AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
June 5th, 2010 at 6:31:15 AM permalink
Quote: nyuhoosier

The administration is not "regulation happy," it is trying to restore some balance and common sense. Look what the lack of regulation hath wrought: Madoff, Enron, oil spills, lead in toys, financial implosions and bailouts. You act like the Obama administration just loved bailing out these unregulated banks (actually it was Bush who engineered the largest bank bailout, but OK). With adequate regulation, the bailouts would never have happened. You can't be opposed to bailouts and FOR less regulation. You can't be FOR tax cuts for the rich and AGAINST deficit spending. It's about time you tea partiers got called on your blatant ignorance and hypocrisy.



This administration is regulation happy. I hate to break it to you, but "lack of regulation" is not what wrought all you said. Madoff? He was just a crook, and no amount of regulation will get rid of crooks. Lead in toys? Well, if people would quit insisting they should only pay for a toy what they paid 20 years ago and you would have the higher quality toymakers still making better toys. Banking, oilm etc are VERY HIGHLY REGULATED. I deal with a number of banking regulations just working processing and taking loans. Several of which actually cause more problems (eg: I cannot legally discourage a borrower from applying for a loan no matter what.)

Now, why can't I be for lower taxes? (BTW: Bus cut taxes for ALL TAXPAYERS, not just "the rich" so you need to drop that line, it is well worn out and a lie at that.) Cutting taxes stimulates the economy which raises revenue. Less spending on things like Obamacare and hiring twice as many census workers hurts the economy. So yes, I am for tax cuts and against deficit spending above a level needed to maintain a liquid and active market for US Government Bonds.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
June 5th, 2010 at 6:49:11 AM permalink
Quote: nyuhoosier

LOL. Businesses, especially small businesses, have to borrow continuously to keep their doors open.



Businesses sometimes need revolving lines of credit to meet short-term needs, but any business that doesn't pay its ongoing expenses from cash-flow will be out of business soon. My point is if you have say a small hotel you are not going to add rooms if all of the sudden you have to pay your employees more via Obamacare; pay more to heat and cool the place via Global Warming Taxes; etc.



Quote:

Thank you for the Fox News talking point. In reality, polls show a majority of Americans favor the actual provisions of the health reform bill. The independent and historically conservative GAO shows a 10-year deficit reduction as a result of the health care bill. When you get to be 55 and you are laid off from your job, you'll be thanking your lucky stars to have access to affordable health care for the 10 years you'll have to wait to get Medicare.



Sorry to bhreak it to you, but 60% want Obamacare repealed : http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/health_care_law

Sure people like teh iudea of fixing a low price, etc. But Obamacare breaks the laws of economics. And I don't want to go to jail just because I don't want to buy an "approved" health care policy I don't feel I need just because Obama says so. I want a low-cost; high deductible plan with a Healt Savings Account and make my own decisions. If you encourage that you will not have to worry at age 55, you will be all set.

Instead we had rammed tru a job-killing bill that will increase deficits. No government estimate has ever come close on health care costs; and Obamacare was estimates using 10 years of revenue against 6 years of expenses. Only a moron would believe you can give out more government benefits and LOWER the deficit. Unlike lower taxes which stimulate economic activity which makes the whole tax pie bigger, more benefits raise costs with no economic benefit.





Quote:

Wait, aren't you a casino dealer? You of all people should know the unions are largely responsible for the respectable wages casino workers earn. In fact, Vegas is one of the few places where you can get a low-skill job without a college degree and be part of the middle class. In most other places, service workers are relegated to a miserable existence as part of the working poor.



Uh, dealers earn minimum wage and work for tips for the most part. No need for a union for that. I am confident in my skills that I don't need to give away $500-1,000 a year of my money for someone to make work rules that hold me back and then give hundreds of those dollars to politicians I do not like.



Quote:

It that is true, and I'm not even sure it is, it's probably because the Democrats control both houses of Congress and the presidency. Do you have a source?



