dw57's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/256400/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/173429-u-s-job-losses-demystified?source=feed#comment-762193 762193 and from the last 8 years, we can't exactly show much good investment from the private sector either. it was all smoke and mirrors


On Nov 16 10:33 AM Zmartmoney wrote:

> Who is America in your equation? It sounds like you equate America
> with Government. That is our problem - America is not equal to Government.
> Government shouldn't be doing all this "investing" to begin with
> - they invest badly, almost without exception, and then give the
> "profits" to those who didn't earn them. This is all about power.
> Wake up! Waging wars??? No doubt. Let's just wait here - the jihadists
> will eventually come to us. Anyway, it's more fun street-fighting
> on your own block - you can go home for lunch. Sheesh. You still
> think the govt is the solution.]]> Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:10:20 -0500 and from the last 8 years, we can't exactly show much good investment from the private sector either. it was all smoke and mirrors


On Nov 16 10:33 AM Zmartmoney wrote:

> Who is America in your equation? It sounds like you equate America
> with Government. That is our problem - America is not equal to Government.
> Government shouldn't be doing all this "investing" to begin with
> - they invest badly, almost without exception, and then give the
> "profits" to those who didn't earn them. This is all about power.
> Wake up! Waging wars??? No doubt. Let's just wait here - the jihadists
> will eventually come to us. Anyway, it's more fun street-fighting
> on your own block - you can go home for lunch. Sheesh. You still
> think the govt is the solution.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/173429-u-s-job-losses-demystified?source=feed#comment-762185 762185 Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:07:02 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/173265-chinese-exports-can-emerging-markets-replace-the-u-s-consumer?source=feed#comment-759431 759431 I.E. that 40% growth in EM, maybe relate to 5% growth in US or EU growth. or less

On Nov 13 05:45 PM HaavBline wrote:

> The author raised an interesting question but failed to dig into
> it meaningfully.
>
> By volume and value terms, China-EM trade is and will continue to
> be only a fraction of China-US trade. But China is pursuing this
> trade because from China's viewpoint, they see much opportunity that
> foreign observers can not see from trade volume stats alone.
>
> China-EM trade is growing at a much faster pace then China-US or
> China-EU trades. For example, China-Africa trade grew at 40% pace
> in 2008 while trades to OECD countries were tanking. So the China-EM
> trade growth volume could be comparable in the near future even though
> total trade volume remains much smaller. This is the part stat
> and chart readers can easily project and comprehend.
>
> The qualitative element is this: China enjoy much better terms and
> quality in its China-EM trades comparing to China-US or China-EU
> trades. China-US trades, for example, consist of a very high percentage
> of foreign owership, in the form of brand names, sales channels,
> IP, even export factory management. In this trade relationship,
> US gets the tuna steak while China gets the fish bones, so to speak.
>
>
> In China-EM trades, on the other hand, much of Chinese owership is
> involved. From financing, infrastructure service to brands, to
> IP to factory, there are much less western involvement ('taxing'
> from Chinese standpoint). It may be lowly smelts, comparing to
> pricey tuna, but China gets much of the fish meat rather than just
> the bones.]]> Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:55:45 -0500 I.E. that 40% growth in EM, maybe relate to 5% growth in US or EU growth. or less

On Nov 13 05:45 PM HaavBline wrote:

