The Housing Bubble

My phone is not a fashion statement. I dont wear a watch.

Apple’s problem is that the walls to their walled garden are weakening.

What made the iPhone great to start?

It connected to your iTunes library, so you could have all your music from your iPod also on your phone.

Next, there was the App store.

And then the Bookstore.

And then movies.

The content was all captive, and so people stayed with the device.

Well:

Music subscription models are OS independent.
Cloud-based book models are OS independent (buy a Google Book to see what I mean).
Netflix is OS independent.
Developers are now making Apps for both iOS and Android.
And now, there are things like Disney Movies Anywhere…if you buy a Disney movie through iTunes, you can also stream it through Google Play (and other places).

Content is king, and the content providers are starting to realize that they are better off NOT being beholden to Apple, and that they should control the consumption of their content, NOT Apple. And that’s REALLY bad for Apple.

Apple tried to throw up a new wall with the iWatch, but people are very unimpressed so far.

There are fewer and fewer reasons to stick with the iPhone.

When the smartphone OS becomes less relevant, Apple’s pricing power will be diminished…and there go their eye-popping margins, and eye-popping profit, and eye-popping market cap.

I always throw a touchdown Donk. Get used to it.

all the newer phones are too big for a pocket/purse

Really? I know plenty of people with iPhone 6’s or those huge Galaxy phones who traded in perfectly good iPhone 4’s for them.

Me? My cheapo HTC android phone gave up the ghost after about a year. I went back to a flip phone. The charge lasts 7 days or longer.

I saw this recently.

http://kindofnormal.com/img/truth_facts/2014/05/08.jpg

why wont they continue to be kept artificially high? what has changed?

I’m with azdude on this. For instance, isn’t a 2015 rate hike pretty much off the table at this point?

I am not talking about the Fed keeping prices artificially high (which they are). I meant the companies themselves trying to keep a computer or tablet at a certain price level even though it is cheaper and cheaper to produce. Apple is doing this always with the Ipads and phones, bringing out “new” versions when they aren’t needed to keep the price point up.

The reasons it won’t go on forever is that there is a limit to bells and whistles that is quickly reached and was reached long ago for most tablets and computers and phones. Plus they are each cannibalizing each other tablets draw demand away from computers, same for phones. This is why it won’t go on.

Interest rates will go up as default rates go up. It won’t be up to Janet.

This is the start of the Tech Fraud Crash.

Wouldn’t the “shorts” keep the frauds in check?

The entire paradigm is a fraud.

^that.

I’m thinking of going back to a flip-up cell phone when my contract expires. I’m tired of paying fifty bucks a month to use 1% of my allotted usage. I’d rather have the money.

I’m thinking of going back to a flip-up cell phone when my contract expires.

With a flip phone you aren’t always worried about running out of juice. I love how smart phone users at airports are always hunting for unused wall outlets to recharged their toys.

I bought a brand new Kyocera DuraXT for $75. It’s ruggedized and even waterproof. It is a little bulky because of the ruggedization but that works for me. There are slimmer flip phones.

Plus they are each cannibalizing each other tablets

Android tablets are dirt cheap.

“I’d rather have the money.”

Me too. However, for my daughter and son, their lives revolve around these smart phones. No smart phone… you’re ostracized. As Dubya might say, “Either you’re with us or against us.”

No smart phone… you’re ostracized

That sounds like a First World Problem if I ever heard one.

Sheesh, it used to be what you wore. Now you need an $80 a month smartphone and dataplan to be cool.

Of course, when I tell people that I don’t have a Facebook account, they stare at me like I grew a second head.

When an automated society can provide all the food and goods for a pretty high standard of living using 5 people and the machines when it used to take 100 or 1000 for the equivalent production, what happens then?

that depends on what kind of system you’re living in. if it’s more socialistic by nature, you’ll get high unemployment and stagnation.

if it’s more free market orientated, the price of everything will continue to edge down as the currency gains value and prosperity rises. in those conditions businesses begin popping up all over. more and better paying jobs come into being and the standard of living rises.

what kind jobs will come into being? just about anything you can think of. things like nail and beauty salons were products of prosperity. the more wealth and prosperity, the more specialized jobs are created.

if you have free market capitalism, automation is a boon and nothing to be feared.