It is true, I have seen it boradcast on many sources. It is probably because many established business favor regulation to keep new, innovative competitors out. My guess.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
matilda
matilda
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 317
Joined: Feb 4, 2010
June 5th, 2010 at 8:42:50 AM permalink
Mr Duffman: Calm down. Stop your ranting. We know what you are saying--let it go. But face the facts--not everyone agrees with you. There is a reason for this, for the most part you are wrong.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
June 5th, 2010 at 8:54:45 AM permalink
Quote: matilda

Mr Duffman: Calm down. Stop your ranting. We know what you are saying--let it go. But face the facts--not everyone agrees with you. There is a reason for this, for the most part you are wrong.



I don't expect everyone to agree with me, that is why we have a forum like this.

BTW: I am not wrong at all. A look at the facts shows that.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
matilda
matilda
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 317
Joined: Feb 4, 2010
June 5th, 2010 at 9:54:28 AM permalink
OH my--I don't know where to begin, there are so many "facts".

Here is a sample:

Fact:Obamacare breaks the laws of economics.
Fact:We just had socialized medicine we didn't want rammed down our throats
Fact: small and managable deficits of 1-3% of GDP are needed to avoid recessions.
Fact:"income equality" = virtually everyone in poverty.
Fact:the USA has the most opportunity for anyone anywhere in the world.

Give it up Mr Duffman-- you are like a losing gambler who refuses to walk away from the table. If you keep playing it is inevitable that you will lose again.
matilda
matilda
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 317
Joined: Feb 4, 2010
June 5th, 2010 at 11:54:48 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

My guess is #3. Show me a country with equality of income, and I'll show you a country where everyone is poor. Those who work harder deserve to be rewarded for it. The only one of those goals I agree with is #4.



These statistics are from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2172rank.html

Remember higher the Gini more inequality of income; lower Gini, more equality of income