> The author raised an interesting question but failed to dig into
> it meaningfully.
>
> By volume and value terms, China-EM trade is and will continue to
> be only a fraction of China-US trade. But China is pursuing this
> trade because from China's viewpoint, they see much opportunity that
> foreign observers can not see from trade volume stats alone.
>
> China-EM trade is growing at a much faster pace then China-US or
> China-EU trades. For example, China-Africa trade grew at 40% pace
> in 2008 while trades to OECD countries were tanking. So the China-EM
> trade growth volume could be comparable in the near future even though
> total trade volume remains much smaller. This is the part stat
> and chart readers can easily project and comprehend.
>
> The qualitative element is this: China enjoy much better terms and
> quality in its China-EM trades comparing to China-US or China-EU
> trades. China-US trades, for example, consist of a very high percentage
> of foreign owership, in the form of brand names, sales channels,
> IP, even export factory management. In this trade relationship,
> US gets the tuna steak while China gets the fish bones, so to speak.
>
>
> In China-EM trades, on the other hand, much of Chinese owership is
> involved. From financing, infrastructure service to brands, to
> IP to factory, there are much less western involvement ('taxing'
> from Chinese standpoint). It may be lowly smelts, comparing to
> pricey tuna, but China gets much of the fish meat rather than just
> the bones.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/173265-chinese-exports-can-emerging-markets-replace-the-u-s-consumer?source=feed#comment-759425 759425 to drive growth either they find another large market (EU) or they grow internally. some thing that their culture seemly won't do


On Nov 13 05:17 PM silver-bug wrote:

> Good charts and diagrams, but I would like to see the demographics
> of the Chinese population, because that is the driving force of their
> economy. China has a growing middle class, as opposed to the shrinking
> middle class in America. It has a labor force of over 800 million
> people, and these are hard-working people who save money to buy things
> instead of using credit. China has $2.3 trillion worth of reserves
> to spend, and it spends this money wisely, developing infrastructure
> and obtaining vast amounts of natural resources for growth. And
> Chinese government is also providing a fiscal stimulus for it's people,
> which is also being spent wisely by the people.
>
> So, I think China has the ability to soak up the export slack with
> an increase in domestic consumption. It may slow down a bit, but
> it won't be significant. Most of the economic growth in the world
> will be driven by China and then followed by India, and other smaller
> eastern emerging market nations.
>
> I would put my bets on China.]]> Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:52:45 -0500 to drive growth either they find another large market (EU) or they grow internally. some thing that their culture seemly won't do


On Nov 13 05:17 PM silver-bug wrote:

> Good charts and diagrams, but I would like to see the demographics
> of the Chinese population, because that is the driving force of their
> economy. China has a growing middle class, as opposed to the shrinking
> middle class in America. It has a labor force of over 800 million
> people, and these are hard-working people who save money to buy things
> instead of using credit. China has $2.3 trillion worth of reserves
> to spend, and it spends this money wisely, developing infrastructure
> and obtaining vast amounts of natural resources for growth. And
> Chinese government is also providing a fiscal stimulus for it's people,
> which is also being spent wisely by the people.
>
> So, I think China has the ability to soak up the export slack with
> an increase in domestic consumption. It may slow down a bit, but
> it won't be significant. Most of the economic growth in the world
> will be driven by China and then followed by India, and other smaller
> eastern emerging market nations.
>
> I would put my bets on China.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/172556-oracle-fights-back-as-eu-tries-to-tilt-database-market-playing-field?source=feed#comment-755652 755652

On Nov 10 04:51 PM BeachRider wrote:

> Apart from being slightly inflammatory, there is one key issue: Can
> Oracle kill MySQL in an attempt to have Oracle reign supreme? The
> answer is "not-really". The nature of an Open Source System is MUCH
> more than simply being a standards-based Open System. If Maria (or
> any database provider) wants to alter MySQL to it needs, they can
> do it without "MySQL's Owner's" consent. If ORCL tried to kill-off
> MySQL they would essentially write-off the $1Bn investment and become
> a by-line for future Maria releases.
>
> What is scaring the EC here? It is important to note that the EC
> is KILLIN MySQL with this delay.]]> Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:37:52 -0500

On Nov 10 04:51 PM BeachRider wrote:

> Apart from being slightly inflammatory, there is one key issue: Can
> Oracle kill MySQL in an attempt to have Oracle reign supreme? The
> answer is "not-really". The nature of an Open Source System is MUCH
> more than simply being a standards-based Open System. If Maria (or
> any database provider) wants to alter MySQL to it needs, they can
> do it without "MySQL's Owner's" consent. If ORCL tried to kill-off
> MySQL they would essentially write-off the $1Bn investment and become
> a by-line for future Maria releases.
>
> What is scaring the EC here? It is important to note that the EC
> is KILLIN MySQL with this delay.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/172556-oracle-fights-back-as-eu-tries-to-tilt-database-market-playing-field?source=feed#comment-755647 755647

