View Full Version : Trumps: White Angry Middleclass
We should model it after what other countries have successfully done.
I think the states should feel free to do that but think it's a very bad idea to allow the federal government that much more influence over us.
freshstart
5-29-16, 6:48pm
I want the Feds running healthcare so it is truly universal and patients in low-income areas of the country don't get screwed
I want the Feds running healthcare so it is truly universal and patients in low-income areas of the country don't get screwed
Should the EU run the healthcare of all it's member states, you know, just to make sure no-one in Estonia or perhaps Malta is getting screwed?
frugal-one
5-29-16, 7:41pm
What's this, the royal we? Speak for yourself.
A lot of people here have their particular hobby horses; use your ignore feature.
Still have to see/listen when the quote function is used. Rob has told us this MULTIPLE times. Time to do something about it. As Alan stated, choose....
freshstart
5-29-16, 7:51pm
Should the EU run the healthcare of all it's member states, you know, just to make sure no-one in Estonia or perhaps Malta is getting screwed?
no, the EU is too new and getting it's feet wet, and I don't have the knowledge whether UH is even one of their goals so I can't speak to that
here, all men are created equal so why should quality/cost of healthcare vary from state to state?
Williamsmith
5-29-16, 7:57pm
Just talked to my mom. When I was born, they had no health insurance. Paid for my birth.....in cash.
gimmethesimplelife
5-29-16, 8:00pm
Just talked to my mom. When I was born, they had no health insurance. Paid for my birth.....in cash.So did my Mom in 1966. The whole amount.....all doctor's visits during pregnancy through birth.... $600. Those days are gone with the wind for sure. Rob
freshstart
5-29-16, 8:02pm
my father paid $22 a month for 11 yrs for my birth, coincidentally we got color tv when I was 12
Williamsmith
5-29-16, 8:21pm
Is there any reason we can't go back. Anybody know how to put healthcare in the time machine?
I must have been born at dollar general hospital.....$31.40.
freshstart
5-29-16, 8:24pm
$31.40, you were a Blue Light Special, williamsmith! lol
We can go back for sure! But that would mean we would all die quickly and younger and many diseases would have no treatments. Are you ready for that?
Williamsmith
5-29-16, 9:14pm
We can go back for sure! But that would mean we would all die quickly and younger and many diseases would have no treatments. Are you ready for that?
Does it really mean that, Tammy? Have we maximized everything along the way? I get nostalgic about it.
We can go back without sacrificing much--just by trimming the insurance and Pharma fat from the process.
People back in the day had to deal with intractable infections (which may be on the rise again), childbirth issues--including infant mortality, and injuries with little access to trauma care. But clean food and water and a hearty lifestyle contributed to long lives for many. A little browsing in genealogy tomes may surprise you.
I believe access to affordable health care is a basic human right, yes. Supporting me in this belief is the fact that such access is a feature included in the citizenship of every other developed nation on this planet.
I thought that in this nation we had abandoned the notion that we had a right to the product of others labor way back in 1865. I knew that the Democratic Party of that era was reluctant to accept it and am sad to see that after all this time, it still exists.
It's not either/or. I'm sure not everything has been maximized. But I would prefer to live today in the Western world of healthcare than any other time or place I'm familiar with.
I've been a nurse for 19 years and I've been a home-birthing home-schooling natural foods mother since the 80s. I'm well read. Tens of thousands of pages on this stuff. I stand by my belief that I'm lucky to be in this time and place for my best chance at a long and healthy life.
When hearing about the ACA I never thought it was going to come with such high deductibles that people would not be able to afford to use it. I don't think others thought that either.
This is why turning Medicare into grants to buy insurance will be a financial disaster for old folks. Instead of that we should be looking to revise the ACA to be more like Medicare.
I would agree that the state of the art in medicine is better than it ever has been--MRIs and other tools can be invaluable. Our trauma care is second to none. But that doesn't negate the fact that costs have been inflated beyond all reason and that outcomes are lackluster at best in many cases--and too often fatal, if statistics can be believed.
Williamsmith
5-31-16, 12:37pm
Trump just unloaded on members of the mainstream press covering a press conference on the money he raised for Veterans organizations. He called one a sleeze and many others dishonest to their face. Those reporters were so offended that one of them asked if this was how it was goin to be if he became President. The answer, Yes.
Im starting to like this guy. But then again, I love hot pepper cheese and salt and vinegar chips.
Ultralight
5-31-16, 12:42pm
I thought that in this nation we had abandoned the notion that we had a right to the product of others labor way back in 1865. I knew that the Democratic Party of that era was reluctant to accept it and am sad to see that after all this time, it still exists.
If you refer to the "abolishing" of slavery I can assure you, we merely outsourced it to third-world countries.
If you refer to the "abolishing" of slavery I can assure you, we merely outsourced it to third-world countries the federal government (with massive citizen approval of course).
There ya go UA, I fixed it for you. ;)
We can go back for sure! But that would mean we would all die quickly and younger and many diseases would have no treatments. Are you ready for that?
Well, pension plans would become more viable.
Ultralight
5-31-16, 2:49pm
Im starting to like this guy.
Trump!!!!
If you refer to the "abolishing" of slavery I can assure you, we merely outsourced it to third-world countries.
And the robots, don't forget them. We've managed to increase domestic manufacturing output for decades as manufacturing employment has declined. I'm not sure that our industrial base has been hollowed out so much as upgraded.
Ultralight
5-31-16, 2:58pm
And the robots, don't forget them. We've managed to increase domestic manufacturing output for decades as manufacturing employment has declined. I'm not sure that our industrial base has been hollowed out so much as upgraded.
Oil. Oil really helps.
Williamsmith
5-31-16, 3:07pm
Hip hip hooray for reindustrialization........to hell with service and finance. Trump will put pride back in America. Even gimmiethesimplelife will want to stay here.
Ultralight
5-31-16, 3:11pm
Hip hip hooray for reindustrialization........to hell with service and finance. Trump will put pride back in America. Even gimmiethesimplelife will want to stay here.
Sold!
Williamsmith
6-2-16, 6:38am
It didn't take the media long to ratchet up the attacks on Trump after the way he embarrassed them over the veterans fund raising fiasco. Trump is getting more free air time and publicity than ever.
What about this, Trump is not hosting the next PGA tour at his course, it is moved to Mexico. Apparently sponsors do not want to support something at his course. Seems like how the free market works, of course he said this will not happen when he is president. Does he even know how this works? Government is not going to tell the PGA where to hold their tournament, and they shouldn't, I know he doesn't seem to have a clue that presidents have to work with people and make agreements across differences, but this is just one more crazy that gets him more air time.
It didn't take the media long to ratchet up the attacks on Trump after the way he embarrassed them over the veterans fund raising fiasco. Trump is getting more free air time and publicity than ever.
The media seems far from embarrassed to me. Some of them in fact seem to be claiming that he only started writing checks after they called him on it.
I think most Americans dislike the media -- the right wingers think it is too liberal. The liberals think it is too right-wing. So everyone is enjoying Trump's jabs at the media.
Williamsmith
6-2-16, 9:07am
The media seems far from embarrassed to me. Some of them in fact seem to be claiming that he only started writing checks after they called him on it.
Many of the media will do anything to rid the country of the scourge of Trumpism. Including inventing fraudulent incidents and ginned up charges. They are wasting their time digging deep into the Trump phenomenon. The answers to his popularity are right on the surface. He is a simple man. Perhaps even a simpleton. But he is motivated by his true feelings and not some elaborate scheme to take over the country. He speaks his mind even if that reveals he hasn't thought it out too clearly. He has been accepted by the common man not because he sits around the fire with them, but because he champions their causes while enjoying things the common man dreams of. And he doesn't tell the common man that their time has passed and now others must reap the benefits of your labor. He is not a puzzle, he is exactly what he appears to be and that irks the media.
Many of the media will do anything to rid the country of the scourge of Trumpism. Including inventing fraudulent incidents and ginned up charges. They are wasting their time digging deep into the Trump phenomenon. The answers to his popularity are right on the surface. He is a simple man. Perhaps even a simpleton. But he is motivated by his true feelings and not some elaborate scheme to take over the country. He speaks his mind even if that reveals he hasn't thought it out too clearly. He has been accepted by the common man not because he sits around the fire with them, but because he champions their causes while enjoying things the common man dreams of. And he doesn't tell the common man that their time has passed and now others must reap the benefits of your labor. He is not a puzzle, he is exactly what he appears to be and that irks the media.
Incredibly astute.
Many of the media will do anything to rid the country of the scourge of Trumpism. Including inventing fraudulent incidents and ginned up charges. They are wasting their time digging deep into the Trump phenomenon. The answers to his popularity are right on the surface. He is a simple man. Perhaps even a simpleton. But he is motivated by his true feelings and not some elaborate scheme to take over the country. He speaks his mind even if that reveals he hasn't thought it out too clearly. He has been accepted by the common man not because he sits around the fire with them, but because he champions their causes while enjoying things the common man dreams of. And he doesn't tell the common man that their time has passed and now others must reap the benefits of your labor. He is not a puzzle, he is exactly what he appears to be and that irks the media.
The secret of his "success" is that he tells his followers what they want to hear with little regard for truth or logic.
I think he is exactly what he appears to be: a crude, mendacious buffoon with a limited grasp of the issues.
a crude, mendacious buffoon with a limited grasp of the issues.
Uh... the typical American?
ApatheticNoMore
6-2-16, 10:08am
The media made Trump with constant coverage, now i am supposed to believe it is somehow against him. give me a break.
iris lilies
6-2-16, 10:29am
The media made Trump with constant coverage, now i am supposed to believe it is somehow against him. give me a break.
I look at it this way:
The journalists doing the reporting are Bernie fans. Their bosses are Hillary voters.
But the news organizations follow Trump, giving him media "love" because he is a sound bite a second kind of guy. He gets people watching their stupid news shows.
Yes, they made him against their own philosophies. It is hilarious to me.
IshbelRobertson
6-2-16, 10:31am
The secret of his "success" is that he tells his followers what they want to hear with little regard for truth or logic.
I think he is exactly what he appears to be: a crude, mendacious buffoon with a limited grasp of the issues.
C'mon, tell us what you REALLY think of this buffoon!
C'mon, tell us what you REALLY think of this buffoon!
He is a liar. He is a bully. He is a boor. He is a Liberal. He is perhaps the only candidate the GOP could have chosen to make Clinton's more conventional vileness and duplicity seem relatively palatable by comparison.
If he wins in November, and perhaps even if he loses, he will have set back the cause of American Conservatism by a generation.
If he wins in November, and perhaps even if he loses, he will have set back the cause of American Conservatism by a generation.
I'm impressed. Even when you talk about that horrible jackass you manage to find something to be optimistic about.
I'm impressed. Even when you talk about that horrible jackass you manage to find something to be optimistic about.
Even liberals would suffer. In recent years, they have needed to look through the conservative wastebasket for ideas like Obamacare or the Carbon Tax.
Even worse, where would they turn to populate their narrative with villains?
Williamsmith
6-2-16, 6:28pm
The secret of his "success" is that he tells his followers what they want to hear with little regard for truth or logic.
I think he is exactly what he appears to be: a crude, mendacious buffoon with a limited grasp of the issues.
Well, Trump is enjoying the "success" most recent conservative candidates only dream of. Conservatism doesn't understand that they speak for a narrow slice of the voting pie. They pretend to speak for a broad base but most of that base doesn't exist, they don't care at all about economic theory, moral politics or Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Thomas Lowell. They care about MLB, NBA, NHL and NASCAR and what beer is on sale at the local distributor.
The basic fact is Trumps base is the salt of the earth, the common working folk, the guys who sit at the American Legion bar and shoot the bull then go home and have it out with the old lady. It ain't brain surgery. And no somebody finally represents them.
iris lilies
6-2-16, 8:22pm
Well, Trump is enjoying the "success" most recent conservative candidates only dream of. Conservatism doesn't understand that they speak for a narrow slice of the voting pie. They pretend to speak for a broad base but most of that base doesn't exist, they don't care at all about economic theory, moral politics or Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Thomas Lowell. They care about MLB, NBA, NHL and NASCAR and what beer is on sale at the local distributor.
