The Housing Bubble

Are you seriously claiming that Germans are the superior race?

Yeah, you get it. You should hear him go on about the Jews, sometime. Vintage ‘38 Hitler.

That’s why many of us ignore his tiresome tirades.

Thank you, but I’ll try not to do it again.

Good one frankie…

And we always read the Drudge Report before reading HBB so we’ll know what right wing talking points will get regurgitated here.

You ladies are really quick to judge people without any effort to get some facts.

We knew some nice older ‘apolitical’ woman like yourself would be ready with some ‘facts’ hot off a right-wing web site.

I’m not clear what you think your link explains though. Ryan was bemoaning the plant’s closing in 2008. So what if it took another year to completely shut down? Another Ryan lie. Another defense of all things GOP by ‘apolitical’ you.

“you ladies”??? Is this really about body parts?

Is this really about body parts?

For Republican men it certainly is, about what “ladies” are allowed to do or not do with theirs

“you ladies”??? Is this really about body parts ??

For many on the right, yes it is…Just ask Akin…

“you ladies”??? Is this really about body parts?

It`s a war on body parts!

Unknown Tenant, I think you are trying for sarcasm as if to “shame” us for our ridiculous “lady thoughts”, but since the war on women is so obvious and true, its really not a viable technique.

You can try the “emperor has no clothes” approach to the war on women, but that doesn’t mean its not there.

Everyone can see it.

I think both sides of this discussion are stupid. What do you think is really going to happen? You’re both arguing as though this is the only issue that matters among women; I doubt that’s the case.

But go on, keep squabbling over what the right and left tell you is important.

“some ‘facts’ hot off a right-wing web site…”

I had no idea the Milwaukee Journal was a hotbed of rightiness, nor that the article from last year was planted as fodder for the election lie fest.

I don’t know much about Ryan, so I did some poking around about this supposedly important plant closing comment. I think what you said is not true, and that you did not make it up, but were captivated by it because of your bias. It’s just hateful gossip which does nothing to inform us.

Dear Ryan,

“You’re both arguing as though this is the only issue that matters among women; I doubt that’s the case.”

First off, not sure how you extrapolate that we are both arguing that this is the ONLY issue that matters to women.

But obviously, in general terms a “war on women”, restricting current methods of contraception, having government act as your doctor and enforce invasive procedures even if your actual doctor disagrees, yes, logically, that WOULD be a top issue for women, if not the top. Although, as a woman myself, I am able to see that OF COURSE we are not a stereotype and we don’t all have the same thoughts and opinions. AND of course nothing is the ONLY issue that matters — so therefore, to you, Ryan, we can’t talk about ANY issue? To me this effort to roll back women’s rights in contraception and abortion is huge. Let’s not go back to the 1950s please.

also, Ryan, I am not “squabbling about what the right or left tells me”. I am fighting for my right, which certain politicians are working at removing. Do you see the difference, Ryan? Because I don’t think you do. Ryan, are you clear on what America is about? Freedom? And all that? Don’t call it “squabbling on what the right and left tells you”. You sound like you are not aware of all the legislation going on.

It’s just hateful gossip which does nothing to inform us.

Like Ryan’s lie that the plant was closed down under Obama? The decision was made in 2008, Ryan was”bemoaning it” at that time. One could argue that the final closing occurred under Obama, but that’s just grasping at a straw (ie that it takes a while to close down a plant) to defend Ryan from his lying about it.

And you got your pseudo-exculpatory link from a right wing web site, I’ll wager.

Here is what i dont get…why do the repubs want a lot of unwanted children being born? Why do they want to make people miserable and increase the cost to all of us?

Is this some racist ploy to keep certain people barefoot and pregnant? Since certain people could always take a trip to Bermuda and get an abortion anyway.

It really makes no sense….if you really wanted poor people to be better off you would encourage abortions at every turn…no waiting times, no sitting through some anti abortion pro life video, and all paid for …no cost to you…just get it done…

I got the link from a google search. IIRC, the article said the plant was still on standby as of 2011, so it does speak to the non-recovery perfectly. It stands that you are an incourageable source of false accusations.

Sorry, Blue. I’m awarding you the Puke of the Day award (or whatever it is) for your continuing defense of Ryan’s chronic lying.

Is it at all possible that the weakness in the overall automobile market from 2008-2011 is the reason for the closure, and subsequent standby status, and not some guy in the White House?

Especially this market?:
“The Janesville plant stopped production of SUVs in 2008 and was idled in 2009 after it completed production of medium-duty trucks.”

“”If we get back to any kind of a reasonable market, with 15- or 16 million sales, then I think that’s going to require Janesville as well,” he said.”

Whatever the Republicans decide (re women’s bodies) it’s all good by me, because now “us ladies” finally have a ballpoint pen that is feminine enough.

Bic Pens ‘For Her’ Get Hilariously Snarky Amazon Reviews

Who knew there was a pen specially designed for women? The Bic pen “For Her” might be the first of its kind, but that didn’t prevent Amazon.com reviewers from offering up snarky, sarcastic reviews of the product.

The Bic Cristal “For Her” pen boasts product features like “elegant design - just for her!” and a “thin barrel to fit a women’s hand.” (Yes, seriously.) The pens also come in an array of pretty pastels such as lavender and mint. (You know, because it’s just “for her.”)

Shoppers on Amazon wasted no time in writing hundreds of scathing reviews on the ballpoint.

“Finally! For years I’ve had to rely on pencils, or at worst, a twig and some drops of my feminine blood to write down recipes (the only thing a lady should be writing ever),” one reviewer wrote. “I had despaired of ever being able to write down said recipes in a permanent manner, though my men-folk assured me that I ’shouldn’t worry yer pretty little head.’ But, AT LAST! Bic, the great liberator, has released a womanly pen that my gentle baby hands can use without fear of unlady-like callouses and bruises. Thank you, Bic!”

