Miscellaneous News. - Page 29

It isn't nearly impossible. It merely requires stepping away the current conventional thinking which is based off charging what credit will finance rather than what the intrinsic value happens to be.


I shouldn't be an outlier. That's the point. It's sort of like obesity, it's hard to recognize the expanding waistlines when everyone has them. I'm not of the view that the government should fix it rather they should stop promoting it. (As they promote obesity too with the dietary guidelines) As MJ noted, when the government is subsidizing housing, then people over commit to a purchase there and that decision costs them for 30 years. (which need not be the norm either)

It's ridiculous that most Americans can't save when Chinese peasants can. They probably just went with the 55 inch television and 2.1 stereo sound instead of the 65 inch and 5.1 surround.

Most Americans are materialistic and want better than their neighbors this has been the pattern for years. Read Vance Packard the Status Seekers.Our society is composed mainly of plastic cards which got us into this financial problem in the first place and now we are suffering for it big time.

I sure wish this administration would make up its mind:

US underwrites Internet detour around censors

Internet 'Kill Switch' Would Give President Power To Shut Down The Web

Oh wait...we only need to end around bad guys who try to shut down the Internet...but in the US it would be the good guys shutting down the Internet...for our own good...or for the children...or something.

President Obama could send text-message warnings under new PLAN system:

So I can't block the POTUS from my phone. Awesome.

link

Camping is a yet another phony "Christian". His "Family Radio" scam raked in $10s of millions in "spiritual blackmail" money, much of it from gullible but sincere believers who were coerced into parting with their life savings. What the greedy Camping did may have been within the law, but when it comes to ethics, morals and being a good human being, he never left the starting block.

Perhaps his karma got back to him while still in the body he inhabits?

Camping may really believe what he's saying, or may indeed be a con artist. But the word "coercion" implies the use of force.

Were these people truly forced to part with their money?

For that matter, were they forced to believe what the man said in the first place?

I'm not saying Camping is blameless, but I believe the people who gave him their money do share some responsibility.

On another note, it's amazing to me how in the case of Camping the Left lectures us about "morals" and "ethics", while for some reason such "morals" and "ethics" don't seem to apply to someone like Weiner.

In both cases, no real "crime" was committed (at least as far as we know - that may change). Yet somehow Camping is evil incarnate and Weiner just needs rehab.

Fascinating, really.

White House: Weiner scandal is a 'distraction'

I wonder how the White House feels about the Sarah Palin emails. Are these also "a distraction from important national business?"

Maybe not impossible, but it's quite difficult even if one doesn't finance consumer items. That's one thing I almost always avoid. I do have some credit card debt at the moment. But other than that, we don't finance anything other than our house and vehicles. A new TV? Pay for it. Furniture? Pay for it. The only exceptions I've had is when I have the money and zero percent financing is available, meaning I can use their money for free.


I don't know that it's all or even mostly the government. Much of it is lack of financial education. As for being an outlier, I still say that staying mostly out of debt while living with conveniences is difficult.


How much are Chinese peasants saving?

And we don't even finance cars. We still have the mortgage...but it is quite small relative to house value (even in stagnated housing economy like now). People need to get away from borrowing for consumption (borrowing for production is a different animal...but still needs to be handled wisely). Almost 90% of individual and government borrowing is for consumption. Business borrowing is for production. If people actually saved to buy things (including houses whose pricing isn't ratcheted up by government meddling) this would provide an amazing boon for the economy.



I suggest being very, very careful about those. Check the fine print on those. You can find yourself being late on a payment and suddenly owing all the back interest. It's a "gotcha" in those deals.

Well first again it isn't at all impossible. We used to be a very frugal society and I'm old enough to remember different prices being charged for cash versus credit because credit used to have a cost, not just be financed via Fed printing.

The point is norms can be positive or negative but regardless that doesn't make it a need versus a want. The norm right now might be smartphones for both adults in the household. The norm might be give the teens or kids as many minutes and text messages as they want. That is a want, not a need.

My wife and I have two Straight Talk plans for $45 a month which are still in the want range. We could get by with two $30 plans. My boys get $10 on their prepaid phones which are good for four months and gets them 100 minutes. The phones are for contact with parents. They can use wifi at home for attempts at socializing or better still, go out and play.

So my family, as an example spends $95 a month on four cell phones when I know most people I know are spending $200 on two smartphones and two kid phones.