The basic fact is Trumps base is the salt of the earth, the common working folk, the guys who sit at the American Legion bar and shoot the bull then go home and have it out with the old lady. It ain't brain surgery. And no somebody finally represents them.
The three strong Trump supporters I know are busness women with IQ's higher than mine. Phd's, MBAs, etc. While i cannot grock their support, they arent fans of NASCAR or any of the sports you named. One IS a rabid NFL fan, though.
Williamsmith
6-2-16, 8:42pm
The three strong Trump supporters I know are busness women with IQ's higher than mine. Phd's, MBAs, etc. While i cannot grock their support, they arent fans of NASCAR or any of the sports you named. One IS a rabid NFL fan, though.
Well, there it is.......proof Trump IS uniting the party.
In recent years, they have needed to look through the conservative wastebasket for ideas like Obamacare or the Carbon Tax.
I agree. I'm equally tired of the democratic party pretending to be republican-lite. It's about time they got back to acting like people matter.
Well, Trump is enjoying the "success" most recent conservative candidates only dream of. Conservatism doesn't understand that they speak for a narrow slice of the voting pie. They pretend to speak for a broad base but most of that base doesn't exist, they don't care at all about economic theory, moral politics or Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Thomas Lowell. They care about MLB, NBA, NHL and NASCAR and what beer is on sale at the local distributor.
The basic fact is Trumps base is the salt of the earth, the common working folk, the guys who sit at the American Legion bar and shoot the bull then go home and have it out with the old lady. It ain't brain surgery. And no somebody finally represents them.
Of the two trump supporters I actually know personally one fits that image (although too young to be interested in the American Legion bar) and the other is a well off retired Canadian immigrant who holds the distinction of being the only Canadian I personally know who doesn't like their healthcare. Not at all a respresentative sample, admittedly, but what can I say, my Canadian former co-worker is probably one of roughly ten trump supporters in the bay area. (or at least one of the ten trump supporters here who will actually admit to being a trump supporter)
Get ready for the mayhem, batten down the hatches.
Check this out:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/06/03/ugly-bloody-scenes-in-san-jose-as-protesters-attack-trump-supporters-outside-rally/
Williamsmith
6-3-16, 8:53am
Get ready for the mayhem, batten down the hatches.
Check this out:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/06/03/ugly-bloody-scenes-in-san-jose-as-protesters-attack-trump-supporters-outside-rally/
People waving Mexican flags appear to be violent. I guess they think We need socialism so we don't have to put up with free speech. Capitalism is a crime.....but they didn't say what the punishment is. I guess we find out later.
"hatred, racism and violence" is universal. The left is very good at it also.
And the police, who can blame them, if they take action they lose their jobs and get arrested too.
Dont worry, Philadelphia will have its share of mayhem. The white middleclass doesn't have a job to go to that they care about, they will have plenty of time to devote to riot, mischief and general rebellion.
I will have to say, that was a pretty wimpy display of riot and violence. We can do better.
The basic fact is Trumps base is the salt of the earth, the common working folk, the guys who sit at the American Legion bar and shoot the bull then go home and have it out with the old lady. It ain't brain surgery. And no somebody finally represents them.
The fact is Trump supporters have a mean household income of about $72,000. Now maybe that's a few dozen billionaires and a lot of redundant factory workers, but I somehow doubt it.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/?version=meter+at+null&module=meter-Links&pgtype=article&contentId=&mediaId=&referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F%3FWT.z_jo g%3D1%26hF%3Df%26vS%3Dundefined&priority=true&action=click&contentCollection=meter-links-click
I would agree that Trump "represents" a lot of unfocused, ill-directed anger.
Williamsmith
6-3-16, 9:48am
The fact is Trump supporters have a mean household income of about $72,000. Now maybe that's a few dozen billionaires and a lot of redundant factory workers, but I somehow doubt it.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/?version=meter+at+null&module=meter-Links&pgtype=article&contentId=&mediaId=&referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F%3FWT.z_jo g%3D1%26hF%3Df%26vS%3Dundefined&priority=true&action=click&contentCollection=meter-links-click
I would agree that Trump "represents" a lot of unfocused, ill-directed anger.
Based on exit poll estimates.......Independent? That is a large block of voters that wasn't counted. In my state for instance, an Independent wasn't permitted to vote in the primary for Trump. Primary voters are more frequently educated and do not represent a cross section of the eventual generalelection voters. AND exit poll questioning about income is usually overstated by the respondent. Human nature. I took a look at th numbers and I fall below even the low estimate on Hillary and I consider myself well off. Also, $72,000 in Pennsylvania is not the same as $72,000 in Texas etc. Your turn.
gimmethesimplelife
6-3-16, 12:07pm
People waving Mexican flags appear to be violent. I guess they think We need socialism so we don't have to put up with free speech. Capitalism is a crime.....but they didn't say what the punishment is. I guess we find out later.
"hatred, racism and violence" is universal. The left is very good at it also.
And the police, who can blame them, if they take action they lose their jobs and get arrested too.
Dont worry, Philadelphia will have its share of mayhem. The white middleclass doesn't have a job to go to that they care about, they will have plenty of time to devote to riot, mischief and general rebellion.
I will have to say, that was a pretty wimpy display of riot and violence. We can do better.I clicked on the link and read about the goings on with the Trump protestor's in San Jose. Two things come to mind. One, I don't approve of violence. Two, with the income inequality issue being what it is in America, why would anyone be surprised that such behavior is going to take place? It's not my method...
I believe in offshoring and educating people in non-violent ways and eventually leaving. But did anyone stop to think that perhaps these protestors have so little to no hope that my non violent ways wouldn't work for them? I can certainly see how the United States inspires such behavior in the young. If I had been there I would have wanted a loudspeaker to shout the following to the protestor's - CEASE AND DESIST ANY BEHAVIORS YOU COULD BE ARRESTED FOR. WITH AN ARREST ON YOUR RECORD IT WILL BE MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO IMMIGRATE TO A BETTER COUNTRY. Common sense but try and get young people of a certain age to listen. Their behaviors really are putting their futures at risk, though.....Rob
I took a class in college in which the professor noted that little or nothing ever changes unless and until the situation is made uncomfortable for those in power. He cited the blind, uncontrolled intersection that finally gets attention after there are a couple of deaths. A casual review of history proves his theory.
ApatheticNoMore
6-3-16, 12:30pm
Well the thing to be scared at about an arrest record is the ability to get a job, that's kind of the important thing, as criminal background checks are rampant, but some people accept that because what they are protesting is worth it to them, and good for them, we need someone who isn't just grubbing for economic security sometimes. Violence is it's own thing, but I mean just getting arresting in protest which of course some do (it's a choice it seldom seems to be required by protest) and non-violently.
I don't think I'd believe any account of a protest I heard second hand. Now I witnessed a small Trump protest recently. I did not go out of my way to witness it. It was very small but it was peaceful (there were no pro-trump forces around, but there were 2-3 times as many people taking pics of the protest as protesting). And my sympathy is with the protestors as there is something to protest in Trump of course, but I choose my battles, at this point in the game before the primaries a protest that will seem to just enable Hillary is ....
Ultralight
6-3-16, 12:31pm
People get rowdy sometimes. No one makes a big deal of it when college kids riot over a football game. But when there is a scuffle over politics, everyone fears that society is descending into total mayhem.
I took a class in college in which the professor noted that little or nothing ever changes unless and until the situation is made uncomfortable for those in power. He cited the blind, uncontrolled intersection that finally gets attention after there are a couple of deaths. A casual review of history proves his theory.
Apparently this guy agrees with your professor. http://www.topinfopost.com/2014/06/30/ultra-rich-mans-letter-to-my-fellow-filthy-rich-americans-the-pitchforks-are-coming
iris lilies
6-3-16, 1:00pm
I clicked on the link and read about the goings on with the Trump protestor's in San Jose. Two things come to mind. One, I don't approve of violence. Two, with the income inequality issue being what it is in America, why would anyone be surprised that such behavior is going to take place? It's not my method...
I believe in offshoring and educating people in non-violent ways and eventually leaving. But did anyone stop to think that perhaps these protestors have so little to no hope that my non violent ways wouldn't work for them? I can certainly see how the United States inspires such behavior in the young. If I had been there I would have wanted a loudspeaker to shout the following to the protestor's - CEASE AND DESIST ANY BEHAVIORS YOU COULD BE ARRESTED FOR. WITH AN ARREST ON YOUR RECORD IT WILL BE MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO IMMIGRATE TO A BETTER COUNTRY. Common sense but try and get young people of a certain age to listen. Their behaviors really are putting their futures at risk, though.....Rob
Getting up and out of a country takes more moxie than most people have. Logistics are difficult. Finding a country that supports you (the generic you) as a legal immigrant, leaving family and friends, and a familiar world may be near impossible. Most people cannot do it. I have respect for immigrants who DO pick up and leave a peaceful place for a world they think is a better fit for them. Action, not words.
While you are the salesman for getting up and out, you havent taken action yourself. You are not a good example of your philosophy and I dont have respect for you as a representative of the idea of leaving a country that does not serve you. You are all talk, no action.
Drilling down to details, how old is your mother? You say you will leaves when she passes. Is she in her 70's? Does that put you here a good ten more years, if not longer? Surely there are some compromise positions such as live for half a year in Mexico, or you move there and come to the US when she is older and more frail. Or you could take her with you. Beng from Austria and havng your same philosophy, surely she does not like Merika much herself ( even though we did offer her entry many years ago, you are welcome!)
My immigrant grandfather from Scotland may not have set the world on fire when he brought his bride here to this country but he did have the moxie to get up and out. I will forever be grateful to him for that.
Having read your screeds now for years I know you will likely think I am responding to your philosophy. I am not. I think its fine to assess where you (again, the generic you) live and pick up stakes and move if there are greener pastures, be that to another city, another state, or another country.
I believe that your expectations about what the world owes you are not realistic and will not be met in the third world countries you like, but I could be wrong and this isnt about me anyway. Its about you. You are getting older and you will not get this time back.you are fretting your life away beng unhappy where you live. why, ever? Why dont you move NOW? what is REALLY stopping you? Sorry, I just dont believe it is your mother.
Teacher Terry
6-3-16, 2:07pm
Many countries will not let you move there unless you can prove you have a certain amount of $ and won't use their services. They don't need anymore people to take care of. Mexico is probably an exception but I can't imagine wanting to live there. I spent a few days there and will never go back.
Many of the media will do anything to rid the country of the scourge of Trumpism. Including inventing fraudulent incidents and ginned up charges. They are wasting their time digging deep into the Trump phenomenon. The answers to his popularity are right on the surface. He is a simple man. Perhaps even a simpleton. But he is motivated by his true feelings and not some elaborate scheme to take over the country. He speaks his mind even if that reveals he hasn't thought it out too clearly. He has been accepted by the common man not because he sits around the fire with them, but because he champions their causes while enjoying things the common man dreams of. And he doesn't tell the common man that their time has passed and now others must reap the benefits of your labor. He is not a puzzle, he is exactly what he appears to be and that irks the media.
Trump = "Perhaps even a simpleton" --- I AGREE! How does this make him capable of running this country? Listen to him speak.... he NEVER uses words over 2 syllables!
The secret of his "success" is that he tells his followers what they want to hear with little regard for truth or logic.
I think he is exactly what he appears to be: a crude, mendacious buffoon with a limited grasp of the issues.
Even his own party is not thrilled with him. That should give you a clue as to his capabilities.
Many of the media will do anything to rid the country of the scourge of Trumpism. Including inventing fraudulent incidents and ginned up charges. They are wasting their time digging deep into the Trump phenomenon. The answers to his popularity are right on the surface. He is a simple man. Perhaps even a simpleton. But he is motivated by his true feelings and not some elaborate scheme to take over the country. He speaks his mind even if that reveals he hasn't thought it out too clearly. He has been accepted by the common man not because he sits around the fire with them, but because he champions their causes while enjoying things the common man dreams of. And he doesn't tell the common man that their time has passed and now others must reap the benefits of your labor. He is not a puzzle, he is exactly what he appears to be and that irks the media.