“Oh. My. God. I’ve been doing it all wrong,” quipped another. “There was me thinking I didn’t need to worry about whether my writing implement sufficiently reflected my gender. Thank you so much Bic for showing me the error of my ways. Perhaps Bic will also bring out a new range of pink (or purple) feminine spanners, screwdrivers, electric drills and angle grinders so that I can carry out my job as a bicycle mechanic without further embarrassing myself? Luckily my male colleagues have managed to keep their disapproval of my use of their masculine tools to themselves. I’m so ashamed. And re-educated as to my place in society. Thanks again Bic!”

It also has a three speed vibrating ink eraser for… more easily erasing I suppose.

Ok, Calurker, I’ll bite. What part of what legislation that is out there right now do you believe is suddenly going to thrust American women back into the 1950’s? Explain it for me. You believe planned parenthood will disappear, what?

That is assuming of course, that the legislation is passed in the first place and it’s not just fear of the boogeyman like the NRA’s fear of UN gun control.

For starters, Ryan, in 2011 alone:
-states passed a record number of abortion restrictions, with 92 new laws taking effect in 24 states.
-41 states prohibit abortion generally, except in extraordinary circumstances.
-In 2011 North Dakota Senate passed a bill banning abortion entirely.
-Colorado tried but failed to get an abortion ban on the state ballot this year and on and on and on. And that’s just recent legislative restrictions on what a woman can do with her own uterus.

I suspect you know how to use a search engine…

Again, not seeing 1950 here. These are states rights issues. If you live in a state that restricts you, what stops you from crossing state lines?

I really don’t get why they leave in that sort of stuff once it has been exposed.

Because it is true, but the liberals are so quick to want to find fault, they’ll latch onto anything to try and prove Republicans wrong.

Here is an excerpt from CNN on fact checking the Ryan speech, specifically the GM quote:

The only thing Ryan appears to have gotten technically wrong in Wednesday’s version was saying that the plant didn’t last another year. It did last another year — more like 14 months — if the Isuzu line and its 57 workers count.

So, though Ryan might have been incorrect in the August 16 telling, he cleaned it up for Wednesday’s convention. Obama said what Ryan said he said.

Obama talked to the plant workers in Jan 2008, specifically about the government helping GM retool. By April 2009, the plant was closed.

Liberals can try and spin facts all they want, it won’t work. Come November, Carter is out, Regan is in…

But did Obama say the plant was going to stay open or not?

Here is the Obama quote from the Feb 2008 speech:

“I know that General Motors received some bad news yesterday, and I know how hard your governor has fought to keep jobs in this plant. But I also know how much progress you’ve made — how many hybrids and fuel-efficient vehicles you’re churning out,” Obama said. “And I believe that if our government is there to support you, and give you the assistance you need to re-tool and make this transition, that this plant will be here for another hundred years.”

The is per the Council on Foreign Relations, that kept a record of the speech. The left is in full dis-information propaganda mode.

Supposedly he said “I believe that if our government is there to support you this plant will be here for another hundred years.”

Funny thing is, the plant is still there.

Disingenuous as best, failed promise at worst. The impression he gave to plant workers in that speech was that he and his administration would support keeping that plant open. See my post above regarding the exact Obama quote.

Fact checking the GOP convention’s second night

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-the-gop-conventions-second-night/2012/08/30/128cbe9e-f260-11e1-adc6-87dfa8eff430_blog.html#pagebreak

The Fact Checker was also fascinated by the enthusiastic response to her prime-time speech.) We will devote most of this column to analyzing claims in Ryan’s speech, but at the end we will also assess a few other interesting claims made by other speakers.

“Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: ‘I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.’ That’s what he said in 2008. Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day.”

In his acceptance speech, GOP vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan appeared to suggest that President Obama was responsible for the closing of a GM plant in Ryan’s home town of Janesville, Wis.

Obama gave his speech in February 2008, and he did say those words. But Ryan’s phrasing, referring to the fact the plant did not last another year, certainly suggests it was shut down in 2009, when Obama was president.

Ryan, in fact, issued a news release in June 2008, urging GM to keep the plant open after the automaker announced it would close it.

The plant was largely closed in December 2008 when production of General Motors SUVs ceased — before Obama was sworn in. A small crew of about 100 workers completed a contract for production of medium-duty trucks for Isuzu Motors, a contract that ended in April 2009.

Note that Ryan called the plant “locked up” rather than “shut down.” That’s because the plant has not been completely shut down; it remains on “standby” and could reopen if GM production reaches the right level, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

[And from a different part of the speech]

“He created a bipartisan debt commission. They came back with an urgent report. He thanked them, sent them on their way, and then did exactly nothing.”

Ryan is referring to the Simpson-Bowles Commission, and he is correct that Obama did not act on its report. But Ryan left out the fact that he served on the commission and voted against the final “urgent” report, largely because he believed it did not do enough to overhaul health-care entitlements such as Medicare.

David Brooks, a New York Times columnist sympathetic to Republicans, recently labeled Ryan’s “no” vote as “Ryan’s biggest mistake,” because he gave up “significant debt progress for a political fantasy” — that a Republican victory in 2012 would allow for real reforms without Democratic support.

Why do you bother Polly? Here is the lie right there in your post:

Obama gave his speech in February 2008, and he did say those words. But Ryan’s phrasing, referring to the fact the plant did not last another year, certainly suggests it was shut down in 2009, when Obama was president.

The plant was largely closed in December 2008 when production of General Motors SUVs ceased — before Obama was sworn in. A small crew of about 100 workers completed a contract for production of medium-duty trucks for Isuzu Motors, a contract that ended in April 2009.

Your a lawyer for god-sakes and you want to try and twist the truth like that? When was the plant closed? APRIL 2009. It wasn’t “mostly closed” in 2008. Either it was operating or it wasn’t. In 2008, it was operating, in 2009, it closed. It closed after Obama said his administration would help keep it open.

Could you try and lie or distort the truth anymore?

Ryan is referring to the Simpson-Bowles Commission, and he is correct that Obama did not act on its report.

Another distortion? Your post says right there that Ryan’s speech was correct. Stop lying to people Polly. Certainly stop reading the dis-information the left is feeding you.

The point for me is that GM has not come back to full production, and I think Obama wanted that to happen. It was one of the significant thrusts of his administration, no? This administration got Hoovered. I do believe the next one will be too, so Ryan is as magical thinking probably as the last guy.