Rank country Distribution of family income - Gini index Date of Information



1 Namibia 70.7 2003

2 South Africa 65.0 2005

3 Lesotho 63.2 1995

4 Botswana 63.0 1993

5 Sierra Leone 62.9 1989

6 Central African Republic 61.3 1993

7 Bolivia 59.2 2006

8 Haiti 59.2 2001

9 Colombia 58.5 2008

10 Brazil 56.7 2005

11 Bosnia and Herzegovina 56.2 2007

12 Panama 56.1 2003

13 Guatemala 55.1 2007

14 Chile 54.9 2003

15 Honduras 53.8 2003

16 Hong Kong 53.3 2007

17 Paraguay 53.2 2009

18 El Salvador 52.4 2002

19 Peru 52.0 2008

20 Papua New Guinea 50.9 1996

21 Zambia 50.8 2004

22 Niger 50.5 1995

23 Swaziland 50.4 2001

24 Gambia, The 50.2 1998

25 Zimbabwe 50.1 2006

26 Dominican Republic 49.9 2005

27 Sri Lanka 49.0 2007

28 Mexico 48.2 2008

29 Singapore 48.1 2008

30 Costa Rica 48.0 2008

31 Ecuador 47.9 2009

32 Madagascar 47.5 2001

33 Mozambique 47.3 2002

34 Nepal 47.2 2008

35 Rwanda 46.8 2000

36 Malaysia 46.1 2002

37 Philippines 45.8 2006

38 Argentina 45.7 2009

39 Uganda 45.7 2002

40 Jamaica 45.5 2004

41 Uruguay 45.2 2006

42 United States 45.0 2007

43 Cameroon 44.6 2001

44 Cote d'Ivoire 44.6 2002

45 Iran 44.5 2006

46 Nigeria 43.7 2003

47 Guyana 43.2 1999

48 Nicaragua 43.1 2001

49 Cambodia 43.0 2007 est.

50 Thailand 43.0 2006

51 Kenya 42.5 2008 est.

52 Burundi 42.4 1998

53 Russia 42.3 2008

54 China 41.5 2007

55 Senegal 41.3 2001

56 Turkey 41.0 2007

57 Venezuela 41.0 2009

58 Morocco 40.9 2005 est.

59 Georgia 40.8 2009

60 Turkmenistan 40.8 1998

61 Mali 40.1 2001

62 Tunisia 40.0 2005 est.

63 Jordan 39.7 2007

64 Burkina Faso 39.5 2007

65 Ghana 39.4 2005-06

66 Indonesia 39.4 2005

67 Israel 39.2 2008

68 Malawi 39.0 2004

69 Mauritania 39.0 2000

70 Mauritius 39.0 2006 est.

71 Macedonia 39.0 2003

72 Portugal 38.5 2007

73 Guinea 38.1 2006

74 Japan 38.1 2002

75 Timor-Leste 38.0 2002 est.

76 Yemen 37.7 2005

77 Armenia 37.0 2006

78 Vietnam 37.0 2004

79 India 36.8 2004

80 Uzbekistan 36.8 2003

81 Azerbaijan 36.5 2001

82 Benin 36.5 2003

83 New Zealand 36.2 1997

84 Latvia 36.0 2005

85 Lithuania 36.0 2005

86 Algeria 35.3 1995

87 Poland 34.9 2005

88 Laos 34.6 2002

89 Tanzania 34.6 2000

90 Egypt 34.4 2001

91 Estonia 34.0 2008

92 United Kingdom 34.0 2005

93 Switzerland 33.7 2008

94 Bangladesh 33.2 2005

95 Moldova 33.2 2003

96 Greece 33.0 2005

97 Mongolia 32.8 2002

98 France 32.7 2008

99 Tajikistan 32.6 2006

100 Canada 32.1 2005

101 Italy 32.0 2006

102 Spain 32.0 2005

103 Romania 32.0 2008

104 Korea, South 31.3 2007

105 European Union 31.0 2006 est.

106 Ukraine 31.0 2006

107 Netherlands 30.9 2007

108 Ireland 30.7 2008

109 Pakistan 30.6 FY07/08

110 Australia 30.5 2006

111 Kyrgyzstan 30.3 2003

112 Ethiopia 30.0 2000

113 Montenegro 30.0 2003

114 Bulgaria 29.8 2008

115 Finland 29.5 2007

116 Cyprus 29.0 2005

117 Denmark 29.0 2007

118 Croatia 29.0 2008

119 Kazakhstan 28.8 2008

120 Slovenia 28.4 2008

121 Belgium 28.0 2005

122 Iceland 28.0 2006

123 Hungary 28.0 2005

124 Belarus 27.9 2005

125 Germany 27.0 2006

126 Albania 26.7 2005

127 Austria 26.0 2007

128 Czech Republic 26.0 2005

129 Serbia 26.0 2008

130 Malta 26.0 2007

131 Luxembourg 26.0 2005

132 Slovakia 26.0 2005

133 Norway 25.0 2008

134 Sweden 23.0 2005











--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PrivacyCopyrightSite PoliciesUSA.govFOIADNI.govNoFEAR ActSite MapContact CIA
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
June 5th, 2010 at 12:30:53 PM permalink
Quote: matilda

OH my--I don't know where to begin, there are so many "facts".

Here is a sample:

Fact:Obamacare breaks the laws of economics.
Fact:We just had socialized medicine we didn't want rammed down our throats
Fact: small and managable deficits of 1-3% of GDP are needed to avoid recessions.
Fact:"income equality" = virtually everyone in poverty.
Fact:the USA has the most opportunity for anyone anywhere in the world.

Give it up Mr Duffman-- you are like a losing gambler who refuses to walk away from the table. If you keep playing it is inevitable that you will lose again.



Uh, no. I generally play very little and only games where a small advantage or at least minimal disadvantage can be had (full pay VP, poker, BJ, Craps.) Butr lets take a look at your so-called "facts."