Well, Trump is enjoying the "success" most recent conservative candidates only dream of. Conservatism doesn't understand that they speak for a narrow slice of the voting pie. They pretend to speak for a broad base but most of that base doesn't exist, they don't care at all about economic theory, moral politics or Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Thomas Lowell. They care about MLB, NBA, NHL and NASCAR and what beer is on sale at the local distributor.
The basic fact is Trumps base is the salt of the earth, the common working folk, the guys who sit at the American Legion bar and shoot the bull then go home and have it out with the old lady. It ain't brain surgery. And no somebody finally represents them.
I would hope that we have someone running this country who is smarter than the guys who sit at the bar and then go home to fight with their women. Running the country deserves someone more astute than that!
I would hope that we have someone running this country who is smarter than the guys who sit at the bar and then go home to fight with their women. Running the country deserves someone more astute than that!
Why not advocate for some college professor to be the president!? Come on.
Trump is a troubled man for troubled times.
This is not the time to have some pointy-headed intellectual philosophizing about problems.
We need a man who can actually make American great again!
America first!
Williamsmith
6-3-16, 3:19pm
What are these capabilities you speak of? Is he not educated ENOUGH? University of Pennsylvania. Is it because he doesn't restrain his speech when others are on the attack? What kind of a person is worthy? Are we electing a spiritual leader or a politician....a President? How many of the past examples put forth by the establishment amounted to a pimple on our ass? All along we watch as bits and pieces of our heritage and tradition are given away. The left is not satisfied with their half of the country, they want to expand and take over from border to border.
This isn't a disagreement anymore......this is an insurrection. Whine and cry all you want, Trump and millions more just like him aren't going away. You are getting a glimpse of your countrymen and apparently you think they are too stupid to deserve a part in the decision making. Well, the establishment created primary rules to keep the decision making process out of the hands of the uneducated farmers and laborers but this time the rules backfired. Now the dimwits get to call a few shots.
It is incredulous isn't it?
ApatheticNoMore
6-3-16, 3:40pm
The stupid might be referring to the quality of his speech, the way he spoke was different than all the other debate contenders - basically it was incoherent.
But stupid I don't know, it's too broad. He is probably smart at some things (like manipulating people, well yes that part goes with the narcissistic personality disorder). But he is inexperienced, it's about like hiring a doctor to fly a plane and a pilot to perform an operation. Neither the doctor or the pilot is necessarily "stupid" but untrained to perform each others jobs, of course they are that. And that's about how unqualified Trump is. No Sanders is not, he has decades of political experience. Hillary isn't inexperienced and untrained either, bad yes and likely to be a complete disaster for the world, but not without some knowledge of the field.
Are we electing a spiritual leader or a politician....a President?
I kind of wish the former, or I mean I wish we were soliciting someone of high moral character (but they might still have to know something about their jobs). But that's not what people want, what they want is something else. So ....
gimmethesimplelife
6-3-16, 5:59pm
Many countries will not let you move there unless you can prove you have a certain amount of $ and won't use their services. They don't need anymore people to take care of. Mexico is probably an exception but I can't imagine wanting to live there. I spent a few days there and will never go back.I have some interesting news that ties into your post TT. It turns out that Pena Neito, the current President of Mexico, is trying to make same sex marriage legal in Mexico. Now who knows if it will pass.....but if it does and BIG IF- if it includes an immigration sponsorship provision or some such.....my husband is a Mexican citizen and there are parts of Mexico that remain safe and affordable and even less dangerous than US cities overall....
There are also places that justify the stereotype. I'd be up for living in Mexico legally with my husband...in one of the former places. Queretaro comes to mind as an example. I'm hopeful this may be an upcoming option. We shall see. Rob
Teacher Terry
6-3-16, 6:33pm
Rob, how hard will it be for you two to get jobs because that is the reason they come here is for work? That would be great if they legalize SS marriage.
Apparently this guy agrees with your professor. http://www.topinfopost.com/2014/06/30/ultra-rich-mans-letter-to-my-fellow-filthy-rich-americans-the-pitchforks-are-coming
Good article. He's one who seems to recognize that having a peasant class is bad for business.
Good article. He's one who seems to recognize that having a peasant class is bad for business.
The thing that so many in the current .1% class don't seem to get is that simply hoarding money won't work. When there aren't enough people out there who can afford to buy crap the whole economy falls apart. Henry Ford understood this and paid his employees what was perceived to be an obscene wage at the time. Hindsight tells us how that worked out for him. Quite well. Rich people hoarding money doesn't work in the long run. Nobody mentions this too much anymore but 'consumption' is still 70-some percent of US GDP. If a smaller and smaller chunk of the population has enough money to actually consume anything then the economy eventually crashes and burns. WHen that happens the .1% may not become destitute but they will certainly get poorer. We may very well have to relearn that lesson at some point in the fairly near future.
How do you "hoard" money?
Most of the extremely wealthy people I know do not keep their wealth sitting around in piles of cash and coin under their mattress like Scrooge McDuck. They invest their capital on things that produce income, generally by providing goods, materials, services, and jobs.
And what is "money" anyways?....
gimmethesimplelife
6-4-16, 9:27am
The thing that so many in the current .1% class don't seem to get is that simply hoarding money won't work. When there aren't enough people out there who can afford to buy crap the whole economy falls apart. Henry Ford understood this and paid his employees what was perceived to be an obscene wage at the time. Hindsight tells us how that worked out for him. Quite well. Rich people hoarding money doesn't work in the long run. Nobody mentions this too much anymore but 'consumption' is still 70-some percent of US GDP. If a smaller and smaller chunk of the population has enough money to actually consume anything then the economy eventually crashes and burns. WHen that happens the .1% may not become destitute but they will certainly get poorer. We may very well have to relearn that lesson at some point in the fairly near future.You have faith then that the 1 percent can actually figure such a concept out? I don't. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-4-16, 9:30am
Rob, how hard will it be for you two to get jobs because that is the reason they come here is for work? That would be great if they legalize SS marriage.I would look to do something in English online. My husband would look to start some kind of business with his savings. So looking for work would not really apply. Rob
Why not advocate for some college professor to be the president!? Come on.
Trump is a troubled man for troubled times.
This is not the time to have some pointy-headed intellectual philosophizing about problems.
We need a man who can actually make American great again!
America first!
We have had this conversation before UA. America is great NOW. We DO need someone who has some smarts to be president! I do agree that Trump is a troubled man. We do not need that. We need someone who knows how to be diplomatic and get along with others. TRUMP IS NOT IT!! Trump is not the common man... he is a billionaire. How that makes him a good representative is beyond me?????
How do you "hoard" money?
Most of the extremely wealthy people I know do not keep their wealth sitting around in piles of cash and coin under their mattress like Scrooge McDuck. They invest their capital on things that produce income, generally by providing goods, materials, services, and jobs.
And what is "money" anyways?....
Great questions. When I refer to hoarding money what I'm thinking about are things like large corporations doing massive stock buybacks. In 2014 nearly a trillion dollars of US corporation stock was repurchased by those companies and in 2015 the latest numbers I could find were that it was expected that slightly over a trillion in stock would be bought back, continuing an upward trend of several years. That number represents nearly 6% of our GDP of money being hoarded as a way to drive up paper asset values instead of being invested in increased production of any sort of useful goods or services. In addition a lot are just outright hoarding cash. S&P 500 companies had a combined total of $1.43 Trillion dollars in cash sitting on their balance sheets at the end of Q2 2015. At the same time capital expenditures by these companies had fallen by 5.6% year over year.
Another example is when profitable companies choose to offshore labor to the cheapest place they can find. I get that it's necessary for corporations to be efficient, but with the American consumer representing 70% of GDP if we do away with all the good jobs then eventually we do away with the ability of consumers to consume and GDP will necessarily fall and with it the stock market and all that hoarded “money”.
And we're not just talking about offshoring manufacturing type, low skilled jobs. All the talk of training people for more advanced skills and blah blah blah is just a bunch of hot air because we're offshoring good information economy type jobs as well. I'll give an example from my own job, underwriting commercial insurance for a large international company. In my company the entire underwriting process has been painstakingly broken down into every single discreet task that happens during the lifecycle of an annual insurance policy. And this process has been done, or is being done currently, for every different insurance product we write since the process is not the same from division to division. Tasks that I used to do, such as creating a new rating spreadsheet each year based off of the expiring one, are now outsourced to a service center in Manilla. That particular task takes perhaps a half hour to do. When I did it myself it cost the company $40ish in salary. Now the Filipino employee who does it gets paid a fraction of that. The result is that there are less commercial underwriters in the US because each underwriter can handle more accounts. Over the coming years the Filipino staff will get more skilled and familiar with US insurance and risk management concepts and be able to do more advanced tasks than enter numbers from one spreadsheet into another. At that point they will likely get assigned a chunk of the actual underwriting analysis while their old job of transferring numbers on spreadsheets will go to yet another, lower cost country. And still fewer underwriters will be needed in the US. Eventually the only tasks the US underwriter will do is review the underwriting workup created somewhere else and then release the proposed policy terms to the broker. I will simply be a salesperson, not someone who actually analyzes risk. Other divisions within my company are already getting there. They have "field underwriters" who simply present insurance quotes to brokers and clients that have been created by "technical underwriters" working in low wage US cities. The field underwriter has no say in the risk analysis and is only tasked with negotiating the final price for each policy within a range recommended by the technical underwriter. I expect that ten years from now the technical underwriting will not happen in the US. That too will have been outsourced to a low wage country (possibly our service center in Manilla), leaving the US technical underwriters unemployed. We've already reduced the number of US employees by several thousand in the 7 years that I've worked there, yet revenue and profits aren't declining. Assuming that this same trend is happening at every organization big enough to outsource I expect that average US wages, which fell after the economic collapse 8 years ago and never recovered, will not recover and will in fact continue their downward fall. It's understandable why a whole lot of money is being hoarded. Corporations understand that there's no point in producing more products than already are being produced because they aren't willing to pay the higher wages that would be necessary for consumers to actually be able to consume more and actually grow the economy. Until they realize, as Henry Ford did, that the whole economy is an equilibrium that necessarily includes paying people decent wages, the future for a lot of people looks pretty bleak.
The thing that so many in the current .1% class don't seem to get is that simply hoarding money won't work. When there aren't enough people out there who can afford to buy crap the whole economy falls apart. Henry Ford understood this and paid his employees what was perceived to be an obscene wage at the time. Hindsight tells us how that worked out for him. Quite well. Rich people hoarding money doesn't work in the long run. Nobody mentions this too much anymore but 'consumption' is still 70-some percent of US GDP. If a smaller and smaller chunk of the population has enough money to actually consume anything then the economy eventually crashes and burns. WHen that happens the .1% may not become destitute but they will certainly get poorer. We may very well have to relearn that lesson at some point in the fairly near future.
I think the answer is in the article jp1 posted:
"We rich people have been falsely persuaded by our schooling and the affirmation of society, and have convinced ourselves, that we are the main job creators. It’s simply not true. There can never be enough super-rich Americans to power a great economy. I earn about 1,000 times the median American annually, but I don’t buy thousands of times more stuff. My family purchased three cars over the past few years, not 3,000. I buy a few pairs of pants and a few shirts a year, just like most American men. I bought two pairs of the fancy wool pants I am wearing as I write, what my partner Mike calls my “manager pants.” I guess I could have bought 1,000 pairs. But why would I? Instead, I sock my extra money away in savings, where it doesn’t do the country much good."
iris lilies
6-4-16, 7:43pm
Lainey and jp,
Is there a moral imperitive for me to remove my money from financial imstruments and throw it at consumer crap I dont want just to keep the economy chugging along? I am not "super rich" but I am rich in assets, not in income.