The point for me is that GM has not come back to full production

See my post below regarding August auto manufacturing data… Zerohedge has been reporting GM channel stuffing cars and trucks for months. It’s “financial comeback” was nothing but smoke and mirrors as it reports sales when the product is shipped to the dealer, not when the dealer sells the auto. All GM has done is flood GM dealers with product that will have to be heavily discounted to move.

Carter is out, Regan is in…

LOL. Mathematically impossible. The beginning of the destruction of the American middle-class can only happen once in our lifetimes.

There just isn’t enough time in the average life for it to happen twice.

Is it the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end?

I think that is my biggest problem with them, as they treat lying as though it is an essential, and I was raised to always tell the truth. Hence I tend to find politicians of all stripes morally repugnant.

they treat lying as though it is an essential ??

Because its not about truth….Its about winning….Like McConnell said two years ago…Its our #1 goal…To hell with the country in the mean-time…

I thought the expression was “bald faced liar”.

Reminds me of how “buck naked” has become “butt naked”.

and “you’re” has become “your”.

Rio, dream on dude. You are so blind to your own side’s lies and misdeeds.

Just keep saying to yourself, “Republicans want dirty water, dirty air and death to old people and blacks. Democrats are loving, kind and just want to help everyone”.

Excuse me while I puke.

Rio, dream on dude. You are so blind to your own side’s lies and misdeeds.

Totally wrong. Unlike you I can differentiate and I know the history of both parties and what the Repubs have become. I know my “sides” lies and misdeeds. The Republican “side” is way worse. Lying nutjob worse. And racist.

Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lets-just-say-it-the-republicans-are-the-problem/2012/04/27/gIQAxCVUlT_story.html

We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.

When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country’s challenges.

Not much different than the groups that find their country of origins identity more important than their current nations identity.

You mean the people who think that their skin color is more important than their nationality?

Are you sure they’re not just rationally voting for their own economic interests? Something white working class males should try, if only they weren’t so easily herded.

Blue Skye, it is amazing how you can speak for how entire groups of people think. How you believe each group is homogenous rather than complex. How, I guess, there is no variation in overall actions and opinions of say, blacks, or “the ladies”. I guess to you, only white males vary in action and opinion. Every other group can be distilled down to a stereotypical soundbite. It’s much easier to be contemptuous of others that way, isn’t it?

If blacks were voting their economic interests they would not be voting for the open border president. illegal immigration has destroyed blue color wages and driven down wages to the lucky ducky level.

What was the last straw was not Obama circumventing the congressional rejection of the dream act but the way it is being implemented. The ICE agents suit against Obama reveals that they are being told to just take the illegals word for the fact that they have the GED or military service to stay in the country. Come on setting the level at a GED but now we just take their word? It it just like the health care act where illegals can get health care just by checking a box that they are here legally with no verification.

Carl, I have absolutely no respect for what your skin color is, and I won’t acknowledge that there is anything special about you on that basis. Anyone who does is abusing you.

Oops, meant Calurker, not Carl.

they would not be voting for the open border president.

The GOP is going to close the border? Don’t make me laugh.

You mean the people who think that their skin color is more important than their nationality

The white CEO’s who shipped our jobs away or the majority of the power behind the Republican Party?

I guess to you, only white males vary in action and opinion. Every other group can be distilled down to a stereotypical soundbite.

Why are you gettin’ all complicated on him? Those concepts are hard.

illegal immigration has destroyed blue color wages and driven down wages to the lucky ducky level.

Along with Union busting, offshoring and worker’s rights being slammed by America’s recent religion of seeking shareholder value above all else.

It’s that season again, the FIRE PR machine is in high gear. And with it, stories telling us how it’s unwise to pay off our mortgage.

Why you shouldn’t pay down your mortgage faster
By JONATHAN FAHEY
AP Business Writer

(AP) - The impulse to pay off your mortgage more quickly than you need to is understandable, especially these days.

You could take the money you borrowed at 3 percent and try to reinvest it in a way that earns more than that. If you have time to ride out ups and downs of the market, 3 percent should be relatively easy to beat.

http://wtop.com/628/3013422/Pay-down-your-mortgage-Not-so-fast

The GOP is going to close the border? Don’t make me laugh.

I think they just adopted a platform plank calling for some new braceros program…so we go full circle to the Harvest of Shame years.

Quote: “Blue Skye, it is amazing how you can speak for how entire groups of people think. How you believe each group is homogenous rather than complex. How, I guess, there is no variation in overall actions and opinions of say, blacks, or “the ladies”. I guess to you, only white males vary in action and opinion. Every other group can be distilled down to a stereotypical soundbite. It’s much easier to be contemptuous of others that way, isn’t”

Well, black folks do vote extremely homogenously. Not much “variation in overall actions and opinions” in the voting booth.

Obama is deporting immigrants faster than Bush.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/27/obama-is-deporting-more-immigrants-than-bush-republicans-dont-think-thats-enough/

Tease:

As of July, Obama deported 1.4 million illegal immigrants since the beginning of his administration — that’s 1.5 times more immigrants on average than Bush deported every month, according to official numbers from the Department of Homeland Security

Blue Skye, you totally ignored the point and started on something else. No point in trying to have a discussion. Congratulations on your trolling abilities, though.

Cal, I responded to one point. What else did you want, applause for your blatant racism? A defense of calling Polly a lady? Some contention about a war on women of which I know nothing?

“Obama is deporting immigrants faster than Bush.”

Nothing but crickets.

“Obama is deporting immigrants faster than Bush.”

Nothing but crickets.

They’re moving on to the next talking point. They believe quantity beats quality. They’re probably right.

Yes, but would it be enough to mobilize the FSA (free shit army) and get them to the polls in November

oops, wrong place…

If any anyone knows how to do it, it would be him. After all he has personal experience:

Republican Senate nominee Mitt Romney’s rescue of a business consulting firm was achieved in part by convincing the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to forgive roughly $10 million of the company’s debts, according to sources close to the deal and federal records obtained by The Boston Globe.