When an automated society can provide all the food and goods for a pretty high standard of living using 5 people and the machines when it used to take 100 or 1000 for the equivalent production, what happens then?

This has already been anticipated by futurists and forward-thinkers: the Basic Income concept.

Give each person a basic salary. No means testing, no qualifying, no work required, very minimal bureaucracy to implement. Free money.

The idea has merit. If you want more money, the incentive is still there to get an education and be creative and do something. Having money in circulation ensures that the producers have customers with money to sell to. The worthless and lazy will take advantage — but so what, it’s better than having half of the population rioting because they are starving due to lack of jobs.

I think we decades away from this happening but something like it is inevitable. The link between labor and money has to be broken if robots are doing all of the work.

Give each person a basic salary.

central planning. unworkable no matter how nice it sounds.

Free money.

no such thing and a destructive concept.

The idea has merit.

it has zero merit.

If you want more money, the incentive is still there to get an education and be creative and do something.

for many, not much incentive if you can live off free money.

Having money in circulation ensures that the producers have customers with money to sell to.

a monetarist myth that merely encourages the devaluation of dollars.

The worthless and lazy will take advantage — but so what, it’s better than having half of the population rioting because they are starving due to lack of jobs.

that will only happen in socialistic systems where disincentives to work are created.

The link between labor and money has to be broken if robots are doing all of the work.

the link between labor and money can never be broken and robots will NEVER do ALL the work.

Then what do we do with all the useless labor whether here or overseas?

We give them an incentive to not reproduce. You want free cheese? Then don’t have kids. Which of course is the opposite of what we’re doing now.

Free money. no such thing and a destructive concept.

The idea has merit. it has zero merit.

Basic Income is not that big of a step. We’re already halfway there with welfare, EBT, disability, WIC, SNAP, earned income tax credits, pensions, Soc Sec…

the link between labor and money can never be broken and robots will NEVER do ALL the work.

You’re a little behind the times. The Industrial Revolution started around 1760 and machines have been displacing people since then. True, robots won’t displace the creative intellectual class (designers, engineers, etc.) but they can and will displace most blue collar labor. Alvin Toffler predicted this way back in 1970 in Future Shock. Much of what he wrote has come true.

We’re already halfway there with welfare, EBT, disability, WIC, SNAP, earned income tax credits, pensions, Soc Sec…

then why not go all the way to full on communism, right?

True, robots won’t displace the creative intellectual class (designers, engineers, etc.)

most of them will be replaced.

but they can and will displace most blue collar labor.

just about all labor can be replaced. and in a free market system, new and better jobs will crop up and they too will eventually be replaced. and so on..

^BINGO

Productivity gains and increases in efficiency.

you’ve got it.

Productivity gains and increases in efficiency.

And no customers to sell to because they are all unemployed. Supply siders never learn.

It separates the men from the boys in the construction biz. New method/approach and/or new materials, new systems.

And no customers to sell to because they are all unemployed.

simply not true. why wouldn’t they be employed?

people would still work, even in a barter system. however, people will refuse to work if they are taxed high enough.

it’s you demand management types that never learn.

simply not true. why wouldn’t they be employed?

Robots and computers, isn’t it obvious? 90% of Americans used to be employed on farms as manual labor. Harvesters, combines, etc. have made that work mostly obsolete. Then average Americans became factory workers. Those jobs are all gone through a combination of going overseas and automation. Now your average high school grad works retail or restaurants. The days of the blue collar guy going to work for 35 years with a lunchbox and retiring with a gold watch are long gone.

Robots and computers, isn’t it obvious?

in a free market economy, robots create wealth which creates more jobs than they destroy.

90% of Americans used to be employed on farms as manual labor.

you want to go back to where 90% of us worked on farms? do you know what that would mean to the rest of the economy?

Then average Americans became factory workers.

and prospered because of it.

Those jobs are all gone through a combination of going overseas and automation.

no, most of those jobs are gone because high taxes and onerous regulations made the USA much less competitive.

Now your average high school grad works retail or restaurants.

thanks to demand management government intervention in the economy.

The days of the blue collar guy going to work for 35 years with a lunchbox and retiring with a gold watch are long gone.

the economy has gotten worse due to the steady march of socialism.

“you want to go back to where 90% of us worked on farms? do you know what that would mean to the rest of the economy?”

