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.
Excellent discussion going on here. First, to Cofga's point about the changing face of "business" in Asheville...it really is a microcosm for what has been happening across the nation. In places that saw the transformation from a manufacturing based economy to a service one (Research Triangle, Seattle, Boston), those areas are healthy (current layoffs notwithstanding). In places like Detroit that bet the farm on manufacturing only, it may be decades before they recover. I think places like Asheville are at a crossroads, and I agree that having creative, smart and forward-thinking town planners is mandatory for success...Paddler, I know Native is negative just as I know that the national media was generally biased in favor of Obama in the election, but that doesn't mean Native and the media made the wrong choices. I try to follow all sides of the housing issue closely for my daily musings at my web site, and my sense is that we have two more years of pain minimum nationwide, with selected metro areas possibly starting the slow road back in 2010. As for Cramer, I think he is just like an economist and weatherman -- makes a prediction and when it turns out badly, he explains the reasons, then goes on to his next bad prediction...As for the stimulus package, I'd spend only for the so-called "shovel ready" projects now, and anything else that directly puts people back to work. I would not do the tax cuts as a) most people will put the money in the bank in this environment, or replenish their kids' education fund, or make the house payment -- all good things but not stimulative and b) it puts the nation (and our kids) further into deficit. Of course if I am wrong, like Cramer I can explain why later.
Of course if I am wrong, like Cramer I can explain why later.
Yeah, Cramer is an easy target for "armchair experts" across the country because he actually has the balls to take a stand on national television (and therefore be held accountable for his calls). Most people, including the "armchair experts" in the media and on anonymous chat boards, don't have anywhere near his knowledge (or his balls), so they sit back and criticize, which is a pretty risk-free venture.
For those who have taken the time to put Cramer in the proper context and do some work for ourselves, his input has reaped very tangible benefits.
Re: the housing market, with all due respect, you're really not saying anything that has already been said over and over and over again in the media. In addition, "two more years of pain nationwide" is a pretty ambiguous statement could be very widely interpreted (i.e., a whole lot more ambiguous than Cramer's very specific, detailed analysis that I posted at the top of the thread).
I'm not sure that folks will save the bulk of the tax cuts since they are supposed to be implemented as payroll tax cuts. That means that folks will only see a few dollars increase in each paycheck--not enough to save but enough to fritter away on things like food. As you said the idea of handing out checks of $1000 per family isn't a good idea since those kinds of rebates do largely end up in savings accounts, although mine went to my son as a graduation present and he promptly spent it all on a trip to attend a convention where he was job hunting so it did get pumped into the economy.
I sure hope that we do have a bunch of shovel ready projects in the files of each state's DOT so we can get that money flowing out fast enough to do some immediate good. The general ratio I've seen is that for every dollar the govt spends on these kinds of projects we generate another dollar whereas tax cuts only give us about 40 cents on the dollar.
I don't meant for this to sound harsh but lgavrich has touched on an important point in his post--there is basic structural change in the WNC economy and the sooner locals realize that and get back to school to learn a new profession the better off they'll be.
They have been doing that for decades, then the move somewhere where high tech jobs are available. I was very fortunate to be able to stay here in high tech, and I am very aware that I was in the minority that went into some kind of technology and was not forced to move.
In the early to mid 90's I was on the leading edge of a technology, and had headhunters after me, but never for a local job, but in places like RTP, Atlanta, and good gawd yankee land.
No, you ain't getting off by blaming the locals for the problem, it is the local government, lack of transportation, tourism/retirement mecca only mentality, and the high cost of living that is keeping technology industries out and tourism in.
I understand your point, Zoo. By "benefit," I meant eliminating foreclosures and stabilizing home prices, which cannot be a bad thing for everyone locally. As for "good" jobs, it depends what you mean by "good." Increased population will certainly be good for the retail, healthcare and residential construction sectors, as well as for the economy in general. Many of these jobs -- nurses, doctors, home building -- will require way more skills than simply being able to say "Do you want fries with that?"
You make a good point as far as requiring additional skills, but outside of the medical and construction fields, it seems as though the majority of jobs being created are low paying service industry and retail jobs. I personally know of at least 10 people working in this town with at least a bachelors (several with a masters) that are waiting tables because they can't find a job with decent wages here.
You make a good point as far as requiring additional skills, but outside of the medical and construction fields, it seems as though the majority of jobs being created are low paying service industry and retail jobs. I personally know of at least 10 people working in this town with at least a bachelors (several with a masters) that are waiting tables because they can't find a job with decent wages here.
What are their Bachelors degrees in? Graduating with a BA in the Humanities or Women's Lit prepared them for exactly the job they have.
No, you ain't getting off by blaming the locals for the problem, it is the local government, lack of transportation, tourism/retirement mecca only mentality, and the high cost of living that is keeping technology industries out and tourism in.
Like the old saying goes, people get the government they deserve. What are you doing to change anything besides enlightening us with your negativity? Get yourselves a progressive government that will push to develop more than tourism while offering training programs, then attract some industries to offer decent jobs. You surely aren't going to bring about any change posting your little diatribes on here--they're about as productive as unicorn farts!