- The Boston Globe, October 25, 1994

The federal government’s contributions, thanks to Mr. Romney, were also immense. By the time the Games were over, about $342 million in federal money to plan and stage the Winter Games had flowed into Utah, a record outlay for the Olympics and nearly $50 million more in constant dollars than was spent for the Atlanta Olympics, according to a report in 2001 by the Government Accountability Office.

- New York Times

Dave: how about some zydeco music?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P4OKxms8hc

Hey…I like it dj….What the hell instrument is that on the guys chest…??

http://www.zydecorubboards.com/Frottoir_Story.html

I think you mean “offshoring.” Why is everyone getting it mixed up now?

Because arguing on the internet is like the Special Olympics, you can win but you’re still retarded

LOL

You wanna play, you’re gonna pay.

My my how quickly everyone has forgotten the Keating 5.

Read and review it? He wrote and made it.

There is so much tolerance for intellectual sloppiness in the Fox Bubble that it considers Dinesh D’Souza a “public intellectual”; one who apparently doesn’t see the irony in equating anti-colonialism with anti-Americanism.

But at least he picked up enough at Dartmouth to know on what side his toast is buttered.

Read and review it? He wrote and made it.

Oops, I meant Mike Rosen.

I though we ‘agreed’ that 32 million sounded better..

How cute…. an alter ego or a fawning sycophant?

Not that we expect you to be truthful.

And you won’t be ignored either Blip. Other than your phoney political diversionary game you’ve got going.

Just think…. You might even get the Lying Puke Award.

Houses - - -

Please give it to me, please, please, pretty please!
Not the award, I want a toke of the stuff you’re smoking.

BTW I have no idea what you’re talking about “phoney political diversionary game”

Blip, Blip, Blip my friend….. you really thought you were going to get away with slipping another misrepresentation of housing between your silly phony political diversions?

You’re dishonest in the very same way as Darryl The Liar is.

Why?

Lip’s complaining about the excessive political posts!

I’m tellin’ ya, God REALLY loves irony.

“Lip’s complaining about the excessive political posts!”

Does the Romney camp pay their propaganda slugs well?

This from the guy who so blatantly fabricates stuff he’d make a realtor blush.

This isn’t about me DarrylTheLiar.. This is all about your constant, repetitive stream of lies.

Why do you lie Darryl?

“This isn’t about me…”

Oh but it is. You’re the only verified liar on the HBB. You were called out and FAILED. One little link and you couldn’t do it. You wailed for PB to bail you out, but he wisely distanced himself from you and your LIES. You’re also the only poster who’s more offensive than Smithers.

Sorry kiddo but 28 MILLION excess empty houses is a reality and the links were provide over and over again. And there is nothing you can do to change.

Now why are you here lying DarrylTheLiar?

Over and over again huh, but not when you were called out. You even proved yourself a LIAR switching from 25 to 28. Can’t even keep your lies straight.

The fact the inventory is actually higher further cements the fact that you misrepresent the truth about housing here everyday.

Why are you lying to the public about housing Darryl The Liar?

The truth is that houses are still too expensive for people with stagnant/declining wages. If you buy today you risk losing tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in the next 5 years…you are buying at peak money, meaning interest rates can only go negative from here.

Even the much lauded cash buyers risk having there a$$es handed to them if they buy today, the cash buyer had a small window in places like the Phoenix metro suburbs (those 20+ miles out)about 14 to 18 months ago. If you missed it, you are too late. Any “deals” 14 to 18 months ago closer in needed tens of thousands of dollars worth of repairs, thereby taking away the “deal” aspect, they only seemed like “deals” to those with bubble price on the brain.

How can anyone make a case for prices rising from here? What constituency groups make up the demand going forward and what economic metrics support higher valuations?

It will take years and years and years to unwind the mother of all bubbles and rising prices are definitely not in the cards. Recent activity is merely a brief illusion created by lying realtors and a pandering government…and now by untruthful statistical cherry pickers.

What’s in this for the untruthful shills and realtors?

“Sorry kiddo but 28 MILLION excess empty houses is a reality and the links were provide over and over again.”

No, they haven’t been. Not once. And you are making an incredible fool of yourself every time you make this claim.

I hate to say it, but you are frustrating me beyond all endurance and I want a link to prove those numbers because they would not surprise me. This can be a great place to provide data - but insisting on something you can’t prove and claiming you have proven it countless times, is starting to make you look a little insane or entirely incapable of reasonable debate/thought.

Just show me the links!

No, they would have made arrangements ahead of time instead of waiting until there was such a limited supply of products necessary to their survival.

Should “rich people” give up their cars for the poor who don’t have transportation out of the danger zone?

Same concept. The rich have resources that the poor don’t. Too bad, life isn’t fair. Get over it.

Who said anything about giving anything up? The store owners hold back what their own family needs. But upping the price of, say, bottled water when none of the normally available water is safe to drink? Do you think it is OK for them to charge 10 times the normal price when everyone needs water to live? 100 times? 1000 times?

You want it, pay the price. No one puts a gun to your head and forces you to pay exorbitant prices. Bottom line, prepare ahead of time. A bottle of water costs .99. A reusable bottle costs a few dollars and allows you to fill it up. An emergency water filter costs $20 and water purification tablets cost $9 [per US Cavalry].

Too bad everyone thinks it’s the government’s responsibility to take care of them, including preventing “price gouging”. Maybe the government should look into the racket that is REALTORS price gouging while they’re at it…

Having a PMS day, northeasterner?

Northeastener : “they would have made arrangements ahead of time ”

and how would you know they didn’t made arrangements…

would you feel the same way if you were left destitute with all your planning and had to depend on strangers for things we take for granted during a ‘normal’ situation.
Where is your compassion and empathy for the poor and down trodden, and mind you, with all the visage of well being, most of us are just a major medical emergency or a layoff away from scoping out the food banks…

We’re not talking about shelters, the Red Cross, or even the good will of neighbors, all of which are excellent aspects of the human condition.

We’re discussing “price gouging” and the government’s need to step in and prevent businesses from raising prices during a “emergency”.

The fact that people want the government to step in and suspend market dynamics like supply and demand just shows how dependent as a culture we have become. As I said, we don’t need government regulation, just don’t buy the damn product. Heck, want to know how the government can get rid of price gouging without “regulation”? Stock up on emergency supplies and sell that at cost.

