The Housing Bubble

Nope. There were proportionately so few of them that no one noticed. In the late 60s /70s there was a bifpg stink about Robert Vesco and the singer Mitch Miller. Today’s Mitch Miller is Wesley Snipes.

QE3 will come sooner or later. And QE4 will come after the “financial cliff of 2013″ is legislated away. No matter who wins in the fall, the trillion dollar+ deficits won’t go away.

I think that whatever happens when we next reach the debt ceiling is more interesting than QE-whatever or even taxmageddon. I know they tried to make sure it would happen after the election, but a downturn in receipts could screw up the calculation and if it happens after the election in a lame duck congress (even if control isn’t shifting and the President is reelected) is…well…I wouldn’t bet against a hard government shut down and not just because I wouldn’t get paid or even be allowed to work.

What does this mean for house prices?

Not sure about houses, but I expect ground beef and gasoline will go up … again. But no worries, iPads will remain “affordable”

“What does this mean for house prices?”

Null hypothesis: Any addition to the monetary base can only work in favor of higher nominal house prices.

Alternative hypothesis: Adding to the monetary base did not lead to higher house prices in Japan over the course of two decades after their bubble popped; is it some how different in the U.S.?

“is it some how different in the U.S.?”

I seem to recall that Japan’s housing bubble was at least an order of magnitude more insane than ours, with multimillion dollar flats and my personal favorite: the Imperial Palace grounds was supposed to be worth more than all of California.

I suppose they had a lot farther to drop. After doing a little googling I found that the average apt in Tokyo (~700 sq ft) goes for $500K USD. They are “cheaper” in places like Yokohama (300K) and Nagoya (low 200s).

So, the average apartment in Japan costs more than the average house in the US. Sounds like they still have a long way to go. I didn’t even look at how much a house costs. They must be only for the wealthy.

“I seem to recall that Japan’s housing bubble was at least an order of magnitude more insane than ours, …”

It may have been more insane, but it was also much more localized. The current bubble is globalized to housing markets in all Westernized nations, including India and China.

Given this qualitative distinction, I believe comparisons of magnitude are futile.

But no worries, iPads will remain “affordable”

+1 Sad, but true.

” The current bubble is globalized to housing markets in all Westernized nations, including India and China.”

Agreed, that is scary. It seems that everyone wants to be a next exporter and have unaffordable housing these days.

Bin Laden and his clan were fundies.

Bin Laden and his clan were fundies.

And Bin Laden used hair color.

Hair color didn’t make him a psychopath. Fundamentalism did.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury.

The quote is usually attributed to Scottish historian Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747-1813), but it never appeared in any of his known published writings. The first verified appearance of the quote was in what appears to be an op-ed piece printed on page 12A of the newspaper “The Daily Oklahoman” on December 9, 1951 under the byline Elmer T. Peterson.
wikianswers
__

It’s always amusing when right-wing talking points collide with facts. Isn’t Elmer T. Peterson an impressive enough source? What would a Frenchman know about Amurrica, anyway?

The question is at what point does nationalism take over and the EU dissolve? At what point does war come to Europe once more (as if two World Wars in the last century wasn’t enough)?

Really 2b
I thought it was when 20-30-40% of the population becomes unemployed and destitute because there is no safety net and no job that things get unstable.

democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits

You might want to take a look at who the winners of the last 30 years have been under democracy. It sure hasn’t been the working class.

The 30 years.

The MASSIVE increase in the size and scope of government.

The MASSIVE increase in the powers of public unions.

The MASSIVE decrease in personal liberty.

Yeah - I know who the winners are. The liberals, socialists and progressives instituting their vision of America

—————————

You might want to take a look at who the winners of the last 30 years have been under democracy. It sure hasn’t been the working class.

The quote is usually attributed to Scottish historian Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747-1813), but it never appeared in any of his known published writings.

Yes, it’s highly unlikely that either Tocqueville or Tytler would have written such a thing. The phrase “loose fiscal policy” probably wasn’t used before the 20th century.

Hey, 2banana, What’s your suggestion for a “permanent government” anyway? I’m not sure I even like the sound of such a thing, and there’s never been one anyway. Monarchy, dictatorship, democracy, anarchy, none of them are permanent, so I don’t see how impermanence is, by itself, such a damning quality of any form of government.

The 30 years…..The MASSIVE increase in the size and scope of government.

2 banana, Serious question? Where do you see a massive increase? According to this guy and using government stats:

Total government spending as % of GDP in 1982: 36.25%

Total government spending as % of GDP in 2007: 35.09%

Now with the soft depression it’s up to 43%? So where is the “MASSIVE increase”? And remember there are two wars lately that are included in that 35% of GDP in 2007 and the figures in 2012. So not including the wars, where is this “massive increase in the size of government?