So Obamacare which somehow promises to cover more people without adding more supply (ie: more medical professionals) will lower costs? Is there somewhere else more demand and static supply lowers costs? Or the fact that Obamacare will "lower deficits." What other government social program loweres deficits? What other government social program did not come in way over budget? Please cite where any of my points above fails to show that Obamacare breaks the laws of economics. Please do it without mere MSNBC Talking Points, please show a source.

So, even though we had massive demonstrations against it and I showed a poll citing 65% want it repealed; plus all the townhall meetings against it in 2009, somehow America really wanted socialized medicine in the form of Obacare?

I never said small deficits of 1-3% GDP will avoid recessions. Nothing will and recessions are actually needed to keep the overall economy healthy. I said suprlusses and a lack of government debt is bad and we need to maintain a liquid and active market for USA Government Bonds. But maybe you know something that Alexander Hamilton, founder of the US Treasury, doesn't?

Again I state show me a country with income equality and I will show you a poor country.

The USA has more opportunity than anywhere else in the world. Tens and tens of millions of immigrants over 235 years didn't come here because there is not.

Give it up Mr. Matilda. You are coming off like some blogger who puts liberal ideas out and expects no one to challenge them. You are like a $5 BJ player who wants a RFB comp for your whole stay after 1 hour of play.

BTW: The last part was only added because of the last line of your post. No need to get personal on these sites.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
ruascott
ruascott
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 475
Joined: Mar 30, 2010
June 5th, 2010 at 6:03:47 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

I think you need to learn more about Wall Street and what it is. Wall Street provides capital for corporations to expand; they provide the liquid markets for farmers,fishermen, oilmen, lumberjacks, etc to sell their production to a guaranteed market; they provide the market for finance for so many things. This is plenty of "value" to me. Perhaps you would prefer to live in poverty but without Wall Street as in say Haiti?



This isn't 100% accurate. This is what Wall St traditionally did, prior to the last decade or so. Go look at any of the Wall St firms today and you find their revenue growth has been entirely built around proprietary trading platforms, not increasing traditional investment banking businesss.

One can raise legitimate questions regarding what policies the nation should pursue to promote or restrain the financial markets. Just because one thinks that the financial services sector has grown to be too large a segment of our economy doesn't mean one is a marxist/socialist. Prior to the Great Depression we had litterally no governemental interference in capital markets, and it lead to the mother of all bubbles. Then for 50-60 years we had fairly rigerous limitations placed upon financial institutions and did not have massive asset bubbles form. Since the late 90s we have had seen one asset bubble build after another - .com, housing, commodities, etc...these things are not conincidences. Institutional investors hold a larger portion of investable assets than at any time in modern history today. Goldman Sachs is not an investment bank or market maker with a proprietary trading desk on the side. It is a hedge fund, with an investment banking and market making business on the side.

Now, to NYHoosier's comments about the middle class tax burden increasing over the last generation....that's completely inaccurate. Tax burdens have decreased for all income levels over the last 30 years, and they have decreased for the lower and middle class at a much higher percentage than the top 20%. I'd invite anyone to look at the CBO data which includes Income Tax, Payroll Tax, Corporate Tax and Excise Tax to truly understand effective federal tax burdens:

CBO Effective Tax Burden
matilda
matilda
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 317
Joined: Feb 4, 2010
June 5th, 2010 at 10:53:14 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Uh, no. I generally play very little and only games where a small advantage or at least minimal disadvantage can be had (full pay VP, poker, BJ, Craps.) Butr lets take a look at your so-called "facts."



You do not understand the meaning of a simile as a literary device.

Quote:

Please cite where any of my points above fails to show that Obamacare breaks the laws of economics. Please do it without mere MSNBC Talking Points, please show a source.



http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/122679278/HTMLSTART

Quote:

So, even though we had massive demonstrations against it and I showed a poll citing 65% want it repealed; plus all the townhall meetings against it in 2009, somehow America really wanted socialized medicine in the form of Obacare?



If you think the bill was socialized medicine, you do not know what socialized medicine is.