Yet I know even we are in the want range and could easily knock that down to $65 a month. Could it go lower than that? I'm sure it easily could if it were down to bare need. The reality is most people just don't want to put up with less. The real point is in the future the choice may not be theirs. A great example is that PagePlus subleases Verizon lines and offers 2000 minutes for $80 good for a year. It comes out to 166 minutes a month. I know for a fact if push really came to shove I could live within that. I may not like it but that is the difference between want and need.

So for need we could honestly probably do $200 a year total on four cell phones. (Since we don't keep a house phone) We obviously spend about $1200 a year on that. That extra $1000 a year is WANT on my part (even though I'm supposedly a frugal person.) My "frugality" only looks like such when compared to the $200 cell bills a month almost all my friends and families have.


Most of it is lack of pure desire and the ability to choose different due to having the cash but letting/demanding the government compensate for the lack of investment. Some people feel obliged because the government has declared it ought to take on certain roles but in reality, in the deepest part of ourselves we all know we are ultimately responsible. I'm supposed to have a state pension that will let me retire at 60 years old. I'm supposed to have some level of Social Security from the years I worked outside of teaching. I've scrimped for my rental properties which should provide inflation adjusted retirement. Obviously that isn't a guarantee either since nothing in life is a guarantee. The point though is that those who think Social Security and the pension are a guarantee due to government promises are just delusional. I consider myself only half-delusional.


Last stats I read said around 29% of income.


You hit the nail on the head. Other countries are borrowing to make more things. We are borrowing to consume more things. We don't make things and continue to borrow even more to make up the shortfall and it becomes a giant negative feedback cycle.

It keeps taking me back to my favorite VDH bit. America is not post anything.

"possession of an imitation controlled substance."

Can we all agree that America has Jumped the Shark?

But the school already was in possession of Grass...

I don't disagree. I do finance cars...though I now buy used or lease.


I know. I don't do it often, and I'm always sure to pay it back early. I had one for my mattress. It was supposed to be 6 months or 1 year no payments, no interest. All of a sudden, they called me at work and claimed I owed them hundreds of dollars. Turns out that not only did they think it wasn't deferred, they also had the wrong address. When I looked at the payment schedule, I looked at when the retroactive interest would be applied. It turns out that if I followed their schedule, I would be one month over that date! I had to chuckle at that. I paid it off early. And since they had my address wrong and hadn't gotten bills, the non-payment issue was completely taken care of.

I remember that as well.


I agree on want vs. need. I still think my point remains: Living with modern conveniences and trying to save that kind of money can be very hard. Now, if that couple got rid of all those conveniences and wants, sure...it would be much easier. Then again, I think they can really add to the enjoyment of life (like my Man Cave...it's a life saver!).


I agree. I'm planning on my own retirement savings and my pension (which is, as a matter of fact, guaranteed in PA). If I get Social Security it will be icing on the cake.


They also don't live in our society and have even our basic cost of living.


I agree with some of that article, but not all of it. A lot of our jobs truly are in in high tech, law, investment, etc. And a lot of those manufacturing jobs aren't coming back.

As for the will of the people to labor, I don't believe that is an issue either. This is the old "Americans won't do those jobs." That's nonsense. If Americans could still make a decent living making cars or using a plastic extruder or being coal miners, many would do it.

It is true, however, that we really don't make anything anymore. The real question will be whether we can survive as a society that doesn't make things. As for "borrowing to consume" I suppose that's true on a national level. But it's also not the reason we are in the fiscal position we are in. The issue is that we're borrowing too much, too quickly due to overspending.

It really is not true. We may not make little, low value items. But we do make things and the value of US manufacturing output continues to rise.



It depends on what you mean by society here, Are you talking about one specific country?



It's true at any level.



It's certainly part of the reason. We're eating our seed corn.

I was obviously exaggerating. And manufacturing in America is not on the rise. Please.


Yes. Us.


I don't agree. Some people borrow to consume, others borrow to build businesses, invest in real estate, etc. The same goes for government...some of that borrowed money gets invested into infrastructure..though that's arguably "consuming" as well. What I mean is that on the whole, the US does borrow to consume rather than build its economic capacity.


You omitted the next sentence, which clarified: "The issue is that we're borrowing too much, too quickly due to overspending."