Is it only the 1% earners that earns your ire? Would those in the upper 10% of assets qualify as holding the ecnomy down as well?
There are not smart alec questions, exactly :~) but
I am nnot sure if Lainey is talking about everyone who holds back money in financial accounts because surely the large 10% of which I am a member would earn your ire. The "we rich people" guy talks about his incme, but yet switches to assets because he does not want to spend assets, he wants to invest them.
No. Just like the guy in the article you only need so many pants and cars and whatever. But if you're an employer and making a decent profit is it really the best plan to cut your employees salaries to the point that they don't have disposable income? Costco can somehow pay it's workers decent wages but Walmart can't and instead relies on government handouts to supplement their shitty treatment of their employees. Yet the Walton family are one of the richest families on the planet.
The economy today kind of reminds me of the prisoner's dilemma. In that delimma two people have been arrested for a crime. There's enough evidence to convict both and send them to prison for a year. However the investigators believe that there was a bigger crime committed but have no proof. They separate both prisoners to interrogate and offer them each the same deal. "We know there was more crime committed but if you confess we'll be lenient and only charge you with the one year offense. However, if the other guy also confesses we'll charge you both with the eight year crime." The best solution, from the criminal's perspective is if they both don't confess. Our economy is the same. The best thing would be if all the employers stopped the race to the absolute bottom (since we won't reach that bottom until the US standard of living is equal to the average of the entire world's) but that requires someone with enough clout, such as Walmart, to stop the race to the bottom. If they started paying Costco level wages and benefits they'd have a huge influx of quality workers applying for their jobs. That influx would potentially be big enough to force other, smaller employers to match those wages/benefits in order to retain their employees and it would be a win for everyone, at a relatively modest cost to most organization's bottom lines. And if that drove some smaller, less efficient, low margin businesses out of business that wouldn't necessarily be a lose to society at large, or the businesses that increased pay because those failed businesses would be replaced by more efficient competitors who figured out how to win on the new, higher wage, playing field.
gimmethesimplelife
6-4-16, 10:57pm
Great questions. When I refer to hoarding money what I'm thinking about are things like large corporations doing massive stock buybacks. In 2014 nearly a trillion dollars of US corporation stock was repurchased by those companies and in 2015 the latest numbers I could find were that it was expected that slightly over a trillion in stock would be bought back, continuing an upward trend of several years. That number represents nearly 6% of our GDP of money being hoarded as a way to drive up paper asset values instead of being invested in increased production of any sort of useful goods or services. In addition a lot are just outright hoarding cash. S&P 500 companies had a combined total of $1.43 Trillion dollars in cash sitting on their balance sheets at the end of Q2 2015. At the same time capital expenditures by these companies had fallen by 5.6% year over year.
Another example is when profitable companies choose to offshore labor to the cheapest place they can find. I get that it's necessary for corporations to be efficient, but with the American consumer representing 70% of GDP if we do away with all the good jobs then eventually we do away with the ability of consumers to consume and GDP will necessarily fall and with it the stock market and all that hoarded “money”.
And we're not just talking about offshoring manufacturing type, low skilled jobs. All the talk of training people for more advanced skills and blah blah blah is just a bunch of hot air because we're offshoring good information economy type jobs as well. I'll give an example from my own job, underwriting commercial insurance for a large international company. In my company the entire underwriting process has been painstakingly broken down into every single discreet task that happens during the lifecycle of an annual insurance policy. And this process has been done, or is being done currently, for every different insurance product we write since the process is not the same from division to division. Tasks that I used to do, such as creating a new rating spreadsheet each year based off of the expiring one, are now outsourced to a service center in Manilla. That particular task takes perhaps a half hour to do. When I did it myself it cost the company $40ish in salary. Now the Filipino employee who does it gets paid a fraction of that. The result is that there are less commercial underwriters in the US because each underwriter can handle more accounts. Over the coming years the Filipino staff will get more skilled and familiar with US insurance and risk management concepts and be able to do more advanced tasks than enter numbers from one spreadsheet into another. At that point they will likely get assigned a chunk of the actual underwriting analysis while their old job of transferring numbers on spreadsheets will go to yet another, lower cost country. And still fewer underwriters will be needed in the US. Eventually the only tasks the US underwriter will do is review the underwriting workup created somewhere else and then release the proposed policy terms to the broker. I will simply be a salesperson, not someone who actually analyzes risk. Other divisions within my company are already getting there. They have "field underwriters" who simply present insurance quotes to brokers and clients that have been created by "technical underwriters" working in low wage US cities. The field underwriter has no say in the risk analysis and is only tasked with negotiating the final price for each policy within a range recommended by the technical underwriter. I expect that ten years from now the technical underwriting will not happen in the US. That too will have been outsourced to a low wage country (possibly our service center in Manilla), leaving the US technical underwriters unemployed. We've already reduced the number of US employees by several thousand in the 7 years that I've worked there, yet revenue and profits aren't declining. Assuming that this same trend is happening at every organization big enough to outsource I expect that average US wages, which fell after the economic collapse 8 years ago and never recovered, will not recover and will in fact continue their downward fall. It's understandable why a whole lot of money is being hoarded. Corporations understand that there's no point in producing more products than already are being produced because they aren't willing to pay the higher wages that would be necessary for consumers to actually be able to consume more and actually grow the economy. Until they realize, as Henry Ford did, that the whole economy is an equilibrium that necessarily includes paying people decent wages, the future for a lot of people looks pretty bleak.Jp1, I thought of you recently as I read a British article stating that underwriters were extremely vulnerable to job loss due to automation, software, and technology in general. That spooked me a bit. Why? Some here may find this hard to believe but when I graduated college back in December 1990 I wanted to be an insurance underwriter trainee. I'm an introvert, I figured it was a good fit. It never happened, and now it seems that job is on it's way out. Just curious, do you have a Plan B? I'm sorry that tech is encroaching on your territory. Rob
Jp1, I thought of you recently as I read a British article stating that underwriters were extremely vulnerable to job loss due to automation, software, and technology in general. That spooked me a bit. Why? Some here may find this hard to believe but when I graduated college back in December 1990 I wanted to be an insurance underwriter trainee. I'm an introvert, I figured it was a good fit. It never happened, and now it seems that job is on it's way out. Just curious, do you have a Plan B? I'm sorry that tech is encroaching on your territory. Rob
Thank you for your concern. I work in a fairly specialized insurance, information security (think Target data breach). At this time it's a new enough field that I won't be automated out of a job any time soon. People who work on more mainstream insurance, like property of general liability, should be concerned. Those are the divisions where our 'field underwriters' are just glorified salespeople. The ones who are generally extroverted will probably do fine, but the rest... Plan B is retirement. Although I'm relatively young (your age) I'm roughly 2/3 of the way towards my retirement savings goal. My main concern, like so many people, is retirement health insurance prior to aging in to Medicare.
The scary thing is that there are SOOOO many jobs like mine that are vulnerable to automation and outsourcing. I wouldn't want to be 25 today and trying to figure out what career to be going into.
Williamsmith
6-5-16, 12:02am
In a broader sense, the Trump phenomenon is two pronged. Political incorrectness...which the media and establishment has held against him and de-industrialization which is generally the process by which we find ourselves in a stagnant economy. And de-industrialization I mean the loss of labor intensive jobs, the off shoring of jobs to lesser developed nations to take advantage of lower worker costs, the transfer of construction facilities to third world countries and so called free trade agreements which are nothing but smoke screens for government abuse of power.
Trump is is talking like he is against all this especially in the energy industry. He appears to be appealing to the working class union democrats and may entice a large percent of the union vote. I believe Trump is in a better position to win an election that nearly five months away in that Clinton has to hope the economy gets no worse, nothing happens on the terrorist front and no homeland security breeches occur. Any of this would assist Trump as a challenger to the status quo.
For me, never Hillary is enough. Period. I don't need to have a President whom I admire. I only need one to quit undermining our sovereignty, security and wealth. The debt is something that immediately threatens our country. Not climate change.
He appears to be appealing to the working class union democrats and may entice a large percent of the union vote.
If the election does actually play out this way then Hillary has no one to blame but Bubba. The democratic party abandoned their working class base 25 years ago and are entirely resistant to reclaiming them. After all they just don't have the bank accounts to drop $225,000 per speech on hundreds of speeches the way the neoliberal democrats on Wall Street do. I really really hope that it doesn't play out the way you predict because I think a lot of bad things and harm will come to a lot of people, but if it does, at least there will be one good to come out of it, in that the current democratic party leadership will be utterly and truly destroyed and sent to the dustbin of failed political party ideas. Right behind the failed republican party that a trump presidency would represent. Good riddance to them both.
Corporations doing stock buybacks are the exact opposite of hoarding cash.
They have excess cash that they do not believe they can effectively use to expand the business or go into new ventures. So they send the cash back to the investors, either by direct dividends, or by doing a stock buyback which increases the value of the remaining shares (equity per share) by the same amount(modulo any tax consequence difference between long term capital gains/dividend treatment.)
A corporation hoarding cash would look more like keeping billions of dollars sitting in banks accounts above-and-beyond what is needed for working capital and expansion needs, while refusing to pay out that money in dividends or by buying back shares.
Williamsmith
6-5-16, 8:07am
Corporations doing stock buybacks are the exact opposite of hoarding cash.
They have excess cash that they do not believe they can effectively use to expand the business or go into new ventures. So they send the cash back to the investors, either by direct dividends, or by doing a stock buyback which increases the value of the remaining shares (equity per share) by the same amount(modulo any tax consequence difference between long term capital gains/dividend treatment.)
A corporation hoarding cash would look more like keeping billions of dollars sitting in banks accounts above-and-beyond what is needed for working capital and expansion needs, while refusing to pay out that money in dividends or by buying back shares.
Bae I guess it's who you want to believe reporting on what is really happening. Yes stock buybacks recycle the money through investors but what I read reports stock buybacks are not robust. Companies ARE sitting on piles of cash because they don't want to invest it in their companies expansion or infrastructure. This to the tune of a trillion or so dollars. The energy sector is driving this hoarding. In Pennsylvania we have a booming latent gas fracking business capped and waiting to be produced and transported. The wells have been prepared. If oil prices rise again it will trigger a boom in Pennsylvania that will rival Texas. But what I read leads me to believe companies have more money than they know what to do with. Their infrastructure is crumbling because they fear for the future of their business. But soon expenditures will be forced but until then workers are forced to deal with machinery that is more reminiscent of Cuba than the USA.
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 9:01am
Thank you for your concern. I work in a fairly specialized insurance, information security (think Target data breach). At this time it's a new enough field that I won't be automated out of a job any time soon. People who work on more mainstream insurance, like property of general liability, should be concerned. Those are the divisions where our 'field underwriters' are just glorified salespeople. The ones who are generally extroverted will probably do fine, but the rest... Plan B is retirement. Although I'm relatively young (your age) I'm roughly 2/3 of the way towards my retirement savings goal. My main concern, like so many people, is retirement health insurance prior to aging in to Medicare.
The scary thing is that there are SOOOO many jobs like mine that are vulnerable to automation and outsourcing. I wouldn't want to be 25 today and trying to figure out what career to be going into.Yes. Anything that involves standardized procedures is vulnerable.....think credit analyst,, loan officer, and thanks to algorhythms, even financial advisors. For those who travel internationally, it is partly now algorhythms checking your prior travel patterns that decides who gets the thrill of a secondary inspection. Even at my lower end....tablets are beginning to reduce server counts at restaurants and with labor cost increases coming this is only going to spread to more restaurants. It is scary out there. I am really dreading self driving vehicles..just think of all the lost jobs under that umbrella....
What do those people do then? As to your insurance concern, my guess is that more people will leave the US for residency in countries with less expensive health care.....they may not have any other choice due to structural changes in the US workplace/non-affordable health care. I wouldn't be surprised if there were an opportunity for me in the future in an advisory role of some sort helping people leave the US for affordable health care/much further stretch of their savings, provided that the US dollar holds its value.
