Seeking Alpha

The claim that conservative policies of new presidential candidate Gov. Rick Perry caused an...

The claim that conservative policies of new presidential candidate Gov. Rick Perry caused an economic miracle in Texas is a myth based on a fallacy, Paul Krugman writes. "A state offering cheap labor and... weak regulation can attract jobs from other states," but any logic applying those policies to the entire U.S. is impossible since "every state can’t lure jobs away from every other state."
Comments (129)
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Yes, but we can lure them away from China.

     

    And referring to the states, isn't a cheap job better than no job? I know that's hard for some. Unemployment's a cheap job too, right?
    15 Aug 2011, 05:28 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3314) | Send Message
     
    Funny just the other day I read that Krugman was saying jobs should take priority over all else.

     

    Now that some may have been created by somebody that is not from his way of thinking, that's no good either?

     

    As far as Perry, I don't know enough about him to have an opinion either way.
    15 Aug 2011, 06:02 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt -

     

    The US needs to lure manufacturing and other quality jobs back from China and other countries but the route to success in that regard is not racing China, India, Bangladesh etc. to the bottom on salaries and wages because:
    (a) This only increases significantly greater income disparity in the US (already the US has greater such disparity and lower social mobility than most other advanced economies),
    (b) This only serves to lower incomes in many countries inordinately (creating unwarranted deflationary pressures). and
    (c) China etc. will win such a contest hands down (although they too will experience deflationary pressures because their markets in the US and other advanced economies will be experiencing deflationary pressures.

     

    The wiser course is to compete for US employment growth based on better management, infrastructure, financial institutions, legal system, innovative collateral and support services and worker training, health etc. Get the good jobs because the whole package makes doing the work in the US more productive and less prone to bottlenecks and production interruptions.

     

    This is what Germany and Sweden are doing and succeeding at.
    15 Aug 2011, 09:29 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    German manufacturers are ADD and can niche out their product lines as a result and Sweden has a homogenous culture despite a recent influx of muslim ne'er do wells. The United States had a little love affair with unions that overstayed its welcome and now has left burned out hellholes across the country. What I'd like to see is more freedom, economic anarchy, where the govt. isn't involved.

     

    If I decide to open up a lemonade stand here in America the govt. now takes a side. The lemonade stand owner is the default enemy. The worker at the lemonade stand OTOH is the recipient of govt. protection and beneficence. Why?

     

    Why did the govt. decide to step in-between and become arbiter of employer and employee? Why? The meddling has only grown over the decades even as the union influence has subsided, the govt. has now assumed that role as quasi-union boss. Why are they even involved? Why?

     

    Why isn't the govt. on my side, the business owner? Why? Why am I assumed to always be guilty until proven innocent? Why? The legislation is a one way street. Go into any workplace across America, walk into their breakroom, look at the mandatory wallpaper that an employer is forced to hang up everywhere with mandatory phone numbers plastered every square foot on what agency to call if your employer has blah blah blah or who to call to help you sue your boss if they have blah blah blah. Why?

     

    Why is the govt. involved? Why is the govt. non-neutral? Why aren't they on my side as a general tendency? Hell, I pay my taxes. I pay the salary of the very agencies that harass me and try to shake me down. I also pay the salary of the employees. I should receive a THANK YOU and that is all, but no I am accused of every foul thing & false accusation in order so that my employees can manipulate the system(ie, the labor laws) to steal from the company.

     

    I tell an employee to show up on time. They've been late the last 3 days. Suddenly, they're in the breakroom screaming that I harassed them! I send them home. They are calling the labor board. Or the EEOC, and making up crap. Suddenly, they are limping. Worker's comp. Can't do anything now. If I do, RETALIATION! They have a lifetime get out of jail free card. Or Bush 1, in 1991 signing ADA law. What a genius! Now I have employees who all have 'a condition'. I can't even schedule people anymore. They all have conditions. I can't even fire them anymore. This business isn't even mine anymore. Its the State's. They own it now. They're telling me what I can and cannot do. Might as well just give it to them like GM and let them run it. I'll leave and go elsewhere to a freer country, someplace where I'm appreciated. Maybe I'll go to Algeria or Saudi Arabia, maybe I'll go to Iran. Maybe I'll go to Russia or China. Anywhere but the pathetic wimps of the victims of the united states of crying america and her thug govt. pimp.
    16 Aug 2011, 01:25 AM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt -

     

    I'm sure that somewhere there is a similarly blinkered, frustrated and angry union official who could make a parallel rant from the opposite perspective. Sorry you can't have things your own way all the time. Good luck in Saudi Arabia.
    16 Aug 2011, 02:23 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Answer the question. Why is the State involved?

     

    Now, answer another follow up question. Since the State is involved, why do they side with labor 99% of the time?

     

    And finally. Why do all the workplace breakroom poster laws, ALL OF THEM, skew into the employee's favor? Why hasn't the State written a single law in favor of the employer?

     

    And back to the first question. Why is the State involved in these matters at all?

     

    Let's say you are an employer. Let's say you are 'charged with wrongful term'. Now, do you think its fair that an employee can with State sanctioned power, take from your own private property through civil action?

     

    What is wrongful term? You fired someone because they were old, short, fat, black, yellow, green, red, orange or paisley.

     

    Say you're a landlord and you don't rent to someone because they're bright pink colored with mauve polka dots. Now, they sue you using laws resurrected around the 1964 CRA.

     

    Now, you, owner of the property, now you, landlord, let me ask you a question. Are you really the owner of the property? Even if your name is on the deed, are you the total and complete owner of said property if you are not the final arbiter in deciding who can and who cannot live in your rental?

     

    You are not.

     

    You are a pawn of state power. I don't care how 'good intentioned' the State is in their assessment of 'law'(which is an arbitrary concept) in re to the 1964 CRA. You are not the owner of the property if you are a coerced partner of the State in deciding who you will and who you will not rent to.

     

    In that sense, the State has intervened and inserted itself into private property. Why has the State inserted itself via force into private property where it has no Constitutional being or authority in doing so?

     

    Because of 1964 CRA law? Because the State has decided they are the arbiter and lord over all caring & sensitive, feel good legislation even if it means they annul the concept of private property law, they know better.

     

    Why is the State involved in any of these matters? Why?

     

    They have overreached with their authority and are now acting criminally and it is supported by Walt Disney-like, after school special, feel good legislation.

     

    They have overstepped their boundaries and authority.

     

    We don't live in a free country. We live in a slave state.

     

    Either you own a business or a property or you don't own it at all. Its one or the other. Either you risk your life's savings and go into business all-in or you don't. There is no halfway here. Entrepreneurs will increasingly leave this plantation and go elsewhere to invest their capital, to take on risk. They will abandon the emotional laws of the united states and seek out countries that respect private property laws. They will find places where private property is protected above all else since it forms the basic foundation of all civilized society and where it is not treated as an arbitrary concept dependent upon the weakest, whiniest self-made victim of our society that would attach itself to either an Oprah cliche or a disaffected DNC buzzword.
    16 Aug 2011, 02:48 AM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt -

     

    You ask why the state is involved in setting the ground-rules for many contractual relationships (i.e. employment, rental accommodation etc.). The answer is that in the absence of such ground-rules the strong can exploit or abuse their advantages to the detriment of the weak and of the community generally. Do such ground-rules sometimes extend unreasonably? Yes the can (but the examples you give aren't convincing on that score). Does the very existence of such rules limit the rights of some to their great annoyance? Clearly so as you attest.

     

    It is the function of democratic debate and the courts to set the best balance for such ground-rules.
    16 Aug 2011, 10:56 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Annoyance? Talk to Steve Wynn. Talk to any multinational CEO. Talk to Boeing about how far the State has intruded upon their private property or their ability to make sovereign choices. Talk to small mom & pops across the country. I doubt you know any. You are a drone. You believe what you're told. You actually think the State is legitimate in its actions because it holds the power. I don't look at who holds the power. I look at what's right and wrong. What are these 'ground-rules' that you talk about? Who made these 'ground rules'?

     

    Who made child labor laws? Why do we need child labor laws? Why not just have parents instead? Who made the min wage laws? Why not just let the market dictate terms? Who makes overtime laws? Or at least who influenced the idea? Why do we even have overtime? Why not triple time? Why not quadruple time? Why time and a half? Who made that arbitrary bullcrap? Who made the mandatory half hour lunch rule? Who made the relatively new 10 minute break for every 4 hours worked rule? Who made AB1855? Why do we have to abide by it? Where did it come from? Research the history on all these things. It will blow your mind!