PovertyLover would only if He/She were King/Queen.

Now your average high school grad works retail or restaurants.

Only around 1 out of 5 jobs in the American economy requires a bachelor’s degree. High school grads hold many different kinds of jobs.

and many kids with their new degree can only find menial entry jobs now. jobs that their degree has no bearing on.

and high school grads may indeed hold many different kinds of jobs. so what? how much do those jobs pay? high school grads have a much harder time of it today than 20 or 30 years ago.

So what? So they’re not concentrated in a small number of industries. That’s what.

the point he was making is that they are doing worse than they were before. he’s correct on that point.

what difference does it make what industry they’re working in if they aren’t as well off as previous generations? their pain is being spread throughout other industries and you think that makes some kind of point for you?

if you really want to counter his point, then show how grads are doing better now than in the past.

tj: in a free market economy, robots create wealth which creates more jobs than they destroy.

You are correct. In a full robot economy you would have a great deal of wealth due to very high productivity. But you would also have nearly 100% unemployment among humans because they would all be displaced, except for some repair workers — maybe.

And unless those unemployed humans get their hands on money somehow, aggregate demand dwindles. The velocity of money goes to zero. Robot owners pull the plug because there’s no sales and no revenue. A mountain of unsold inventory builds up.

A full blown free market supply side economy is chronically unbalanced and doomed to fail, just as we’ve seen with the failure of “trickle down.”

“a full robot economy”

Is that a beaut from Dailykos?

But you would also have nearly 100% unemployment among humans because they would all be displaced, except for some repair workers — maybe.

you would have new types of jobs that you can’t even imagine. the new and growing wealth would demand them. unemployment would be extremely low. the value of the dollar would increase dramatically. nearly everything would be cheaper and our standard of living would naturally rise.

And unless those unemployed humans get their hands on money somehow, aggregate demand dwindles.

you just got through admitting that the robots/automation would increase wealth, so why do you think there would be trouble earning dollars? dollars would both be worth more and easier to come by at the same time. for some reason, even when you admit there would be more wealth, you think there would be fewer jobs. jobs and wages aren’t static. they aren’t zero sum.

Robot owners pull the plug because there’s no sales and no revenue.

no, they’d be looking to buy better robots to make things cheaper or more efficiently to increase their profits and at the same time lower their prices for increased sales. the result would be better products at lower prices that even more people could afford.

A full blown free market supply side economy is chronically unbalanced and doomed to fail, just as we’ve seen with the failure of “trickle down.”

a free market is always correcting imbalances. that’s the nature of it.

supply side hasn’t failed. it has been market intervention that has caused failure.

no, they’d be looking to buy better robots to make things cheaper or more efficiently to increase their profits

No, they would use their robots to take over the world and enslave us all.

figures the village idiot would chime in.

should i tell them your other identity? not alphasloth, but the newer one you don’t use very much?

why do you hate to admit your new identities so much? it’s probably only big deal to you..

why do you hate to admit your new identities so much? it’s probably only big deal to you..

Why do you deny their robotic takeover of the world?

i don’t know, interested observer, why don’t you tell me?

i don’t know, interested observer, why don’t you tell me?

because you are a tool in their takeover

why do you try to keep your identities so secret when almost no one else does?

“high school grads have a much harder time of it today than 20 or 30 years ago.”

tj, why is that? With all of the automation currently taking place, and your claim of subsequent wealth creation, how are things harder? Do we just wait another 20 years for the wealth effect to kick in?

And when I say, “currently taking place” I mean here in the US. Are you suggesting that we’re in some tween state and given more time and more production coming here, facilitated by even more automation here, the wealth effect will follow? If so, I’m not sure I buy that.

“why do you try to keep your identities so secret when almost no one else does?”

Because he’s Lola and that’s what Lola does.

Are you suggesting that we’re in some tween state and given more time and more production coming here, facilitated by even more automation here, the wealth effect will follow? If so, I’m not sure I buy that.

if you read from my first post you’ll see that i’m talking about conditions in a free market. interventions in the economy stop much of the good that takes place. i think you’ll agree that we have less and less of a free market as time goes by. we become more and more of a socialist state. the harmful policies are too long to list and we keep adding to them. that’s why the economy is so weak and getting weaker despite the good effects of automation. that’s why grads are having such a hard time of it.

