Why? The real “game changer” already happened. Democracy has been replaced by Wall Street’s new “disaster capitalism.” That’s the big game-changer historians will remember about 2008, masterminded by Wall Street’s ultimate “Trojan Horse,” Hank Paulson. Imagine: Greed, arrogance and incompetence create a massive bubble, cost trillions, and still Wall Street comes out smelling like roses, richer and more powerful!

Yes, we’re idiots: While distracted by the “illusion of democracy” in the endless campaign, Congress surrendered the powers we entrusted to it with very little fight. Congress simply handed over voting power and the keys to trillions in the Treasury to Wall Street’s new “Disaster Capitalists” who now control “democracy.”Why did this happen? We’re in denial, clueless wimps, that’s why. We let it happen. In one generation America has been transformed from a democracy into a strange new form of government, “Disaster Capitalism.” Here’s how it happened:

Three decades of influence peddling in Washington has built an army of 42,000 special-interest lobbyists representing corporations and the wealthy. Today these lobbyists manipulate America’s 537 elected officials with massive campaign contributions that fund candidates who vote their agenda.

This historic buildup accelerated under Reaganomics and went into hyperspeed under Bushonomics, both totally committed to a new disaster capitalism run privately by Wall Street and Corporate America. No-bid contracts in wars and hurricanes. A housing-credit bubble — while secretly planning for a meltdown.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10849

It’s GOOD to be the Banksta!

Interesting, but I don’t think occupancy or room rates are at previous prices & levels…perhaps neither is the park attendance…Walt would marvel at the time people spend in line to go on 2 minute, 25 second amusement ride…

What is your point? Robert Rubin was Bill Clinton’s Treasury Secretary. He helped to blow up the world. Larry Summers was Bill Clinton’s Treasury Secretary. He is scum. These guys helped to blow up the world. Without these monsters there would have been no tech bubble. Oh, but Bill Clinton balanced the budget. That is a crock. It was a phony bubble economy whose aftermath led to the bigger bubble being blown in housing.

It looks like it’s back to skipping over your posts. I won’t lose a moment’s sleep over that.

Glad to see that you agree about Cheney-Shrub’s 8 year toil to Improve America’s eCONomy!

“It looks like it’s back to skipping over your posts..”

“…If there’s no good reception for me then tune me out
Cause honey who needs the static?
It hurts the head and you wind up cracking
And the day goes dismal…”

Joni Mitchell, “You Turn Me on I’m a Radio”

repeat x5 while your waiting for everyone to pony up to your private POV:

Seventeen slimy slugs in shiny sombreros sat singing short sad songs…

Every American deserves the right to honorable work

No they don’t. Read the founding principles of our Republic about rights. There is no such silly thing as a “right to honorable work.” Good grief!

Every American deserves the right to honorable work

No they don’t.

“No they don’t”, don’t matter Billy. Read the next part of my sentence.

Every American deserves the right to honorable work and even if they didn’t it wouldn’t matter because the result would be same because it is the natural, historical perception of Americans that being able to work IS their right.

Ignore reality, history and human behavior at your own detriment. Good Grief!

Your whole statement is nonsense. Did you ask every American yourself? You did not ask me. I am one American saying I do not have any right to “being able to work.”

If I was a quadriplegic who do I sue to make me able to work?

Good Grief!

“Let them eat cake” is not a very good way to run a country. You could lose your head over such a philosophy.

People do indeed deserve to be able to earn a living. Or they will damn well find a way and not in a very nice manner.

Every. Single. Time.

But maybe some of you slept through history class. Apparently most of the PTB did.

Your whole statement is nonsense.

It is not at all nonsense. No way. It might appear that way to one not appreciative of human behavior, American history, and American’s earned expectation though. It’s possible you didn’t read it carefully but I think everything I’m going to say now is there. If not please let me know.

Did you ask every American yourself?

That is a meaningless question. But what part about Americans wanting, needing and historically expecting to be able to honorably work and/or support their families would I need to ask about? Do you find this an odd concept in relation to America?

I am one American saying I do not have any right to “being able to work.

And you have that right. But sometimes it doesn’t matter what is interpreted on paper.

That was my secondary point (and equally important) as whether jobs are a right or not. I explained that it doesn’t matter much in this case.

It doesn’t matter to American perception or feeling if a job is a literal constitutional right or not because being able to work hard and flourish is an important part of our history and our lore. Working is America.

It is an earned expectation in American culture that most hard working citizens who apply themselves, will be able to better themselves and their families. Isn’t that our whole deal? Were we the beacon of hope because of Goldman Sacs and CEO’s bonuses, or for being the land of opportunity for many?

The secondary point was that if America takes this kind of opportunity away, even though it isn’t listed in our constitution, it won’t matter. People will react the same.

That’s why Fiorina’s opinion on this matter is moot. Formerly middle-class people out of work desperate to feed their families are not going to give a damn about Carley’s Cato philosophy, a philosophy that will bring about its own destruction.

Debating it while things go down will be like Nero fiddling while Rome burns.

My writing above expressed an A gist of my writing above because it does not really say you are wrong in the literal sense of what is a “right” or not in the context of the constitution. In fact, books could be written on how you are literally right in some points. Carly Fiorina is literally right in a narrow sense too.

But that doesn’t matter

The entire history of working American’s was work, it is part of our culture and American structure. If you take this away, no matter the theories or laws, a dangerous gap will be formed that will be more difficult to

I’m leaning toward BMWs. ”

One word of caution ITSHTF I would not want to drive a new BMW with CA plates to AZ.

You need a back up car better yet a truck with 4 wheel drive

One word of caution ITSHTF I would not want to drive a new BMW with CA plates to AZ.

+1 Or anywhere else for that matter. Even just down the street…especially if that street is anywhere near Florence and Normandy.

“Anybody who voted for the bailout needs to be turned out of office.”

YES. In fact, there needs to be a big list posted online, so that people can see who needs to go. Linked repeatedly. With tar & feather graphics.

I think it’s deeper than that, combotechie. A guy going off to a job, even if it’s soul-crushing, can at least feel like he’s doing his bit to bring home the bacon. A guy sitting around drawing unemployment - if he’s any kind of guy at all - is going to feel frustrated and depressed at his failure to support his family.

“…is going to feel frustrated and depressed at his failure to support his family”

For example:

The unidentified and forgotten:

Sequoyah County Times:
2 days 23 hrs ago

Dear Editor:
“We hear about Joe the Plumber, complaining about the tax situation for small businesses. Well, Joe the Plumber is employed, has a good income, always in demand, so he has no issues that are important in my opinion, and in the opinion of many unemployed.

Let me tell you about the John and Jane Doe, the unidentified and the forgotten people.

They are the ones hurting, scared, and uncertain of their lives. They are losing their homes, their dreams, their livelihoods, their families, their medical care, their confidence, their ability to provide, their ability to want to live.

They are the important people above and beyond Joe the Plumber, who still has these things. Joe the Plumber has minor worries and minor set backs, John and Jane Doe, are from the once American dream, to the make shift boxes in the parks, and homeless on the street, they are the desperate increasing number of emotionally depressed, who have the need to not want to go on in life, because they cannot see the light at the end of the tunnel. So I think it is time for Congress, and the President, our senators, representatives, and our governors to remember that John and Jane Doe were once an extremely important working class members of society, and now they are reduced to the forgotten and unwanted item in the landfill.

They are your American people, your society, and your production workers who do the dirty work so the higher ups can sit in their plush offices.

They are dying of heartbreak, bleeding ulcers from worry, inability to want to live. Suicides have gone up, family killings have gone up, and depression has gone up. There are millions out there who have major medical problems, who are in major pain, who are dying, and cannot get any help, because the states they live in don’t supply adequate health care for the unemployed.

“There are millions out there who have major medical problems, who are in major pain, who are dying, and cannot get any help, because the states they live in don’t supply adequate health care for the unemployed.”

The states they live in DON’T HAVE ANY MONEY! It all comes down to HAVING THE MONEY. If there is no money then the choices are limited. No money means some people have to do without.

Hello, is there anybody out there that gets this?

“The states they live in DON’T HAVE ANY MONEY!”

lol…Define: ALLOCATION

“The assignment and reassignment of a cost or group of costs to one or more cost objectives based on a reasonable standard”

I like that one, as it applies to “distribution” to these “standards”:

TSA
DEA
ATF
Prison overtime
Police overtime
Fire Dept Admin. & Equipment

…And the beat goes on

No money means some people have to do without.

Hello, is there anybody out there that gets this?

It is becoming slowly more clear. The problem is the distribution of what money is left, where should it go and who should do without what.

People are starting to figure out they want to prioritize health-care as very important. The money is there but at the expense of other things. Now comes the tough part.

Thanks Combo. There are a few lingering nabobs on HBB who still do not realize that whatever government gives to person A was taken from person B.

Nabobs - I love that word! Use it some more, will you?

“…that whatever government gives to person A was taken from person B….”

A government’s SOLE function is to promote the GENERAL welfare. How much of something to give most of its citizens is available if it doesn’t give a lot of that something to a small select few of citizens?

A society that puts a price on everything values NOTHING. And such a society is ultimately doomed.

I don’t think the bailouts saved the financial system as much as they ruined any chance for reform of its fundamental problems. I will do everything I can as a voter to make sure we don’t follow the same path when bailout 2.0 rolls around.

Had Napoleon been born a year earlier he would have been Italian (actually sardinian, i think). France got Corsica by treaty.

“So was George Washington born in the United States? How about Jefferson and Adams?”

There’s actually a clause in the Constitution dealing with that. Basically, it said that for X number of years, it was okay that the Presidential candidates weren’t born in the US. Then it stopped.