The Housing Bubble

Vancouver is awsome. Beautiful scenery, though the buildings themselves are a little homely. Cops are reasonable. People are friendly and helpful on public transportation or giving other directions. It smells better than the cities I am used to.

Unfortunately, I caught a monster cold on the ship, so I was a little out of it (thanks to Canadian generic Dayquill) on cold medicine for a few days. That slowed me down a bit, so I didn’t get to everything I wanted to. Went out to Capilano bridge. Saw a few productions at Bard on the Beach. Saw two of the fireworks festival entries (Canada’s was fantastic; Spain’s was nice; China won, but I was still in Alaska for that one). Got to a number of musueums (I think that “bone eating snot flower worm” is my new favorite animal name). Wandered around Granville Island. Spend a day vegging out on the beach. Spent a day in Stanley Park and the aquarium. Caught a few street festivals and Chinatown. Ate local salmon from a food truck.

Alaska is also lovely once you get to the natural parts. The commercial areas near the cruise ship terminals are just disturbing. Seriously, I don’t dress like a person who should be dropping $20K on a ring. Or $12K on a fossil. But I was treated like a person who could and was even likely to do so. Like I said, disturbing.

Did you go over the Cap bridge? Gutsy !

The Grouse Grind is nearby the bridge. Hope you tried it.

Thank you for coming to Canada for part of your vacation.

ps I have been to the Bard only once but enjoyed it as well.

I think this program is about as likely to have a significant effect as HAMP was - as in not very much. I wouldn’t worry too much about it. The technical problems are overwhelming. Not that the effect it will have won’t be unfair, it will. I just don’t see a lot of widespread success.

The biggest problem will be the risk. That means that unless they sell for truely ridiculous prices, there will be very little capital that private investors will be willing to risk. If no capital, then the funding has to be borrowed. From whom? Banks aren’t going to want to touch this with a 10 foot pole. So the borrowing would have to be federally provided or guaranteed. Good luck getting that through Congress.

When the prices really come down, there is plenty of private capital on the sidelines that will be willing to play this game.

Good luck getting that through Congress.

C’mon, Congress, bury this bad idea! I know you can do it!

The property I purchased in Montana is part of an original homestead from 1929. It’s the first time any of it had been resold.

“whether the 12-by-14 dwelling was to be built in feet or inches.”

Back in the 1950s, when we used to go up to the family homestead on the high desert south of Palmcaster, I saw some of the weird fakey “houses” that were built to hold claims. They were low to the ground with a slanted roof. But at least they were 12×14 ft and not inches.

Protectionism against foreign goods and services? It’ll increase wages and jobs, but also cost of living

Protectionism is the answer. I’d rather have a good job and pay more for my toaster.

Protect OUR jobs. Not someones higher profit margin.

It is trade imbalnces. Pure and simple trade imbalances.

You have to focus on the trade imbalances every where they exist.

International? Trade war.

Domestically? Unions, taxes, regulations.

Trade imbalances can not exist long-term because they result in unsutainable debt growth. if we do not attack them directly, then the debt will collapse, the money the debt created goes away, people lose faith in money, and we go into depression. ALWAYS, EVERY TIME.

We fix the trade imbalances, or the trade imbalances fix themselves. Trade imbalances fixing themselves is very depressing.

VAT tax
Cut payroll tax
Socialize medicine thust reducing the cost of employing and insuring in America by 3500 per head
Change our trade agreements.
Gas tax
Tax on elite
More gov spending on infrastructure energy and communications.

These things would cut the cost of labor in the US and increase employment much more so than say

Cutting capital gains taxes and dividend taxes for the elite who then sit on their money or build factories in CHINA.

A few thoughts on the protectionist route:

1) If you’re gonna do it, go big or go home. No putting a 10% tax on stuff from this nation or that. It won’t create jobs, only increase cost of living. It would have to be more of a ban on imports of manufactured goods.

2) Such a ban would have to be against practically all nations, otherwise supply chains will adapt to get the job. (Sure this TV was made in England, at least we put these last few buttons on what came from China.)

3) Be ready for retaliation. Stuff the US still wants from abroad might not come. Energy and raw materials being the biggest concerns. The US will not be able to continue the exporting it does currently.

4) Prices won’t just go up on toasters, it’ll be everything. Price hikes and shortages could be very severe while US manufacturers get their act together. After stabilization, the standard of living will be well below that of the 90s.

5) While the US is in the process of pissing off the rest of the world, might as well write off some national debt.

6) Troops abroad should probably come home before any of this is implemented.

A few thoughts on the protectionist route:

1) If you’re gonna do it, go big or go home. No putting a 10% tax on stuff from this nation or that. It won’t create jobs, only increase cost of living. It would have to be more of a ban on imports of manufactured goods.

Raising tariffs 10% would do a lot actually. I’ve read that landed costs of imports are on average 17% cheaper than American made. Yes we gave away the farm for 17%. It is even less now with Chinese currency appreciation and rising fuel costs. Throw in the logistic hassles and 10% would start bringing back US production and slowly enough to avoid many problems you described.

As far as rising prices on goods, a 10% rise in tariffs would cause a max 20% rise in prices but I’m sure it would be less because of the laws of supply and demand. I am certain though that it would translate into less CEO bonuses.