Quote:

I never said small deficits of 1-3% GDP will avoid recessions.



Yes you did--I only copied and pasted your statements.

Quote:

But maybe you know something that Alexander Hamilton, founder of the US Treasury, doesn't?



In fact, he did not found the treasury department-he was just the first secretary. It was established by Congress. Yes, I know something he did not: I know not to screw a married person and the pay blackmail to the spouse for the deed and be forced to resign my cabinet post. I also know to avoid being shot in a duel.

Quote:

Again I state show me a country with income equality and I will show you a poor country.



There is no country with income equality--rich or poor. So you demand is meaningless.

Quote:

The USA has more opportunity than anywhere else in the world. Tens and tens of millions of immigrants over 235 years didn't come here because there is not.



More than anywhere--you must have a very broad knowledge of the world if you can make such a sweeping statement. I wish I was as well informed. In fact, I just read that people are moving out. I think it was in the Wall Street Journal, but I am not sure.

Quote:

Give it up Mr. Matilda. You are coming off like some blogger who puts liberal ideas out and expects no one to challenge them. You are like a $5 BJ player who wants a RFB comp for your whole stay after 1 hour of play.



I never stated any ideas liberal or otherwise. I only pointed out a few of your mistakes and mis-statements. There are many more that are just as egregious. You have no idea of what my views are. Maybe I am a true conservative that is tired of the tea-bagger type.

Quote:

No need to get personal on these sites.



But you did. I quess you don't believe in your own statements.
timberjim
timberjim
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 398
Joined: Dec 5, 2009
June 6th, 2010 at 2:33:52 AM permalink
Quote: matilda



http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/122679278/HTMLSTART

If you think the bill was socialized medicine, you do not know what socialized medicine is.

More than anywhere--you must have a very broad knowledge of the world if you can make such a sweeping statement. I wish I was as well informed. In fact, I just read that people are moving out. I think it was in the Wall Street Journal, but I am not sure.



I can't get this link to work. I would like to read it.

What is your definition of socialized medicine?

Please give some examples of other countries where people have more opportunity to succeed.
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
  • Threads: 326
  • Posts: 9557
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
June 6th, 2010 at 3:17:19 AM permalink
Quote: timberjim


I can't get this link to work. I would like to read it.


try this

edit: over *my* head anyway.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!”   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
timberjim
timberjim
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 398
Joined: Dec 5, 2009
June 6th, 2010 at 3:43:23 AM permalink
Quote: timberjim

Quote: matilda



http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/122679278/HTMLSTART



I can't get this link to work. I would like to read it.



Something was blocking it earlier. I've read it. Now I remeber why I did'nt persue a career in economics after taking courses in micro and macro economics. How does this article support the recently passed health care plan?
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
June 6th, 2010 at 6:43:28 AM permalink
Quote: ruascott

This isn't 100% accurate. This is what Wall St traditionally did, prior to the last decade or so. Go look at any of the Wall St firms today and you find their revenue growth has been entirely built around proprietary trading platforms, not increasing traditional investment banking businesss.



And this provides liquid markets for the people I mentioned. Pretend there are only 5 producers and 5 sellers of corn. Farmer 1 wants to lock in his price right now. Without the markets he has to knock on the door of all 5 and make a deal, no idea if he has made a better or worse deal. Now pretend there is a market (a Buttonwood Tree they all met once a day.) He tries to sell but only one consumer showed up today. So he gets a lower price if he can sell all needs to at all.

Now pretend 5 guys decide to trade in corn. All five show up--they bid for his corn. So he has a ready place to sell it when he feels he will get the best price. Multiply this many times over and see how more efficient this makjes things.

This has helped keep oil supplied to the USA. It was 1981 I think when oil wsa traded on the Mercantile Exchange for the first time. SInce then we have not had a shortage of oil. Yes, we had price spikes, but no shortage. Anyone who lived in the 1970s with $5 or 5 gal max putchases; odd/even systems, etc would have been very happy to pay more for all they needed. But back then there was no spot market.

