U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-20-2018, 04:30 AM
 
4,718 posts, read 2,251,841 times
Reputation: 8709

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobster View Post
This didn't even touch on the impending oil crisis, which will only exacerbate this.
You've been saying this for years, it's like you're on a mission to become CityData's version of Peter Schiff where after enough time being wrong you get to be the broken clock that nails it.

 
Old 01-20-2018, 06:54 AM
 
Location: SW Florida
9,098 posts, read 3,918,635 times
Reputation: 18766
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowonLuck View Post
I am not one to ask for help. I would much rather have people volunteer to help.

Our first stay was unexpected. It was the 3rd day in and I was desperate for clean clothes. A friend purchased some things and sent a bill. Don't get me wrong, I was grateful that she took the time to go grab me socks and underwear.

Lesson learned now is to take a packed suitcase to every doctors appointment, so we have clean clothes and items needed for hospital stays.

People are not mind readers and may need a push in the right direction. As for your "friend" who purchased a few things for you and sent a bill? Doesn't sound like much of a friend unless she bought hundreds of dollars of stuff for you.
 
Old 01-20-2018, 08:25 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
12,672 posts, read 9,420,097 times
Reputation: 14930
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnojr View Post
Which is a better deal for society? To "give a man a fish" today, knowing he'll be back tomorrow looking for another fish; or to invest in successful, profitable businesses which produce the goods and services people want and need, buy things, provide jobs, etc?
While your question is rhetorical, it turns out you've just pointed to the place where the interest of society diverges from the interest of the career government employee whose job it is to hand out fish each day.

Your example is the reason why the "War on Poverty," the "War on Hunger," the "War on Crime," the "War on Drugs," the "War on Homelessness" and all the other wars never succeed. It is in the best interest of career government employees to treat the problem each day rather than fix the problem for once & for all.

It isn't just career government employees whose best interest lies with handing out fish each day. It is also the career elected representatives. One of the most contentious political issues for the past 50 years has been "right to life" vs "right to choose". The issue could be put to bed by the passage of a constitutional amendment (either affirming or restricting), but the reason no one has pursued this with any gusto is both sides prosper from campaign contributions when the issue has not been resolved.


Returning to poverty -- we could make substantial progress in the "War on Poverty" by simply passing a law stating if the poverty rate exceeds X%, then all elected official are ineligible for re-election and all public sector employees will have their pensions cut. I suspect poverty could be brought down below X% within a year.

Last edited by SportyandMisty; 01-20-2018 at 09:42 AM..
 
Old 01-20-2018, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
12,672 posts, read 9,420,097 times
Reputation: 14930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leisesturm View Post
But allowing the 1% to make money offshore and bring it home without taxation going forward.... well... slap me, but I fail to see how that will incentivize Corporate America to do more domestic labor investment. I mean... why? <confused>.
Your premise is incorrect: the 1% are not allowed to make money offshore and bring it home without taxation going forward.
 
Old 01-20-2018, 09:04 AM
 
8,278 posts, read 3,452,461 times
Reputation: 1584
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowonLuck View Post
I am not one to ask for help. I would much rather have people volunteer to help.

Our first stay was unexpected. It was the 3rd day in and I was desperate for clean clothes. A friend purchased some things and sent a bill. Don't get me wrong, I was grateful that she took the time to go grab me socks and underwear, but if the roles were reversed, I would never have expected her to pay me back. The hospital is in a really bad neighborhood, so going out is not really an option.

Lesson learned now is to take a packed suitcase to every doctors appointment, so we have clean clothes and items needed for hospital stays.
Sounds like where I did my medical training in Chicago.

There are people at medical centers that do social work. Such as assistance with medical bills, housing and other HC related supports. You should ask your docs for a referral to them.

My wife is undergoing stem cell transplant, and our insurance pays $10K for out of town living expenses during the procedure. We wouldn't have known that without the social service telling us. They do have a program for those without HC insurance or the means.
 
Old 01-20-2018, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
12,672 posts, read 9,420,097 times
Reputation: 14930
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
That belief is based on MONEY MADNESS.

Under current money madness, there are only THREE ways to acquire the necessary money tokens.
1) Trade (labor, property)
2) Charity (private, public)
3) Predation (crime, etc)
Don't forget:

4) Inheritance. Perhaps you include inheritance in "charity," but I would argue the two are different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
When a worker loses his job, his property, exhausts private charity, his remaining option appears to be crime.
Untrue. He also has the option of finding a new job or starting his own business.

Currently, economists agree we are at Full Employment. Some serious economists forecast an unemployment rate of 3.5% later this year -- the lowest rate since 1969.

Currently, it is hand-to-hand combat among employers competing with one another to hire talented employees to fulfill customer demand.
 
Old 01-20-2018, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
12,672 posts, read 9,420,097 times
Reputation: 14930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leisesturm View Post
Is it that preposterous that the 1% pay some money
Your unstated premise is that the 1% do not pay. That is false. The 1% pay. And pay. And pay.

Your unstated motivation appears to be jealousy: you appear jealous of the 1% because you are not a member of the club. Wouldn't you be better served focusing your energy into economic success rather than jealousy of those who have achieved success?

Said differently, why is your happiness hurt by my success?
 
Old 01-20-2018, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
2,978 posts, read 1,012,279 times
Reputation: 3796
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
Your unstated premise is that the 1% do not pay. That is false. The 1% pay. And pay. And pay.
Of course they pay; only the truly ignorant can be unaware of the distribution of tax revenues. But not necessarily in proportion to what they take from the overall system. They may pay billions in taxes, but that represents a far smaller percentage of their real wealth gains than for most lower brackets, especially the 2/5 and 3/5.

I am in no way advocating stratospheric taxes for this segment, or anything equivalent. But we either level the economic playing field (to certain values of level), or it will get leveled for us. And that leveling will start with the house on the hill full of economic hoarders smugly assuring each other that they deserve every last million. And end very badly for pretty much everyone.
 
Old 01-20-2018, 10:15 AM
Status: "delete" (set 20 days ago)
 
3,189 posts, read 1,273,221 times
Reputation: 2351
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
You've been saying this for years, it's like you're on a mission to become CityData's version of Peter Schiff where after enough time being wrong you get to be the broken clock that nails it.
I've been saying this based on the economics since maybe 2014 when CAPEX was rising exponentially even when this so-called miracle technology was developed to extract oil in unconventional places. By its own definition, unconventional means that it is not conventional, meaning that conventional resources are in significant decline, exploration budgets have been cut, and actual findings are lower than ever before in history by a significant margin in comparison to even a decade before.

This is not an overnight process. WTI prices are not subject to commodity exchange commission regulations if traded on ICE market, likely resulting in majority of oil price the result of manipulation of prices, which is very dangerous when concerning such a strategic resource.

WTI was moved to that market to ensure less volatility. Oil is volatile because it is scarce and relies on discovery and extraction. It is the nature of oil to be volatile. To control its volatility through the majority of traded contracts being those that do not connect supplier with purchaser, distorts the price of a vital resource that it is in the public's best interest to be aware of.

Furthermore, if people could see how volatile oil is when, predicated on fundamentals, they would probably demand that more resources are shifted towards sustainable development and alternative energy. Does this makes sense?

Instead, it is likely, based on REAL life fundamentals and not artificial numbers that we are due for an oil shock that will likely precipitate the largest financial crisis in global history. I suppose there could still be time to fund a massive R&D project for sustainable transportation and logistics, but that should have been started at least a decade ago.

It is too late in my view. I advise you to do the math and look at government reported numbers, look at decline rates in the Permian basin and Balken field, and look at our reserves and our estimated percentage of extraction of reserves, the duration of extraction time, and then global consumption rates.

Also look at recent oil findings.

Let me paint you a picture. Findings of a Billion barrels are considered big news today. Roughly 25% of that will be extracted over perhaps 10 year duration, which amounts to 250M barrels which the it takes the world to use in less than three days.

Also look up global demand for crude and let men know if it has gone down, despite our "shift" towards non-renewable resources.

Then let me know if this shouldn't be a primary concern.

I haven't even delved into how it's a matter of national security considering that oil is necessary to both wage war and to defend. I'm not saying that I want to go to war, but if our nation decides to, I'd say it's a primary strategic resource, wouldn't you?

Look at the chart. https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/crudeoilreserves/
 
Old 01-20-2018, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
2,978 posts, read 1,012,279 times
Reputation: 3796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobster View Post
II haven't even delved into how it's a matter of national security considering that oil is necessary to both wage war and to defend. I'm not saying that I want to go to war, but if our nation decides to, I'd say it's a primary strategic resource, wouldn't you?
My immediate concern with US oil is that too much of it is exported to maximize the profits of the companies involved. So we got the Keystone pipeline rammed down our throats, mostly with rah-rah flag waving about energy independence... and most of its contents flow through gulf refineries to other countries.

We're now facing massive expansion of drilling in protected areas; I am sickly, cynically certain most oil from that expansion will sell to the highest bidder, globally. But gosh-a-roonie, the arguments are all for American security and energy independence, rah rah.

I don't know where drilling and development will go from here; I suspect we're about to see a lot of damage to ecologically and culturally delicate regions. Maybe the arguments support that. But my view is "pump it here, refine it here... keep it here" - whether that's the most profitable option or not. No US oil exports. (In and out refining? Fine.)

Last edited by toosie; 01-20-2018 at 03:10 PM.. Reason: Still works without profanity ;)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top