BTW, I live in Brazil which practices strong protectionism and posted a 7.5% economic growth rate in 2010, does booming business with China, has countries banging on its do to trade with and has increased it’s middle class by 20% the past 12 years.

As far as retaliation, not so much if implemented slowly. China is Brazil’s #1 trading partner and Brazil just raised tariffs on cheap Chinese imports because they are starting to flood Brazilian markets. What did the Chinese do in retaliation? Nada. Oh yea, they bought more soybeans from Brazil.

Nice post.

I would like to think of protecting North America, not just the USA - primarily because of our integrated energy systems, automotive, and commodities.

I agree that without new jobs there will be no recovery and that to create them we have to get a good deal of our manufacturing back into North America.

Service industries related to energy, auto, and commodities that have not departed town - should be encouraged to stay to help keep advanced manufacturing technologies.

But both countries need much better R&D systems with qualified government personnel who do not exist for their own benefit, but for the benefit of advancing science.

The OEMs in Wichita are currently sending a lot of their jobs to to Mexico.

According to the people out of work, doesn’t matter much to them if their job went to Mexico or China. It ain’t here no more.

So……manufacturing jobs go to Mexico, keeping their middle class happy. We get Mexico’s wretched refuse.

Such a deal.

As Darrell is stating ,we have no other choice but to bring back our manufacturing base and job base .People cannot live without jobs ,even if they are a farmer living off the land . Governments can’t survive without having people they tax who have jobs or wealth .

This idea that China produces for the rest of the World ,while eventually it would gut the job base/tax base for any Country that imports all the China good is crazy . American Companies making manufacturing deals in China or mexico is no different than them becoming Foreign Companies in terms of taking the money and jobs out of America .If you become a producer in another Country ,than you have become that Countries provider of jobs . No doubt USA companies don’t like a bunch of the regulations that are imposed in America ,but I have had enough of crap plastic and toxic food and toxic drywall because of lack of regulation in foreign Countries , I would rather pay more for USA manufactured products that are regulated and I would rather the Companies have pollution control that costs more . Look at how polluted China has become .

For instance if Norway for example opened up all their manufacturing in America and provided jobs for Americans by doing this ,while they expected not to be taxed if they exported the American production back to Norway I think the people of Norway would laugh in their face .Trade imbalances are a destructive thing .

Look ,the bottom line is that Middle men are making excess profits by using cheap foreign labor . Providing no job benefits is another way of saving costs . Face it ,China is one big Monopoly now . All the outsourcing of jobs is another example of USA Companies underminding
the American Job and tax base and they should get a penalty tax that is equal to the destruction of money kept in America by having a American having the job at a higher wage and spending the money in America and paying taxes in America .

It doesn’t mean that you don’t trade with other Countries ,but the word trade is a lot different than tranporting your work force and natural goods to other Countries to produce everything while you call yourself a American Company . Ford just opened a car manufacturing plant in Mexico . They should have a grave penalty tax put on every car they import from mexico because their savings on cheap labor just puts extra money in the middle mans profit and it destroys jobs in America .In fact ,china goods aren’t even worth the cheaper price

We can’t afford to support 30% of the population that might be unemplyed because of jobs going away . All systems collaspe eventually because they can’t be held up by faulty globalism designed to put more money in the
elites pockets .

Another problem the Post Office has is that it’s not allowed to set its rates, it requires gov’t permission to do so.

Likewise, Fedex and UPS get the juicy $10 overnights, while the post office has the burden of delivering first class mail to rural areas for under a dollar.

44 cents IIRC. I’d like to see UPS or FedEx do that.

if they weren’t required to charge the same amount to deliver mail to Alaska and Hawaii as the within CONUS

But, but, but…”States Right$!”, “States Right$!”, “States Right$!”

Rick Santorum vs. The Tenth Amendment

The rise of the tea party has breathed new life into the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which states that all powers not listed in the Constitution should be left unto the states. But Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, a staunch social conservative, is fed up with it.

“This is the Tenth Amendment run amok!” Santorum declared, referring to suggestions from other candidates to allow states the right to set their own marriage policy. “We have Ron Paul saying, ‘oh, whatever the states want to do under the Tenth Amendment, that’s fine.’ So if the states want to pass polygamy that’s fine. If the states want to impose sterilization, that’s fine. No. Our country is based on moral laws, ladies and gentlemen. There are things the states can’t do. …We are a nation that has values. We are a nation that was built on a moral enterprise. But states don’t have the right to tramp over those because of the Tenth Amendment.”

Correct, IIRC they receive no gov’t subsidies.

“Information technology has crushed this business model.”

The only thing that needs to change in the USPS “business model” is that they be allowed to set their rates to cover their costs (while reducing those costs at the same time).

But yes, they became WAY too dependent on junk mail, which has now morphed into Spam email.

USPS is a [Gov't] business.

So is the U$MilitaryIndu$trialComplexInc’$, $till desire to argue ’bout it with the “TrueAnger™” & “TrueReducetheDeficitNow! Today!!$™” cult members?

Tent cities will be front and center in the media only if/when a Republican is elected president.

The rural poor turning increasingly to “food auctions,” which offer items that may be past their sell-by dates.