     

    Unions, for the most part. And the reason why companies are leaving en masse or not investing here(at least not hiring here): unions. Unions that had their training wheels taken off by WDC and given a pat on the head. Unions that, even if a small mom & pop isn't organized, still has all these laws that emanated from... unions. We are all 'organized' whether we like it or not. Companies have decided that they don't like it and now because of globalization, they can leave where before they couldn't. But now, they sure as F can and they are. Good for them.

     

    Look up sexual harassment law. I remember it crystal clear like it was yesterday. The democrat left didn't want Clarence Thomas as a SCOTUS justice in 1991. The black vote was a 90% lock for the left. They had a guaranteed slave demo as part of their base and they didn't want anyone with those same skin cells that didn't kowtow to their line.

     

    Anita Hill was the perfect circus clown, and so Barnum & Bailey showed up in the well of the Senate. I remember Ted Kennedy, himself a pervert, and Diane Feinstein playing Scarlett Letter mideval Catholic church head games, fat Ted pointing his fat finger in Thomas' face and accusing him of being a perv.

     

    Bottom line. There was a thin concept of SH, but it was expanded thereafter and put on steroids. A cottage industry was born and placed on the backs of businesses across the nation. New laws were passed and still are today with AB1855. Its not just the judgments either, its the lawyer retainer fees, its the compliance costs of even the smallest business, its the fear and hatred fomented now because 'a law' was given to the employee to use as a billyclub over the head of their employer. The majority of the time I have to deal with this crap, it is not even legal harassment as its defined. It doesn't stop the employees. They will use it to get their way, to manipulate the system, to avoid personal responsibility or to define & dictate the workplace according to their interpretation. This has cost businesses, both large and small, hundreds of billions of dollars since its inception and ruined workplace morale. Just look at Mark Hurd at Packard. The day of the announcement of harassment charges, the company lost billions in marketcap the following day. One example. And worse of all, authentic SH in my experience is probably 1% of all cases that I'm forced to waste my time in investigating. The rest of the time it is outright manipulation of 'law'. Employees are given a new 'law'. They use it once they are given it. They are trained to hate, cause division, foment wedges and to control the workplace.

     

    Thanks the democrats for that. Not all the bad laws, but definitely for SH. It was foisted on us thereafter, perpetually, since once you have a new law it never goes away. It was that important, that powerful to the DNC, not to have a black conservative on SCOTUS that they would enslave corporate America along with mom & pop forever with this new creepy gimmick. Political power meant that much to the DNC. They would saddle businesses with new lawsuits and break down mom & pops using the new buzz phrase, tossing it out into the private sphere, not only inventing the idea but educating society, training them on how to sue your boss, then writing law to allow them to do it and bleed out a company. Thanks Ted Kennedy. Thanks Diane Feinstein. You're awesome!

     

    I could do this all day with every new arbitrary law in these last 25 years. There are so damn many of them now. I hope our unemployment rate goes to 25%. We deserve it. We get what we vote for. And we vote for parasites who in turn write parasite law. These assaults against freedom and private property have never retreated. They only advance, line upon line, precept upon new trendy precept. There is no one who rolls them back, reforms them or sunsets them. ADA law alone has done more to harm the disabled community than business ever has. Now businesses won't even hire someone who is deaf or in a chair because they're afraid they'll get sued or that they'll be forced to put in a ramp or a rail.

     

    Again, I could do this all day long. I have 3 decades of examples I can pull on. I doubt you'd care to stick around. To you, these new laws are all fantastic examples of our sensitive and kind civilized advancements over the years.
    16 Aug 2011, 11:29 AM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    Hi Wyatt -

     

    I think we each have made our respective cases on this issue.
    16 Aug 2011, 11:41 AM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7703) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt, very well stated and documented. However, the liberals who write the laws don't care about the consequences as those who get the "protection" from the laws contribute too much money.
    16 Aug 2011, 02:29 PM Reply Like
  • Rookie IRA Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2588) | Send Message
     
    ¨¨Who made child labor laws? Why do we need child labor laws? Why not just have parents instead?¨¨

     

    The movement towards child labor laws was inspired by the works of such as Charles Dickens, who was himself sent to work in a factory at the age of 12 while the rest of his family was confined in debtor´s prison.

     

    While I personally have no objection to children being set to work in factories instead of watching TV or playing video games, Dickens didn´t care for it and made his fortune by inventing the whole child abuse industry and writing about it.

     

    But you are certainly right that if children could be made economically self sufficient, this would be a great help to families. They could probably even pay for their own schooling, thus relieving the taxpayer.
    18 Aug 2011, 01:15 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Or, as I said, parents could parent.

     

    Child labor laws are for idiots.

     

    But so are motorcycle helmet LAWS, seat belt LAWS, texting LAWS, walking while chewing bubblegum LAWS.

     

    Yeah, I don't need Big Blubbermint to tell me how 'to do' life, for me or my family. We're not idiots who do stupid crap. But I guess since we have a lot of idiots we need not only these laws but several hundred thousands more for the several hundred million idiots.

     

    You're not an idiot are you?

     

    Do you put a helmet on when you ride a motorcycle or do you do it because its the law and you are a follower of law? Would you send your kids up chimney flus on 8 hour swing shifts? Or are you a good parent?

     

    Do you need the government to tell you you're a 'good' parent or a 'bad' parent? Do you need to be told how to live your life? Maybe you're a child too? Are you a child?
    18 Aug 2011, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    Rookie and Wyatt -

     

    You both probably think Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" set out a serious and practical solution to 17th century Irish poverty (even if Swift himself thought it a biting satire).
    18 Aug 2011, 02:19 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    Bob:

     

    With every new post besting the previous one, they are convincing me more and more that they are better satirists than you, as they seem to have a following here on SA although their aim seems to be show the logical conclusions of the right wing nuttery in their full glory - no child labor laws, no anti-serfdom laws, no helmet laws - WTF indeed.
    18 Aug 2011, 02:30 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    No running with scissors laws, no playing in traffic laws, no eating broken glass laws.

     

    I know! WTF.
    18 Aug 2011, 02:35 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    Bob:

     

    Poe's law, named after its author Nathan Poe, is an Internet adage reflecting the fact that without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between sincere extremism and an exaggerated parody of extremism.

     

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    18 Aug 2011, 03:39 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Hey extremist, what other neato laws can we have?

     

    Put down yer phone and buckle up yer seat belt and put on yer helmet cause there's more where those came from, right?

     

    Govt. is here to protect us all. From each other, from ourselves, from the ground we walk on. Yeah, the ground. Asphalt. Sometimes its hot. We need a mandatory flip flop law. Flip flops or else. Dunt wanna git injured.

     

    Take care of me govt.

     

    Can't live without you.

     

    We're the stupids.
    18 Aug 2011, 05:00 PM Reply Like
  • Rookie IRA Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2588) | Send Message
     
    One can use a bit of hyperbole, but I do suspect that when people say they want less government, they really mean that they could live without dog leash laws, and other trivia rather than seeking the reintroduction of child slavery.

     

    I am here in the Dominican Republic and most of the dogs just live and sleep on the sidewalk outside their homes, and take an occasional stroll down the road to visit other dogs, but don´t bother anyone as long as you step over them, which makes you think the US is a bit hysterical about the matter.

     

    I am a great fan of Swift, but it is Book 3 of Gulliver´s Travels, A Voyage to Laputa that is most relevant to current US politics. In the land of Laputa (check your Spanish dictionary for the derivation!) the land is governed by mad scientists who are completely out of touch with the real world.

     

    Since the Mad Hatter´s Tea Party´s objective is not just to abolish overly fussy regulations, but also to turn the US into Haiti, we might as well know what we are getting into so we can be prepared.
    18 Aug 2011, 07:14 PM Reply Like
  • phoneranger
    , contributor
    Comments (350) | Send Message
     
    "every state can’t lure jobs away from every other state." typical Princeton pointed-headed logic. If you have faith in America and Jesus Christ as the only Lord and Saviour, then of course every state can lure jobs away from every other state. Faith-based governance.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:29 PM Reply Like
  • mattyw
    , contributor
    Comments (125) | Send Message
     
    Hahaha, love it.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:35 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Krugman is more like Karl Marx then Dr.Roubini........

     

    Lets see him manage your money........ If Carlos Slim didn't lend the NY Times 250 million @ 15% plus stock. Paul would be doing stimulus infomercials on the Communist News Network....... CNN.

     

    Prof Rogoff made him look silly on the Obama's financial butt hole show with Mr. Moron Zakaria

     

    Fiatsville man fiatsville !!!!!!! He wants the budget to have more zeros than a google ! That is a lot of f---ing zeros.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:33 PM Reply Like
  • American in Paris
    , contributor
    Comments (5504) | Send Message
     
    Why don't you try to contribute to the discussion as opposed to revealing your political leanings?