Definitely major change is not far off,,,,,change akin to strapping yourself into one of the world's great roller coasters. Rob
I wouldn't be surprised if there were an opportunity for me in the future in an advisory role of some sort helping people leave the US for affordable health care/much further stretch of their savings, provided that the US dollar holds its value.
How much would you charge people to advise them to go to Mexico? I guess they would need a valid passport, so you could tell them about that as well. ;)
IshbelRobertson
6-5-16, 10:05am
From personal experience I don't think most citizens of whatever country would ever wish to leave home. I have lived around the globe, but I am a Scot and will die one. I suspect most Americans will feel like that. My country, right or wrong is a powerful tie.
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 10:09am
From personal experience I don't think most citizens of whatever country would ever wish to leave home. I have lived around the globe, but I am a Scot and will die one. I suspect most Americans will feel like that. My country, right or wrong is a powerful tie.The incentive to quit working working years sooner and have access to high quality affordable health care is a very powerful morivator, too. Some people feel the way you do, and that's fine.....but not everyone does and some people will flee to improve the quality of their lives. Count me in the latter camp. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 10:17am
[QUOTE=Alan;243561]How much would you charge people to advise them to go to Mexico? I guess they would need a valid passport, so you could tell them about that as well. ;)[/QUOTE
I am current on the permanent residency requirements and overall healthcare costs of all European countries, all Central and South American coumtries, and most Asian cohntries. I have put a great amount of time into this research and I believe there will be a larger than present and not too far off market for this knowledge. If I am correct remains to be seen.....my point is that I know a lot about this topic and not just about Mexico.....I only refer to Mexico so often as it's been my escape valve/quick and easy method to access basic human rights I wasn't worth in America. Certainly there are many other low cost countries worthy offering permanent residency and much lower costs and a way out of unending relentless struggle to make those at the top yey more wealthy. Rob
I only refer to Mexico so often as it's been my escape valve/quick and easy method to access basic human rights I wasn't worth in America. You have the same worth as anyone else, you just refuse to believe it.
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 10:34am
You have the same worth as anyone else, you just refuse to believe it.Try on not having access to health or dental care for years in the US and then let's talk. You might well talk very differently then. Rob
Try on not having access to health or dental care for years in the US and then let's talk. You might well talk very differently then. RobYou're confusing 'access' with free access. We're no different.
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 10:43am
[QUOTE=Alan;243569]You're confusing 'access' with free access. We're no different.[/QUOTE WE are very different. I an not speaking of free access but affordable access. Here America fails miserably. Rob
You have the same worth as anyone else, you just refuse to believe it.
That is very nice, and also I am not sure if anyone realizes how hard it can be sometimes. Some of us fee pretty beat up in our own ways. Internal self worth is essential, and right now I know I can't access it. Not really part of a political post, however too many recent suicides and attempted suicides in my awareness to be really detached on this issue.
WE are very different. I an not speaking of free access but affordable access. Here America fails miserably. Rob
We both have the same access, although for you, it boils down to whether or not you're willing to pay while not taking on some of the responsibility for ensuring a better outcome.
If I'm not mistaken, you have a college degree you've never used and allowed the citizens of Arizona to send you back to school for a certificate you've never used. You've had more opportunities than many to live the American Dream and for some reason have not. America has not failed you,
iris lilies
6-5-16, 11:32am
The incentive to quit working working years sooner and have access to high quality affordable health care is a very powerful morivator, too. Some people feel the way you do, and that's fine.....but not everyone does and some people will flee to improve the quality of their lives. Count me in the latter camp. Rob
No, you are not in the latter camp. Ya gotta actually flee. Action. That is different from words.
I an not speaking of free access but affordable access.
What do you consider affordable Rob? I took a quick look at the ACA plans for Arizona, and the most I was seeing as far as a co-pay was $50 for a bronze plan. How is that an "insane copay"? The copay is there to make sure people aren't being frivolous in doctor visits, but not so high as to prohibit someone who is truly sick.
As far as dental care, a cleaning and X rays costs me about $120. There have been many years I've just paid for that out of pocket. I also don't have a smart phone, don't go to Starbucks, or out to dinner much at all. I exercise at least 5 days a week, do lots of things to reduce stress, eat good fresh healthy food. Its my responsibility to take care of my own health. It drives me crazy to hear health care equated with medical care. The doctor is there for accidents and the things that couldn't be avoided, not to make me better when I make bad choices.
Bae I guess it's who you want to believe reporting on what is really happening.
Perhaps you should reread what I wrote.
Stock buybacks aren't "hoarding". Sitting on piles of cash and note reinvesting it/distributing it as dividends/buying back shares to increase shareholder equity *is* generally hoarding, unless there is some plan for the use of the Scrooge McDuck -like piles.
Companies that sit on hoards of cash without abelievable plan for its use seem to eventually get targeted by other folks who swoop in, do a takeover, cut up the company into bits, and turn the capital to more efficient uses. This is of course not an instantaneous process, so you almost always can point at some poster-child corporation with tons of loot cluttering up its hallways.
What do you consider affordable Rob? I took a quick look at the ACA plans for Arizona, and the most I was seeing as far as a co-pay was $50 for a bronze plan. How is that an "insane copay"? The copay is there to make sure people aren't being frivolous in doctor visits, but not so high as to prohibit someone who is truly sick.
As far as dental care, a cleaning and X rays costs me about $120. There have been many years I've just paid for that out of pocket. I also don't have a smart phone, don't go to Starbucks, or out to dinner much at all. I exercise at least 5 days a week, do lots of things to reduce stress, eat good fresh healthy food. Its my responsibility to take care of my own health. It drives me crazy to hear health care equated with medical care. The doctor is there for accidents and the things that couldn't be avoided, not to make me better when I make bad choices.
(Bolding mine) My sentiments exactly--at least with regard to seeing doctors rarely, and for cause. I was just reading an article about the rise of n=1 care, in which treatment is geared to an individual, not handed out like Halloween candy, thoughtlessly, with no regard to if it actually works. The figures quoted in that article (numbers needed to treat) included 1 in 50 for statins, for example. That's a lot of wasted drugs discharged into the water supply, never mind the health sequelae. So you have to, as much as possible, take your health into your own hands, do your research, don't blindly trust corporate medical representatives, and be vigilant. I imagine that's pretty daunting for the average health care consumer.
Williamsmith
6-5-16, 12:14pm
Perhaps you should reread what I wrote.
Stock buybacks aren't "hoarding". Sitting on piles of cash and note reinvesting it/distributing it as dividends/buying back shares to increase shareholder equity *is* generally hoarding, unless there is some plan for the use of the Scrooge McDuck -like piles.
Companies that sit on hoards of cash without abelievable plan for its use seem to eventually get targeted by other folks who swoop in, do a takeover, cut up the company into bits, and turn the capital to more efficient uses. This is of course not an instantaneous process, so you almost always can point at some poster-child corporation with tons of loot cluttering up its hallways.
Would you put Google, Apple and General Motors in that category? What I read points to these companies as leaders in the cash hoarding business.....are they subject to being cut into bits? Or is it more a clever way to avoid being taxed by shifting cash overseas. Or are they just waiting for a smarter investment with an optimistic view of the future?
Apple is my personal poster child for a company that has more money than it has a clue what to do with, and which has expressed no believable plan for what to do with the cash in the future. Google maybe less so, I think Google is still trying to formulate a coherent plan.
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 12:53pm
That is very nice, and also I am not sure if anyone realizes how hard it can be sometimes. Some of us fee pretty beat up in our own ways. Internal self worth is essential, and right now I know I can't access it. Not really part of a political post, however too many recent suicides and attempted suicides in my awareness to be really detached on this issue.Plus 1,000.....Thank You for your very human take. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 1:04pm
What do you consider affordable Rob? I took a quick look at the ACA plans for Arizona, and the most I was seeing as far as a co-pay was $50 for a bronze plan. How is that an "insane copay"? The copay is there to make sure people aren't being frivolous in doctor visits, but not so high as to prohibit someone who is truly sick.
As far as dental care, a cleaning and X rays costs me about $120. There have been many years I've just paid for that out of pocket. I also don't have a smart phone, don't go to Starbucks, or out to dinner much at all. I exercise at least 5 days a week, do lots of things to reduce stress, eat good fresh healthy food. Its my responsibility to take care of my own health. It drives me crazy to hear health care equated with medical care. The doctor is there for accidents and the things that couldn't be avoided, not to make me better when I make bad choices.Recently I had issues with kidney stones. It was very painful. I could not afford the deductible and copay combo.....and wasn't thrilled about the track to Mexico. My husband called a curando (sp?) - a traditional Mexican healer - who recommended corn silk tea. I'm very fortunate to have this wonderful person in my life....he raced off to get me cornsilkto brew......in twenty minutes the pain was reduced and I passed the stone about 90 minutes later.
So I did get around the United States yet again luckily. I don't see how making medical access in this instance unaffordable serves society......if anything, I fear America more and have further respect for Mexico. What does society win from my fear and distrust? I also don't see how having kidney stones is my fault......though I would agree it's my responsibility to keep up with the chanca Piedra and the cornsilk tea the curando recommended, which I am doing. Rob
PS....as to your cleaning at $120..... $25 to $30 in Los Algodones and with a car full of people fleeing to offshore medical/dental your share of the gas is quite cheap. Also (legal) medical herbs and Western pharmacy cheaper across the border too. At 18K a year at the moment, I'm worth the Mexican price. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 1:17pm
We both have the same access, although for you, it boils down to whether or not you're willing to pay while not taking on some of the responsibility for ensuring a better outcome.
If I'm not mistaken, you have a college degree you've never used and allowed the citizens of Arizona to send you back to school for a certificate you've never used. You've had more opportunities than many to live the American Dream and for some reason have not. America has not failed you,Where I will fault myself..where I can look back and see where I was dense and what was I thinking? I should have went self employed years ago and I should have gotten in on the ground floor with eBay years ago during that incredible economy in the 90's.....For that I kick myself. Also for not buying Ford at $1.76 a share back in 2009.....what was I thinking????? About the degree.....I graduated into the recession of 1990 to 1991 to find it worthless. I ended out waiting tables and for awhile did well.....I was not middle class but I was above where I was raised. I should have saved and invested ALL the excess......I'll even give you that, Alan. Over the years, especially since 2008, serving has become less and less lucrative. About the certificate - I have tried to make something of this but so far no luck. I have tried and I'm not giving up. So I'm not going to say that you are entirely off base here but things are not so cut and dried and linear as you seem to imply. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 1:23pm
No, you are not in the latter camp. Ya gotta actually flee. Action. That is different from words.Wish us luck, IL. Pena Neito is trying to legalize same sex marriage in Mexico and if there is a provision to sponsor for immigration, my husband is a Mexican citizen and I could live there legally. It remains to be seen if this will happen...but if so, places like Querataro and Guanajuato are safe and affordable and I would go for so many reasons....Also not far from the US to keep tabs on my Mom. Rob
Curandero. My SO's father was one, and so was my g-g grandmother Magdalena. It's a good skill to have handy.
I hope Mexico does the right thing, and the two of you can make a comfortable life south of the border, Rob.
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 1:37pm
Curandero. My SO's father was one, and so was my g-g grandmother Magdalena. It's a good skill to have handy.Yes, that's it. I already owe much to my mother in law's curandero and I don't mean money. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-5-16, 1:44pm
Curandero. My SO's father was one, and so was my g-g grandmother Magdalena. It's a good skill to have handy.
I hope Mexico does the right thing, and the two of you can make a comfortable life south of the border, Rob.Jane, Thank You. Your kind words mean a lot to me. Rob
In a broader sense, the Trump phenomenon is two pronged. Political incorrectness...which the media and establishment has held against him and de-industrialization which is generally the process by which we find ourselves in a stagnant economy. And de-industrialization I mean the loss of labor intensive jobs, the off shoring of jobs to lesser developed nations to take advantage of lower worker costs, the transfer of construction facilities to third world countries and so called free trade agreements which are nothing but smoke screens for government abuse of power.