Has nothing to do with “compassion” or down-on-your-luck families and everything to do with power and dependence.

Do you think it is OK for them to charge 10 times the normal price when everyone needs water to live? 100 times? 1000 times?”

That happened here during the Northridge earthquake

The fact that people want the government to step in and suspend market dynamics like supply and demand

Defending price gouging during an emergency as “market dynamics” is hilarious.

You are so lost in the dogma that has failed America that you are sometimes very amusing.

There is a reason we have regulations against monopolistic practices.

We still have a government that’s supposed be ‘by the people, for the people’, and apparently ‘we the people’ decided a while back that certain regulations were needed for the betterment of our society, now if you disagree, you are welcome to run for office and change that, and i will respect your right to do so - but wait, a certain political party thinks that changing the game rules on the fly is just fine if the results don’t suit them - to me that’s crossing the line and a slippery slope to facism.

We still have a government that’s supposed be ‘by the people, for the people’,

Half of Repubs nowadays would call someone who said something like that a commie.

That’s how far warped the Repub dogma has become. Damn Un-American if you ask me.

Do I support price gouging?

What kind of question is that. Of course not. And if I came across a merchant who was gouging, I wouldn’t buy the damn product. That simple.

The argument was always and is always “DO WE NEED MORE OR LESS GOVERNMENT REGULATION”. “Price gouging is just one more example of the government getting in the way of commerce. As I stated above: Don’t like the price? Don’t buy the product.

Want a simple way to purify water? Buy water purification tablets for $9. Add it to your disaster bug-out bag… oh wait? You mean you never bothered to create a disaster bug-out bag and were completely unprepared for the events that unfolded? Huh, well, I wonder who exactly should pay the price for that…

And if I came across a merchant who was gouging, I wouldn’t buy the damn product. That simple.

Wrong. It’s not “that simple” if one needs something during an emergency no matter your perception of someone being unprepared.

Your simple “free-market” dogma does not solve all the world’s problems and does not negated man’s worst natures. How could it?

Your simple “free-market” dogma does not solve all the world’s problems and does not negate man’s worst natures. How could it?

You’re right of course. But I’m not out to solve the world’s problems. What I am trying to show is stupidity and weakness on the part of some leads to overbearing government regulation for all.

I’ve been trolling down the comments of today, and after all the ridiculous arguments about government interference “helping” people, I decided I had better get the conversation going in the right direction.
The issue is SCARCITY and Conservation. The market system, when left alone, solves the problems by PRICING.
Pricing is limited by Competition.

Let’s look at the stupid ideologies that the ‘government’ should interfere with the “market” in times of crises.
It says, you can’t charge more than $1 per gallon for water which is in shortage.
It doesn’t conserve the water. It doesn’t provide incentives to get water to the market where there is a “shortage”.
So, a few lucky people go out and buy up all the water at $1 per gallon and use it to drink, bath and wash their dogs.
They got 20 gallons each.
Other people didn’t get any.
If the ‘do-gooders’ in government got out of the way and let the free market work, people in neighboring counties would be loading up their cars when they found out they could get $10 per gallon. There would be plenty of water in a big hurry. I’d load up my car, too.
Instead, there is no incentive. The ‘government” says if you charge more than the $1 per gal. you will be arrested and sent to jail and your property confiscated.
How does this help?
It does nothing to solve the problem. The typical solution is to get taxpayers to provide troops to send in truckloads of water to bathe and drink.
That temporary measure doesn’t get the supply/demand change working fast which price ‘GOUGING’ DOES.
AND what is REALLY STUPID, Women, mostly women, will gladly pay $10 per gallon or MORE for drinking water if it says it’s from some ’spring’ or filtered to heavenly cleanliness.
Try 8 oz. at $1.39 plus tax, say $1.50 for their favorite bottled water: 128 oz/ gal. 128/8 = 16 bottles.
16 x 1.50 = 24 dollars per gallon and women will gladly pay this. Then complain about 4 dollar per gallon gasoline.
People are stupid.
Does Dasani have to reduce their price during hurricane
season???
All you leftist government should take care of everybody should support such a move.
See if Dasani ships any.

Then maybe people ought to stop lying, cheating and stealing and preying on the less fortunate.

OK, I get it. So diogenes and northeasterner wouldn’t hesitate to take advantage of an opportunity to leverage a temporary increase known demand in order to boost their ROI.

Otherwise known as denying humans water to make a buck.

Thank you, that’s all I need to know.

So diogenes and northeasterner wouldn’t hesitate to take advantage of an opportunity to leverage a temporary increase known demand in order to boost their ROI.

Could you have made up a better strawman?

I said people need to stop being stupid and depending on the government for everything.

Diogenes explained how market dynamics fixes the scarcity problem during supply shortages.

And how does the liberal socialist interpret that? That we both would price gouge others a critical necessity to life. Way to go socialists. You have once again proved to me there is no protecting people from their own ignorance and stupidity.

Your implication is very clear here.

1) get the government out of the disaster relief business.

2) private sector can handle shortages better than government can. How? By using the free market principal that prices will adjust accordingly to decrease demand to match supply.

3) People are lazy bums. If they can’t stock up on water themselves, then they deserve to be charges 6x the price of water.

You are a disgusting human, if that.

Buy water purification tablets for $9. Add it to your disaster bug-out bag…

LOL. Who needs government? We’ll just carry our survival packs at all times. And our assault rifles. It’ll be like Afghanistan!

And if you withhold your emergency supplies from someone stronger, younger, faster and they shoot you, then it is your own fault for being too weak, too old, or too slow to defend yourself.

Thats why goon….we have to make retirement contingent on being RETIRED….you want a full check then no w2’s otherwise you get your full check at 65 66 67…

You wouldn’t believe the amount of “double dippers” collecting both Fed retirement and a contractor paycheck

yes I would works with state retirment as well but probably not in technology more in public safety

Unless you have lots of very loving children who want to stay home and take care of you or you have enough to pay for a private nursing home for an unknown amount of time or you have good long term care insurance and know the company won’t go bankrupt you should be scared too. Medicaid pays for long term care insurance once people use up their own resources and that program can not be sustained under a state block grant system. It would simply disappear.

Yes, I’m a 40-something.
And someday I will be a 60-something.
And when I am a 60-something, my income will drop precipitously if/when I retire.
And when my income drops, I will not be able to afford to pay for housing indefinitely.
Especially at the rates that rent will be 20 years from now.
Which is why I bought a house.
Because when I am 60-something, I will have a paid-off house
so that my monthly payment will be low enough to afford on my precipitously dropped income.

And when I am a 60-something, my income will drop precipitously if/when I retire.

No worries Oxide. You can just join the Free-Sh1t army and the AARP and then hold the generations behind yours hostage for entitlements and handouts.

You can just join the Free-Sh1t army and the AARP ??

Just wondering Northeastener…..I do enjoy many of your post…I believe you were educated by the Jesuits right ?? Boston University ??

Anyway, I would like to know your answer to this question;

Is health care a right of the commons or a privilege ??

My answer is somewhat complicated. Personally, I think as a society we should accept basic healthcare as a right. In order to do that, we need to remove the majority of the profit motive from providing basic health care. If human life is to be preserved, we can’t let dollars determine who lives and who dies at the most basic level. Market dynamics determining the value of human life here is not in the best interest of society. Other countries have done this in a successful fashion so there is no reason that the US cannot. I’m not against a private, for-profit industry for those who wish to go beyond the basic government healthcare offered.

What I think we have is a bastardization that serves no one particularly well. I despise the “Government Mandate” that forces us to purchase a product from a for-profit company or pay a penalty. If as a society we decide it isn’t a right, than healthcare should remain the sole provider of private enterprise [I won't get into the merits of lack thereof for VA or Medicare].

You forgot the part about making little kids starve…

Get real. That comes later.

You forgot the part about making little kids starve…

They could earn a living in the coal mines, if government would get out of the way.

Younger people are more cavalier than someone facing death in the near term.

Where is Dr Kevorkian when I want him ??

In the gun safe….

It would never occur to me because it’s not true.

NO ONE in their right mind willing dies.

The ECO who is going to pay for your million dollar long term care?

Go to a nursing home…and see what LIFE is …..Its the profit motive keeping people alive who are one step away from death.

Where is Dr Kevorkian when I want him?

I often think that when I read your posts.

not for along time alpha…i’m still healthy …..NYC is not a great place to live if you are obese.

How much of the lost revenue would the oil depletion allowance in the AMT raise? How much more do they have to cover?

And isn’t Romney planning to eliminate the AMT? So how does closing a loophole in it help?

Do I look like Romney or his tax-policy advisors? As RAL has said before, do your own homework. I provided posts in response to your request for details. You want more answers, go bother the Romney campaign.

It’s their job to communicate those points to us, not our job to have to beg them for answers.

He’s not hiding his plan:

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/tax

It doesn’t talk much (if at all) about closing loopholes for individual taxes.

Since broadening the tax base would produce enough revenue to pay for cutting everyone’s tax rates,

So we’re going to broaden the tax base and yet still cut everybody’s tax rate?

Sounds like voodoo economics to me.

All of the attempts to broaden the tax base are based on family incomes over $200K. Incomes under $200K should see a net benefit from the tax rate decreases.

Got a link for that one? Looks like you just tacked it on yourself.

Got a link for that one? Looks like you just tacked it on yourself.

LOL. Did you not look at the post with the link in it? Did you not read the article?

Who do that voodoo economics that you do so well?

from the WSJ link
But past experience shows that taxpayers do respond to lower marginal tax rates by acting in ways that increase their taxable incomes: increasing work effort, receiving more of their compensation in the form of taxable cash rather than untaxed fringe benefits, and spending less of their income on tax-favored forms of consumption that are deducted or excluded in calculating taxable income. More specifically, history shows that a tax cut that raises the after-tax share of earnings that an individual keeps by 10% raises taxable income by about 5%. This implies that the revenue loss from the 20% tax cut would be $148 billion, not $181 billion.

I posted some specifics from the article above.

I meant from the actually Romney campaign. I realize that the WSJ is a proxy of sorts, but I would really like to hear from Mitt himself.

I’m sure it will be brought up and discussed in the debates.

I should have added, Mitt is playing that most political of games: don’t alienate or anger your base before you have to by giving specific examples of tax increases on your biggest doners.

wasn’t there talk of a 3% sales tax on selling homes ?

There is much waste and quite a few military programs that are unnecessary, but wholesale cuts to the MIC will kill the economy as quickly as raising taxes.

Why does that only apply to the military (MIC)?

Why does that only apply to the military (MIC)?

How much of the public and private sector does the MIC account for? Get the answer to that, and you’ll have your answer as to why cutting MIC is not the path to growing your economy out of the doldrums…

How much of the public and private sector does the MIC account for?

So we’re in agreement that we need to reform entitlement spending.

“The point I’m making is if you cut military spending, you cut jobs, both directly and indirectly. If you’re trying to get the economy back to “full-employment”, you don’t cut military spending.”

Northeastener is a Keynesian. What is the multiplier for military spending? Now tell me why it is lower for support services for the impoverished.

Cutting social spending such as food stamps and medicare would harm rather than help the economy as well.

Northeastener is a Keynesian.

I’m definitely an Austrian when it comes to economic theory, leave central planning to the Socialists and Communists… having said that, only a fool would think that cutting government spending in such a large sector of the economy while attempting to get your economy back to full employment would make any sense. You cut when the economy is doing well, not when the economy is stagnant or shrinking.

Repeat after me: Austerity does not work. You’d think the PIIGS of Europe that Cantankerous mentions almost daily would show that.

The point I’m making is if you cut military spending, you cut jobs, Northeastener

We know you are a huge advocate for government jobs and any avocation that provides socialized (VA) medicine, but sometimes you have to bite the bullet and do what’s best for America.

What is the multiplier for military spending? Now tell me why it is lower for support services for the impoverished?

Why are you throwing around trick questions?

the estimated multiplier for temporary defense spending is 0.4-0.5 contemporaneously and 0.6-0.7 over two years. If the change in defense spending is “permanent” (gauged by Ramey’s defense-news variable), the multipliers are higher by 0.1-0.2. The estimated multipliers are all significantly less than one and apply for given average marginal income-tax rates.

Other individuals with a high, and benevolent, MPC would include almost anyone on a low income - students, parents with young children, and the unemployed.

i.e. for those most needy, the multiplier approaches 1 because of the assumption of a high marginal propensity to consume.

There is a reason why Economics is called “The Dismal Science”… the fact that mathematically, economists can show better results through entitlement spending on the poor than on national defense.

I’m definitely an Austrian when it comes to economic theory

Repeat after me: Austerity does not work.

LOL.

Northeastener is a Keynesian. What is the multiplier for military spending? Now tell me why it is lower for support services for the impoverished.

Northeastener,

You just got outmaneuvered.

Peace

Not at all. One, I’m not a Keynesian. Two, as I stated above, economics is called the Dismal Science for a reason…

Based on that logic, one could fire the entire MIC, put everyone on SNAP, and because you just impoverished everyone, their MPC goes to 1… yes, mathematically it is possible to show the government gets the best bang for it’s buck by impoverishing everyone.

So…

Government spending on defense = Jobs.

Government spending on anything else = Waste.

Because tanks and bombs are so productive?

Because people would rather not worry so much about approaching hurricanes, tornadoes or floods.

We don’t need all that equipment if we’re not fighting 2 wars.

But I agree the troops are going to be expensive. Should we subsidize them in the military, or subsidize them in the job market?

Rio, it’s interesting how you want to raise taxes on Americans when you probably don’t even pay any.

I do pay American taxes.

Assuming we’re actually allowed to start on THIS side.

I’m guessing you’re not taking Landlords Are Pimps’ advice and selling your place and becoming a renter?”

Always good advice sell at the bottom, works with stocks, Re whatever. Once you do this and realize what you have done your only recourse is to haunt Blogs and post inane advice…

post inane advice

That wasn’t advice, it was snark.

Then why not tax the gain from founder stock also at ordinary rates, where the capital risk was taken by investors like venture funds and not the entrepreneurs?

Bifurcating different parties labor seems problematic to me; What about a person who uses their own labor to make the same kind of investment with their own money? Since the return is generated from THEIR labor, should the labor associated with their own investment also be taxed at ordinary rates?

If the law is then changed (which fundamentally changes partnership tax law), shouldn’t it go from:

Current situation:
Investors get $80 in Capital Gain
Manager gets $20 in Capital Gain
Total of $100 in Capital Gain from Investment is taxed by the Feds

To:

New situation:
Investors get $100 in Capital Gain and deduction for $20 that they pay in compensation to Manager
Manager gets $20 in Ordinary Income
Total of $100 in Capital Gain from Investment is taxed by the Feds

What you are saying is that by simply having an investor choose to hire a third party to manage their investment, that the overall taxation of that activity should be different than the investor investing their own money?

The unintended consequence of making the change differently than my example would cause investing activities that include third party managers to get taxed at an overall rate higher than investing activities with no managers involved.

I personally think that is bad policy, as it MAY reduce investment activity overall, but would almost certainly shift investing activities into the hands of the less experienced, which would increase mal-investment into the economy.

If what you are suggesting is akin to my example (where neither investment activity gets beneficial tax treatment overall), frankly, my issue is only related to the fact that this will throw partnership taxation on its head, and create lots of new loopholes to exploit.

If you don’t like my method of changing the carried interest law (which taxes managers at ordinary rates, rewards the investors of capital more, but is revenue neutral to the Federal Government as compared to current law), you must be focused on raising revenue from those who can afford to pay more…and so I ask…isn’t there a simpler way to meet that goal?

No, I might have known that decades ago but not anymore.

Are they all answerable to the Executive? I know that the Obama team has had some sway in the actions and effectiveness, but it seems like some of these do their own thing during the Republican administrations.

For instance, the State Dept seems to be contrary to everything Republican/conservative and it has been this way for years.

Yes, the State Department is under the executive branch. The Secretary of State is a cabinet official. He or she runs the State Department. If it has done anything that you see as contrary to conservative principles or against Repulican policies, it is because they are dealing laws that already existed (and were not changed) or their actions were more in line with the preferred policies of the president than you think. The courts and the legislature are not under the executive branch. All the rest (except for those quasi-independent ones) are part of the executive branch.

Guys, be nice to Polly. While we don’t necessarily agree with her very often (ever?) at least she uses reason and doesn’t devolve into name calling or ad hominem attacks.

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

And she gives us facts. Don’t forget those____ (redacted in consideration of Bronco’s delicate sensibilities) facts.

And she gives us facts. Don’t forget those____ (redacted in consideration of Bronco’s delicate sensibilities) facts.

From what I can tell from her posts about the Ryan speech above, they aren’t facts so much as regurgitated lies from the left, and easily proven wrong.

And to your point a few days ago regarding a particular US Senator voicing support for the Taliban in the early 90’s, one senator doesn’t make US policy. Where is your proof that the US government had an established policy of providing material aid and support to the Taliban, especially once they came out as supporters of strict Sharia law? I’ll stand by my statement that the Taliban was and is a construct of Pakistan, supported by Saudi Arabia in an attempt to consolidate Muslim power in the region.

wonder what Polly thinks of this…lawyer clawbacks…..

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/08/29/dewey-asks-court-to-approve-70-million-partner-clawback-plan/

In 2006, the OFHEO announced a suit against Raines in order to recover some or all of the $90 million in payments made to Raines based on the overstated earnings,[

Civil charges were filed against Raines and two other former executives by the OFHEO in which the OFHEO sought $110 million in penalties and $115 million in returned bonuses from the three accused.[7] On April 18, 2008, the government announced a settlement with Raines together with J. Timothy Howard, Fannie’s former chief financial officer, and Leanne G. Spencer, Fannie’s former controller. The three executives agreed to pay fines totaling about $3 million, which will be paid by Fannie’s insurance policies. Raines also agreed to donate the proceeds from the sale of $1.8 million of his Fannie stock and to give up stock options, which were valued at $15.6 million when issued. The stock options however had no value.[citation needed] Raines also gave up an estimated $5.3 million of “other benefits” said to be related to his pension and forgone bonuses.[8]

You’ve put a few provisos and modifiers into your statement since my response, NE. And ascribed to me assertions I didn’t make. Read my posts, use your common sense, and draw your own conclusions.