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html

And this:
In 2010, the Federal government of the USA spent an average of $11,041 per citizen (per capita). This compares to the …..average of $16,110 per citizen for the World’s 20 largest economies (in terms of GDP). Of the 20 largest economies, only six spent less per citizen (than the USA) wiki

And this:
“Since the beginning of (Obama’s) term, state and local governments have shed 611,000 employees, including 196,000 educators, according to government statistics” 4/29/12 Washington Post

The MASSIVE increase in the size and scope of government.

The MASSIVE increase in the powers of public unions.

FWIW, those groups are not “the majority” that is allegedly using the ballot box to help themselves to the treasury. They are a minority. Perhaps they are a problem, but they don’t fit your quote.

Using the same web page you quoted which you obviously didn’t read:

“Federal debt exploded during World War II to over 120 percent of GDP, and then began a decline that bottomed out at 32 percent of GDP in 1974. Federal debt almost doubled in the 1980s, reaching 60 percent of GDP in 1990 and peaking at 66 percent of GDP in 1996, before declining to 56 percent in 2001. Federal debt started increasing again in the 2000s, reaching 70 percent of GDP in 2008. Then it exploded in the aftermath of the Crash of 2008, reaching 102 percent of GDP in 2011.

And BTW - Spending (today) does not equal all the debt/promises that has been piled on in the last 30 years. Every chart in the web site you cited SCREAMS this.

Try not to be so blind in your partisan hunt for data to back up your absurd talking point that the US government has not massively grown in the last 30 years.

————–

2 banana, Serious question? Where do you see a massive increase? According to this guy and using government stats:

How are unions gaining power?

They are the weakest they have ever been.

And don’t forget the MASSIVE decline in overall union membership

—————————

You might want to take a look at who the winners of the last 30 years have been under democracy. It sure hasn’t been the working class.

I usually refer to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Handy graphs on who has benefited the most from MASSIVE spending over the past 30, and on union membership as well.

Try not to be so blind in your partisan hunt for data to back up your absurd talking point that the US government has not massively grown in the last 30 years.

2bananna,
You did not answer the question 2banana. You said the government has grown massively the past 30 years. I showed you in my above post that total (Fed, State, Local) government spending as a percentage of GDP did not grow “massively” :

Total government spending as % of GDP in 1982: 36.25%

Total government spending as % of GDP in 2008: 37.14%

You did not address the total governmental spending as a % of GDP, which the above figures show did not grow much at all the past 30 years until the current Depression. Instead you cited debt figures which anyone knows grew massively after the BushTaxCutsForTheRich and the Depression. “Federal debt started increasing again in the 2000s, reaching 70 percent of GDP in 2008″ The debt is as much of a revenue problem as a spending problem.

So you have ducked the figures and ducked the question. So maybe you should take your own advice and:
Try not to be so blind in your partisan hunt for data to back up your absurd talking point that the government has not massively grown in the last 30 years

Here is another chart to 2003 showing no “MASSIVE” increase in government spending the 20 years prior 2003 and it also shows that spending went up more under Repub than Dem Presidents. And as my first chart above showed, from 2003 to 2008 total government spending hovered around 35% of GDP. So again, where is the “MASSIVE” increase in government the past 30 years relative to GDP? And remember much of the government spending is for wars.

http://carriedaway.blogs.com/carried_away/2003/10/us_government_s.html

PUBLIC unions gentlemen.

They have destroyed and bankrupted every city/county/state they infest.

They are the top ALL time campaign political donors (nearly 100% to the democrat party).

“Federal debt exploded during World War II to over 120 percent of GDP, and then began a decline that bottomed out at 32 percent of GDP in 1974. Federal debt almost doubled in the 1980s, reaching 60 percent of GDP in 1990 and peaking at 66 percent of GDP in 1996, before declining to 56 percent in 2001. Federal debt started increasing again in the 2000s, reaching 70 percent of GDP in 2008. Then it exploded in the aftermath of the Crash of 2008, reaching 102 percent of GDP in 2011.

Did you notice the pattern there? The debt-to-GDP ratio rose under Reagan and Bush 1. Then it fell under Clinton. Then it rose again under Bush 2. I read somewhere that it also rose under Gerald Ford and fell under Jimmy Carter. It’s funny that Republicans would try to make an issue of the rise in the debt that has occurred under Obama.

2 banana, Again, where do you see a massive increase in government the past 30 years? Federal spending is about 24% of GDP now during this “Recession” and up only 3% from a 40 year average of about 21%. Where is “MASSIVE” besides the effects of MASSIVE propaganda from the far right?

Did Obama really make government bigger?
By Tami Luhby @CNNMoney January 25, 2012

CNNMoney takes a look at the facts.

Spending: Government spending as a share of the economy has hovered around 24% during the Obama administration, several percentage points higher than under President Bush, according to Congressional Budget Office data. It’s also elevated from the historical average of 20.7% over the past 40 years.