Trump is is talking like he is against all this especially in the energy industry. He appears to be appealing to the working class union democrats and may entice a large percent of the union vote. I believe Trump is in a better position to win an election that nearly five months away in that Clinton has to hope the economy gets no worse, nothing happens on the terrorist front and no homeland security breeches occur. Any of this would assist Trump as a challenger to the status quo.
For me, never Hillary is enough. Period. I don't need to have a President whom I admire. I only need one to quit undermining our sovereignty, security and wealth. The debt is something that immediately threatens our country. Not climate change.
Interesting that you say Trump in the same sentence as sending jobs to other countries ... that is his MO. Also you talk about this being a stagnant economy.... look at other nations.... they are in a depression. We are doing well compared to the rest of the world yet you complain. Trump's political incorrectness is beyond brash... he is repugnant to many Americans and most foreigners. Also saying climate change is not an immediate threat is having your head in the sand. Even the head of the Republican party is put off by Trump. Now, that says a lot!!! Even after Ryan said he would endorse Trump he reprimanded him for his ridiculous remarks about the judge in his Trump University fiasco. Also saying you don't need a President that you can admire.... what BS. I do agree that Trump is not someone to admire. Clinton has problems too. Again, it is going to be picking the lesser of two evils.
Teacher Terry
6-5-16, 4:43pm
I think it is the deductible and not the co-pays which are hurting people. Many deductibles start at 6k. To get a low one you have to pay a lot for the coverage which many people can't afford. Since career counseling was my field for many years you can end up with a degree that has no jobs for where you live. I found this out the hard way when I got a MSW in the Midwest back in 1990 and my son who was 16 was making 50 cents more/hour telemarketing/surveys while I was working with abused kids/families and had no benefits. Luckily I was married because I did not make enough $ to support even myself. My friend and I both looked into job employment rates that the school published but found out later they lied. They report as employed even if you are flipping burgers or had a job before you started. WE assumed all those people had jobs in their field. My friend was a single mom and had to move to KS to get a job. Many certificate programs do not lead to jobs. If our clients did not want to move I always researched the local job outlook so we didn't end up paying for education that couldn't be used.
Perhaps you should reread what I wrote.
Stock buybacks aren't "hoarding". Sitting on piles of cash and note reinvesting it/distributing it as dividends/buying back shares to increase shareholder equity *is* generally hoarding, unless there is some plan for the use of the Scrooge McDuck -like piles.
Companies that sit on hoards of cash without abelievable plan for its use seem to eventually get targeted by other folks who swoop in, do a takeover, cut up the company into bits, and turn the capital to more efficient uses. This is of course not an instantaneous process, so you almost always can point at some poster-child corporation with tons of loot cluttering up its hallways.
But what are the sellers of the bought back stock, or dividend receivers likely to do. Probably invest in more stocks in most cases. So, no the company hasn't hoarded the cash, it's instead now being used to push up some other paper asset's price. Owner/foermer owner is now the hoarder. it's not being used for is to invest in increased production capacity or more employees.
That is such an odd view of the function of the stock market (owning stock == hoarding) that I don't really know where to go...
That is such an odd view of the function of the stock market (owning stock == hoarding) that I don't really know where to go...
But when a corporation buys back stock and that money is spent to purchase existing stock in another company that's certainly not the definition of investing in increased production. It's simply storing wealth in the hopes that that wealth will increase in value.
But when a corporation buys back stock and that money is spent to purchase existing stock in another company that's certainly not the definition of investing in increased production. It's simply storing wealth in the hopes that that wealth will increase in value.
Nope.
So enlighten stupid me. What is that situation?
Williamsmith
6-6-16, 4:38am
Interesting that you say Trump in the same sentence as sending jobs to other countries ... that is his MO. Also you talk about this being a stagnant economy.... look at other nations.... they are in a depression. We are doing well compared to the rest of the world yet you complain. Trump's political incorrectness is beyond brash... he is repugnant to many Americans and most foreigners. Also saying climate change is not an immediate threat is having your head in the sand. Even the head of the Republican party is put off by Trump. Now, that says a lot!!! Even after Ryan said he would endorse Trump he reprimanded him for his ridiculous remarks about the judge in his Trump University fiasco. Also saying you don't need a President that you can admire.... what BS. I do agree that Trump is not someone to admire. Clinton has problems too. Again, it is going to be picking the lesser of two evils.
I don't want you to consider me thoughtless to your remarks. I have chewed on them. But I would like to respond only to your last. In picking the lesser of two evils.
How can we be satisfied in this picking of one evil over another? One evil has spawned the other. One evil we know where it comes from, the other I am not sure what it believes. One evil has been responsible for much of the beauracratic mess that has allowed the infrastructure of this country to crumble. The other evil is thriving in criticizing the inefficiency.
Of course, Trump has no idea how to solve the problems and probably will get a few things right and a few things terribly wrong and mostly will get nothing done because of his inexcusable narcissistic thin skin. Clinton has been more in control of the power that is necessary to get things done more than any other in the last ten years save Obama and yet because of the Democrats inability to govern efficiently.....we now have an environment where toxicity thrives.
You can point at how disgusting Trump,is...and I will agree with you but Democrats like Clinton must be held accountable for their governance in abstentia. If we can solve terror by killing American citizens by decree, then we can attack our crumbling schools and infrastructure with equal precision. The Democrats have been woefully inadequate and enjoy too much blaming it on the machinations of Republican resistance.
When I hear Clinton talk, I hear someone who is pausing to filter words through a political correctness app. I do not know who she really is. With Trump, I know immediately. It is impossible to be in this political discussion without getting the crap all over you whichever side you choose. I do feel a little cause for alarm over that. And I do believe our government has been layered and crusted over with buearacracy to the point of gridlock. A little knock on thensidenof the machine with a rock is in order.
I'm leaning toward bae's approach of voting your conscience; I may write in Bernie. (Which will have no real effect--Hillary is a shoo-in here.)
Williamsmith
6-6-16, 12:21pm
I have a connection to Ron Paul that goes back to his childhood home. I could write in Rand Paul and sleep well at night.
Williamsmith
6-8-16, 4:04pm
Where are all the third party candidates who could win enough electoral college votes to keep both Hillary and Donald from getting to 270. That way we could have the House pick a President and the Senate a Vice President. And the third party candidate could have a vocabulary that includes more than four letter one syllable words and isn't as insufferable as the other nominee.
Now I know this scenario has been laughed at and tossed in the trash bin more than once over the last few months but bear with me here.
First, I realize it was unthinkable that a third party independent could turn any blue state enough to win delegates in the primary. But the toxic political environment around Trump has the worm turning and considering his penchant to double down on stupidity, there is reason for renewed optimism here for the general election.
So let's make some desperate assumptions. Assume that a candidate from the Deep South can be found that could win Texas. Hmmm. That strips 38 from most likely Trump. Now let's say this same person could command Florida and Pennsylvania or Ohio..... that blocks 47/49 from the other side. Or how about New Mexico, Colorado, Oregon and Nevada....that's 27 otherwise blue electoral college votes.
The real fireworks are about to begin between Donald the blowhard and Hillary the unimaginable. Perhaps now someone will see the opportunity is fading and jump in with both feet for Texas. Gimme a T for Texas.
Or someone mainstream on the right needs to decide to run independent but only if Bernie will also run independent. Then we've got a 4 way race with outsiders and insiders from both sides of the spectrum. Let the best (wo)man win. If that happened then bring out the popcorn because it'd be the most exciting presidential race of my lifetime.
Williamsmith
6-8-16, 11:43pm
Or someone mainstream on the right needs to decide to run independent but only if Bernie will also run independent. Then we've got a 4 way race with outsiders and insiders from both sides of the spectrum. Let the best (wo)man win. If that happened then bring out the popcorn because it'd be the most exciting presidential race of my lifetime.
In a case like that probably nobody would get to 270 and the top three would be thrown to the house and senate respectively for picking president and Vice President. Right?
iris lilies
6-9-16, 8:56am
I have a connection to Ron Paul that goes back to his childhood home. I could write in Rand Paul and sleep well at night.
Right now, that is my plan in the voting booth.
Right now, that is my plan in the voting booth.
A vote for Paul is a vote for Hillary!
A vote for Paul is a vote for Hillary!
I'm considering doing the same for Bernie, and a vote for Bernie is a vote for Trump. In this election, more than ever it's time to stand up for what you believe in.
And speaking of Bernie, I thought that this video of Bill Maher's interview with billionaire capitalist Nick Hanauer to be a succinct and compelling case for why we should have a national $15 minimum wage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyXG8pYZ054
I will either vote Trump outright or write-in The Bern.
I'm considering doing the same for Bernie, and a vote for Bernie is a vote for Trump. In this election, more than ever it's time to stand up for what you believe in.
And speaking of Bernie, I thought that this video of Bill Maher's interview with billionaire capitalist Nick Hanauer to be a succinct and compelling case for why we should have a national $15 minimum wage.
Refreshing to hear Hanauer speak out--especially since he agrees with me, or I with him.
Williamsmith
6-9-16, 11:37am
The owner of my sons tool and die shop is doing quite well based on the size of his house and the number of expensive toys his family plays with. He pays his employees chicken feed. In 1913 Henry Ford figured it out and was called a socialist for doubling the minimum wage and cutting his work day to 8 hrs. to get workers who were dedicated and loyal. He did pretty well for himself.
Ultralight
6-9-16, 11:44am
The owner of my sons tool and die shop is doing quite well based on the size of his house and the number of expensive toys his family plays with. He pays his employees chicken feed. In 1913 Henry Ford figured it out and was called a socialist for doubling the minimum wage and cutting his work day to 8 hrs. to get workers who were dedicated and loyal. He did pretty well for himself.
That is only half the history of Ford.
But nonetheless, it sucks that your son is working for a place like that. No other options there?
The owner of my sons tool and die shop is doing quite well based on the size of his house and the number of expensive toys his family plays with. He pays his employees chicken feed. In 1913 Henry Ford figured it out and was called a socialist for doubling the minimum wage and cutting his work day to 8 hrs. to get workers who were dedicated and loyal. He did pretty well for himself.
Henry also knew that in order to sell cars, he needed people who could afford to BUY cars. And his best customers are his employees. Henry's strategy helped to build a strong middle class. A class who could buy cars and clothes and vacations (with all the purchases that entails) . The middle class IS the job creator we need, and we need it to be big and strong and bad-ass.
Too bad the McDonalds and Walmarts of this country, along with those who oppose a minimum raise, can't see that.
Ultralight
6-9-16, 12:57pm
So Ford paid his workers enough to buy his cars? So he gave them money and they gave the money right back? They gave him their labor and he gave them the car they built?
Why not just make them work for the car itself, ya know? Just pay them in cars. lol
Something don't sound right to me in this scheme.
Something don't sound right to me in this scheme.
It's the whole "we'll all make a fortune taking in each others' washing!" economy.
Williamsmith
6-9-16, 1:01pm
So Ford paid his workers enough to buy his cars? So he gave them money and they gave the money right back? They gave him their labor and he gave them the car they built?
Why not just make them work for the car itself, ya know? Just pay them in cars. lol
Something don't sound right to me in this scheme.
Because you can't feed cars to your growing babies.
Because you can't feed cars to your growing babies.
So he paid them enough to buy his cars back from him that they built AND he paid them enough to buy food, clothing, and shelter?
How did Ford get rich doing that? I am no mathamagician but something ain't adding up!
It's the whole "we'll all make a fortune taking in each others' washing!" economy.
If it worked for Ol' Hank Ford then it can work for America!
Williamsmith
6-9-16, 1:09pm
Give up on blocking the new minimum wage , that is a done deal. Three quarters of the population are in favor of it. Adjusted for inflation, minimum wage peaked in 1968. Given how well off we are compared to the rest of the worlds population, you'd expect a better minimum wage. So the proof already exists that stifling the minimum wage doesn't do a thing to help the economy. We've been doing it since 1968. How has it worked out?