     

    And, oh, Rogoff's analysis leaves a lot to be desried ...
    15 Aug 2011, 05:46 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Political leanings.... What does politics have to do with 115 trillion dollars of debt......Is the US Debt clock Rep or Dem ?

     

    The morons I named are Obama shills and want to print more. They think Obama is Jesus with a tan...They thought Carter was Jesus with big white false teeth. It took 30 years to recover from Jimmmmmmmmmmmmy.

     

    I am too old to watch this show again I will lean any way I want and If I was big enough I would lean on all the Dems until Barney went straight............

     

    At least Rogoff doesn't want to print all the way to Mars.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:59 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Forgot to mention. This is strictly a political post. Krugman was going after Perry because he was ??????? Yes the new REPUBLICAN candidate ............ Go ahead and lie and say he wasn't ! Go ahead!
    Waiting............
    15 Aug 2011, 06:08 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3314) | Send Message
     
    golfittobob,

     

    American in Paris' comments are not even worth it to bother responding to.

     

    I'm Glad he is in Paris, they can have him.
    15 Aug 2011, 06:13 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7703) | Send Message
     
    AIP----You just revealed yours
    15 Aug 2011, 06:15 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    golfitobob:

     

    In your bio, you write about how absolutely great it is to live in Panama, and before that, in Costa Rica.

     

    It’s interesting that both countries have very left leaning governments. Here’s some info:

     

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    15 Aug 2011, 07:48 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Bilder, you were right. Now your only 1/2 right. I dragged my Tica wife to Panama because CR is almost communist under the new lady. She is interested in taxing the crap out of Americans and giving out all the things she can't afford like Obama.

     

    BUTTTTTT. President Ricky Martinelli is a conservative DREAM ! A billionaire business mad man and he is rebuilding Panama ASAP... 10% GDP low unemployment and a booming infrastructure growth going on country wide. A giant expansion of the canal and Panama has the best foreign residency program. Americans line up 5 days a week applying for residency.

     

    Panama's claim to fame is offshore banking and great business laws. When the Dem's finally o/k the Free Trade deal even more multinationals will pour in. Many have already and a few names that would shock the US when there offices are up and running and announce there filing tax here and not the US.. There biggies from the S&P.........

     

    Only bad thing is they went with the US dollar here. If they went with the crappy Euro they would be 18% higher and would have over taken Brazil as L A's top. We lost 9% because of the dollar drop !

     

    Look up Martinelli......... A bull in a China shop.... Can't bribe a billionaire.............. gb
    16 Aug 2011, 02:36 AM Reply Like
  • youngman442002
    , contributor
    Comments (5131) | Send Message
     
    His next statement will be...that the states with jobs need to subsidize those that don´t...its only right...or left I mean..he leans far left...
    15 Aug 2011, 05:33 PM Reply Like
  • buyitcheap
    , contributor
    Comments (1850) | Send Message
     
    Exactly Wyatt - we seem to be "luring" assembly jobs from Korea and Japan.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:34 PM Reply Like
  • American in Paris
    , contributor
    Comments (5504) | Send Message
     
    Can you document that claim? I suspect if there is any net gain in jobs is due to that depreciating dollar that the Right cites as a symptom of America's decline ...

     

    :)
    15 Aug 2011, 05:47 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    AIP............. Right........hmmmmmmmmmm

     

    Right =s right. Why do they call Republicans the right ! RIGHTTT.

     

    Dems are the left and they should have a long time ago........
    15 Aug 2011, 06:25 PM Reply Like
  • buyitcheap
    , contributor
    Comments (1850) | Send Message
     
    Sure Toyota, Kia and Hyundai plants in kentucky, Tennessee, and South Carolina and are regularly opening more.... my first instinct was that it was to be closer to its bigger markets, but I can't really argue with the weak buck either.

     

    Next big industrial boomlet, shale gas processing, give it five years.
    15 Aug 2011, 07:38 PM Reply Like
  • mattyw
    , contributor
    Comments (125) | Send Message
     
    Another reason for Texas' good economy is the existence of defense companies located in the state, which have been helped by two wars. Probably not sustainable assuming those wars will soon be ending.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:38 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Since the war with England the defense industry has been the US economic backbone.........How is it the we were in Iraq and Afgan plus all the little stuff and spent trillions an still the economy tanked..... Easy ......................... DOOM

     

    Congress spent more than Bennie could print. That is some f--ing amazing feat !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...

     

    Run Forest Run.....................
    15 Aug 2011, 05:50 PM Reply Like
  • buyitcheap
    , contributor
    Comments (1850) | Send Message
     
    I would in part agree, but Mass, Virginia, Maryland, California, Florida all have substantial defense related spending through both universities and contractors, I'd argue even bigger than Texas'

     

    And I'll give you an Amen on the wars ending soon, really soon I hope.
    15 Aug 2011, 07:40 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Loose the minimum wage and the young can get work experience and we can produce some low cost stuff for America. Then the old don't have to fight the young for all the low paying jobs.....

     

    Crap DC has 50% unemployment and young blacks have no shot country wide and they still love him. Idiots !

     

    Things will get like Greece an England if the Reps cut of the heroin or Obama dollars..................

     

    Death will come quickly.......... Print by the S roid .Die by the printed S roid..................... hasta la vista baby..............
    ( or in Arnie's case lots of baby's )
    15 Aug 2011, 05:41 PM Reply Like
  • JoefromCranston
    , contributor
    Comments (25) | Send Message
     
    ecommunist
    15 Aug 2011, 05:43 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    You should get credit for this most marvelous word........cool

     

    ECOMMUNIST like it bueno
    15 Aug 2011, 05:44 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7703) | Send Message
     
    Thanks SA. It must be Monday.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:43 PM Reply Like
  • drekon
    , contributor
    Comments (182) | Send Message
     
    Did anyone expect anything different from Paul? Create jobs and a liberal will tell you why it isn't a job worth working. Cut taxes and they'll say you are starving the poor to save the rich. Break a union and they squeal about their taking away "rights." Suggest tort reform and they babble about evil corporations. Yet, not one policy decision they make helps the working man.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • mike mohr
    , contributor
    Comments (451) | Send Message
     
    Rick Perry another corporate whoe who wants to kill the middle class.
    15 Aug 2011, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    MM, psssssst. the only real good politician in the past 100 years never ran........... He was depicted in the movies and Jimmy Stewart played him.
    15 Aug 2011, 06:03 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Dirnfeld
    , contributor
    Comments (1128) | Send Message
     
    Only Obama can create jobs. And if he can't it's Bush's fault. I only wish Obama would campaign a little more instead of playing golf.
    15 Aug 2011, 07:48 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    OK so his approach applied to the whole country would mean luring jobs away from China and India. Do the Krugman haters know the salary of a worker in these countries?
    16 Aug 2011, 01:20 AM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    varan,

     

    I do and you know where i live. Salaries suck here to for the masses, but, the populations in all these type countries know there poor and know how to live an survive. They get no Gov help and don't think about it.

     

    American poor have depended on the Gov for decades and now do to Dems and Reps they can't survive without hand outs. For the country to heal we need to live like all the other countries who don't live like Europe or were doomed. Why, half the country lives on 18,000 or less. They can't even try an make it........

     

    I think were doomed......

     

    Here is what you will here from me first and not from all the SA genius types who write from both sides of the political financial.

     

    The financial cancer is inflation and China an India's inflation is from wage growth and that is what EVERYBODY here doesn't get. That is why China an India have rocketed the cost of borrowing there....... That is why the Chinese are letting their Yuan get stronger and why you can not use a US dollar in India........

     

    It is not commodities and real estate doing it.....It is Wages and that is why China an Indians are buying all the luxury goods and big chains are heading there. The forest for the trees. Yes our politicians lambast China ,but not India. India we sell weapons to and have a surplus and Chian we don't Sell weapons to China or we could balance trade. Since we don't their building there own and now were in big trouble.........

     

    When all my dear friends at S A on both sides understand this the market will be much easier to make money.......

     

    I am a biased idiot ,but, my little IRA an mom's are hitting new highs a bunch of times in the last 2 months...... gb
    16 Aug 2011, 01:51 AM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    All this nonsense about over-regulation is bullshit. If you want to start a small business there is not much to do by way of government regulations and you can get going in an hour.

     

    Of course if you are Koch brothers wanting to get away with throwing toxic chemicals in rivers and soil, they will come after you. And why not? And if you employ hundreds of people you have to provide safe working conditions and not rip them off. Nothing wrong with rules for that. We are way past the time when workers could be abused with impunity.
    16 Aug 2011, 01:36 AM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    really? no child labor laws?

     

    why not bring back serfdom?

     

    amazing! the right wing attracts some real nutcases. may be that's why ron reagan defunded the mental institutions.

     

    or may be it's a leftist trying to show how lunatic the right wing ideology is when carried to its logical conclusions.
    16 Aug 2011, 11:39 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Why do I need a law? I'm a parent. I know to you lefties you always need a law to know what to do, because you can't live your life without being told what to do, but I don't. I prefer to make my own decisions.

     

    Hey, here's an idea. Its kinda crazy. Pay attention. Try not to ... freak out or lose the train of thought on this. But instead of child labor laws why don't you try PARENTING instead? I know, crazy right? You don't want your kid working, don't let them work. Not that that's a big problem anyway. They'd rather play XBox. But hey, I know how important this stupid holdover law from the early part of the century is to you. You progressives are so with it.

     

    I prefer anarchy, both social and economic. Freedom. Just leave me the hell alone. Don't tell me what to do. I don't need your gooey kind nice laws of abuse and slavery.

     

    Why do we need child labor laws?

     

    Because now we have drones like you where the State is the parent and without the State you wouldn't know what to do or what to believe or how to even live your life.

     

    I don't need to be told what to do. Most laws are for weak people. Most laws are admissions of social failure or worse, a reflection of the corruption within.

     

    I don't need to be told what to do. I don't need 'protection' from the big evil scary guys who run businesses. But, I do need protection from unmitigated, runaway State expansion. Only problem there is I have no redress against it since voting has become a joke. I'd rather leave and hire overseas in freer countries. Much easier. Seems that's the trend anyway, just getting TF out.
    16 Aug 2011, 11:45 AM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    Please go anywhere you please. No one is stopping you. That's the beauty of a democracy.
    16 Aug 2011, 09:06 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    And we'll see what happens. I'm still giving America a mulligan. It depends on this next election cycle. We either get it right or we disappear. And if we disappear, then I disappear. Jim Rogers was right. He went to go live in the next American empire that is in the 1950's equivalent.

     

    I doubt we'll be able to shake off the lie of Big Lib Socialism, but for now I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. One more cycle. Just one more. That's all I need.

     

    Does America have one more 10 to 20 year supercycle left in her? Keep voting for a crat, and she won't.
    17 Aug 2011, 11:22 AM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    No need to bother and tax your little mind with this dilemma. Not much will be lost if you give up on America.

     

    There are hundreds of millions of Americans who want to stick with America.
    17 Aug 2011, 11:34 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    You mean John/John voters. Kerry, jigolo fraud & Edwards, adulterer(on cancer wife) and jackpot tort lotto fraud.

     

    Yeah, they'll all want to stay on the Titanic. They have no other choice. Parasites eating parasites.
    17 Aug 2011, 12:57 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    No I mean three time adulterer Gingrich and the hooker connoisseur Vitter and the wide stance guy and the appalachian trail guy from South Carolina and so many more who I consider patriotic Americans despite their glaring imperfections as human beings, and who I am sure are not thinking of leaving America, and who I am sure do not think that without them America will not survive.
    17 Aug 2011, 01:43 PM Reply Like
  • buyitcheap
    , contributor
    Comments (1850) | Send Message
     
    Guys, when it comes to deviance, sadly no party has a claim on superiority - both parties' seem to elect real phreaks.
    17 Aug 2011, 03:54 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    And Al 'I dropped the towel' Gore in the massage parlor groping & grabbing for an Asian hug-n-tug and Anthony Weiner texting little girls his junk and Billy Yeehaw Jethro rapin' & molestin' Flowers and Chappaquiddick Ted making man meat sandwiches with unwilling waitresses during cocktail hour, none of who I consider patriotic but instead parasites, and none of who will ever leave this country but should because if they did maybe this country could actually survive.
    17 Aug 2011, 04:28 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7703) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt, why do you waste your time responding to people who refuse to , or are unable to, see facts?
    17 Aug 2011, 05:06 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt,

     

    I wonder where you might go if the GOP doesn’t win the election???

     

    I think that I can accurately infer that you would prefer either no government or a distinctly right-wing government. Also, it seems that you may disdain the democratic process, perhaps favoring something that more precisely coincides with your overall world view and what you believe is “right”.

     

    So I’ve looked around for some model societies and political systems that may better jive with your sensibilities. Unfortunately, there aren’t too many examples around, because most of them went out of business after but a few years of existence.

     

    At this time, the only countries that have distinct right wing governments are Azerbaijan and Belarus. Perhaps one could add a few more “freedom-loving” countries to this list, like Iran and Syria. These are all places where liberals find life be to a little tough, to say the least. Would any of these countries be more to your liking?

     

    Here’s some info about the history of right wing regimes:

     

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

     

    Now they haven’t exactly had a sterling record of success. Perhaps Azerbaijan and Belarus might do a little better???

     

    Then there are places where there is little or no government. Somalia comes to mind, as do some areas of Pakistan and places like that. And those are places where you can be your own cop! Better invest in an AK 47.

     

    I think that it might be wise to take a trip to those yonder places and see if they may give you a more comfortable existence. Why? Looks like the tea party is enjoying mass disapproval. Here’s some info regarding that:

     

    www.nytimes.com/2011/0...

     

    If you do leave, I will miss your comments on SA. As you already know, they often have me laughing despite the fact that I don’t agree with them.

     

    I’ve been tongue and cheeky here, but seriously, the real world is a place of ying and yang. Sometimes the pendulum needs to swing a little the other direction. I’m no fan of inefficient government, as I’ve had some experiences with examples of it. That’s why I think that your comments have a place. They sure do highlight a few of the things that need some repairing.

     

    But a swing all the way over to where you seem to want it would ultimately have a counterproductive effect. Like I’ve said before, want socialism? Keep going tea party.

     

    Cutting down the tree never worked, Wyatt. Trimming a few branches, in an intelligent way, is a better way to go. And if you like your life style of earning big bucks courtesy of your employees, while spending your days writing comments for SA, you best find a way to be satisfied.

     

    Just friendly advice here. It’s takes all kinds, and I like it that way.
    17 Aug 2011, 05:10 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    It's obvious who holds American values. It's not you.

     

    You can call every one parasite to your heart's content. But it's clear that it's people like you who are the problem.
    17 Aug 2011, 07:49 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for your input, parasite.

     

    Parasite = part of the problem.
    17 Aug 2011, 07:54 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Chile. I like Chile. Pro-capital, investor friendly.

     

    But they did the RIGHT WING thing and reformed their social security equivalent pensionado program. The lefties would never allow that to happen here. I know. Chile must be totally RIGHT WING.

     

    And you know what? After they reformed it in the 80's? Its solvent. The politicians can't steal from it like our slush fund here that got tramped out to hobos and drifters and political hacks. SOLVENT. And, not only that, its hugely successful. You manage your own personal account. When you start working they ask you when you want to retire. The younger you want to retire, the more you contribute. The older you want to retire, the less you contribute. And, they go into personalized accounts. I know, Bush only suggested 3% going private and the democrats said he was insane!

     

    Chile = RIGHT WING.

     

    Chile knows their S.
    17 Aug 2011, 08:00 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Where will the world go if Obama wins......

     

    Look at my picture !

     

    That pathological lying idiot will cost the US it's very life..........

     

    He will change more than the dollar that already changed from a dollar to 80 cents under his kingdom so far and he will force the world to drop the RESERVE !
    Then there will be no mo obama monee for his own tribe. The young around him in da WH aea als redee bes 50 pcent un ins ployed ........yall.

     

    I miss Howard Cosell......... We lost him because he said >>>>

     

    " Look at that monkey run " Do you think he meant Obama ? He was that intelligent !
    17 Aug 2011, 08:00 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    I like pop tards. Strawberry flavored.
    17 Aug 2011, 08:02 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    You do belong in Somalia or Chile.

     

    I would strongly encourage you to seek your freedoms at one of those places.
    17 Aug 2011, 08:17 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt, Are you sure?

     

    Income taxes in Chile:

     

    www.nationsencyclopedi...

     

    "Personal income taxes are applied only to individuals making more than US$6,000 per year. People earning over about US$75,000 are taxed at the highest rate of 45 percent. Businesses are taxed 15 percent on the profits they keep as earnings and 35 percent for those that they distribute. Businesses are given tax breaks for their donations to educational institutions. In 1999, 73 percent of total government revenues were derived from taxes. Tax evasion is not a serious problem in Chile”.

     

    Also the two major political parties are not extreme, just slightly to the left and right of center, which has helped avoid the unproductive confrontation that Chile had to endure in the past. Here’s another quote:

     

    “Economic progress, combined with the return of democratic politics largely devoid of the confrontation and polarization of the past, positioned Chile to enter the twenty-first century with increased prosperity in a climate of peace and freedom.”

     

    I think that this is an excellent example of the point that I was trying to make. If we can do the same thing that Chile did, the ultimate result will be similar.

     

    And I think that we will, as soon as tea party congressmen get voted out.
    17 Aug 2011, 08:30 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12964) | Send Message
     
    Bil:

     

    Chile's financial system was, in essence, designed by Milton Friedman to be solvent and fully funded, and is. It's that simple.
    17 Aug 2011, 09:30 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Tack,

     

    And the hefty income tax bite in Chile goes a long way towards maintaining solvency.
    17 Aug 2011, 09:49 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12964) | Send Message
     
    Bil:

     

    Well, if we just raise rates to 90% and send all our money to DC, then, everything will be swell, right?
    17 Aug 2011, 10:05 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Another country that did that very same thing? Estonia.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:08 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    All in, here, we're well over 40% too. Its even higher if we throw in state & local. Its tragic.

     

    I like the 15% corporate tax rate. Beats our 39% by a mile. You weren't trying to make my point were you? We should implement that. Could be a jobs boon. You're not against jobs are you?
    17 Aug 2011, 10:11 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    And you belong in the nanny state, cradle to grave, helpless small person.

     

    BTW, thanks for the compliment. I actually can take care of myself. Unlike you, govt. dependent state slave who needs a surrogate parent, apparently.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:12 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    A word of caution to you Wyatt, there have recently been significant public demonstrations in Chile against the current right of centre government.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:14 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Are those like the ones in Greece, Egypt, France, Libya, Syria, Iran and England?

     

    Or perhaps Wisconsin?

     

    Beware. When the parasite can't get their free crap, the infants bang their sippy cup against their cribs.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:17 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Tack;

     

    No, I don't advocate extreme solutions. Closing tax loopholes and reversing Bush tax cuts along with some intelligent budget cutting is all that I think is needed to get things pointed in the right direction.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:17 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    What's a tax loophole? I've never heard that before.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:18 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt, If true, then google is your friend.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:27 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Help me with Google. I want to believe in the tax loophole.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:29 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt -

     

    You do like to try to shock the tender sensibilities of the more politically correct (and on this I somewhat share your glee) and you do have a great turn of phrase.

     

    It would be trite and somewhat juvenile for me (and others will undoubtedly do so better than I would in any case) to point to Somalia and Afghanistan as two countries where a strong religious fervour, a robust gun culture, an abhorrence to government regulation of any kind and other values you appear to treasure are resolutely practiced. I will therefore refrain from pressing that point.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:31 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Well there you go! You made me laugh again.
    17 Aug 2011, 10:35 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Republicans Democrats your both Americans !

     

    Here is something all L A people know and the US knows about ,but, doesn't care...... Read it and tell me if you want Obama running the country ! Honestly................. God loves America ,but, Obama doesn't and has said the Muslim call to prayer is the most beautiful thing ! Do you want him in charge !?

     

    www.amcostarica.com/07...
    17 Aug 2011, 08:48 PM Reply Like
  • enigmaman
    , contributor
    Comments (2686) | Send Message
     
    Krugman says " "A state offering cheap labor and... weak regulation can attract jobs from other states,"

     

    Perry gets it and Obama doesnt, Exactly what Krugman hates is exactly how things work, and makes the real world turn round and round, every nation that is growing follows these principals to one extent or the other, China, India the biggest examples and then there is Germany whose GDP has grown at the expense of its workers wages, the expensive labor and strong regulations which the likes of Krugman and Obama crave is exactly why the USA has been baked in the squat. Obama had expectations for high wage jobs and handed business a big dose of repressive regulations and all he got in return was economic constipation.
    18 Aug 2011, 10:42 AM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    India is following these 'principals'? What do you know about India? I will tell you - nothing.

     

    I have never seen such vehement insistence that ignorance is the most useful way to face the economic issues of the day.
    18 Aug 2011, 10:54 AM Reply Like
  • enigmaman
    , contributor
    Comments (2686) | Send Message
     
    Var- Please show me the way into intellectual enlightenment with real world results, something that will put a paycheck in the pockets of workers and food on their table and not just empty promises.
    18 Aug 2011, 11:25 AM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    e-man,

     

    Are you talking about moving jobs from one state to another? That means no net gain in jobs for the country.
    18 Aug 2011, 11:27 AM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    Real world results: That's USA, despite all the current problems.

     

    You aught to get out more to see how screwed up India and China are.

     

    For supposed patriots, tea baggers are strikingly down on their own country, mostly because of willful ignorance. Very sad.
    18 Aug 2011, 11:32 AM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Jobs, jobs, jobs………

     

    Corporations, the “job creators”, have mega dollars on their balance sheets, approximately 1 trillion. And they’ve had these dollars for quite a while now.

     

    Where are the jobs?

     

    I guess there needs to be a real reason to create jobs: like demand.

     

    So what creates demand?

     

    Ponder that.
    18 Aug 2011, 11:47 AM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12964) | Send Message
     
    Bil:

     

    Jobs and capital naturally moved to low-cost and low-regulation environments. That's why they've been fleeing the U.S., and within the U.S. fleeing high-cost, burdensome states, like CA.

     

    The seemingly implicit conclusion from your comment seems to be that moving jobs from CA to TX accomplishes nothing, so why bother to have less regulation and lower taxation. Of course, it's the opposite argument that needs to be made, namely taxation and regulation, across the board in all states and Federally, need to be reduced, so businesses will get reinvigorated, invest, hire and produce those very same earnings that Government is so gleeful to tax. Concurrently, more capital and jobs will be attracted back from overseas, so there will be a net positive influence all around.

     

    It simply amazes me that so many argue for VAT's, closing "loopholes" and other measures that do nothing but increase the tax burden and provide more largesse to our "benevolent" Government, which is destroying jobs and wealth apace.

     

    Have the socialist public school systems done such a marvelous job that literally no hope remains among our populace for capitalist enterprise? Let's hope not.
    18 Aug 2011, 11:49 AM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Well put, Tack. I will ponder that, and hopefully respond with something when I have a bit more time.
    18 Aug 2011, 11:56 AM Reply Like
  • enigmaman
    , contributor
    Comments (2686) | Send Message
     
    Bil- What Im talking about is simply "half a loaf is better then none" When a Walmart wants to opena store people picket because they say the jobs arent good paying yet, thousands show up to apply, I guess "good jobs" means different things to different people. Right now a job paying "OK' is better then no job.

     

    Businesses move and take there jobs only because its more beneficial to the company otherwise they wouldnt move. If a state like NY wants to be known as the highest tax state in the country, good for them but then dont belly ache or demagogue the company when it moves it business move to NJ or other places.

     

    Obama talk a great talk good paying jobs , good paying jobs, good paying jobs, and in almost three years the only good paying jobs created was in government. I would make the case a not so good job is better then a good job yet to be created. People need to make some money, need to be back at work, nobody is saying we shouldnt have good jobs one day but right now we are moving in the wrong direction and the biggest obstacle is government and Obama. One day this is resonant with middle earth America and when it does the shit is going to hit the fan and get on everybody. My original point was cheap labor attracts jobs, thats a fact, China took jobs from America, Vietnam is taking jobs from China. What constitutes a good job is all in the eyes of the beholder. The guy with a good job may turn his noes up to the offer a guy with no job might just jump at the chance, but this Administration wont have it, its either good jobs or no jobs with endless unemployment checks. This admin is saying un insurance creates jobs, food stamps create jobs, what the hell kind of good jobs they are creating they dont say.
    18 Aug 2011, 12:01 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    the advantages of the wage differential between USA and the third world and emerging countries cannot be overcome even if the corporate taxes are reduced to zero.

     

    the major driver of the transfer of jobs have been the technological improvements that have allowed the work to be done by relatively unskilled workers overseas at very low wages.

     

    US jobs will come back only when the corporations see demand coming back. corporate tax reductions at this stage will only add more cash to corporations' coffers without any significant change in unemployment. they will be good for the Kochs but will not have much effect on the Joneses.
    18 Aug 2011, 12:05 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12964) | Send Message
     
    varan:

     

    Tax cuts to individuals and corporations have been proven highly stimulative in every instance they've ever been employed, but, repeatedly, the Big Government lovers trot out vacuous arguments that this isn't so or that "this time it's different." Yet, as burdensome regulations and taxation are maintained, we see utterly no investment or hiring by corporations, nor increased spending by individuals, but, again, those supporting the endless benefits of funding ever-more Government simply ignore this in-your-face reality and suggest that it's due to "other" factors.