On Nov 10 08:16 PM RK wrote:

> If Oracle drops MySQL, I am pretty sure another company will pop
> up to support MySQL. The source code of MySQL is after all public.
> ]]> Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:36:06 -0500

On Nov 10 08:16 PM RK wrote:

> If Oracle drops MySQL, I am pretty sure another company will pop
> up to support MySQL. The source code of MySQL is after all public.
> ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/172556-oracle-fights-back-as-eu-tries-to-tilt-database-market-playing-field?source=feed#comment-754283 754283
not really sure thats true. if Oracle were to drop MYSQL it would reduce competition. and they both run on the same platforms don't they? while bad produces reduce the amount of competition its not quite so drastic as a competitor dropping out all together


"Approve this or Oracle is out of Europe. Who needs your dying statist economy anyways?"

I suspect the last argument would only get them kicked out of Europe. one of the 7 largest economies on the planet. ]]> Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:00:01 -0500
not really sure thats true. if Oracle were to drop MYSQL it would reduce competition. and they both run on the same platforms don't they? while bad produces reduce the amount of competition its not quite so drastic as a competitor dropping out all together


"Approve this or Oracle is out of Europe. Who needs your dying statist economy anyways?"

I suspect the last argument would only get them kicked out of Europe. one of the 7 largest economies on the planet. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/172571-oracle-ec-has-profound-misunderstanding-of-database-market?source=feed#comment-754274 754274 sounds like Oracle is going to learn the same lesson MS did. ]]> Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:49:39 -0500 sounds like Oracle is going to learn the same lesson MS did. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/172199-corporations-win-again-this-time-it-s-healthcare?source=feed#comment-753069 753069 Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:58:21 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/172152-u-s-healthcare-legislation-investment-impact?source=feed#comment-753061 753061

On Nov 09 02:59 PM Gedankonomist wrote:

>
> Yes, just like social security. The definition of "insanity" is
> essentially the idea that, after trying something and finding out
> you are wrong, you go and try the same thing again, expecting a different
> result.
>
> Roosevelt promised you "social security" and what you got instead
> was a Ponzi scheme. Actually, it is worse than a Ponzi scheme, since
> most Ponzi schemes are VOLUNTARY. So my apologies to Charles Ponzi.
>
>
> Anyway, now the same monstrosity in DC is promising you "free health
> care." You fools, you are about to find out the hard way that "free
> health care" is actually stealing. Although you think your neighbor
> will be paying for your "free health care," you will be getting robbed
> at the same time.
>
> On Nov 09 11:21 AM Michael D. wrote:
>
> healthcare won't be only available]]> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:49:11 -0500

On Nov 09 02:59 PM Gedankonomist wrote:

>
> Yes, just like social security. The definition of "insanity" is
> essentially the idea that, after trying something and finding out
> you are wrong, you go and try the same thing again, expecting a different
> result.
>
> Roosevelt promised you "social security" and what you got instead
> was a Ponzi scheme. Actually, it is worse than a Ponzi scheme, since
> most Ponzi schemes are VOLUNTARY. So my apologies to Charles Ponzi.
>
>
> Anyway, now the same monstrosity in DC is promising you "free health
> care." You fools, you are about to find out the hard way that "free
> health care" is actually stealing. Although you think your neighbor
> will be paying for your "free health care," you will be getting robbed
> at the same time.
>
> On Nov 09 11:21 AM Michael D. wrote:
>
> healthcare won't be only available]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/172107-don-t-believe-long-term-oil-forecasts?source=feed#comment-752479 752479 and the export countries desperately need the US consumer to buy their stuff, and that consumer is dollar based. make the dollar decline and they stop buying. raising interest rates may or may not have any impact at all. didn't before now in the last 8 years.