Give up on blocking the new minimum wage , that is a done deal. Three quarters of the population are in favor of it. Adjusted for inflation, minimum wage peaked in 1968. Given how well off we are compared to the rest of the worlds population, you'd expect a better minimum wage. So the proof already exists that stifling the minimum wage doesn't do a thing to help the economy. We've been doing it since 1968. How has it worked out?
If we raise the minimum wage then all the corporations will just raise their prices. Duh.
But if we lower minimum wage then corporations will lower their prices. They have to!
And if we lower the minimum wage to $1 an hour we'll pay almost nothing for everything!
Some jobs just aren't worth $15/hour.
https://youareobsolete.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/auto_kfc.png
It's the whole "we'll all make a fortune taking in each others' washing!" economy.
When I was a kid my feet would get cold during the winter because my blanket was too short.
One year I decided to cut the top 12 inches of blanket from the top and sew it onto the bottom of my blanket.
When I got in bed and covered up I noticed that my feet were still uncovered and cold!
How could this be?
Some jobs just aren't worth $15/hour.
Correction: Some people's lives are aren't worth $15/hour, right!?
Correction: Some people's lives are aren't worth $15/hour, right!?
Not what I said, now is it?
Not what I said, now is it?
No, not really. But were you implying that?
No, not really. But were you implying that?
My words were pretty simple and clear. Only one word even had two syllables, and that one was a "contraction".
Some jobs don't generate $15 of value/utility. Such as punching your order into the order screen at KFC. So if you require $15/hour for that task, the task is quite likely to end up getting performed by some other less-expensive means.
I was travelling the past 3-4 weeks. I stopped at a McDonalds the other day, and the fellow behind the counter at the non-busy restaurant took about 5 minutes to punch in the order for my family of three, and we were each ordering simply "meal #X" off the screen above his head - nothing complex. I could have placed our order in about 5 seconds on a touchscreen or phone app myself. I suspect at a mandated $15/hour, in a few years that's how food will get ordered at such places.
Heck, they'll probably invent burger-flipping robots too. Oh wait, I seem to recall that they have.
I'm curious, why is $15 the magic number? Why not $12? Or $50?
Interesting article on Ford that just popped into my mailbox this morning:
http://priceonomics.com/henry-fords-campaign-to-make-america-great-again/
It is an interesting question. As technology advances, and it becomes increasingly cheaper to substitute capital for labor, what do we do with the people whose labor isn't valuable enough to support them?
Some form of a dole?
Government-funded make-work?
Mandating a certain level of inefficiency into the economy to force firms to use labor where technology would be cheaper?
Soylent Green?
It will be interesting, if somewhat heart-breaking, to see how we solve the problem.
Teacher Terry
6-9-16, 1:59pm
WS: tool and dye makers used to make the big bucks in Wi. My ex made great $ and got lots of overtime. It supported the 5 of us and allowed me to get 3 college degrees all paid for in cash. We lived frugally but owned a decent home/cars, etc. He always worked for the big companies and when he was laid off he would go work at a smaller place that didn't pay as well and wait to get called back to the bigger place. He was never out of a job more then a week. I suspect you guys are living in a small town which might be why his pay is low. There is a shortage of real tool and dye makers that have been through the 4 year apprenticeship program. Manufacturing jobs allowed people that did not go to college to have middle class life styles and yes Ford understood his workers couldn't buy his cars if not paid enough. You don't have to be greedy to be rich.
Ford understood his workers couldn't buy his cars if not paid enough. You don't have to be greedy to be rich.
Am I really the only one here who thinks this mythical Ford economic model does not make sense?
Am I really the only one here who thinks this mythical Ford economic model does not make sense?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-so_story
Teacher Terry
6-9-16, 2:06pm
I grew up in a blue collar manufacturing town and people made decent $ at their jobs. Often the wife didn't work and men made enough to support a decent lifestyle. Not a grand lifestyle but decent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-so_story
This link safe for work?
This link safe for work?
Some job sites prohibit Kipling, so be careful.
Am I really the only one here who thinks this mythical Ford economic model does not make sense?
Welfare capitalism - Endicott-Johnson shoe company and IBM (once upon a time) followed this model (my father was employed by IBM in the 60's). It worked for a time - eventually it just could not compete with businesses who could cut their labor costs to the bone by relocating overseas.
Williamsmith
6-9-16, 2:13pm
My words were pretty simple and clear. Only one word even had two syllables, and that one was a "contraction".
Some jobs don't generate $15 of value/utility. Such as punching your order into the order screen at KFC. So if you require $15/hour for that task, the task is quite likely to end up getting performed by some other less-expensive means.
I was travelling the past 3-4 weeks. I stopped at a McDonalds the other day, and the fellow behind the counter at the non-busy restaurant took about 5 minutes to punch in the order for my family of three, and we were each ordering simply "meal #X" off the screen above his head - nothing complex. I could have placed our order in about 5 seconds on a touchscreen or phone app myself. I suspect at a mandated $15/hour, in a few years that's how food will get ordered at such places.
Heck, they'll probably invent burger-flipping robots too. Oh wait, I seem to recall that they have.
I'm curious, why is $15 the magic number? Why not $12? Or $50?
The folks at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, otherwise known as MIT have studied what it costs people in different parts of the country to live. They have defined a living wage for full time workers and then classified the hourly rate in three categories....living wage, poverty wage and current minimum wage. I live in one of the cheapest counties in the nation except for gasoline which is the highest due to our crumbling infrastructure of bridges on highways.
So in my county one person should earn $9.40/ hr for a living wage...$5 / HR for poverty and the current minimum wage is $7.25. Contrast with San Fransisco.....$14.37/ hr for a living wage ....$5 poverty and current is $9. They even have it broken down in expense categories to justify their numbers.
Now that is just one person. Say they have to support one child. California becomes $29.37/ hr for living wage, $7 for poverty and $9 is the current.
My county, $20.14 living, poverty $7 and current is $7.25.
Im no genius but the folks at MIT usually know what they are doing with numbers.
My way of thinking, if you can't pay somebody enou to live decently then you shouldn't be claiming to be a decent businessman. Admit it, your business model sucks.
My way of thinking, if you can't pay somebody enou to live decently then you shouldn't be claiming to be a decent businessman. Admit it, your business model sucks.
Or just invest in industrial robots.
Or just invest in industrial robots.
Or just say: "Hey, we're making massive profits!" And then leave it at that.
Or just invest in industrial robots.
Or keep turning people into robots. After all, I am pretty close to one now. And I know many who are too.
Or just invest in industrial robots.
A local business I help own and operate decided several years ago to pay our workers a living wage. This was. substantial commitment on our part - this is a very expensive part of the country to live in, and you can't generally manage to hire reliable unskilled labor for $15/hour.
We went down this path partly out of a sense of social justice and honoring labor and all of that. But frankly, mostly for self-serving reasons - employee retention, emote reliability, quality and predictability of work output, and all that evil business stuff. Most of our jobs require some specialized training and skill, and the use of judgment. Retraining new people every year, only to have them quit after two weeks of hard work wasn't really economical.
To find this increase in payroll expenses, we doubled the price of our product, and *eliminated many of the unskilled positions* by investing in machinery or hiring specialists to come in to perform just the needed work.
At the end of the day, we now have positions that pay a living wage, but fewer positions overall. So, that's a win for the people who retained their jobs, maybe a lose for those who found that glueing wine labels onto bottles wasn't worth $20+/hour.
ApatheticNoMore
6-9-16, 2:36pm
Am I really the only one here who thinks this mythical Ford economic model does not make sense?
it makes as much sense as the present model which is massive debt (that's how people buy things these days, not wages but massive debt). Even if it makes narrow sense for business, consumer debt is certainly not making sense in the big picture as a way to run an economy - with all the periodic default on debt it implies.
Sure Ford was a rather dislikable fellow often of rather fascists political opinions but that is neither here or there. It makes business sense if it's a tight labor market (probably the condition Ford himself ACTUALLY faced), if labor is a fairly small cost of production anyway (this is often the case), if a company benefits significantly enough from happy workers (service work might actually benefit a lot from this) or from having it's pick of workers for it to be more than worth it (Costco), or if there aren't extreme competitive pressures to lower wages (competing with China on labor costs or something - good luck with that - $15 a DAY might be too much if that's what you are trying for).
Specific example I didn't manage to get typed in above:
Pruning grape vines properly and tending to their trellising is a semi-black art. You can train someone how to do it in a few hours, then they need supervision for the first few hundred hours, and the new person tends to screw up a bit, which messes up the vine and the yield. Also, it's pain-in-the-bleep work, and a bit physically demanding.
Someone who is *good* at it is 4-8x as productive as someone who is merely "OK" at it, or new to it.
So, previously to get this job done, we hired 3-4 people, at $15-$20 an hour, and then spent additional payroll for someone to train and supervise them. It was a constant pain hiring, training, and retaining novice workers.
Now we pay one guy $30+/hour, who does the work of 3-4 novice workers, in less time, with better results, while freeing up our other skilled staff to attend to other functions. He always shows up, doesn't quit because "the work is hard", and gets the job done very well.
Result: one living wage job created, 2-3 jobs eliminated. Payroll *reduced*. Pain-in-the-bleep staffing/training issues eliminated.
Result: one living wage job created, 2-3 jobs eliminated. Payroll *reduced*. Pain-in-the-bleep staffing/training issues eliminated.
That's happening all over the country. The problem is what to do with the unneeded workers. Have government support them, directly or indirectly from taxes on a diminishing cadre of highly compensated "makers"? Force them on businesses? Will the politics of the later 21st century focus on the size of the dole 80% of us have to live on?
That's happening all over the country. The problem is what to do with the unneeded workers. Have government support them, directly or indirectly from taxes on a diminishing cadre of highly compensated "makers"? Force them on businesses? Will the politics of the later 21st century focus on the size of the dole 80% of us have to live on?
Some other nations are doing some interesting things to cope with this problem of "unneeded" workers.
For instance, in Brazil's major cities, people are living in the landfills. They scavenge things, sell something here or there, built a small hut out of trash and refuse, and they also beg and get a little charity. Some have part time jobs doing this or that.
It is a simple life really, and they might be impoverished, unhealthy, and desperate...but they're happy!
Some other nations are doing some interesting things to cope with this problem of "unneeded" workers.
For instance, in Brazil's major cities, people are living in the landfills. They scavenge things, sell something here or there, built a small hut out of trash and refuse, and they also beg and get a little charity. Some have part time jobs doing this or that.
It is a simple life really, and they might be impoverished, unhealthy, and desperate...but they're happy!
The Swiss considered simply paying everybody an income decoupled from work, but decided against it. I hear the Dutch, the Finns and the Canadians are planning experiments in the same vein.
Other countries try addressing the problem with regulations making it extremely difficult to shed employees no matter how they perform, but that tends to make firms reluctant to hire new staff, especially if they are young or inexperienced.
We could consider putting more people on government payrolls in CCC type arrangements.
I'm not sure what the solution will eventually be.
That's happening all over the country. The problem is what to do with the unneeded workers. Have government support them, directly or indirectly from taxes on a diminishing cadre of highly compensated "makers"? Force them on businesses? Will the politics of the later 21st century focus on the size of the dole 80% of us have to live on?
Maybe the robots will be super-productive, and we'll end up like:
https://archive.org/stream/galaxymagazine-1954-04/Galaxy_1954_04#page/n7/mode/2up
If we end up having an economy of abundance of goods/materials and "excess" free time, might be worth looking at the how the First Nations cultures of the Pacific NW coast developed.
I wouldn't mind being able to live in a reasonable home, devote most of my time to my research and projects, and recieve an allotment of enough goods/services to live happily on, without the nonsense of all this money-and-accounting that's necessary to do that sort of thing today.
The Swiss considered simply paying everybody an income decoupled from work, but decided against it. I hear the Dutch, the Finns and the Canadians are planning experiments in the same vein.
Other countries try addressing the problem with regulations making it extremely difficult to shed employees no matter how they perform, but that tends to make firms reluctant to hire new staff, especially if they are young or inexperienced.
We could consider putting more people on government payrolls in CCC type arrangements.