     

    If and until we place a Government in office, which once again has some, even basic, understanding of capitalism, we'll flail about uselessly and get more lectures for the likes of Krugman, who is completely bankrupt of understanding of the incentives that drive individuals and business.
    18 Aug 2011, 12:16 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    Look at the results of Bush tax cuts. We had the kind of government that you seek for eight years.

     

    Who is ignoring the empirical data here?

     

    Obviously you are speaking more from an ideological perspective than one that seeks to solve the problems.

     

    And about incentives, don't take Krugman's word for it. Ask the uber entrepreneur, Warren. But I am sure you will dismiss his assertions as well, since they contradict your ignorant prejudices.
    18 Aug 2011, 12:33 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    "the advantages of the wage differential between USA and the third world and emerging countries cannot be overcome even if the corporate taxes are reduced to zero."

     

    The wage differential will increasingly reach parity as the renminbi rises over time. Then another third world hellhole will pick up the low wage slack. Until then 'made in China' will still be stickered over all that crap you see at the Dollar Store. The consumer here is still the beneficiary of price deflation in everything from spatchulas and ice cream scoopers to big screen TVs. Nothing wrong with that.

     

    Parity will take some time, but I doubt the 'jobs Americans won't do' will be assauged any time soon by factory line workers gluing snow man eyes onto white styrofoam balls that sell for a buck in the burned out steel factories of Pittsburgh.

     

    Cheap shit isn't the only manufacturing however. The real danger is the reverse engineering going on in China and the day when they can build their own John Deere bucket loaders, or, even worse, their own airliners. Right now China is enrolled in the University of America and we are giving them all a free education, courtesy of our unions here making it unaffordable to build things anymore. Its the middle class that the unions are killing. The unions never were 'for' the middle class. They were self-serving due collectors making bank and destroying the middle class in the process.

     

    Wage disparity is only one side of the story however. Regulations, all of which are spawned by litigation(Congress = lawyers), are what's driving out most of the manufacturing. A new sunset strategy of rooting out these dead sea scroll prohibitions and ablating them off the books must occur if we are to get any return to jobs growth. In addition, seeing as how the United States is now the highest corporate tax rate in the world now at almost 40%, we need to get competitive and cut it in half. Until then more and more corporations will continue their capital strike.

     

    "the major driver of the transfer of jobs have been the technological improvements that have allowed the work to be done by relatively unskilled workers overseas at very low wages."

     

    It is just the opposite. Robotics, automation and IT and the initial prohibitive capex they require are the very reason why unskilled labor overseas is still attractive. Not because of 'technological advancements'. In spite of them.

     

    "US jobs will come back only when the corporations see demand coming back. "

     

    Chicken & egg hyperbole. Demand keynesian robots versus supply side freedom loaders.

     

    Nobody takes this one back far enough to its proper conclusion.

     

    What 'creates demand'? Jobs. Prosperity. A feeling of wealth. Security giving rise to the ability or want to spend. Demand isn't something artificial that just happens. Jobs are what form the foundation of demand. Why are corporations not hiring and instead doing M&A, record buybacks and raising divvys? Because they don't know what other asinine law, regulation or tax will come out of this administration. They need to see at minimum, at least 5 years out, a projection of something stable. This administration defines nothing, goal posts are in constant motion, tax gimmickry, nothing seemingly permanent and what is isn't even clearly understood(Zerocare or Dodd/Frank regs) and that by the experts in the field. Even after this stuff gets passed we need 5,000 medieval priests, JDs, esquires, corporate attorneys and shamans to break it all down for us.

     

    We are getting to the point now where this isn't funny anymore. Laughing at Zero was funny at first. It no longer is. It is becoming increasingly dangerous. If the economy doesn't turn around soon, we are in danger of not just a recession anymore but increasing the debt even further as the economy cannot bring itself up over the debt obligation watermarks. This will cause the permanent zero, the interest rate flatline of financial repression and the banks clinging to their reserves in fear. We are almost there.

     

    We need something/one to liberate us to grow, but that only comes with freedom. There are fewer and fewer who believe in freedom anymore. They are derided as Tea Party freaks. And Steve Wynn, tea party freak that he is, or should I say 'terrorist'(Joe Biden) will continue to leave these shores with more and more congloms and multinats as the system implodes from the weight of government overload. Pretty soon we will need regulations for the regulations and committees for the committees and agencies for the agencies and bureaucrats to govern other bureaucrats and more public employees to be minders over other public employees until there is no more private sector at all.

     

    The private sector is the only thing that is real. It is the only real part of the economy. It is the only thing that has earnings, the only thing that pays the bills & keeps the lights on. It is the only thing that makes things, real things, that people want. The government creates nothing, adds nothing, has no value. It is only a destroyer of capital, a promiser of lies, a thief and an inefficient black hole that shreds taxes through several useless agencies and spits out debt in its place. As this monstrosity grows and as productivity slows as a result, our GDP goes negative and as this trend continues we are at more and more threat of further chaos, guaranteed.
    18 Aug 2011, 12:41 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12964) | Send Message
     
    varan:

     

    Your diatribe hardly merits reply, but I'll humor you. It's typical of liberals to engage in ad-hominem attacks if their opponents don't roll over and subjugate themselves to their "masters."

     

    Bush was one of the largest spenders and Government builders in history. It's only incidental that he was a "Republican," as he would have fit neatly into the Democratic Party. It's the incessant Government usurpation of capital resources and regulation of enterprise that is crippling our economy, yet, there are those, like yourself (and idiot Krugman, of course), I suspect, who champion even more.

     

    Buffet made his billions by taking advantage of every tax situation possible and only now, approaching his oun mortality, hypocritcally suggests that wealthy people should play a lot more. This is fatuous and disingenuous in the extreme, as he would have been the first person to set up shop elsewhere had earlier circumstances suggested that was the way for him to make money. The very same goes for his buddy, Bill Gates.

     

    I don't expect to convert you to belief in capitalism, so I'll stop here and allow you the last word, as I am sure you'll insist.

     

    P.S. Government -- Democrat or Republican-- never solves problems; it creates them.
    18 Aug 2011, 12:47 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    OK so you want some form of government and political system and political parties that does not yet exist in the USA and has not existed in the recent past. And your ideal prototypical capitalist entrepreneur does not yet exist either.

     

    I get it. You can go back to reading Fountainhead.

     

    No need to argue any further.
    18 Aug 2011, 01:01 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    enigmaman –

     

    There are a couple of problems with your line of reasoning:
    1. All nations or states within nations can play this ‘race to the bottom’ game with labour costs.
    2. The Chinas and Indias of this world will win the first round of game hands down (only to be beaten in turn by the Bangladeshs etc.).
    3. All will lose from the cumulative deflationary effect of a state, national and global reduction of purchasing power of employees generally entailed by this game.

     

    Rather, the optimal approach is to try by every reasonable means to promote ever increasing productivity of labour and not just the decrease in the cost of labour input to production. The logic of this is compelling, particularly for the advance industrial economies.
    18 Aug 2011, 01:13 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Glad you agree Bob. We do need to lower regulations... drastically.
    18 Aug 2011, 02:15 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    "OK so you want some form of government and political system and political parties that does not yet exist in the USA and has not existed in the recent past."

     

    Absolutely, as the RINOs are big spending thousand points of light globalists and the marxist crats are big spending vote buying whorebaggers. I think that's why we're seeing a Tea Party that wants to root out the rot from the entire regime and either purify it or replace it. Not a bad solution. The motive is good. Probably why Joe Biden called them 'terrorists'. Can't rock the boat, *ahem*, I mean the yacht.

     

    And Atlas shouldn't shrug according to you. He should kneel, right?

     

    *spit*
    18 Aug 2011, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • enigmaman
    , contributor
    Comments (2686) | Send Message
     
    Bob- 1- you see a race to the bottom, I see a race to the top, its not about the big getting smaller its about smaller wanting to get bigger, they call it progress. The big growth of the future will come from these smaller nations and not the big ones. That the big cannot see or understand this only goes to prove "not all asses have long ears"

     

    2-See #1, proves my point a race to the top

     

    3-all will not lose only those to big to see the trees for the forest

     

    To your final point " promote ever increasing productivity of labour " sounds great and is what business is doing, would optimal be when one person is able to run an entire corporation.
    18 Aug 2011, 03:18 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Tack,

     

    Regarding the public school systems: Look around a little. Millions upon millions of people who have been educated in public schools are starting businesses and running corporations. I can only take your statement with a huge grain of salt. I sincerely hope that you were using hyperbole to make your point, seriously.