Southwest made a killing in 2005-2007 by hedfging their fuel costs. They lost some in 2008-2009 doing it again. But they had a predictible fuel cost. All thanks to Wall Street and the markets.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
June 6th, 2010 at 6:56:25 AM permalink
Quote: timberjim


Please give some examples of other countries where people have more opportunity to succeed.



Don't hold your breath waiting for him to answer. He seems to be the type that thinks the USA has no opportunity because some people fail and many just don't want to put in the work needed to succeed. His motto in 1776 would be "Give me Public Option Health Care or give me death."

I'm done with this thread. I know I have backed him into a corner and he has nothing more useful to add after that goofball answer of Hamilton not founding the Treasury but Congress just appointed him. Clearly anyone who wants to make sucha statement does not want to have an intelligent conversation. He just wants to make Obamamaniac talking points.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
matilda
matilda
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 317
Joined: Feb 4, 2010
June 6th, 2010 at 8:48:27 AM permalink
Quote: timberjim

Something was blocking it earlier. I've read it. Now I remeber why I did'nt persue a career in economics after taking courses in micro and macro economics. How does this article support the recently passed health care plan?



It doesn't, it's basic research, not politics. Duffman was saying, I think, that the reasoning behind the bill violated the laws of economics. He claimed this in the context of supply and demand. I am probably giving him much to much credit here, but if it was a violation of the demand-supply model, the violation would rest on the assumption of the sign of the 1st derivative of the demand function, the slope if it is linear. A negative value indicates an inverse relation between price and quantity demanded; as price increases people demand less. Therefore, to show a violation of the model it is necessary to show a demand function with a positive slope so that quantity demanded increases as price increases. Under certain conditions: size of income effect, substitution effect, the demand function can have a positive slope, and in the economics literature a case of this is known as a "Giffin" good. The article I gave the link to attempts to analyse medical care as a Giffin good. Duffman demanded a cite, not something from MSNBC, so I gave him a cite.
ruascott
ruascott
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 475
Joined: Mar 30, 2010
June 7th, 2010 at 6:24:40 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

And this provides liquid markets for the people I mentioned. Pretend there are only 5 producers and 5 sellers of corn. Farmer 1 wants to lock in his price right now. Without the markets he has to knock on the door of all 5 and make a deal, no idea if he has made a better or worse deal. Now pretend there is a market (a Buttonwood Tree they all met once a day.) He tries to sell but only one consumer showed up today. So he gets a lower price if he can sell all needs to at all.

Now pretend 5 guys decide to trade in corn. All five show up--they bid for his corn. So he has a ready place to sell it when he feels he will get the best price. Multiply this many times over and see how more efficient this makjes things.

This has helped keep oil supplied to the USA. It was 1981 I think when oil wsa traded on the Mercantile Exchange for the first time. SInce then we have not had a shortage of oil. Yes, we had price spikes, but no shortage. Anyone who lived in the 1970s with $5 or 5 gal max putchases; odd/even systems, etc would have been very happy to pay more for all they needed. But back then there was no spot market.

Southwest made a killing in 2005-2007 by hedfging their fuel costs. They lost some in 2008-2009 doing it again. But they had a predictible fuel cost. All thanks to Wall Street and the markets.




I'm not arguing against the validity and value of deeply liquid markets provided by market makers on Wall St. In fact, my post supported the idea that investment banks should stick to what they were meant to do....funneling capital to businesses, and making a market.

You are mistaking making a market with propritarty trading. They are two different things. The first is a valid and vital function of Wall St banks. The second is gambling ala a hedge fund. All I want is to not have the same players doing BOTH.

The most recent "innovation" is high frequency trading programs. Their proponents claimed they provided liquidity, while in actuality those programs fail when liquidity is needed the most...the most recent example was seen just a few weeks ago when the Dow dropped over 1k points in a few minutes. All the "sophisticated" HFTs created mass chaos and sucked all liquidity out of the market.
  • Jump to: