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.
As I have explained repeatedly, you have Surplus Labor and no place for it to go --- the exact same situation that caused the Great Depression --- and without a major world war in which you'd have to draft 6 Million troops, you will have Surplus Labor indefinitely
Arguments that are patently false do not magically gain validity through being repeated. Concepts of work/leisure preferences have of course been here disregarded completely, as has the fact that the objective behind every "labor-saving device" ever invented has been to allow either more output with the same level of input, or the same output with a lower level of input. This is how economic growth and progress occur. We have washer-driers today so that women can escape the drudgery of such prison-work activities as washing, wringing, and hanging clothes out to dry on a line, and devote their time to other things. Did this create armies of idle women? Don't make me laugh!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
...until such time as people come to terms and accept reality, at which point your unemployment rate will decline, but your E-Pop Ratio will be incredibly low.....so low that you will not be able to fund Social Security or Medicare or any kind of universal health plan without increasing the tax rates to levels that will further harm your economy, creating even more Surplus Labor.
E-Pop Ratio, huh? Is that sort of fabricated term supposed to make you sound like a suave and in-the-know insider-type? It doesn't. It makes you sound like a tongue-tied rube. But since you're in over your head already, how about explaining all the terrible things that happened to SS as the worker-per-retiree ratio (that's an actual term, you know) fell from 16.5-to-1 in 1950 to 5.1-to-1 in 1960. It was then 3.2-to-1 in the 1970's, and even with the Great Recession's recent erasure of ten million jobs, it's fallen only to 2.8-to-1 here lately. Doesn't comport well with your claims and analysis, does it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
The Bush Administration implemented EPA Tier 2 --- gasoline must be 30 ppm Sulfur. As I have explained ad nasuem, the Sulfur Redux process is neither free nor instantaneous...it takes both time and money to reduce Sulfur in gasoline to 30 ppm. The additional cost is passed onto you, the consumer.
Do you favor pollution controls at a source point, or would you rather see this junk just spread all over the place and then trying to clean it all up with paper towels? And whose estimates of the health care cost savings are you eventually going to introduce here?
You have a Quasi-Free Market System (largely in name only), that is heavily interfered with Soviet-style Command Economics.
For example, when the American Hospital Association banded together member hospitals to stifle competition and drive non-member hospitals out of business in 1939, that is an example of Soviet-style Command Economics.
The government should have interfered to stop it.
This sounds eerily similar to government employee unions (and CTA, CCPOA, etc) legislating (FORCED) unionization (complete with rules making it EASY to unionize and IMPOSSIBLE to de-unionize) and then funding the elections of those they sit across the table 'negotiating' with.
It is dishonest because producers as a rule, do everything possible to hide the fact that they are cutting quantity in order to keep from raising prices. The psychological effect on the customer is that they do not realize they are getting less for their money and as a result do not adjust their spending habits to accommodate for the inflation they do not know is happening.
That's crazy talk. It reads right on the label how much product the package contains. The manufacturer isn't hiding anything. It is incumbent upon the consumer to look at the label, examine the price, and do the math. Though in most cases, the supermarket does that for us, with a price per ounce or whatever sticker on the shelf beneath the item. No one is hiding anything.
Anyone wishing to derive a single rate to apply over a given interval. Meanwhile, what about the fact that all of your numbers were wrong? Did you not wish to address that problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom
There are several CPI rates...
There is exactly one CPI-U. It includes food and energy and always has. The fact that BLS also produces and publishes a series of several dozen special aggregate indexes that are of use and interest to researchers and scholars is completely irrelevant. Your claims were and are pure and utter falsehood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom
...you are are lacking in all ethics to the point that you are tying to act as if there is only one, and that it includes food and energy when the most used index by the majority of economists does not.
Without the slightest question, the price index most used by actual economists is the CPI-U itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom
As I said before your posts add nothing to the discussion here so I would greatly appreciate it if you would go watch cartoons or something.
That would be an upgrade over many of the posts found here.
What? No such policies existed. Laissez-faire means no interference, not by government, not by special interest groups, not by anyone.
It was kind of you to travel all those light-years to come and inform us. Unfortunately, the informing part is not going so well, as for one thing, your free-floating lexicon is not known to us here. We do recognize belief that markets are wise enough to regulate themselves as being evidence of abject laissez-fairianism though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
No, the problem is Surplus Labor....and you have Surplus Labor because you cannot compete globally...thus global under-consumption of Made in America goods.
US exports are at record levels. We are the world's most significant nation in terms of international trade. This news has seemingly been slow to reach you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
And for the record......those are all premium high-paying wages in each respective State....and the Laws of Economics via the Law of Supply & Demand sets the wages in all States except the US...where the union interferes and drive up wages in violation of the Laws of Economics.
Plainly, you've neither studied nor practiced much labor economics. It is corporations in their condolidation of market power that tilt the playing field for wages. That of course is their God-given right according to airhead laissez-fairians, but let workers try and do the same thing -- appoint a small group of experts to represent them and their interests in collective bargaining -- and all of a sudden, it's the work of Satan himself. How can such people not realize what a spectacle of absurdity they make of themselves?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
0% down is prima facie evidence that they borrowed beyond their means.