     

    While I’m on this subject, there are many notable examples of CEO’s of major American corporations who are liberals. Some examples: Howard Schultz, chairman and CEO of Starbucks, is one. Steve Jobs is another. If I had more time I’d provide you with a long and well documented list.

     

    There are times when taxes and regulation are excessive, and there are times when they are not. Moderate liberals tend to appreciate the subtleties, as do some moderate conservatives.
    18 Aug 2011, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Ah yes, subtlety, nuance, sure. How about ... complexity? We need a little of that too, I'm sure. The virtue of being able to sit still comfortably in an unresolved Hegelian dialectic without noticing any inconsistencies.

     

    I know, the moderate liberal is able to appreciate all this. They are smarter than everyone else. They can say 'yes' and 'no' at the same time. Geniuses.

     

    Compromise is everything. No white/black thinking, please. Let's put the rowdies out. We need intellectual articulation instead. Another Camp David, more talks, hands folded over knees, meetings, some discussions.

     

    In the end, no one is right. No one is wrong.

     

    Its like art.

     

    Hey, little Johnny, what do you see? What does this mean to you?
    18 Aug 2011, 05:39 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12964) | Send Message
     
    WJ:

     

    "I'm OK; you're OK"

     

    It's like speeding down the road at 100 MPH and seeing a Y in the road up ahead, with a huge concrete abutment in the middle, and one party says go left, and the other go right, so they compromise and go straight. That's the no-acrimony, we-all-get-along plan.
    18 Aug 2011, 05:49 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Ha! Wyatt, your entertaining writings are a prime and pristine example anti-Hegelianism. But I’m happy that you are familiar with the concept.

     

    You also jump to conclusions (a characteristic of having an enlarged amygdala. This is not a diss or a value judgment, just a fact). None of what I wrote was intended to make any kind of value judgments regarding any differences in the intellect of liberals versus conservatives. In fact there is no difference.

     

    But there is a slight difference in brain structure, on average. Here’s some info:

     

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

     

    And just in case wikipedia may be considered a tool of the liberals, here’s the same info from Fox News:

     

    www.foxnews.com/scitec.../

     

    Now please don’t jump to a conclusion that there is a unequivocal difference. Things like this are tendencies, true in various degrees, but, on average, true. And there is no value judgment implied. These differences have evolutionary significance, so we need to have these differences in the population.

     

    So you and I are hardwired to disagree. Sounds like fun, huh?

     

    I’ve also come up the perfect solution for you dilemma, in case Chile doesn’t work out.

     

    Just find some cheap real estate somewhere, South America would do, and START YOUR OWN COUNTRY!

     

    If there was substantial acreage, you could call it Wyattland! Or, if it was the small side, like kid of a city-state, you could call it Junkerville!

     

    Just think, there would be NO GOVERNMENT! Every man could chart his course with out any government impediments: No police, no fire department, no organized army.

     

    Just think about who’d you attract as citizens! Far right conservatives from around the world would congregate there. You’d get a nice mix of tea party guys, radical Muslims (yes, they are conservatives too), and a fair number of criminals who want to escape the nasty aspects of government, like prisons.

     

    You could open up a gun shop! The population would be so well armed, and fearful, that no one would dare to step out of their non-combustible homes (no fire department, remember) at night.

     

    You could also start up a non-combustable home building business. Just think, you could call your homes JUNKER-BUNKERS, ‘cause they’d have to be bunker-like for protection. Your slogan could be, “Hunker in a Junker Bunker”!

     

    There is some downside. You would have hardly any scientists (only 4% of scientists label themselves as Republicans, and only 6% as conservatives. But who needs scientists? They only mess things up with dire warnings about climate change, pollution, and things like that.

     

    So be prepared to figure out a healthcare system that works, because you’re gonna have a high of cancer. Ah, forgot, healthcare is left up to the individuals. Doctors could come in from the outside and charge up the ying yang!

     

    Wow! Maybe I’ll write a sci-fi movie based on this concept!

     

    But I’ll have to think of a clever twist, or it would just be another one of those post-apocalyptic flicks.
    18 Aug 2011, 06:52 PM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Bildar, to say public schools tend to be extremely liberal bastions would be an understatement. The progressive curriculum has turned our kids into serious lefties......
    Not to mention distorted American history so much it really isn't our history...... It is there vision ( no sick vision ) of it.

     

    As Reagan quoted Winston Churchill often and said if you are 20 and not liberal something is wrong with you. And, if your 40 and your not conservative something is really wrong with you . Says a lot. With age comes wisdom !.....

     

    But, then there are the Dem mega rich. And, yes are wise ! But who are so for publicity only ! Maybe a few true ,but, even the Mike Moores are phony !

     

    Yes there are the mega rich and Hollywood types that are Democrats and keep up that holy liberal facade ,but, the CPAs and financial advisors are not so liberal.... There ferocious financially. Guest spots at charity events
    pssst Write offs.......

     

    The Oprah's of the world have bean counters making sure she doesn't stay in Ca. too long and risk paying tax there and Jobs has been kinda sneaky over the years with his options.
    ANDDDDDD

     

    He is something I learned in the banana republic where I live.......

     

    The greatest democrat tool that is the biggest scam. It is the magnificent FOUNDATION........ Panama's claim to fame it the worlds best foundation. Many megas who have them have them registered here.. .........Yes, there set up for charity, but, there vehicles to keep Tim and Barry or Rick Perry from getting there paws on a penny...... So, yes Warren and Bill and Zuck give away many millions, but, there foundations shelter billions tax free. When they die nothing changes hands. Only a secret letter has the names of who runs it. Oh, yes they say there kids get nothing ! But, they run the empires tax free until there kids take over....... There SMARTOCRAT'S who get lots of public admiration and tell others they want to pay more.

     

    I am pretty poor ,but, I have a foundation and my little properties are in mine. And, all my other assets are in it. And, yes I must donate to charity and prove it...... The wife an I buy school uniforms for the baseball teams......... Kinda % wise equal to the billionaires asset wise. All things in life are not always what they seem..........

     

    And, guess what. The kids and parents love us and welcome us as part of the community. They don't know I am a republican and mail my vote back home. I do it just to cancel a democratic vote and prey the Democrats won't spend the country into oblivion . gb
    18 Aug 2011, 06:56 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12964) | Send Message
     
    Bil:

     

    You think you're being funny:

     

    www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...
    18 Aug 2011, 06:58 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    No, Tack. You go a little to the right, or a little to the left, just enough to miss the concrete abutment. Your overall speed would hardly be affected. Extremists tend to run off the road.
    18 Aug 2011, 06:59 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12964) | Send Message
     
    Bil:

     

    The problem is, no matter the direction, somebody has to drive, not some "camel by committee." That requires both authority and leadership. Presently, we lack both.
    18 Aug 2011, 07:03 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Tack,

     

    Wow! That’s an amazing idea. It’s perfect for Wyatt!

     

    Wait ‘till the Somali pirates find out about it.
    18 Aug 2011, 08:00 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    I’d say that it would have been better if Boehner would have been able to convince the tea party guys to go with the plan that he and Obama were close to finalizing.

     

    We have a constitution that mandates sharing of power. Congress is part of that and the way it is set up requires a certain amount of compromise to get anything done. If there was a leadership problem, it was a Republican leadership problem.

     

    Instead we had the intransigent ones hold the country hostage.

     

    Have any suggestions on how Obama could have better influenced the outcome?

     

    Perhaps using the 14th amendment option was one way. But that had a huge and time consuming future overhead in terms of legal wrangling that would likely have been as destructive as the tea party influenced outcome that we had.
    18 Aug 2011, 08:17 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Golftobob,

     

    I’m glad that you buy the kids their uniforms. Even though cash may be a little scarce, you were generous. That speaks well of you. Being “part of the community” is an extremely good thing.
    18 Aug 2011, 08:28 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3621) | Send Message
     
    Maybe Obama and his Dem cohorts could have actually proposed (and passed - they had the super majority) a budget, so none of the sideshow circus shenanigans would have been necessary...
    18 Aug 2011, 08:34 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    He was trying really hard to be funny. Fail.

     

    Sea steading looks nice. I just want to be left TF alone. I think the ocean satellites would have to work first at self defense. We'd have to create high tech outer artillery walls. And then, a few nukes just to keep the other nations guessing. Beyond that, a sea stead doesn't need much. We would need to desalinate for drinking, but that's relatively easy enough. And perhaps a small HOA fee. Get some leafblower guys in there on Tuesdays.
    18 Aug 2011, 09:22 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Sounds like early American history. The interesting thing though is that you are moving towards the inevitability anyway. The end game. That's where we're going. We are about to start our own country right here once the dollar crashes.