Much of that increase has come from mandatory spending, including Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. Those programs have expanded mostly because of the recession, which has prompted more people to apply for Medicaid and Social Security, as well as the growth in people hitting retirement age.

“How much do you lay at the recession’s feet versus the president’s policies?” said Josh Gordon, policy director at the Concord Coalition, a fiscal policy group. “The aging of the population can’t be blamed on the president.”

Many safety net programs, such as Medicaid and food stamps, automatically expand during economic downturns.

Banana on the run.

Total government spending as % of GDP in 2007: 35.09%

Do you realize that government spending is counted in GDP.

Do you not see how that skews such a metric?? and renders it useless for computing the “size” of the government?

Once again the nanners is blowing ethylene out its bung,

Ever since Ronald Reagan broke the air traffic controllers’ union (lessee, that was about 40 years ago) the hold of America’s unions has been steadily eroding in favor of so-called free-market forces.

“Massive”? Are you kidding me? Even with the Boomers joining the work force, union membership across-the-board has been steadily decreasing over the last 30 years until it’s about as irrelevant and ineffectual today as it was before the turn of the 20th century.

As for “massive government regulation” and personal liberty, it was in my lifetime that unmarried persons could not buy birth control, people of color could not eat in public places, single women could not get a hotel room or wear trousers in the workplace–let alone hold managerial positions, school cafeterias only served fish on Fridays, the air in Los Angeles was unbreathable, alcohol could not be sold or consumed in restaurants on weekends, young men were subject to the draft, abortions were illegal, homosexual people were thrown in jail, police beat prisoners with impunity, miscreants were sent to work on chain gangs, only publishers could express their opinions in print, the maximum speed limit was 45MPH, the “illegitimate” were shunned, rock music was the devil’s handmaiden, possession of “pornography” could land you in prison, tax assessors came into your home….

And please tell me how “massive public unions” are any different from the political machines and good old boy networks they replaced?

I’m not sure what America you’re thinking of, but mine is pretty free-wheeling compared to the halcyion days of the 1950’s you seem to long for so much.

P. McCartney/Wings does Banana On The Run

Stuck inside these four walls, in his empty skull forever,
Never trolling no one nice again like you,
Obama you, Obama you.
We’ll never get him out of here,
He never gives a thing away,
He really hates charity.
All he gives is a troll a day
We’ll never get him out of here.

Well, his head exploded with a mighty crash as he trolled another one,
And his first post said to the second one there I think I gotta run…..

Banana on the run, banana on the run. He’s a flim flam man, with another scam, trolling every one…..

Now it’s banana on the run, banana on the run.
Banana on the run, banana on the run.

government spending is counted in GDP…..Do you not see how that skews such a metric?? and renders it useless for computing the “size” of the government?

Useless? How? Let’s assume GDP is 100 and government spending is 20 of that 100. This means that Gov. spending is 20% of GDP and the non-government spending part of the GDP is 80.

Now if Government spending increases by 50% from 20 to 30 and GDP absent government spending remains at the same 80 then the new GDP is 110 (30+80) and the increased government spending (30) is now 27% of the 110 GDP. (30/110) So in this case, government spending has risen from 20% of GDP to 27%. Does this not mean that government spending has increased relative to GDP even though the government spending is counted in the GDP?

Or if both government spending and GDP minus government spending grow 50% the 80 becomes 120 and the 20 becomes 30 and 30 is still 20% of the total new 150 GDP which means the government spending has NOT grown relative to the GDP even though the government numbers are included in the GDP.

Since Federal spending has averaged about 21% of GDP the past 40 years before this recession, does this not mean that federal spending has not massively grown relative to the GDP for almost the past 40 years?

2banana you rock! You slew those nanny staters Rio and Meathead!

2banana you rock! You slew those nanny staters Rio and Meathead! Bill in Los Angeles

That’s pathetic Bill and you know it. Either that or you have become delusional. 2banana has not answered my last three posts that posted numbers and charts that disproved his false points. You can’t answer the numbers either. And you just don’t like that do you?

Federal spending has averaged about 21% of GDP the past 40 years before this recession. That means that federal spending has not massively grown relative to the GDP for the past 30 years as 2banana incorrectly asserted. Now these are facts Bill. You just don’t like them.

The difference between you and me Bill is that I’m an entrepreneur who never made a dime off the government while you hypocritically have sucked on the government’s teat almost your entire career in a job supporting wars that your idle Ron Paul says are unconstitutional. All this while you bash your feedbag and act so libertarian. Other than that, you rock too!

The current/recent wars are unconstitutional because they are started and waged outside the rules of the constitution. That isn’t in much dispute and it doesn’t really matter who points it out. What the people who do these things say is that the constitution has been superseded by executive authority.

‘Where do you see a massive increase?’