Bottlenecking and price fixing isn’t inflation.

*Learn* the difference.

Fewer and fewer are growing up in such a society. More and more are growing up in the opposite handout society. Even those who originally had those values ingrained can be and have been seduced by handouts. The last 10 years have made it much worse.

Class is certainly an issue, but there I should have used the term “class of people” to be more clear that I am only talking about the class of people who formerly would have been doing these jobs. Use group of people if it makes you feel better.

“Use group of people if it makes you feel better.”

Cohort?

Fewer and fewer are growing up in such a society.

Fewer kids are growing up families and communities in which the adults work in factories, etc. only because there are fewer such jobs in the economy.

Fewer are growing up in families in which the adults work at all.

You’re comparing today to the ’70s? The difference is probably not significant or relevant.

It’s an interesting question. Those countries may not have signed on to the treaties that require them to take refugees. There are certainly well-educated Egyptians, Jordanians, etc. who move to those countries to get good jobs.

Hillary can’t beat Trump, who by the way is leading Bush among college educated Republicans in a brand new Bloomberg poll

But those Christian Zionists are no different from ISIS when it comes to their affinity for 9 year old girls

This is a very large “base” of the Republican Party, particularly in the South

These people believe the Earth is 6,000 years old

They want the Rapture to happen

And they are attracted to 9 year old girls

Yes - Christians = ISIS

I learned that in a government school.

Obama will protect us from both.

That same Bloomberg poll reports that Huckabee is in second place among GOP voters with only a high school education

These people handle snakes and roll around on the floor of their church speaking in tongues having convulsions

And you want to entrust American foreign policy and a $600,000,000,000+ a year war machine to the people they elect?

Hillary can’t beat Trump

I think you’re right with Trump’s volatility a straight-up contest won’t happen. The most likely scenario is for Trump to beat himself with a fatal gaffe and leave the door open for Hillary to slide into the WH.

I think you’re right, but with Trump’s volatility a straight-up contest won’t happen.

Dick Cheney outed a CIA agent for political reasons, but he’s not in jail either. Scooter Libby took the fall for him like a good little neo-con Labradoodle.

“Hillary can’t beat Trump”

Can’t beat Melania Trump either. The White House needs some thigh gap to set an example for the young ladies these days.

Why rent when living in a van is a fraction of that? Think of all the money you could be saving.

The answer is plain as day. Renting is a mere 10% of annual income.

You could literally live for free in a van. Then you take that 10% rent money and invest it wisely. See, I told you how you can save 10% of your annual salary. You can thank me later.

Why would you?

At 10% of income, you’ll have so much money after paying rent at the end of the month you won’t know where to throw it.

Because Free>10%
Besides, I think your logic is flawed. For an annual income of 200K, one could afford $1,666 a month in rent. For someone whose income is 40K, only $333. Quite the disparity, no?

Free or 10% of income is far better than the losses associated with paying a grossly inflated price for a depreciated asset, no?

“You could literally live for free in a van. Then you take that 10%…”

Spoken by a debt donkey who has never done any rough camping, or earned $200,000 for that matter.

Most of my renters pay 20-25% of their income in rent.

Doesn’t matter when you pay a grossly inflated price for a depreciating asset…. then throw more good money after bad on it.

And let’s not forget one of the key drivers of these pension obligations: public employee unions, funded by dues paid out of the salaries of the public workers which are in turn paid for by the public.

It could also be argued that the taxpayer’s responsibility ends at making the promised contributions to the pension funds

Okay, but in Illinois’ and many other state’s case, the legislators elected by the taxpayers decided over the years to NOT make the needed pension payments. If you skipped a payment due 20 years ago, the lost principal and especially the compounding becomes a much bigger hole to fill today. It’s not the retiree’s fault the state government made mathematically stupid decisions.

If the contributions were not made the retirees could make a case for breach of contract.

Is he the one who became a cop on TV?

Always liked this (NSFW):
Sam Kinison - Rappers Suck
The late great Sam Kinison expressing his distaste for rap music. Funny to note Ice T in the house for this bit.

It seems to me that shooting at American soldiers would make it more likely that guns would be confiscated, not less.

Not to mention that the shooters would actually be “exterminated”

the correct arm band