We actually have a store in town that specialized in selling that kind of food (mostly canned goods).

“Tent cities will be front and center in the media only if/when a Republican is elected president.”

You must not have a big screen TV because you are clearly missing the big picture. Unless there is interference coming from background partisan claptrap radiation…

“Tent cities will be front and center in the media only if/when a Republican is elected president.”

So why are Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, the Tea Party, talk radio, and all of the Republican candidates silent?

“2. The rural poor turning increasingly to “food auctions,” which offer items that may be past their sell-by dates. And for those who like their meat fresh, there’s the option of urban hunting. ”

I had forgotten about this. A couple of the local grocery stores (in Davis) just give their expired food away. At least they were five years ago.

Yes, a whole bunch have, Max Power. I saw a figure somewhere (don’t have it now) that in parts of California, 28% of mortage holders re-fied into option ARM mortgages. They are done for.

If they opted for ARMs, wouldn’t their payments have dropped in the past few years?

“… you also have the ABILITY.”

Up to a point you have the ability. Mr. Market has the final say on just what the stock price will be.

HINT: Artificially raising the prices of imports restricts the flow of international trade.

Well, losing Mandarin Orange$ from China might not be so awful, perhaps it might improve the bottom line$ of growers in Spain.

At the time of Smoot Hawley we were China, ie we had massive exports vs imports.

What is China going to do??
1. Sell our treasuries, well that will just drive up the value of their currency and make exports even harder.
2. Put Tariffs on what we sell them?? Not food, Not natural resources that they need to make stuff. Other stuff doesn’t count for a hill of beans.
3. Probably their biggest threat would be to ignore our patents and produce those goods for export to the world. If Europeand Australia who face similar problems got on board I’m willing to give the rest to China.

Nope Tariffs and or VAT taxes are EXACTLY what this country needs.

Agreed. We’re in a totally different situation now than we were during the 30’s. Protectionism will have a very different effect now that we’re a net importer.

the Chinese already tax imports.

So, if the Americans suddenly decided to tax imports from China the same way that China taxes imports from the US, then what would China do? Tax imports even more?

Are raw materials taxed too, and how much? For example, $952M of hides and skins is used to make $15B in footwear. Does the shoe price include the import taxes for the hides to go into China, and would that cancel out the lower price of Chinese labor?

And I wonder about all thsoe soybeans. If those are taxed, then the Chinese can’t possibly afford to eat much.

the Chinese already tax imports. ”

yes I hear its still very cheap here in the USA to buy stuff compared to even buying it where it is made.

I saw this in Mexico it often makes for a thriving black market

If tariffs cause widescale suffering in China, who will they go to war with?

Why didn’t the hammer come down on those who were putting the MBS together?

Because the Republicans controlled most of Congress and the White House and Treasury Sec? Because K Street was running full tilt providing p*orn to the political appointees at the SEC so they would allow monopolistic mergers and acquisitions galore?

Now that there is a different Admin, someone’s at least trying to bring down the hammer, and you’re complaining?

“I disagree” Fair enough.

“Why didn’t the hammer come down on those who were putting the MBS together? That’s who the SEC is charged with overseeing.”

I’m not arguing that point, absolutely the hammer should have come down. Investors relied on the opinions of the ratings agencies. The ratings agencies relied on the “implicit guarantees” of the US govt. Nice cover, but it doesn’t mean squat, as we can see. And the ratings agencies know it, IMO. Or should have known. I personally just ended off relying on an “implicit guarantee” from a small business I worked with for almost a year. Needless to say, “implicit guarantees” mean nothing. If it isn’t written, it isn’t true. And sometimes even then… But I knew that going in, so I just shrug, take my lumps and move on.

“The reason it was triple A was because of the GSEs.” Well, if the ratings agencies are that incompetent, then they’re useless and shouldn’t exist anyway. BTW, I recall seeing a clip on 60 Minutes or some such program where a whistle blower at one of the ratings agencies tried to do his job and got fired for it. What does that mean, then? He committed heresy because he didn’t trust the GSE “implicit guarantee”?

“The media wasn’t doing it.”

Ben, sooner or later you are going to have to confront the fact that you ARE the media now, along with others like you. Whether you realize it or not, you stepped up to the plate and picked up the bat. You’ve designated yourself a journalist in your profile. So there you are. Those people and entities you call the media? They’re more concerned with whether Bert & Ernie should get married. I don’t know what you call them, Paul Craig Roberts calls them “presstitutes”. I’d say that’s apt.

You’ve picked up the bat they left lying in the dirt.

‘Because the Republicans…’

This partisan approach will never solve anything. Neither of the two parties has a monopoly on truth or right. What I can count on is that Democrats and Republicans are constantly working on one thing; to get re-elected.

‘Now that there is a different Admin, someone’s at least trying to bring down the hammer, and you’re complaining?’

Just who exactly is the hammer being brought down on?

Back to the credit thing: we have a govt that has borrowed more money than any entity in history. And they have to borrow billions EVERY DAY to keep the doors open. We’re numb to it. A billion is a thousand millions. Remember the old saying, ‘a billion here and a billion there and soon you’re talking about real money’? Now we’ve moved up to trillions.