     

    I don't think we'd have a problem with doctors. They might like a world without lawyers or being told what to do. No insurers to protect them. No court to sue. Just back to the basic principle. A lot of common, shared sense and the golden rule.

     

    I even bet Dominoes could get their pizzas delivered in under 30.
    18 Aug 2011, 09:28 PM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt,

     

    Sounds like you are going to need to have some type of tax structure to pay for defense and infrastructure. I think that you can forget about nukes, that‘s too expensive. Who is going to decide all of this? You’ll have to have some type of government. One step will lead to another, and then you’ll be back to square one. You might as well stay here.
    18 Aug 2011, 09:39 PM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    Bilder:

     

    But the society will be homogeneous,, and seminal engineering will be used to make sure that it is so for generations to come, and so all will be well. Just like Sweden before the Mooooslems moved there.
    18 Aug 2011, 10:17 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt -

     

    The history of fundamentalist and ideological movements is full of visions of a utopia (following some cataclysmic or revolutionary cleansing, of course) where metaphorically the lion lies down with the lamb through natural inclination and not force of law or ruler. Both Marx and Trotsky wrote thus as did some of the proponents of the Thousand Year Reich. In saying this I'm not suggesting that only the criminally delusional have such visions (many good people clearly gain comfort from such visions of a better life). I'm only saying that our real task is to make the best of the here and now and not let sentimental dreams of some distant future divert us from that task.
    18 Aug 2011, 10:26 PM Reply Like
  • ColdLogic
    , contributor
    Comments (81) | Send Message
     
    You think that were it not for the institution of forced theft of everyone's money (taxation), nobody would willingly pay for protection from violence and imprisonment of the violent (police), fire protection (firefighters, sprinklers, fire-retardants, insurance), and a group of citizens who keep tabs on other hostile individuals in other nations (army)? You're delusional. Give us back 40% of our income and not only would these services be provided, but at lower cost and with less incidence of error. Give us back the right to privatize neighborhoods to keep out criminally-inclined youths (discrimination aka freedom of association), and police protection in most neighborhoods would cost almost nothing. I'm sick of this system where you run a higher risk of getting a ticket in a violent ghetto neighborhood simply because the cops need to recoup the higher cost of policing those areas. Privatize huge sections of cities, like amusement parks! Entrance fees! Add cost to their living expenses! Then, insurance companies assign a cost to individuals based on their criminal background. Nobody wants people who have had 10 DUIs driving, or 3 armed assault convictions in their vicinity. The cost of civilization need be higher than it is for those whose actions tear it down! Too bad, liberal politicians need those voters, so cities are prime targets to infiltrate with criminals, whose problems require solutions that they offer (tax the rich!)
    19 Aug 2011, 01:43 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Agree on all points. I think a well trained, armed militia is the best solution. People in the community, the doctors, the pig farmer down the street, the pastor, the guy that works at Intel, etc.

     

    The problem is that we have all grown lax in that kind of personal & social responsibility in building a community. And so we have 'cops' and 'border patrol' who don't do their jobs(aren't authorized to, its not their fault) and we have gigantic prisons due to LBJ's incentivized baby mama welfare program.

     

    I don't buy into the It Takes A Village b.s., but I know we can do things much better than the public sector. We have given up our civic duty, or I should say it was taken away from us and the moment unions got involved, all hell broke loose to the point where now the paid 'public servant' is now wagging the dog who pays their way. Roles got reversed.

     

    9 outta 10 public employees think they're our boss. They forget we write the checks.
    19 Aug 2011, 01:52 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Just go back to a Milton Friedman economy, adopt it & implement it. Problem solved. Next.
    19 Aug 2011, 01:53 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Nukes can be had through the black market, given enough .... 'incentive'. Russia has plenty and I'm sure they will rent them to whomever wants one. The problem is the maintenance issue.

     

    Also, I am sure there are plenty of scientists who lean hard libertarian.
    19 Aug 2011, 01:55 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Yeah, just like a lefty, right on cue to interject the race card. And a little Hitler eugenics sprinkled on top too.

     

    Yeah, I'm sure that's the first thing a new free society would do, bust out the test tubes and decanters and start making the blue eyed, blonde hair Ken Doll. WTF world do you live in?

     

    Obsess much?
    19 Aug 2011, 02:00 AM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4557) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt -

     

    I'd really like to see you square the circle of your political libertarian philosophy, on the one hand, and minimal government operating essentially through each local and independent "well trained, armed militia" unfettered by courts, legislatures etc, on the other.

     

    Logic suggests that your militias dominated mini-societies would soon degenerate into something too much like the Protestant and Catholic neighbourhoods dominated respectively by Loyalist paramilitary gangs and the Provisional IRA units during the height of 'The Troubles" in the 1980s. (or, if you prefer, Sicily under the mafia before WW I).
    19 Aug 2011, 02:11 AM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    You can always dump the undesirables from flying helicopters. No need for courts. It has been done before in the bastion of freedom known as Chile under Pinochet.
    19 Aug 2011, 02:19 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    We're already there now. Drive into South Central. Go too far down the wrong street in the wrong car wearing the wrong skin... bang... you're dead. Bigger isn't always better.

     

    You can hope and pray for corruption to enter into post revolutionary societies to support your argument, but the fact is even modern day societies are far worse. Government is not the solution. Most times it is the problem.
    19 Aug 2011, 02:27 AM Reply Like
  • golfitobob
    , contributor
    Comments (2347) | Send Message
     
    Bildar, thank you for your generous response ,but, that wasn't the point . I did feel good about the uniforms ,but, truthfully it was the cheapest idea we could come up with that would give us the ... Lets say charitable public bang for the buck... So to speak.....'

     

    To make everything I own worldwide sheltered to all Gov.s like the US and Costa Rica seems like a miniscule price to shelter everything.

     

    You can't even imaging the thousands of foundations that are written every year and the many BIG names that boast of there Foundations in America, but, there really here an the US Gov. Won't disturb the Panama sovereignty. They did force Panama to sigh the financial secrecy agreement and the IRS opened an office ,but, if your legal .Hey......... Trump the scamster is the latest to infest Panama...... Yes, he isn't a Dem and his business technique always relies on Bankruptcy's all over the US, but, foundations here hide the rest..... The famous Beatle who got in the nasty divorce ,paid only 30 million because the billion was in trust here.
    And the beat goes on..............

     

    That is why I hesitate to love some of the Dems you tout ,but, they do get some wholesome shit kicking PR....................... Thanx again for the kind words. gb
    19 Aug 2011, 02:32 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    So, would you dispute that Chile is the leading Latin American economy? No, you wouldn't because you would be wrong. For all Pinochet's faults, the middle class expanded due to privatization of the SOEs, an economic lazy hand and getting ahold of inflation.

     

    As far as courts we have Casey Anthony and Ojay who have made jurors a joke. I have no problem if someone wants to murder someone as long as they know the family of the deceased is allowed to lay their hands on the offender and drag them to the nearest creek and hold their head underwater until they stop thrashing about. Singapore has the lowest crime, but the highest penalty. And courts aren't the big deal we've made them out to be here as they are there. America doesn't always 'have it right'.
    19 Aug 2011, 02:42 AM Reply Like
  • Bildar
    , contributor
    Comments (184) | Send Message
     
    It’s funny, Wyatt, that nukes were one of first things that you put forth as being a necessity for your new society. But it was no surprise, given your previous commentary.

     

    Nukes would increase your security needs a million fold. Pre-nuke, you would only have to worry about Somali pirate types, border security, and things like that, much like small countries around the world do.

     

    Yep, nukes in an unregulated environment make a lot of sense.

     

    Junkerville would be viewed as a major threat by countries around the world, worse than an Iran with nukes. The costs of maintaining and protecting nukes would bankrupt Junkerville in short order.

     

    Now that you have revealed your philosophy and ideas in some detail, going beyond US politics, I have no more need to provide arguing points for you on this subject. Unbeknownst to you, I’m sure, your comments on this thread speak volumes.

     

    I hope that you find some peace and happiness no matter where you go to try to find it.
    19 Aug 2011, 08:40 AM Reply Like
  • varan
    , contributor
    Comments (3566) | Send Message
     
    The phrase 'Free society' does not mean what you think it does.
    19 Aug 2011, 10:11 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Okay, kid. You can have the last word.

     

    Enjoy the echo chamber on a dead thread.

     

    Buh bye.
    19 Aug 2011, 12:25 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|