On Nov 09 09:47 AM ringo3khan wrote:

> I think it's important to remember that as much as the price of the
> commodity is determined by supply/demand considerations, it's also
> determined by the value or lack thereof of the U.S. dollar as same
> is held in vast quantities by the producing countries. Thus, oil
> has, in many ways become the new "Currency" and will be for as long
> as it's valued primarily in "dollars"; it's natural that as the instabilities
> in the U.S. financial and economic models become ever more violent
> and less predictable that the dollar will continue to fall in value.
> There is of coure the "model" out there that would indicate that
> if the Fed was to begin to raise interest rates, the dollar might
> begin to strengthen. However, the increased instability and inefficiencies
> of the U.S. society, political system and financial systems may well
> put us in a place where despite interest rate increases, the dollar
> doesn't appreciate significantly in value because, just as may now
> be the case with the currency of Zimbabwe, other countries and central
> banks won't want to be holding dollars in reserve. To the extent
> that this is the case, until such time as a more stable world reserve
> currency can be found, there may be no forseable ceiling on the price
> of oil.]]> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:38:11 -0500 and the export countries desperately need the US consumer to buy their stuff, and that consumer is dollar based. make the dollar decline and they stop buying. raising interest rates may or may not have any impact at all. didn't before now in the last 8 years.


On Nov 09 09:47 AM ringo3khan wrote:

> I think it's important to remember that as much as the price of the
> commodity is determined by supply/demand considerations, it's also
> determined by the value or lack thereof of the U.S. dollar as same
> is held in vast quantities by the producing countries. Thus, oil
> has, in many ways become the new "Currency" and will be for as long
> as it's valued primarily in "dollars"; it's natural that as the instabilities
> in the U.S. financial and economic models become ever more violent
> and less predictable that the dollar will continue to fall in value.
> There is of coure the "model" out there that would indicate that
> if the Fed was to begin to raise interest rates, the dollar might
> begin to strengthen. However, the increased instability and inefficiencies
> of the U.S. society, political system and financial systems may well
> put us in a place where despite interest rate increases, the dollar
> doesn't appreciate significantly in value because, just as may now
> be the case with the currency of Zimbabwe, other countries and central
> banks won't want to be holding dollars in reserve. To the extent
> that this is the case, until such time as a more stable world reserve
> currency can be found, there may be no forseable ceiling on the price
> of oil.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/171526-japan-demographic-time-bomb-waiting-to-explode?source=feed#comment-747039 747039

On Nov 05 04:20 PM maff wrote:

> "if we don’t take care to make sure our population is dynamic, healthy
> and growing sooner or later bad economic things will happen"
>
> and if we do manage to engineer continuous population growth and
> ever-increasing consumption everything will end happily?]]> Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:24:52 -0500

On Nov 05 04:20 PM maff wrote:

> "if we don’t take care to make sure our population is dynamic, healthy
> and growing sooner or later bad economic things will happen"
>
> and if we do manage to engineer continuous population growth and
> ever-increasing consumption everything will end happily?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/170604-the-performance-of-japanese-companies-a-growing-connection-with-external-demand?source=feed#comment-747002 747002 Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:44:14 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/171388-financial-regulation-how-would-you-have-it-work?source=feed#comment-746808 746808

On Nov 05 11:57 AM Techtrader10 wrote:

> The was a great law in place that was removed during the Clinton
> Admiinistration because it was said to "hinder" the banking industries
> competitiveness. The Glass Steagall Act was a way to separate the
> banking and investment firms. It was a good idea and should be reimplimented.]]> Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:24:38 -0500

On Nov 05 11:57 AM Techtrader10 wrote:

> The was a great law in place that was removed during the Clinton
> Admiinistration because it was said to "hinder" the banking industries
> competitiveness. The Glass Steagall Act was a way to separate the
> banking and investment firms. It was a good idea and should be reimplimented.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/170489-bailout-nation-mentality-ford-workers-reject-further-concessions?source=feed#comment-740464 740464 Mon, 02 Nov 2009 11:49:01 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/35530?source=feed#comment-737825 737825 Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:10:50 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/168710-dollar-forced-to-abdicate-its-throne?source=feed#comment-731147 731147 Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:13:38 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/168074-the-hypocrisy-and-high-stakes-of-healthcare-reform?source=feed#comment-725813 725813 what are the odds that any business will keep this benefit when its that high?
and business has been dropping this already (down to about 50% of those business that have ever done so).
and why is the rest of the world has solved this problem, but the richest country in the world is helpless to solve it? ]]> Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:47:03 -0400 what are the odds that any business will keep this benefit when its that high?
and business has been dropping this already (down to about 50% of those business that have ever done so).
and why is the rest of the world has solved this problem, but the richest country in the world is helpless to solve it? ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/168074-the-hypocrisy-and-high-stakes-of-healthcare-reform?source=feed#comment-725808 725808

On Oct 22 12:45 PM CLH wrote:

> This whole reform is unbelievable. America has the best health care
> in the world. Does anyone go to Europe or Canada for health care?.
> Of course not. They all come to America where the health care is
> the best. The only way to cut costs is to privatise Medicare which
> is a bankrupt disaster.]]> Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:42:55 -0400

On Oct 22 12:45 PM CLH wrote:

> This whole reform is unbelievable. America has the best health care
> in the world. Does anyone go to Europe or Canada for health care?.
> Of course not. They all come to America where the health care is
> the best. The only way to cut costs is to privatise Medicare which
> is a bankrupt disaster.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/168074-the-hypocrisy-and-high-stakes-of-healthcare-reform?source=feed#comment-725798 725798 and while patients have no idea about costs and doctor's do either. i doubt very seriously any one ever signed up for surgery because it didn't cost them any thing. or at best they did that once.
and learned that it was painful. and thats true of almost procedures isn't it?

and not every one will be allowed to buy insurance. you can't do that if you have some really minor conditions they won't write the contract for any amount of money. they will also cancel your contract if they can for any reason if they have a major claim coming (even if it will kill you to not have a procedure). happens all the time

and you still can't buy drugs from Canada. they won't allow that.
you can go there to have surgery if you want (they haven't stopped that. in fact your insurance company might suggest you go to India on a medical vacation.
all insurance is regulated. it all has rules as to what can be sold and what has to offered. and do you really think that buying from another state will really help? and how likely will that state be in helping you when the insurance companies fails to do some thing (like pay a claim?). not likely to be much help there at all

On Oct 22 07:32 AM fwi wrote:

> The central problem with health care expenditures is that consumers
> think of their insurance like an all-you-can-eat buffet. They overconsume,
> primarily because "it is already paid for", and they do not know
> what anything costs. Doctors often over-treat because of fear of
> grotesque lawsuits. And insurers only compete within a state, often
> with very few players.
>
> We no more need the Federal Government to take over our healthcare
> than we need a Federal bureaucrat picking out our clothes. Wholesale
> overhaul is complete madness. We need only address the above three
> issues in the following ways:
> 1. Each consumer uses his own allowance to buy his own insurance.
> For those employers who want to provide , fine, but not in purchased
> insurance, but with money to the employee. For the person who cannot
> afford insurance, the government provides the consumer with a cash
> allowance, with the freedom to use it as he would any other life
> sustaining purchase. For example, food stamps allow the consumer
> to purchase his own food choices. If food stamps were run like a
> public option, then the Feds would tell the consumer what brand of
> bacon to buy, how often he could buy it, and what store he was required
> to use. How long would anyone stand for that?
> 2. Doctors would stop over-prescribing procedures and tests if they
> told the patients what each cost, and what the dangers were if the
> tests were not done. The two then decide how best to manage the
> risks and benefits. Out of control lawsuits would be capped. One
> thing that everyone has forgotten is that the practice of medicine
> is as much an art as a science. To hold doctors to a standard of
> infallibility is unfair, as politicians and money managers are clearly
> not.
> 3. We are in a global economy and insurance cannot be purchased
> across state lines. The consumer then overpays to an insurer who
> is under challenged by the marketplace. This crazy law must be overturned.
> If you live in Florida and can buy controlled drugs in Canada, why
> cannot you buy cheaper insurance from Georgia?
>
> None of these reforms cost a dime, no new bureaucracies and entitlements
> created. Consumers take control of their own health care, insurers
> would have a more competitive marketplace, and doctors would practice
> more common sense medicine and less "defensive" medicine.
>
> If the Federal Government has decided that the citizens of this country
> cannot handle their own healthcare decisions, then what is the next
> thing they will decide we cannot handle? We must be beware of the
> unthinkable, because it is already happening.]]> Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:38:07 -0400 and while patients have no idea about costs and doctor's do either. i doubt very seriously any one ever signed up for surgery because it didn't cost them any thing. or at best they did that once.
and learned that it was painful. and thats true of almost procedures isn't it?