Like the old saying goes, people get the government they deserve. What are you doing to change anything besides enlightening us with your negativity? Get yourselves a progressive government that will push to develop more than tourism while offering training programs, then attract some industries to offer decent jobs. You surely aren't going to bring about any change posting your little diatribes on here--they're about as productive as unicorn farts!
It's the transplants that keep electing these socialists ideologists to city, and now county government, with a lot of support from those on the dole, of which Asheville has more than it's share of. Then council appoints the VP of the chamber of commerce to the council, so he can vote to create or increase new taxes, then send them over to the COC where he has influence on how they are spent.
PS: Truth is truth, your constant attempt to relabel it as negativity does not change the fact it is the blunt truth.
Yeah, Cramer is an easy target for "armchair experts" across the country because he actually has the balls to take a stand on national television (and therefore be held accountable for his calls). Most people, including the "armchair experts" in the media and on anonymous chat boards, don't have anywhere near his knowledge (or his balls), so they sit back and criticize, which is a pretty risk-free venture.
Paddler -- Ouch. I hope your defensiveness is because Cramer has made you oodles of money. As for your definition of "armchair experts," save it for those who think they know how the Super Bowl and other contests will turn out. When we are talking about our own money and investments, we are beyond the armchair and have a right to criticize those who think they know how best to invest it (In this environment, no one knows best, but that doesn't stop folks who have a show to do). Cramer is an entertainer who comes with a warning label during commercial breaks, and for good reason. I watched him faithfully for a year, made a little money from his recommendations, but came to understand that the stock he was in love with one month was the one he trashed a month or two later. He talks about long-term investing but his backpedaling indicates another agenda. As for being "held accountable for his calls," his phone screeners make sure he is not. How many times do callers take him on about his wrong guidance? I support your right to defend him, buy his books, and accept his after the fact explanations. After all, it's your money (and "balls").
Paddler -- Ouch. I hope your defensiveness is because Cramer has made you oodles of money. As for your definition of "armchair experts," save it for those who think they know how the Super Bowl and other contests will turn out.
Hey Igavrich. I wasn't specifically referring to you in my definition of "armchair experts" -- I was referring to the media pundits who don't know anything about investing (especially when compared with Cramer), but who have a column to write or newsletter to publish or a blog to use to attract visitors. And so rather than take any kind of risk themselves, they just sit back and criticize others, despite the fact that they have misunderstood the entire premise of the show. This is a popular sport on anonymous chat boards too.
But hey, if the shoe fits . . . .
Quote:
When we are talking about our own money and investments, we are beyond the armchair and have a right to criticize those who think they know how best to invest it (In this environment, no one knows best, but that doesn't stop folks who have a show to do).
Well, sure -- you have the right to criticize and offer your opinion on an anonymous chat board if you like. No one questions that. But not all opinions are created equally.
No offense intended, but consider the facts. Cramer is a billiionairre ex-hedge fund manager on Wall Street who has written countless books on investing and the stock market and who the NBC network apparently thinks enough of to give him his own television show on the subject. Not only that, but he provides rigorous analysis for his calls, supplies the research behind his reasoning, and is respected as one of the top stock market guys on Wall Street.
You are an anonymous chat room poster whose analysis so far consists of "there will be two more years of pain nationwide".
So perhaps your criticism has to be taken with a grain of salt.
Quote:
Cramer is an entertainer who comes with a warning label during commercial breaks, and for good reason. I watched him faithfully for a year, made a little money from his recommendations, but came to understand that the stock he was in love with one month was the one he trashed a month or two later.
Your complaint is a common one. The problem is not with Cramer, it's with how you people are using the show. Obviously, the "entertainment" is part of the game of attracting viewers. But you have to be sophisticated enough to look past that part and sift through the garbage in order to find the golden nuggets.
Most people are lazy -- they tune in to the show and hear him mention a stock ticker symbol and go out and buy the stock because Cramer said so . . . which is absolutely foolish. He's providing a free education on investing, and that's how it should be approached, not as a quick way to make money.
Most people, including the media critics, are clueless as to how to use the information presented on the show, and so they criticize because they are misguided.
The "lightning round" is a waste of time, but no doubt that's probably what most viewers pay attention to. The meat of show is not the stock picking, it's the *education* that he provides in his main segments. Cramer says this dozens of times on the show, so anyone who is paying attention should know that. But people are greedy . . . and impatient.
As to changing his mind, isn't that what any sane, reasonable person should do once it becomes obvious that the thesis was either wrong or is no longer working? The market is dynamic -- **** happens that you cannot foresee. And so like the football coach who comes into a game with a gameplan but is getting crushed, he has to modify the plan based on changing or unforeseen circumstances. Only a stubborn dogmatist would stick with something that isn't working, just for the sake of being "right". You should be congratulating Cramer for having the good sense to change with the changing conditions.
Apparently you (and the media critics) are perfect, and therefore expect perfection from Cramer. But did you know that your average Wall Street fund manager considers a 12% return to be a pretty damn good year? That means they are wrong most of the time. This is not an easy game, and most people fail miserably and get washed out.
Those of us who are imperfect and who understand how difficult it is to be "right" have a different perspective. The rest complain and criticize the messenger instead of looking inward.
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.