Got math? Down payment is one loan term among many. This statement is evidence only of more rookie cluelessness. Meanwhile, the people doing the low-doc, no-doc, teaser-rate-with-the exploding-trigger mortgages were the unconstrained cowboy capitalists of Wall Street. Sensible oversight would have seen them reined in. But that's not at all what you get when a bunch of pie-eyed, laissez-faire, free-marketeers is in charge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Yes, there was. There were thousands and thousands of "internet businesses" that had IPOs. They suckered in millions of novice investors not experienced in reality (or investing).
There's one born every minute, I guess. In the aftermath of GLB came a groundswell of criminality. In addition to all those Enron-style accounting scandals, over at the bank, the investment side was setting up rigged IPO's (particularly on the NASDAQ) that were structured to earn massive early profits for favored commercial-side customers. Surely, you heard about that. And surely you recall as well the nascent cable business channels pumping up their ratings by encouraging so-called "day-traders" to make a fortune off the info to be provided by this or that deep business insider right after the commercial break. Both of those things actually happened. They comprised a crime-wave on the one hand, and a rash of self-serving false advertising on the other. They did not comprise a "dot-com bubble". In the real, actual non-banking, non-cable-business-channel world of IT, Moore's Law continued to function, the internet continued to mushroom, business and personal investment in hardware and software continued to explode, and the burgeoning industries of IT maintenance and security continued to create thousands upon thousands of new jobs. Basically, the IT world sailed right through the millennial era following along the same path it had been on for at least one decade and has continued to follow now for more than another one. Your phony "dot-com bubble" is just another failed attempt at a propaganda cover-up.
Excuse me, but that's exactly how it happened. The source of the credit crisis that bled out into the Great Recession of 2007-2009 was not house-flippers or greedy, irresponsible borrowers. It was the unconstrained greed of Wall Street and its cohort of unscruplous private brokers, compromised property appraisers, and look-the-other-way bond-rating agencies. In other words, Romney's people. And in a supporting role, we had various braindead members of the Bush administration -- people whose job it was to prevent this very sort of thing from happening, but who ardently cheered the villains on or just sat on their hands and watched it all happen right under their noses instead.
Here, check out this cute little 11-minute cartoon. Apart from its inexcusable confusion of subprime lending with abuse and exploitation of subprime and other credit markets, it does a fairly good job of summarizing just how things went so horribly wrong...
Who forced banks to make those loans? Who warned about letting banks make those loans? Democrats and Republicans and Wall street all have blood on there hands. So stop this bushs fault crapola...I didnt like him either but jeez, try putting down the huffington post and think for yourself.
The American tax payer got screwed, and with much predictable outcome we are still getting screwed...and you know why?????????
Re-electing the same trash, and its not the politicians fault, its your fault.
That's true in part, but it doesn't explain inflationary cycles in the US.
Well, you aren't going to see hyper-inflation in an economy that produces 21-22% of world GDP, so there you go. A confusion of apples and oranges has happened again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Excess currency relative to demand and GDP can create Real (Monetary) Inflation.
MV=PY? Wow, that's so deep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
That is effectively what happened in the 1970s
No. What happened (twice) in the 1970's was the exogenous event of an oil price shock. They were in all the papers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
A few years ago when I calculated the Coefficient of Absorption (a laboriously pain-staking process)...
Hahahaha! What are you, some sort of noise-abatement specialist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
...the Global Economy can handle another $9 TRILLION to $13 TRILLION in excess US Dollars before you start seeing evidence of Real Inflation.....and that would only be slightly higher than the normal 2%-3% annual Real Inflation rate. What I would expect, is that Europe emerges from the funk far earlier than the US, a global shift in reserve currencies and international trade currencies, and suddenly the US has hyper-inflation running in the 25%-35% range annually.....worse than the post-WW I Era but not as bad as the Civil War Era.
Save these sorts of free-floating ramblings and musings for the home-front folks. Nobody here is taking them seriously. I for one have heard much better from post-docs on acid.
Excuse me, but that's exactly how it happened. The source of the credit crisis that bled out into the Great Recession of 2007-2009 was not house-flippers or greedy, irresponsible borrowers. It was the unconstrained greed of Wall Street and its cohort of unscruplous private brokers, compromised property appraisers, and look-the-other-way bond-rating agencies. In other words, Romney's people. And in a supporting role, we had various braindead members of the Bush administration -- people whose job it was to prevent this very sort of thing from happening, but who ardently cheered the villains on or just sat on their hands and watched it all happen right under their noses instead.
Here, check out this cute little 11-minute cartoon. Apart from its inexcusable confusion of subprime lending with abuse and exploitation of subprime and other credit markets, it does a fairly good job of summarizing just how things went so horribly wrong...
You've got the basic gist, but it goes back farther than 'Romney's people' or the Bush administration. It all has its genesis in the first S&L crisis under Reagan. Add to that extensive deregulation of the financial industry, compounded with the effects of how the US implemented its 'free trade' and globalization policies. Clinton hammered home the final nail in our financial coffin when he went along with the repeal of Glass-Steagall. And of course all our wars and tax cuts to the uberwealthy certainly hasn't helped. One fine mess, as Oliver Hardy would say.
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.
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.