The Pentagon. $12 million an hour in Afghanistan. That’s not a massive increase?

Hard to blame Afghanistan on Obama. I believe it was Bush 2 who got us in there, then got us into Iraq to make it even more fun and expensive.

The difference between you and me Bill is that I’m an entrepreneur who never made a dime off the government while you hypocritically have sucked on the government’s teat almost your entire career in a job supporting wars that your idle Ron Paul says are unconstitutional.

Nailed it. Biggest hypocrite on the blog.

What the people who do these things say is that the constitution has been superseded by executive authority.

What we need to do is chain the executive, with a constitutional amendment that makes it crystal clear that executive authority NEVER supersedes constitutional authority.

That is actually the entire length of the article.

That’s one way to make sure a URL is unique!

And stay away from modern vegetable oil (soy/canola).

What’s wrong with it?

Had to look it up at the primal/paleo diet sites: Lots of Omega-6 acids which aren’t as good as omega-3. It’s processed at high temperature which oxidizes the omega-3 and cholesteral, which is also not good. And it’s probably all GMO.

Whenever my dad wants to lose weight; he goes Adkins. No pasta, or even carb loaded veggies for that matter.
He still gets to drink red wine and eats fatty meat w/o restriction. He has successfully dieted before; but this one has kept his weight in check for the last few years. If he gains a few; he cracks down on his carb intake. Problem solved; and quickly at that. But it is the lower carb lifestyle that keeps the weight off.

Avoiding carbs begets avoiding carbs….

He says he feels hungry the first couple days of any serious carb cutting regimen, but after that he just is not as hungry so the diet becomes painless to follow.

This has led to a more “carb free” lifestyle in general; he eats carbs much more selectively even when he is not strictly “dieting”. And he weighs the same as he did in highschool, down 40 lbs from his 200 lb peak.

I guess the point is if you can drop the carb intake; the craving for them subsides mercifully. And the extra weight melts away…

Soy has estrogen-like chemicals in it, or so goes the theory. Unfortunately, so many protein-supplements or protein-enhanced products contain soy. I’d like to see a high-protein bar made of something other than soy one of these days.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=soybean-fertility-hormone-isoflavones-genistein

oxide
I’m on the same page. 8 years ago I was 30 lbs heavier, but because I treaded, I could hide my gut in my clothing. When the doc told me to get an education on carbs to bring down my blood sugar, I went to the bookstore and read my heart out. Fastforward to 2012, I’m 30 lbs lighter, under 100 carbs a day, no gluten or the gluten-free junk foods, and I am healthier, w/normal blood sugar. I don’t eat starch either. You’re spot on and know your stuff.

I loved Dr. William Davis MD’ book “Wheat Belly” (great website as well/interviews/ a fantastic history of GMO wheat.) He’s a Preventive Cardiologist.

“I’d like to see a high-protein bar made of something other than soy one of these days.”

It’s called beef jerky.

“I’d like to see a high-protein bar made of something other than soy one of these days.”

It’s called beef jerky.

Price differential: protein bars are like 1-2 dollars, beef jerky starts at like 4-5 dollars typically. Plus, a semi-vegetable-only option makes it an option for a broader range of people.

Dr. Davis recommends high doses of Niacin, which I find questionable since some studies suggest a link between faulty niacin metabolism (really, faulty excretion would be more accurate) and faulty sugar metabolism and Type II diabetes. Also, he seems like a really nice guy, but he is not the picture of health. Like many things in the human body, metabolism is an extraordinarily complex system, and I’m not convinced he has it all figured out.

I have been fortunate enough to be thin all of my life, and many (certainly not all) of the overweight people I know eat far less than I do. One woman I know seems to try to exist on salad alone. For all the voodoo science out there, I still have not heard a cohesive and comprehensive theory to explain it. Including Taubes’ work.

Low-carb does not help a lot of people. Eating protein alone causes insulin spikes, too. It also causes the release of stress hormones. This can cause some people to start producing too much sugar (our live can make it even if we don’t ingest it). An extreme reaction is pretty rare. but this is why most doctors caution Type II diabetics against going hard-core low-carb without at least closely monitoring blood sugar. And the higher stress hormones are no joke. They affect different people very differently, sort of like coffee. And over time, once the body tires of being over-stimulated in this way, low-carb can “just stop working for me.” I’ve heard this from dieters in the office many times. For some people, this happens sooner than for others. This is why certain long-time advocates for low-carb who were well-known in the community have eventually softened their stance. It not a simple lack of willpower.

There are some bars based on nuts (larabars?), but generally if you want non-soy protein you need meat, eggs, or whey powder. Haven’t seen any whey-based bars yet.

“I’d like to see a high-protein bar made of something other than soy one of these days.”

It’s actually called whey.