and not every one will be allowed to buy insurance. you can't do that if you have some really minor conditions they won't write the contract for any amount of money. they will also cancel your contract if they can for any reason if they have a major claim coming (even if it will kill you to not have a procedure). happens all the time

and you still can't buy drugs from Canada. they won't allow that.
you can go there to have surgery if you want (they haven't stopped that. in fact your insurance company might suggest you go to India on a medical vacation.
all insurance is regulated. it all has rules as to what can be sold and what has to offered. and do you really think that buying from another state will really help? and how likely will that state be in helping you when the insurance companies fails to do some thing (like pay a claim?). not likely to be much help there at all

On Oct 22 07:32 AM fwi wrote:

> The central problem with health care expenditures is that consumers
> think of their insurance like an all-you-can-eat buffet. They overconsume,
> primarily because "it is already paid for", and they do not know
> what anything costs. Doctors often over-treat because of fear of
> grotesque lawsuits. And insurers only compete within a state, often
> with very few players.
>
> We no more need the Federal Government to take over our healthcare
> than we need a Federal bureaucrat picking out our clothes. Wholesale
> overhaul is complete madness. We need only address the above three
> issues in the following ways:
> 1. Each consumer uses his own allowance to buy his own insurance.
> For those employers who want to provide , fine, but not in purchased
> insurance, but with money to the employee. For the person who cannot
> afford insurance, the government provides the consumer with a cash
> allowance, with the freedom to use it as he would any other life
> sustaining purchase. For example, food stamps allow the consumer
> to purchase his own food choices. If food stamps were run like a
> public option, then the Feds would tell the consumer what brand of
> bacon to buy, how often he could buy it, and what store he was required
> to use. How long would anyone stand for that?
> 2. Doctors would stop over-prescribing procedures and tests if they
> told the patients what each cost, and what the dangers were if the
> tests were not done. The two then decide how best to manage the
> risks and benefits. Out of control lawsuits would be capped. One
> thing that everyone has forgotten is that the practice of medicine
> is as much an art as a science. To hold doctors to a standard of
> infallibility is unfair, as politicians and money managers are clearly
> not.
> 3. We are in a global economy and insurance cannot be purchased
> across state lines. The consumer then overpays to an insurer who
> is under challenged by the marketplace. This crazy law must be overturned.
> If you live in Florida and can buy controlled drugs in Canada, why
> cannot you buy cheaper insurance from Georgia?
>
> None of these reforms cost a dime, no new bureaucracies and entitlements
> created. Consumers take control of their own health care, insurers
> would have a more competitive marketplace, and doctors would practice
> more common sense medicine and less "defensive" medicine.
>
> If the Federal Government has decided that the citizens of this country
> cannot handle their own healthcare decisions, then what is the next
> thing they will decide we cannot handle? We must be beware of the
> unthinkable, because it is already happening.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/34376?source=feed#comment-719347 719347 Sun, 18 Oct 2009 10:45:21 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/166900-the-debt-equity-clock-is-ticking-morgan-stanley?source=feed#comment-717992 717992 Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:17:32 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/166986-how-ge-beat-our-consensus?source=feed#comment-717743 717743 Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:02:45 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/164881-a-different-take-on-september-s-employment-numbers?source=feed#comment-705760 705760

On Oct 06 09:23 AM TeresaE wrote:

> Your analysis does not take into account the millions that have gone
> from fully unemployed, to working part time for little pay and no
> benefits.
>
> The BLS stats can pretend that a guy that used to make $50k a year
> with vacations and health care, is fully employed when he goes to
> work part time at Home Depot with crappy, if any, benefits. But
> to his local businesses, he is still fully unemployed.
>
> These counts/stats were intentionally altered under Clinton, the
> criteria changed but the analysis stayed the same.]]> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:21:09 -0400

On Oct 06 09:23 AM TeresaE wrote:

> Your analysis does not take into account the millions that have gone
> from fully unemployed, to working part time for little pay and no
> benefits.
>
> The BLS stats can pretend that a guy that used to make $50k a year
> with vacations and health care, is fully employed when he goes to
> work part time at Home Depot with crappy, if any, benefits. But
> to his local businesses, he is still fully unemployed.
>
> These counts/stats were intentionally altered under Clinton, the
> criteria changed but the analysis stayed the same.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/164942-employment-in-crisis?source=feed#comment-705552 705552

On Oct 06 07:10 AM tedstr wrote:

> This is not so complicated folks. The social change that is happening
> is that the dual income home is fading. More women are finding that
> they do not need or want to work as much. Some men are finding they
> do not need or want to work as much. Some of this takes the form
> of early retirement. Some is just moms staying home. Some is discouragement,
> some is just making choices.
>
> To be sure unemploymnent is high, but not all of the non-employment
> seeking workers are still discouraged workers. This is a very significant
> social change that will have profound effects on consumption and
> savings for the next generation.
>
> The past 25 years of runaway consumption in the US was fueled by
> the two income home and disproportionate wealth in the upper middle
> class (ie "mass affluence"). This will be replaced by increasing
> hourly wages for a reduced labor force, reduced consumption and increased
> savings rate.]]> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 14:30:38 -0400

On Oct 06 07:10 AM tedstr wrote:

> This is not so complicated folks. The social change that is happening
> is that the dual income home is fading. More women are finding that
> they do not need or want to work as much. Some men are finding they
> do not need or want to work as much. Some of this takes the form
> of early retirement. Some is just moms staying home. Some is discouragement,
> some is just making choices.
>
> To be sure unemploymnent is high, but not all of the non-employment
> seeking workers are still discouraged workers. This is a very significant
> social change that will have profound effects on consumption and
> savings for the next generation.
>
> The past 25 years of runaway consumption in the US was fueled by
> the two income home and disproportionate wealth in the upper middle
> class (ie "mass affluence"). This will be replaced by increasing
> hourly wages for a reduced labor force, reduced consumption and increased
> savings rate.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/33672?source=feed#comment-704335 704335 Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:37:23 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/news/market_currents/post/33672?source=feed#comment-704309 704309 Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:05:15 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/163500-the-dangers-of-fiat-money-end-the-fed-by-ron-paul?source=feed#comment-701488 701488 Sat, 03 Oct 2009 13:24:21 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/163500-the-dangers-of-fiat-money-end-the-fed-by-ron-paul?source=feed#comment-701482 701482


On Oct 03 08:54 AM roy piper wrote:

> On Oct 03 03:27 AM bbro wrote:]]> Sat, 03 Oct 2009 13:19:48 -0400


On Oct 03 08:54 AM roy piper wrote:

> On Oct 03 03:27 AM bbro wrote:]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/164379-is-the-jobs-data-a-concern?source=feed#comment-699943 699943 Fri, 02 Oct 2009 10:53:15 -0400