I don't think that the loss of manufacturing jobs had a significant impact on our current economic situation. Those jobs weren't present when the economy was booming in 2005, for example. There weren't many more of those jobs during the late 1990, either. What I'm saying here is that in many respects we really have become a post-industrial nation. The article trumptman posted argued and implied that white collar work wasn't actually work. The further insinuation was that blue collar work was somehow more noble. There is certainly nothing wrong with it. We need it...and it's something I respect quite a bit. But we are becoming a service and information economy. People don't work at the factory or steel mill or auto plant any more (I'm being very general, of course). They work for telecommunications firms. They work in IT. They work in advertising and sales and education and consulting and design...not to mention retail, food service, lodging, etc. These are all valuable professions.

Union Boss Calls Governor Christie "Nazi" and "Adolph."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKgdw...embedded#at=12

It absolutely is in dollar value. There is less employment in it and we don't make little shit. But we still make a lot of stuff.

The Truth About U.S. Manufacturing:




Then I would say yes, we can.



I'm confused here. I already pointed out the two different types of borrowing. What are you disagreeing with me about?



Yes I did. You seem to be suggesting that it is either/or. I don't agree. Borrowing for consumption is a deep problem in the country and borrowing too much, too quickly due to overspending is also a problem.



Agreed.



In many ways this is correct, yes.



I missed that article but I would disagree with both claims. White collar work is work and I don't think there is any particular work that is more or less noble.



Yes they are.

Jimmy Carter, Libertarian Hero

But of course, he's right. As usual.

That wasn't what it stated.

Our top graduates opted for Wall Street, insurance, law, journalism and academia.

These are jobs that while necessary at some level, have attempted to become primary drivers of the economy rather than side functions. Is Wall Street important? Sure because it is important to have a place and means to own and value public companies. However when that action becomes more important that the companies being traded themselves, you've got a problem. When the journalists and news organizations are bigger than the news itself, you've got problems. When academia becomes an insular bubble that exists for itself and is financed through an increasing bubble with no connection to real value provided, you've got a problem.

If you wanted to infer anything from it, when you've got a community organizer for president, but no one to build the community or earn anything for it, you've got a problem. That is America's problems. All the hard work appears to have to be done by someone else. We cannot be post hard work.

All religions are scams and phonies involved. From Born Again to the Catholics.

Who gives a shit about Palins emails!

The poster above you for one. The legion of media outlets that assigned people to pour through the emails for another.

Saw this and celebrated! Hope it comes to fruition.

I hope so too. I hope will be the beginning of the end of the "war on drugs" (more appropriately called the war on people who chose to produce, sell or consume substances not approved by the government).

Governments and their wars...always destructive.

Smoking is for stupid people, that's doesn't change whether or not legalization occurs.

What I want to know is whether or not we have a simple, cost-effective roadside test for drivers who are suspected of driving under the influence of marijuana.

Otherwise, this is just another misguided liberal idea that will end up killing innocent people.

I think you might have a stronger argument here with stronger drugs such as cocaine, crack, heroin, LSD, etc. But, with pot, this case is much harder to make. Pot's negative effects are on par with alcohol, probably not even as bad.

Um, yeah. That's my point. Drunk driving kills a boatload of people now. A bunch of idiots driving while high (no matter how high) isn't going to make things better.

I understand that drunk driving kills people.

I also realize that excessive alcohol consumption results in many negative consequences.

Of course we tried prohibiting it and that seems to have resulted in even worse negative consequences. What we're seeing with drug prohibition is really not any different from what happened in the 1920's and 1930's in the US. Same story, different substances.

Actually, alcohol is much worse, as it's a sensory depressivE, which is where we get into trouble. Pot is a sensory stimulant and it makes you hyper-alert (paranoid). People who drive while stoned are known to drive 10MPH in a 30MPH zone (which, I admit is not safe) and they won't suddenly swerve into a tree or oncoming traffic.

Now they're interested in reading and following the Constitution.

*sigh*

Some days yes, some days no.

Yet nowhere in the story does it mention... a joint resolution.

*ba da bump*



Isn't he great folks? He'll be here all week.

Well this thread has gone to pot.

So, if Obama simply bypasses Congress on the debt ceiling and he's bypassed and basically ignored Congress on Libya...I think we ought to start asking whether the President of the United States is now a dictator and Congress (not to mention the Judicial branch) are simply cowardly, gutless paper tigers.)

Is the debt ceiling unconstitutional?

Cornyn: Obama Bypassing Congress on Debt Limit is 'Crazy Talk'