There are whey protein bars out there? That would be pretty fab. When I go to the organic store or vitamin store, I’ll look through the protein bars. One ingredient early on in the list is usually something like soy crisps or some such.

You don’t need an app. It’s called “stop eating starch.”

If they moved to Rio, I think many could eat all the starch they’d want and still lose weight.

Maybe because it’s hot, you walk a lot and there is no high-fructose corn sweetener in anything?

IDK but I love pasta.

Canola oil stands for Canadian oil, low acid.

One of the few food items that is allowed to be sold under a pseudonym.

It’s actually rapeseed oil.

The nutrition stuff is cool, but I rarely see exercise mentioned in conversations about obesity and weight loss. I am pretty sure it has a lot to do with the progressive’s war on food…Promoting exercise does not further the cause.

I am glad I went to school when I could get a chocolate milk and small cup of ice cream (remember the little wooden spoons) with my lunch. I was an active kid, we did not have smart phones and the internet, I needed all the carbolicious calories I could get my hands on.

It has more to do with exercise than with diet. Since we retired and got more active, wifey and I are lighter now than we have been in MANY years. Our diet hasn’t changed- we still enjoy pizza, and a meal of steak, baked potato and salad. I’ll admit the meat portion is smaller now but we don’t leave the table craving dessert. I’m within 10 pounds of what I weighed when I came home from Army basic training. My remaining (3) suits will have to be taken in if I want to wear them again, but I think I’ll only be needing one of them.

That’s not “overweight”, that’s obese.

I might be imagining this but fifteen years ago you would hardly ever see two wheelchairs at a gate with a person waiting to board. Now it is common. On one flight I counted four wheelchair-bound people at the gate. At some point it will take 45 minutes to board planes, fifteen to seat the ones who “need extra time to board.” this is getting ridiculous!

Baby boomers are fifteen years older now than they were fifteen years ago.

Also, it shouldn’t surprise you, of all people, that more and more people have to move cross-country for jobs and no longer live within driving distance of grandma.

And it’s cheaper to fly grandma than to fly the whole family to visit grandma.

It is weird what’s happening. Everywhere I go the butts get bigger and bigger. I started noticing it about 20 years ago, but it seems to be hitting crisis proportions now.

“Seatbelt extenders”.

What the airlines don’t tell you is that their seatbelts are shorter.

When I fly on the DA900, I can buckle the seatbelt and shoulder harness just fine. On the airlines? I’ve flown, SWA and AA recently, and although I don’t need a seatbelt extender, their belts are significantly shorter.

Sounds like a nice, under the radar revenue producer to me. Keep shortening the belts, and blame the extra fares/charges on your customer being fat.

According to a published article (arg, can’t remember when or where) a few years ago; the belief that families are more seperated than ever before is largely a myth. Mobility has always been a characteristic of the so-called “American Dream”.

As for why the great unwashed masses are flying more than ever; just look at the inflation-adjusted prices of flying over the past fifty years. Flying has never been as cheap as it is today. Back in the day you sent a letter a few times a year and a couple phone calls. Now? You fly around with impunity.

Everywhere I go the butts get bigger and bigger. I started noticing it about 20 years ago, but it seems to be hitting crisis proportions now.

Cramer’s @ssman would be in heaven… Seinfeld

This is true X-GS, but people are also getting fatter and that has been proven in many studies.

You start getting over say 300 lbs NYC subways and buses become a challenge very few really obese people use them

Except lawyers with the big briefcase or pull carts….and sloppy female whales…. noticeably absent is males

As for why the great unwashed masses are flying more than ever; just look at the inflation-adjusted prices of flying over the past fifty years. Flying has never been as cheap as it is today. Back in the day you sent a letter a few times a year and a couple phone calls. Now? You fly around with impunity.

+1 Good observation!

Until about 7-8 months ago, I agreed with the conventional wisdom that overweight people or obese people were greedy pigs who stuffed their faces. I don’t believe that now. I, too, read Wheat Belly and am convinced that the new wheat, which is growing so well on the high plains, is a low-level drug, complete with addiction, withdrawal, rationalization, defensiveness, and pushers. Some people are more susceptible than others, and they don’t even know it. I feel kinda sorry for them, but the word IS getting out. Hope it helps them.

“….people are getting fatter……”

WHY is everyone getting fatter suddenly?

From personal experience, I might suggest that our society values profit more than it does health. Especially of it’s employees.

My weight problems started the same time that my former employer figured out it was cheaper to mandate 800-1000 hours/year of overtime, than it was to do what was required to adequately staff their shop.

I’d also like to see a chart comparing sales (in product, not in dollars) of soft drinks vs. obesity rates.

(I worked at MickyDees 1973-75. The “Large” drink at McDonalds of that time is now the “”Small” or “Medium”, and absolutely nobody was selling 32-48-64oz drinks. Please note also that this was the period when they transitioned from the 16oz glass bottle to the 2 liter, and corn sweeteners started replacing sugar)

I remember, circa 1971-72 the big debate the local school board had about letting the soft drink companies put machines in the local schools. The opponents (correctly, as it turns out) predicted that it would lead to a lot less milk and water being consumed.

Their opposition was overcome by the soda companies money, and the “This is a free country” lobby.

IMO, Coke and Pepsi is where all of the cigarette hustlers moved.

“Now? You fly around with impunity.”

FWIW, the bulk of travelers I see at airports are people flying solo, on business. Not a whole lot of familes. It would cost $1500 for a family of 5 to travel, and that’s if you get the tix on sale.

Airfare might be “cheap” if you’re in the managerial class, but for lucky duckies it’s a small fortune.

According to a published article (arg, can’t remember when or where) a few years ago; the belief that families are more seperated than ever before is largely a myth. Mobility has always been a characteristic of the so-called “American Dream”.

Hard to say. My wife works at the local public library, and they had to expand the computer room because so many people come to use them to job hunt on Craigslist.

And a lot of those people are migrants who get a library card to use the computers, and who vanish after giving up and moving on to the next town. The number of dormant library cards is staggering.

The days of corporations moving people has definitely slowed down, as it is very costly. Currently I’m part of a geographically diverse team that spans 6 different locations on 3 continents.

Anyway, if you’re an “individual contributor” and want to relocate to a new job, the chance that you will be paying for that move yourself has increased over the years.

X-fixer, there’s a theory that metabolism is affected by cortisol (stress) and lack of sleep. Plus you have no time to make your own meals so you’re stuck with gluten and corn syrup.

I just finished Wheat Belly and Davis carefully hedges his language on a lot of points…I’m not convinced. I’m skeptical of any argument that tries to blame a mulitude of ailments on one cause.

But that’s not to say people should be eating all the wheat-based products that have proliferated in the last 20 years. Wheat, corn, rice - lotta bad carbs out there.

Nobody is getting fatter “suddenly”.

Geometric progress just makes things seem “suddenly”.

FWIW, the bulk of travelers I see at airports are people flying solo, on business.

When I talk to people who travel frequently for business, a lot of the travel sounds unnecessary. I think that people like to get away from the office, or maybe the wife and kids, on a regular basis.

Montana — yes, I agree that Wheat Belly is hedged and poorly referenced, but it’s the most accessible to the masses, so to speak. If you want to be blown away by research, try Good Calories Bad Calories (Gary Taubes). Or look up Paleo/primal for something in the middle.

Hedging conclusions is the mark of a true scientist. Every scientist knows that it’s nearly impossible to run all possible controls and therefore any theory can fail at any minute. If you see a bold statement that something is “healthy” that has no qualifiers, it was probably written by a marketer trying to push a product for Big Ag.

When Davis published his book, he was immediately attacked by the Big Ag companies. That alone is a sign that he’s onto something.

Addictive poison wheat…really? You will get my crusty french bread out of my cold dead hand Weight management is very simple, calories in/calories out, that’s it.

I also think it’s a question of preservatives. If environmental bacteria can’t eat a food product (if it doesn’t go bad), what chance have gut bacteria to do so? I’ve read a variety of articles suggesting that gut flora do play a role in digestion and nutrient extraction. So, if someone is not getting the nutrients they need, they’re naturally going to feel hungry till they do get them.

Not saying it’s the whole issue, but one of the likely perfect storm of multiple factors leading to the national obesity problem.

Weight management is very simple, calories in/calories out, that’s it.

No. From mid-January to the end of March this year, I experimented by eating the same thing every day. Eggs, ground beef, chicken soup, vegetable and butter. Lots and lots of butter — I even had hot cocoa made with butter instead of milk. I ate 200 calories MORE per day than I had been eating before. I didn’t exercise AT ALL (tendonitis). And I LOST 3 pounds. 3 pounds doesn’t sound like a lot, but I’m petite and I was very nearly underweight to begin with.

I am not kidding here (i am bragging of course) but I weigh in under 160 lbs (skinny legs), but I am a swim fanatic of well over 3200 yards on alternate days and do that within one hour. I am 52. A 76 year old friend in Phoenix puts me to shame. He places in the senior olympics and swims faster than most 30-somethings. If you were not looking close you would guess he is in his 30s.

I was a fat kid from age five to 17, then for a year in my late 30s due to a wonderful girlfriend who was an incredible cook. I came home every night to an awesome restaurant of one table and before I knew it, ballooned to 195 lbs. A picture of me was all it took for me to reduce again. She was not hurt by my dietary chqbpnge. I still love her!

Oxy,

Muscle weighs more than fat. You lost muscle, you added fat. Try that diet for a year and you’d gain 12-15 pounds. (6500kcl=1lb).