This is a govt that “bailed out” how many companies in the past few years? Prop up house prices? How much have they spent on that? How much for the mortgage interest deduction? And the wars; how many are we running now? This country spends more on the military than the rest of the world COMBINED. Need I bring up the old saying “war is a racket”? That’s because at the root of it, corporations are stuffing more billions into their pockets. No problem, we’ll borrow it.

All this at a time when just about everybody is cutting back. Families, local govts, companies; all to get through this recession. But there is one entity in the world that refuses to cut anything. Not only that, but they want to borrow even more. And if anyone dares to suggest “they” might not pay it back, look out.

“Neither of the two parties has a monopoly on truth or right.”

I know that and you know that, but some of them don’t seem to.

This partisan approach will never solve anything.
——–

You asked why the SEC didn’t attack the rating agency of the MBS back when they were being bundled in 2005. I gave you a possible answer: that the SEC is partisan, from political appointees.

Will an equally partisan Dem SEC solve it? I dunno. They never seem to be in office long enough for us to find out.

The hammer is not being brought down yet, but they are least looking to see if it needs to be brought down.

“partisan approach”

No it won’t solve anything, especially if one side of the aisle utterly refuses to budge in their bargaining stance in order to through a wrench into the prospect of finding any potential way out for near-term political advantage.

“Neither of the two parties has a monopoly on truth or right.”

Yes but that does not mean that on grand, macro economic issues that both party’s truths are equal.

For 30 years the Republicans professing that cutting taxes for the rich/corporations and that free trade would create good jobs and shared economic growth has turned out to be a lie.

And for them to continue to do so when evidence has proved it is not so is not “right”.

They said it straight out; Uncle Sam!

“True$editionist$$erialEnabler$™” = Indemnified!

They’re still saying that, only with a different goal meaning…this time around. iHhopinionation.

It may seem like I pick on Republicans.

If so, it’s because they are telling more/bigger lies than the Democrats.

Rio, it’s not just a cost problem, it’s an insurance problem.

The young and healthy pay health insurance twice: once for their own health insurance. That money goes to a high-profit insurance company. Then they pay again, for Medicare. Why not let the young and healthy help to pay for the old and sick directly, and knock out the middleman altogether?

This would work even if every procedure and drug costs that same.

Rio ,you hit it on the nose . Just like the cost of housing was not sustainable ,the cost of health care is not sustainable in the USA now .

I think it’s error for people to think of health care as the same as a regular business . Health care is a Insurance system to start with . The ‘Art of medicine ” isn’t even practiced anymore because of the profit motive insurance companies running the ship ,and the drug companies think in terms of profits ,not cures .The Insurance conpanies idea of curbing costs is to deny care ,or rationing If anybody trusts them they are crazy .

We must do medical care for 50% less cost . Its absurd that in order to get a good policy a young healthy family of 4 has to pay 25 or 30 % of the average wage to get that good policy . And why would they want to pay when they don’t think they will be provided for when they are
older and they really need to use the health care system a lot .
I think part of the problem is that we had these long term systems that worked and than the greed machine started altering the ratios for greater profits . Companies can’t afford the health care costs and people can’t afford them either .

If someone told me when I was young that the cost of a
good insurance policy for health would costs more than rent I would say that they must be joking . Further , a lot of these new drugs aren’t better than the old drugs that were used . No wonder Companies want to outsource jobs based on the health care costs alone in this Country . Evrything is tied into everything else .

The health care cost problem affects every other area of our economy . Just like you can’t buy a house that you can’t afford ,you can’t have health care that is out of sink with the average wage of the middle class which is the majority .

Many prices are out of whack these days based on the average income .
What is going to happen when people are forced to put to many dollars into health insurance and not enough toward other areas . One industry can unbalance the whole economy ,just like when you put 50% of your income toward housing rather than the 25% toward housing that was common for so many years . In Egypt they put 80% of their income toward food and that doesn’t leave much for anything else .

Nobody talks about what the price of things should be in terms of ratios of a family budget .All the price fixing in the world isn’t going to change the affordablity index.
Companies use to know how much they could get and they were willing to work on smaller profit margins to remain competitive .
In my view ,the economy need to be balanced or it will fail or you will have to many poor people that you won’t even be able to generate enough taxes to help them .
We are reversing all the gains we made for 100 years for whacked out unbalanced systems were the cost of things don’t make sense anymore .
People know that they are being fleeced ,but they don’t exactly know what to do about it,

Anyway ,any Country that doesn’t protect their job base is stupid ,to say the least .

Well there ARE presumably plenty of trades that could have or may have been made that would have benefited from prior knowledge of the downgrade. Of course since the Obama administration was desperately trying to persuade them not to downgrade, the information might have come from there too.

And yeah, as a watchdog, the SEC seems more Fifi than Cerberus these days.

“No one puts a billion bucks on the line without solid information.”

I don’t buy it. We saw many billions of bucks bet on housing without solid information go straight down the tubes. Ten years earlier, the same thing happened with tech stocks.

And if memory serves, S&P’s had hinted of a potential downgrade months ago. Even without insider information, some large investors would naturally have taken positions that would benefit after a ratings downgrade. You cannot conclude that just because some individuals made a lot of money after the downgrade, they must have traded on insider information.

We’re talking about a single entity here, Bear. Not “some” individuals. At least, that was my takeaway from the story.

Anyway, palmy always enjoys a good conspiracy theory. As opposed to the utter banality of evil.

At least you buy your own. I do my husband’s clothes shopping FOR him. Unless it involves a trip to one of REI’s sales.

Shopping to an Engineer is like kryptonite to Superman, unless it’s for electronic toys.

Shopping to an Engineer is like kryptonite to Superman, unless it’s for electronic toys.

Or in my father’s case, laboratory equipment. Stuff he has in that place has mind-blowing price tags.

Mom and I didn’t know that he was capable of spending like that.

I buy $60 to $85 Hawaiian shirts at thrift shops for $3 to $5 each. I’m sure the dead guys wouldn’t mind! (wink)

“Did I mention that I’m an engineer?”

Same here, civil, and I’m hauling in $82k ± change in fly-over, and we honestly can’t afford a new car when you put a sharp pencil to it, yet we’re surrounded by $45k pick-up trucks. It’s the government supporting the financing of the automotive industry.

Which wouldn’t be sooo terrible if it wasn’t being sold as-is.

House #1 is the one being sold As Is.

House #2 is the one where the re-al-TOR doesn’t want to turn on the power. I still don’t know if it’s something with the house. In this case, three deals already fell through, and there are already multiple inspections and appraisals. Maybe the re-al-TOR (or the bank or the FB) doesn’t want to repeat the process for another buyer? If I were looking at this house, I would ask for the inspections and appraisals from the prior deals. Would that be sufficient?

You are spending $205,000 of your life’s savings or future debt…

Just what does that mean to you?

If it is jsut a small part of your personal net worth - go with it as is and trust the other inspections.

If it is everything you have in the world - know exactly what you are buying. Do your own homework. Trust but verify everything.

OK let’s try again.

I posted listings for two houses.

House #1 is the As-Is house for $205K. The utilies in this house are ON. Now there’s probably something else wrong with the house, but you CAN check the utilities and the power outlets and flush the toilets etc.

For House #2, the $695K house is NOT being sold As Is. The utilities are OFF. Apparently the house has already been inspected/appraised several times for previous deals that fell through. I would guess that all the utilities were checked in the past couple of months. So, assume I want the house. I would look at the previous inspections. What if the previous inspection shows that the utilities were working just fine a month ago?

My dad was an exec. He often said that “companies are just groups of people.”

My dad was an exec too. He often said “I can’t find my cigarettes”.

Companies are a lot more than just groups of people. They are also concentrations of wealth and power. This is probably much more true now than it was when your father made his statement.

Companies are groups of people where some people are a LOT more equal than others. Try again, Skye.

Aren’t public companies groups of people who are bound by law to make as much money for another group of people, a group of people who don’t much care for the members of the first group or how the money is made?

“Everybody’s selling? Then buy! Everybody’s buying? Then sell!”

Yes, Mr. Bubble. Which means that the top half of the company could make its profit by eating the bottom half and the stockholders wouldn’t care.

This is precisely what has been happening.

Big Corporations are entities that can bribe politicians ,they can price fix ,they can create a monopoly ,they can crush the small guy ,and they are entities that can blackmail because they are to Big to
fail . Corporations are detached from the human factor and they are well skilled at playing the Government for pawns to improve their bottom line because they provide jobs . They can transfer Society pains to the
government while they make off with the extra profit .

Wall street and the banks can create ponzi schemes and debt and bubbles and fake pricing and all that jazz .

The incentive of profit is good up to the point that it gets destructive .

i heard a Africian on TV say one time that he didn’t want a hand out from Americans but he wanted a job to be self sustaining ,but his Country was so corrupt that money ended up going to the powerful .

Perhaps no Obama care.

No stimulus. What?
Bush did a stimulus. McCain was talking about stimulating the economy during the campaign. But, for the sake of argument you are correct.

We lost 750K jobs the month before Obama took office and the trend was increasing. That immediatly reversed when the stimulus passed. As stimulus ended, weak job economy returned.

Would we really have been better had we been in depression 2 years ago instead of 2 years from now?

No war in Lybia? McCain was a huge proponent of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was a big proponent of the surge. I see no reason to beleive he would not have dropped some pain on Lybia had the rebels riden up, then begun losing the fight.

Again, you aren’t convincing me McCain understands that used of debt to ignore trade imbalances is the road to doom. You aren’t convinging me McCain would have aggressily attacked the trade imbalances, both internation and domestic, and reversed them so that people with debt have a chance of getting the money they need to repay thier debts.

You are not convincing me he would have been any better of a president.

It is WAGE to DEBT ratio stupid. You may be able to improve wages by making conditions better for corproate profits, but only through increased access to debt, which destorys the wage to debt ratio and is the road to economic collapse.

Mc$ame = Peace bro!

“Get out there sacrifice and protect America’$ Interest’$!” (and my wife$ x7 really really, nice homes.)

No war in Libya

Bomb! Bomb! Bomb! Iran!

Bush did a stimulus. McCain was talking about stimulating the economy during the campaign. But, for the sake of argument you are correct.

Obama’s 1 Trillion dollar stimulus passed without 1 Republican vote…

And the very same bill would have had all kinds of Republican votes, if McCain was elected.

How many of them voted for TARP??

Wake me up if Ron Paul reaches the final four of the playoffs.

The economy is sick.

Greenspan gave it junk food and cheap beer.

Bernanke gave it vitamins, but didn’t stop the cheap beer.

Now he’s thinking of giving it antibiotics (and cheap beer).

The Chinese might be brought in to operate on it.

And Ron Paul is prescribing a multiple organ transplant. Even if that is the right solution, it ain’t gonna happen.

Ron Paul is going to throw Grandma into the street.

If metahor isn’t your strong point, try this one: Ron Paul is going to take Grandma out of the nursing home (no longer paid 2/3 by medicaid) and throw her onto your front doorstep. And she will need food and medication (no longer by paid by SS/Medicare). That is NOT metaphorical.

lil Opie (non-Hawaiian) Muslim = Evil-doer destroying America!

“I never meet a politician who didn’t provide something of value for the American Citizen” Hwy50

(italics & Highlights are owned by Hwy50)

Ron Paul on Budget & Economy:

* Wall Street is dumping its trouble onto Main Street. (Sep 2008)
* Mortgage & Financial Institutions Trust: more of the same. (Sep 2008)
* Wasteful government spending backed by both parties. (Apr 2008)
* There’s payback for guns and butter. (Feb 2008)
* Repeal 16th Amendment and get rid of the income tax. (Feb 2008)
* Great nations and empires end for financial reasons. (Feb 2008)
* Live within our means and start paying down the deficit now. (Feb 2008)
* All bets are off if a cataclysmic dollar devaluation occurs. (Feb 2008)
* We owe foreigners $2.7 trillion and more printing won’t do. (Feb 2008)
* Stimulus package means more printing & devaluing the dollar. (Feb 2008)
* Economic Revitalization Plan: “Prescription for Prosperity”. (Feb 2008)
* We’re worse off than in 2000, due to Bush & Congress. (Jan 2008)
* The people, not government, are supposed to run the economy. (Jan 2008)
* Reagan was very sympathetic to the gold standard. (Jan 2008)
* Federal Reserve creates money and prints it out of thin air. (Jan 2008)
* Economic stimulus ok, but not via spending & printing money. (Jan 2008)
* Dollar crashing due to trillions spent on maintaining empire. (Jan 2008)
* Waving a flag the whole time on spending. (Jan 2008)
* Lower interest rates CAUSED housing bubble & can’t solve it. (Jan 2008)
* The longer the Fed delays recession, the worse the recession. (Jan 2008)
* Give up American empire; that reduces debt without sacrifice. (Dec 2007)
* We spend too much, tax too much, & print too much money. (Dec 2007)
* Restore GOP by returning to less gov’t & fiscal conservatism. (Dec 2007)
* Weak economy is source of resentment against immigrants. (Dec 2007)
* Maintain the value of the dollar, unlike Federal Reserve. (Oct 2007)
* Currency inflation counterfeits prosperity & destroys poor. (Oct 2007)
* Can’t legislate economic fairness; so make government small. (Sep 2007)
* Prioritize spending based on Constitution–and lower it too. (Sep 2007)
* Fiat money causes economic & political imbalances. (Jun 2007)
* Government out of regulating economy & out of our bedrooms. (Jan 2007)
* Oil prices rise in part because of the weak dollar. (Jan 2006)
* We can’t afford a trillion-dollar war in Iraq. (Jan 2006)
* Maintaining American empire diminishes dollar. (Jun 2004)
* We’ve come to accept debt, wealth confiscation, & big gov’t. (Dec 1987)
* Gold standard limits deficit spending. (Dec 1987)
* Friedman monetarist policy is better, but still inflationary. (Dec 1981)
* Depreciating currency is greatest threat to middle class. (Dec 1981)
* Gold standard avoids need for government promises. (Dec 1981)
* Gold standard means minimal inflation. (Dec 1981)
* Dollar as fiat currency only benefits politicians. (Dec 1981)
* Voted YES on terminating the Home Affordable mortgage Program. (Mar 2011)
* Voted NO on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
* Voted NO on modifying bankruptcy rules to avoid mortgage foreclosures. (Mar 2009)
* Voted NO on additional $825 billion for economic recovery package. (Jan 2009)
* Voted NO on monitoring TARP funds to ensure more mortgage relief. (Jan 2009)
* Voted NO on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)
* Voted NO on $60B stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy. (Sep 2008)
* Voted NO on defining “energy emergency” on federal gas prices. (Jun 2008)
* Voted YES on restricting bankruptcy rules. (Jan 2004)
* Allow $3 on 1040 form to pay off National Debt. (Sep 2000)
* Supports Balanced Budget Amendment & on-budget accounting. (Dec 2000)
* Maintain public information about M3 money supply. (Mar 2006)
* Member of House Banking Committee. (Mar 2011)
* Raise small business depreciation to $125,000. (Jul 2009)
* Liberty Candidate: End the Federal Reserve. (Sep 2010)

Ron Paul on Civil Rights:
Protect all voluntary associations; don’t define marriage. (Oct 2007)
Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)

Ron Paul on Crime:
# Opposes death penalty at state and federal level. (Jan 2008)
# Changed opinion to anti-death penalty due to many mistakes. (Sep 2007)
Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)

Ron Paul on Drugs:
We don’t need laws to tell us to not use heroin. (May 2011)
War on drugs is out of control; revert control to states. (Dec 2007)
Repeal most federal drug laws; blacks are treated unfairly. (Sep 2007)
Inner-city minorities are punished unfairly in war on drugs. (Sep 2007)
Drug War fosters violence at home & breeds resentment abroad. (Oct 2001)
Societal inconsistency on alcohol contributes to drug use. (Dec 1987)
Distribute sterile syringes to reduce AIDS and hepatitis. (Jan 2009)
Sponsored bill letting states legalize industrial hemp. (Apr 2009)
$500B on War on Drugs since 1970s has been a total failure. (Sep 2007)
Legalize industrial hemp. (Jan 2007)
War on Drugs has abused Bill of Rights . (Dec 2000)
Legalize medical marijuana. (Jul 2001)

Ron Paul on Foreign Policy:
We spend $1 trillion a year overseas; it’s needed at home. (Sep 2008)
We invested $70B in Mubarak; stop spending on puppets. (Feb 2011)
Can’t spread our goodness through the barrel of a gun. (Feb 2008)
We tax people to blow up bridges overseas then rebuild them. (Jan 2008)
Cut off all foreign aid to Israel & to Arabs. (Dec 2007)
Stop interfering with Latin America; talk & trade instead. (Dec 2007)
Empires usually end by spending too much to maintain empire. (Dec 2007)
Stronger national defense by changing our foreign policy. (Nov 2007)
Right to spread our values, but wrong to spread by force. (Aug 2007)
Interventionism perpetuated by politician’s false patriotism. (Jun 2007)
No foreign aid; no treaties that commit US to future wars. (Jun 2007)
Our foreign policy is designed to protect our oil interests. (Jun 2007)
Non-intervention is traditional American & Republican policy. (May 2007)
Avoid double standard–follow international law. (Jun 2006)
No nation-building; no world policeman; no pre-emptive war. (Jan 2006)
Ban foreign aid to oil-producers who restrict production. (May 2001)

There is a lot to like in Ron Paul’s positions.

I think they are dead wrong, but it has become apparant to me that until their program blows up in everyone’s face and their economic policy is totally discredited, they will stick with the plan.

They’ll just blame it on Obama and all the ditto heads will agree.

Even if the were in charge and slashed welfare we’d still have a trillion+ deficit. Of course then President Bachmann will tell us that “deficits don’t matter” whike we invade yet another country.

I saw a recruitment ad for the Navy, showing proud swabbies doing humanitarian deeds around the globe.

The tagline was something like “The Navy: A force for good around the world”

I’m sure that the citizens of other countries don’t quite see it that way.

I’ve given up on discussing anything with the Tea-publicans. ……It’s like discussing politics/economics with someone from an alternative, parallel universe.

No, no, no….. Don’t stop discussing politics with the Tea Party spaceballs. You just have to be tricky and confuse them into thinking differently.

For example if they are ragging on Obama about being a “socialist” you say something like, “I know dude, he’s the worst kind of “socialist”….he takes our hard earned tax dollars and bales out the corporations and banks just like neocon Bush did…he privatizes the profits and “SOCIALIZES” the losses, its crazy!”.. Then they’ll scratch their heads and mumble something and then you hit them with something like. “And we need to get big money out of the campaigns. The corporations and UNIONS can now give as much money as they want to campaigns!” (stress unions while you are including corporations in the argument and after they agree on the evil union thing you add in the corporation angle again. (They’ll get all flabbergasted and mumble something inane again but you got them thinking)

If they’re on Medicare say something like. “And what’s up with Obamacare? Why couldn’t we all be able to buy into Medicare to help bring down the costs for the elderly” (by supporting the “elderly” they’ll listen because it’s their cheese.)

Then bring in the patriot angle of the troops. Say “And why couldn’t we ALL be able to buy into the VA system that heals our heroes? With more of us buying into the system it would bring costs down and give our troops even better care than the fine public/military healthcare they get now” (This will really stump them so at this point you go on to talk about football or something because that was enough for one day)

They’ll still hate Obama but for the first time they’ll be thinking about other things that they hadn’t before.

’spaceballs’

That’s a strong political point you’re making there. I’m sure you are going to win over a lot of converts with school-yard name calling.

This is what I don’t get about positions like yours. It isn’t effective. Anymore than starting a discussion out by calling the other side “union thugs” or “towel heads.” Nothing constructive will follow such a position. Then you probably wonder why no one will agree with you, or if they do, there aren’t enough of you to actually change anything.

Like it or not, our political system has many factions. Some you may not agree with and some that won’t agree with you. But we’ve got a lot of problems in this country, and we better start figuring out how we can agree on some basics and move forward. Being an ideologue may bring you some sort of satisfaction, but ultimately it’s a dead end, unless you are willing to force everyone to do what you want. And good luck with that.

IMO, everybody has some point of view worth considering. If we do that, debate the relative merits of each and, maybe even through (gasp) compromise, vote and move to the next issue, we can get somewhere.

If we do that, debate the relative merits of each and, maybe even through (gasp) compromise,

Who requires documented signatures on a “Our-Party-Policy-Pledge” written in “we’ll-come-after-ya” blood oath ink? :-/

Then you probably wonder why no one will agree with you, or if they do, there aren’t enough of you to actually change anything.

I stand by “spaceballs” and most Americans agree with me. The Tea Party is laughed at, ridiculed and enjoy only about 31% of Americans support and respect according to many latest polls.

Being an ideologue may bring you some sort of satisfaction, but ultimately it’s a dead end, unless you are willing to force everyone to do what you want.

I’m not forcing anyone. I just gave a good plan on how to deal with the Tea Party spaceballs.

He’s about as far right as I’ve ever seen a dem president go.

Oh yea? Well he looks like a socialist.

Really
DAN SAYS “” Reagan accepted the need for higher rates and that both slowed his recovery and increased his deficits “”

Reagan didn’t control interest rates, unless you believe the FED is not independent of the president.

DAN SAYS “”However, only beginning in the Clinton Administration and carrying over in Bush II, did we have the federal reserve adopt policies which artificially depressed interest rates ?????

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5ETNX&t=my&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=

Sure looks like the fall started earlier.

Who fired paul volker and appointed Greenspan I just can’t remember.

Dan I love a good rant as much as the next guy, but do a little research.

I drove an $15K Accent in Florida and Texas. It felt like a tin can. A friend let me drive his new $20K Corolla. It felt like a corporate jet.

Rational + Assumptions?

Who was it that stated the USA Gov’t would be greeted as “Conquering Hero’s” in Afghanistan/Iraq?

EAS is one of those programs that seemed like a good idea, but need to go away. Like government subsidies to Amtrak running long distance trains in Flyover states. Or building new ATC towers out in BFE, when most of the ATC funding needs to be spent fixing bottlenecks in the Northeast Corridor.

The reality is that nothing gets passed, unless the (usually Republican) flyover state reps get their pet projects funded.

Hell, if “Dictatorship” and “National Interest” is the sole criteria, why are not at war with:

-China
-Venezuela
-Every country in Africa
-Russia
-Mexico

Actually, we are at war with them. Economic War. And they are winning.

Cause enough social problems in the USA, and pretty soon, nobody is going to give a crap what happens to Taiwan, or the Spratleys.

I said it was in the national interest, the next question is cost benefit analysis, I don’t think a nuclear war meets that test, Russia and China are out. The African countries aren’t worth the trouble. I want us to deploy troops on the border to prevent immigration but I don’t think that requires war with Mexico. Venezuela is interesting. The election of Chavez has lead to large decrease in oil production when everyone thought before him that oil production would double. So there is an economic reason to remove Chavez. He has turned into a dictator and also has supported the rebels in Columbia and is cooperating with Iran and probably Hezbollah. When Obama is out of office, I don’t think he should sleep in the same place two nights in a row. Just saying.

“I don’t think a nuclear war meets that test. Russia and China are out”

So, they would be “in” if they didn’t have nukes?

Maybe we should be helping Iran, etc. in getting nukes then. Or understand why they want them.

For decades, our unofficial policy was against “getting bogged down in a land war in Asia”. For good reasons.

As far as “National Interest”…….our government has been getting “National Interest” confused with “Multi-National Corporation Interest” way too many times.

Has it been in our “National Interest” to provide the Germans, French, Koreans, Nationalist Chinese and Japanese a free defensive umbrella, so they can concentrate on commercial products for export, while making US citizens and companies out of work/out of business?

Spending a trillion plus dollars/6000 lives in Iraq, and all we get in return is a (optimistic, IMO) $20 discount in the price of oil? I’ll bet we could have gone a long way into building a liquid-hydrogen transportation infrastructure with a trillion bucks.

FWIW, Mexico right now is more democratic than we are. The have 3 major political parties: PAN, PRD and the PRI.

FWIW, Mexico right now is more democratic than we are. The have 3 major political parties: PAN, PRD and the PRI.

And when there’s an election, the whole country gets into it. Sort of like how we do when it’s March Madness.

Did America quit when the German’s bombed Pearl Harbor??

Hell No.

Germans?

Let it go he’s on a roll.

Facts don’t seem to mean much in his rants.

Doubt it. JFK’s lights went out when his lightbulb went on. Obama is about Obama, and he wants to leave office adored with all his body parts intact.

Thomas Jefferson could not fix this mess, stop blaming Obama for 30 years of irresponsible spending.

So instead of all these sacrifices (since the money was spent due to fraud) maybe we can just get rid of all the wars and cancel the debt that was due to fraud.

I don’t see why I should sacrifice for this. Screw that

Thomas Jefferson could not fix this mess, stop blaming Obama for 30 years of irresponsible spending.

First of all, if we had Thomas Jefferson around, we would not be in this mess. And second of all, he most assuredly would be able to fix it, people from that day and age were willing to “eat their peas” and didn’t play kick the can with the economy.

Does anyone else wish that Hwy did not know HTML?

Maybe we can impose Twitter limits on him…

U’s-have-yer-“TruePOV™”-eyes-1-2!