P.S. Dana Rohrabacher is a US Congressman, not a Senator.

You’re right of course. I did add a few provisos, but it was required to elaborate on the statements made.

One US Congressman doesn’t US foreign policy make.

Polly’s post are the most articulate on this blog.

Oh how sweet….

TRUE

She is clearly the most articulate

lmao

How about the most fact-based? The most concise? The most reliable?
Polly is a treasure and we’re very lucky to have her here. The “a” you’ve laffed off? Maybe not such a loss….

Yes… because fawning is more important the truth. We understand.

Because the uber rich deserve to be rewarded for their speculative, non job creating “investments”.

Why should Capital receive a lower tax burden than labor?

Because capital has already been taxed, while labor has not. Ex. Dividends paid by corporations to shareholders. Dividends are paid out of profits that were taxed, prior to being paid to shareholders.

Additionally, the investment of capital holds risk, more so than the investment of time [labor]. For the majority of hourly and salaried employees, the tradeoff of time for money sees an immediate return weekly, bi-weekly, etc. when they are paid

The investment of capital often sees a return over a much longer time horizon. That longer horizon increases risk.

Why should Capital receive a lower tax burden than labor?

Would you support lowering tax rate on labor below to capital level?

Your statement:

“8. Repatriate Overseas Corporate Profits and tax at the current rate”

America has the HIGHEST corporate tax rate in the industrialized world.

America is one of the few countries that taxes corporate profits MADE IN OTHER countries.

Result: Companies keep their money OUT of America. Companies MOVE out of America. And TAKE their jobs with them.

Liberal Solution: Even MORE draconian laws.

Because there is no problem in the world that can NOT be solved by a bigger and more powerful government.

(Reuters) - Thirty large and profitable U.S. corporations paid no income taxes in 2008 through 2010, said a study on Thursday that arrives as Congress faces rising demands for tax reform but seems unable or unwilling to act.

Pepco Holdings Inc, a Washington, D.C.-area power company, had the lowest effective tax rate, at negative 57.6 percent, among the 280 Fortune 500 companies studied.

The statutory U.S. corporate income tax rate is 35 percent, one of the highest in the world; but over the 2008-2010 period, very few of the companies studied paid it, said the report.

The average effective tax rate for the companies over the period was 18.5 percent, said Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, both think tanks

“Because there is no problem in the world that can NOT be solved by a bigger and more powerful government.”

As a Regan Republican in my youth, I’m still very economically conservative in my core.

I think government should manage the macro-economic conditions of an economy for long-term sustainability, then be as hands off as possible on its actual involvement.

For example, I think welfare is a horribly destructive thing. Paying people to sit him and not work? Oh, I don’t think so. Ditto food stamps.

I’d much rather we had a government that was focused on keeping money circulating in the economy, so people could get jobs that pay well enough that they could eat without food stamps, then a government that has embraced trade imbalances and now has to pump $1.3T a year new debt/money into the economy to keep it functioning.

And, there is my statement on the root cause of the problem.

In the 1960s and 1970s, the government decided to stop fighting trade imbalances, and instead began embracing them. After all, it is trade imbalances that allow some people to sell more than they buy, accumulating money.

Trade imbalances create money, and make some people very rich, so they are very good, right?

I would say no. Money is borrowed into existence, and the flip side of the trade imbalance that allows some individuals to accumulate money, is that it requires other people go into debt.

I think that all the little issues of the last 50 years, from more government intrusion into peoples’ lives, to the unsustainable rate of debt growth, has its root in our government’s decision to embrace rather than lean against trade imbalances.

And, what specifically did the government do to embrace imbalances? We removed trade tariffs, embracing globalization and free trade. We flattened the tax code, reducing the top marginal rate from 90%+ to under 40%, with capital gains well below that.

What are my solutions? Undo most of what we have doen in the last 50 years… yes, including most of the social safety net for working aged people.

Or, more specifically.
1) End free trade with a large tariff on money leaving the country. Bring jobs back to the USA, increase wages to American workers.

2) Steep income tax code with lots of deductions. The super rich need to stop getting super richer, and start spending down some of the money they have. Money is debt, and we can’t pay down the debt unless the people with the debt have a chance to get the money, and a necessary prerequisite to that is the people with that money spending it.

3) Once we have money flowing through, and staying in, the USA economy, then we can remove all the social safety net programs for working aged people. Food stamps, housing rental assistance, FHA and GSEs, school lunches, SCHIP, etc.

4) What I would keep is Social Security. What I would add is nationalized healthcare for all with lots of cost/benefit analysis spending controls and playing hard-ball with supplies. I consider healthcare to be a basic necessity of modern life, like water, electricity, phone, and the other utilities that are tightly regulated and profit constrained.

5) Oh, and end the war on drugs, slash military spending, roll back PATRIOT ACT, eliminate dept of homeland security, more funding for EPA oversight and cleanup efforts, more funding for basic scientific research, funding for research into alternative fuels… None of this is specifically about trade imbalance… it is just getting govet to do more of what it should do (regulate business and protect the environment) and less of what it shouldn’t do (have its hands in peoples’ personal lives).

If there was no corporate income tax then there would be no tax refunds either….

Pepco Holdings Inc, a Washington, D.C.-area power company, had the lowest effective tax rate, at negative 57.6 percent, among the 280 Fortune 500 companies studied.

Because capital has already been taxed, while labor has not.

The original capital yes … the gains … no.

Which was decided by SCOTUS. Through a process dictated by the Constitution.

Sorry, I was referring to Hi-Z’s first question regarding overturning a Supreme Court decision.

Thanks, Hi-Z. Will consider, research, and respond.

The sad fact is that here is no mechanism for enforcing Constitutionality as the SCOTUS only hears and reviews cases brought to it.

In theory member of Congress would have standing to file a case against the POTUS on this issue, to be heard by the SCOTUS. There was one such case filed not too long ago…