Nick’s right on this one (but then he’s always…right). Calories in =<calories burned, and you’ll lose weight. Period.

ahansen, nick, bill, I’m sorry, I don’t believe you.

Weight has some dependence on what you eat minues what you burn, but what you burn depends a lot more on how much you exercise.

If I lost muscle during that time, then must have lost abs muscle because that’s the part that was thinner. Everything else looked about the same. Without exercising.

Oxide, I’ve read all of taubes’ stuff..been on low carb since july.

When you see veins under the skin where your belly is, you don’t have much body fat. I lifted weights a lot years ago and still lift enough to maintain muscle. How’s several sets of 25 pushups sound? I total at least 160 pushups every other morning.

“It’s worse if you have to watch your kids waste all their potential study time updating their FB status.”

BINGO

What fawkin’ waste of time. Facebook is akin to every a$$wipe getting his/her own TV show broadcast to the world that nobody watches.

is facebook and ponzi scheme like groupon?

My bad

Is facebook another ponzi scheme like groupon?

How much more can facebook grow? It seems that every kid with access to a PC already has a facebook account.

How is groupon a ponzi scheme? Genuine question, I really don’t know the answer.

Groupon isn’t a ponzi scheme as far as I can tell. It is a marketing idea with limited utility. The store/serivce provider has to provide a huge amount of good/services for 25% of their normal income and while they might cultivate repeat customers, they won’t if their ability to provide good quality falls apart because of the volume.

I’m not signed up for groupon but I get similar e-mails from Amazon and AAA and I don’t even think the stuff is a good deal at 50% (sometimes more) off. I don’t think I’ve ever been seriously tempted to try one of the offers. I know I’ve never used one.

Facebook is akin to every a$$wipe getting his/her own TV show broadcast to the world that nobody watches.

A world where everyone is a mini-Kardashian?

BINGO.

Even Aunt Mildred. GET A LIFE!!!!!

“What fawkin’ waste of time. Facebook is akin to every a$$wipe getting his/her own TV show broadcast to the world that nobody watches.”

It’s a tool. It depends on what you do with it.

Through my union’s Facebook page, we now know a lot more about what’s happening in our agency just by exchanging information. It’s mostly very bottom up. Often we know a lot more about what’s happening than local management.

As for my employer’s use of Facebook, I view that as a lot less useful.

Facebook is akin to every a$$wipe getting his/her own TV show broadcast to the world that nobody watches.

It’s called “the long tail” and there are benefits: Music and entertainment can be consumed (and tailored) for individual preference. It’s not about “mass market”, it’s about niche market.

It’s why Amazon eats “brick and mortar’s” lunch…

“Facebook is akin to every a$$wipe getting his/her own TV show broadcast to the world that nobody watches.”

POTD

“What fawkin’ waste of time.”

It will be impossible to quantify the damage to the U.S. economy from kids spending their free time posting to FB, but I am convinced the damage will be large and lasting.

It will be impossible to quantify the damage to the U.S. economy

This is just one more step towards the virtualization of life… when the virtual economy and virtual life overtakes and becomes the real. Read William Gibson or Neal Stephenson for an idea of what I’m talking about.

Like most things, this will hurt the parts of the economy that can’t/won’t adapt. But it will create other opportunities…

…mini-Kardashian…

Oxymoron?

Mini as in marketshare and not the size of their butts.

Google doesn’t make all that much money off the Droid OS

Google understands that mobile advertising is it’s future and also understands that the easiest way to ensure domination in that space is to have the largest installed base of phone OS’s. They don’t need to make money on the OS when they own the underlying ad network. It’s why they opened up their App marketplace, unlike Apple… They want as many free apps as possible to piggyback their mobile ads on.

Facebook is the domestic spy system the CIA could only dream about.

All you fakebook users…… don’t forget to inform the world about your Aunt Mildred’s bunion operation.

“My daughter’s classmates incriminate themselves on facebook all the time. Rat themselves out.”

My daughter and her friends have similar issues.

All you fakebook users…… don’t forget to inform the world about your Aunt Mildred’s bunion operation.

And get off my lawn!

All you fakebook users…… don’t forget to inform the world about your Aunt Mildred’s bunion operation.

Funny thing about Facebook and most every other social media technology… it’s all about the content.

I posted a video of my 8yo daughter shooting daddy’s AR15 at the range Sunday (the first such video and only the second time she has shot). I was able to upload that video to Facebook once and share it with my entire family, my wife’s family, and our friends. Seem like a waste of time? That’s called community and maintaining a connection with people we want involved in our life…

That’s not to say everything posted on facebook is worthwhile, but like anything else, value is subjective and often based on what you put into it.

lmao

Like said, the CIA could only DREAM about.

a video of my 8yo daughter shooting daddy’s AR15 at the range

Enjoy this time in her life. They grow up so fast….

Indeed. Truly a gift… and it makes weathering the infant/toddler/teen stages so much more bearable.

MikeInBend,

They should all shave their heads net to be different. Oh wait!…

“next”

“…a video of my 8yo daughter shooting daddy’s AR15 at the range.”

Isn’t that adorable?! I can’t wait to have grandbabies so I can teach them how to skin marmots and eat them raw!

I can’t wait to have grandbabies so I can teach them how to skin marmots and eat them raw!

LOL, Allena!

Gold is up in euros…

Gold is bouncing around its all time high in Brazilian Reals.

Gold is bouncing around its all time high in Brazilian Reals.

What kind of inflation are you experiencing in Brazil?

What kind of inflation are you experiencing in Brazil?

Officially it was 6.5% in 2011 and it’s about a 4.5%-5.5% forecast in 2012.

Reuters) - Apr 24, 2012 Inflation in Brazil rose slightly more than expected in the month to mid-April, breaking with an easing trend that allowed the central bank to focus on stimulating growth by cutting interest rates to near record lows.

…..In the 12 months to mid-April, prices rose 5.25 percent, below the 5.61 percent increase to mid-March, but nearly stable from the 5.24 percent gain to the end of March.

Brazil’s government targets annual inflation rate at 4.5 percent, with leeway of plus or minus 2 percentage points.

As the annual inflation rate has eased from a seven-year high of 6.5 percent in calendar year 2011, the central bank has shifted its priority from curbing inflation to stimulating the economy, which nearly fell into recession in the second half of 2011.

The bank slashed its benchmark interest rate to 9 percent last week, just above an all-time low, and gave hints that more cuts will come……

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/24/us-brazil-economy-inflation-idUSBRE83N0MZ20120424

It is tempting

Exactly my issues with FB. I didn’t have the heart to defriend anyone. Instead I checked out of FB permanently. Don’t miss an thing.

Don’t you mean, “Keep your gov’t hands off my SS” messages?

I finally had it out in front of friends and family on FB with the BP agent a few weeks ago. He kept posting his anti-Socialist, pro-austerity rhetoric.

He never did get around to answering how his comments square with his public salary and his ability to retire at full salary on the taxpayer dole at age 50, while those of us in the private sector look over our shoulders daily at the possibility of being right-sized or off-shored.

Nope, he didn’t do that. But he (and all of his FB thumbs-uppers) did, as a self-proclaimed conservative, go all in on Romney, in spite of me pointing that candidate’s propensity for unconstitutional healthcare bills and right-sizing of companies. Hypocrites. All I can say is, be careful what you wish for…

I was resisting the urge to remind my friend how he’d worked off the books for so many years. LOL

I was too, Montana. I finally couldn’t take the hypocrisy anymore. Now that I’ve jumped the fence, I find it’s really easy to point it out. Practice makes perfect, and it comes naturally now!

Oh, one more note. Instead of recognizing his own folly, he deflected and accused me (after I said I was voting for a write-in candidate) of giving BO a de facto vote.

When I pointed out that if my candidate didn’t exist I still wouldn’t vote for either of the MSM appointed candidates, so that my vote actually has net zero effect on the election, all I heard was crickets…or should I say hypocrickets?

I have relatives, one of which is very Romneyish and against Obamacare (but not Romneycare?) and worked only one year in his 36 year life, lives at home with impoverished helicopter mom.

I have an ex girlfriend, I admit a berry fun woman who is not pretentious who posts “progressivism” all the time.

In both cases it is al, broadcast.

I am not inspired at all by Facebook. I am more annoyed at the fact that Facebook merely accentuated the issues I disagree with from my relative and ex. Thanks FB!

Hypocrickets. Excellent, sleepless!

Cheers, a!

Since she had a student loan the religious order would have to assume it,

I don’t see any legal reason they would have to assume it. They could instead leave it unpaid for all eternity, as the nun would have no assets that could be pursued or attached.

I’m guessing that they do this only to avoid the bad PR associated with it showing up in the press, that some of God’s servants are debt-scofflaws.

Running is too hard on my skinny legs.

It’s not a hard and fast rule but most of the best runners are skinny. You’ve got to build slow to get past the injury stage of the beginner, only adding 15 min of running at a time after a few weeks of getting the body used to the added stress. I had crappy knees growing up but they’re actually getting stronger as I run.

As you well know, swimming is a high calorie burner too. Yours is primarily an upper body work out (so I’m imagining you have nice shoulders) while a runner’s is primarily a lower body workout.

Another added benefit of swimming over running is you don’t endure your doctor waving a finger in your face that you’re ruining your joints (even though she runs too).

Yes My shoulders look like steel cords, very ripped. But in weightlifting shoulder presses are my weakest. I focus on wide grip chins for the lats to compensate and rely on my swimming to work the shoulders.