I'm not sure what the solution will eventually be.
Well, there are a lot of things that could happen. If antibiotics are no longer effective on some major diseases the population could drop.
Some new discovery could create an employment bubble for a decade and hold the wolves at the door for a while longer.
I know this: It is possible that my greatest skill -- not needing much -- could come in handy.
I doubt that the US govt will do much more than let the market sort it out. I mean, the govt will indeed do a little, but not much at all.
I doubt that the US govt will do much ..l.
Are large federal-scale governments traditionally good at "doing much" about this sort of thing?
I could repost my usual pictures of Zimbabwean grocery stores and factories... Or giant empty Chinese manufacturing cities.
Are large federal-scale governments traditionally good at "doing much" about this sort of thing?
I could repost my usual pictures of Zimbabwean grocery stores and factories... Or giant empty Chinese manufacturing cities.
Who should do something about it? State gubmint? Local gubmint? A corporation?
Maybe the robots will be super-productive, and we'll end up like:
https://archive.org/stream/galaxymagazine-1954-04/Galaxy_1954_04#page/n7/mode/2up
If we end up having an economy of abundance of goods/materials and "excess" free time, might be worth looking at the how the First Nations cultures of the Pacific NW coast developed.
I wouldn't mind being able to live in a reasonable home, devote most of my time to my research and projects, and recieve an allotment of enough goods/services to live happily on, without the nonsense of all this money-and-accounting that's necessary to do that sort of thing today.
It's possible that we could become so wildly productive that work becomes more or less voluntary for virtually everybody. We might evolve into a system of patronage power relationships similar to some Classical civilizations or the old Pacific Northwest. We might simply realize the dream of a happy entitlement state.
I'm not sure you could you could run a civilization without accountants, though. We'd probably need to maintain some Morloch CPAs.
I'm not sure you could you could run a civilization without accountants, though. We'd probably need to maintain some Morloch CPAs.
Let's make Alan do it.
ApatheticNoMore
6-9-16, 5:03pm
I'm not sure you could you could run a civilization without accountants, though. We'd probably need to maintain some Morloch CPAs.
yes, but we've outsourced them to China .. needed but not at wasteful first world wages.
yes, but we've outsourced them to China .. needed but not at wasteful first world wages.
By that time all of China's skilled labor will be directed to censoring internet blogs.
Let's make Alan do it.
Maybe he'd be interested in handling Rob's account.
Let's make Alan do it.
Maybe he'd be interested in handling Rob's account.
I don't think so!
So far, I've spent the past 43 years supporting myself, my family and Rob's right to free or very low cost services from highly skilled professionals. When the utopian entitlement state comes along, I'm going to assert my right to a life of leisure.
gimmethesimplelife
6-9-16, 8:22pm
I don't think so!
So far, I've spent the past 43 years supporting myself, my family and Rob's right to free or very low cost services from highly skilled professionals. When the utopian entitlement state comes along, I'm going to assert my right to a life of leisure.Ummmm.....I'm lost. Totally lost. How do you support my paying for high quality low cost services in Mexico again? No snark here. I'm just not seeing a connection. Rob
iris lilies
6-9-16, 8:28pm
Ummmm.....I'm lost. Totally lost. How do you support my paying for high quality low cost services in Mexico again? No snark here. I'm just not seeing a connection. Rob
Rob, you had a long hospital stay in the U.S. in recent memory. That was, I believe, the period where you were all atwitter about Medicaid coming through for you.
If the Alan fairy didn't pay for that multi-week stay, who did?
gimmethesimplelife
6-9-16, 8:40pm
Rob, you had a long hospital stay in the U.S. in recent memory. That was, I believe, the period where you were all atwitter about Medicaid coming through for you.
If the Alan fairy didn't pay for that multi-week stay, who did?OK, IL, your point. That was two years ago and I'm no longer on the Medicaid rolls BUT you are correct that that 13 night stay was completely covered. As was a 3 night stay preceding that stay. Medicaid did come through for me here, you are correct. Rob
The conservatives on here treat Rob like the whipping boy.
The conservatives on here treat Rob like the whipping boy.
I can't speak for Rob but I know guys who enjoy that role.
iris lilies
6-9-16, 9:23pm
I can't speak for Rob but I know guys who enjoy that role.
omg, that made me laugh!
The conservatives on here treat Rob like the whipping boy.
You just noticed that? He's remarkably sanguine about it.
iris lilies
6-9-16, 9:25pm
The conservatives on here treat Rob like the whipping boy.
Just inserting some reality when lala land seems to have taken over.
gimmethesimplelife
6-9-16, 10:09pm
You just noticed that? He's remarkably sanguine about it.Honestly.....how could I be offended by the conservatives here? They lead very different lives from me and life has apparently taught them different lessons than I have learned. They likely don't fear the police......but they don't know the joy of crossing the border for various reasons as I do. These are just two examples that come to mind....I'm sure there are many others. I think it's a good thing certain posters here are exposed to my thinking as I doubt they run across the line of thinking often on their daily lives.....just like I don't run across their thinking often. I used to get offended but honestly......these people have never packed six to a car to Mexico for health care.....how could I possibly be offended by a person's opinion who doesn't get how things really are in the lower classes? I have compassion as I get older......I also know that fortunes can change overnight and those who don't get it these days may find themselves thrown out of their former position and forced to understand. If that happens to anyone here, perhaps they will remember my realistic advice and I'll then be of service in a way. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-9-16, 10:12pm
I can't speak for Rob but I know guys who enjoy that role.Mmmmm....if I'm reading this right? I'll pass. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-9-16, 10:15pm
Just inserting some reality when lala land seems to have taken over.IL, here's the rub....and it's taken me years to understand this. Your reality is not my reality and vice versa. That doesn't mean either of us is wrong.....though your solutions may not work in my reality and vice versa. Rob
I can't speak for Rob but I know guys who enjoy that role.
I charge extra for that in one of my moonlighting professions...
gimmethesimplelife
6-10-16, 12:16am
I charge extra for that in one of my moonlighting professions...Do tell, Bae. Rob
Williamsmith
6-10-16, 8:39am
You know, I had no idea this thread would generate so many views and replies. I think I will try for 30,000 views and 1,000 replies. After all, it's just for entertainment anyway. Not bad for a thread about an imbecile billionaire.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 8:45am
You know, I had no idea this thread would generate so many views and replies. I think I will try for 30,000 views and 1,000 replies. After all, it's just for entertainment anyway. Not bad for a thread about an imbecile billionaire.
The cultural insights of the OP were profound and incredibly thought-provoking.
Williamsmith
6-10-16, 8:47am
The cultural insights of the OP were profound and incredibly thought-provoking.
I must have been high on opiods at the time.
The conservatives on here treat Rob like the whipping boy.
I wouldn't call it "like a whipping boy", it's more that Rob has spent a lot of time and effort here asserting his right to other peoples expertise and effort at a cost he deems appropriate. Sometimes those assertions beg another viewpoint, one that liberals don't seem interested in providing.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 9:09am
I wouldn't call it "like a whipping boy", it's more that Rob has spent a lot of time and effort here asserting his right to other peoples expertise and effort at a cost he deems appropriate. Sometimes those assertions beg another viewpoint, one that liberals don't seem interested in providing.
From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs. ;)
From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs. ;)So, if someone is operating below their abilities, should they be forced, or have a duty to change?
Ultralight
6-10-16, 9:22am
So, if someone is operating below their abilities, should they be forced, or have a duty to change?
Does Alan decide if they are operating at, below, or above their abilities?
So, if someone is operating below their abilities, should they be forced, or have a duty to change?
I have heard that argument made in a slightly different context.
The case given was for an investment banker earning $600K annually. Disgusted with her life of greed, she considers chucking it all and working as a relief volunteer in South Sudan.
But not so fast, says a concerned utilitarian. Local workers can be hired for a sack of rice per week. She is ethically obligated to stay in investment banking and donate her salary to hire squadrons of local relief workers in order to serve the greater good.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 9:26am
I have heard that argument made in a slightly different context.
The case given was for an investment banker earning $600K annually. Disgusted with her life of greed, she considers chucking it all and working as a relief volunteer in South Sudan.
But not so fast, says a concerned utilitarian. Local workers can be hired for a sack of rice per week. She is ethically obligated to stay in investment banking and donate her salary to hire squadrons of local relief workers in order to serve the greater good.
Investment banking does not serve the greater good.
That is like saying one must keep working at his job clear-cutting forests so he can afford to replant trees. Better to just not cut down the trees.
Does Alan decide if they are operating at, below, or above their abilities?
Nope, but according to socialist dogma, don't we all have a duty to contribute as much as possible in order to fulfill our obligations to the collective? Every benefit must have a corresponding responsibility.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 9:33am
Nope, but according to socialist dogma, don't we all have a duty to contribute as much as possible in order to fulfill our obligations to the collective? Every benefit must have a corresponding responsibility.
Uh... no.
Think of socialism this way:
"Many hands make light work."
I have heard that argument made in a slightly different context.
The case given was for an investment banker earning $600K annually. Disgusted with her life of greed, she considers chucking it all and working as a relief volunteer in South Sudan.
But not so fast, says a concerned utilitarian. Local workers can be hired for a sack of rice per week. She is ethically obligated to stay in investment banking and donate her salary to hire squadrons of local relief workers in order to serve the greater good.
I suppose her decision should be based on why she wants to be a relief volunteer in South Sudan. If it's truly because she wants to help as many people there as possible then, yes, she should probably continue working as a banker and donate the salary. If it's because she wants to leave her soul sucking job and do something she considers more meaningful with her life energy then by all means she should quit and go do that. But she should be honest with herself about her true motivations for going there if she does the second option.
Uh... no.
Hmm, maybe that's why socialism doesn't work.
Investment banking does not serve the greater good.
Of course it does. Investment bankers are the heralds of capitalism. They assemble the elements that advance new technologies, fund infrastructure and otherwise deploy resources efficiently.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 9:37am
Hmm, maybe that's why socialism doesn't work.
Capitalism doesn't work, Alan. lol
Ultralight
6-10-16, 9:38am
Of course it does. Investment bankers are the heralds of capitalism. They assemble the elements that advance new technologies, fund infrastructure and otherwise deploy resources efficiently.
Nope.
I suppose her decision should be based on why she wants to be a relief volunteer in South Sudan. If it's truly because she wants to help as many people there as possible then, yes, she should probably continue working as a banker and donate the salary. If it's because she wants to leave her soul sucking job and do something she considers more meaningful with her life energy then by all means she should quit and go do that. But she should be honest with herself about her true motivations for going there if she does the second option.
That was the basic counter-argument I made. That benefit-maximization is more an economic than an ethical argument. My friend responded that the Sudanese would ultimately be better served by benefit maximization.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 9:48am
If your widget manufacturing business pollutes the groundwater then the best thing you can do is keep making widgets so you can afford to buy water filters for those effected by your water pollution too. Got it. Makes sense. :cool:
Uh... no.
Think of socialism this way:
"Many hands make light work."
"Many hands in your pocket."
Of course it does. Investment bankers are the heralds of capitalism. They assemble the elements that advance new technologies, fund infrastructure and otherwise deploy resources efficiently.
Maybe a third option for our mythical investment banker would be to go to South Sudan in a management/advisory role. She could recommend cutting the wages of the relief workers to 2/3 of a sack of rice. When they complain that they can no longer feed their families she could generously offer to hire on their wives and teenage kids, but only at 1/3 of a bag of rice per week since they'd likely be less efficient workers. The families would still be able to eat and now the organization could do even more good work. A win all the way around!
gimmethesimplelife
6-10-16, 10:42am
I wouldn't call it "like a whipping boy", it's more that Rob has spent a lot of time and effort here asserting his right to other peoples expertise and effort at a cost he deems appropriate. Sometimes those assertions beg another viewpoint, one that liberals don't seem interested in providing.I find this call out of place. Given that I am now crossing the border to access expertise at a price I'm OK with.....why the judgement call here? If anything, one would think I should be respected for offshoring. See why I throw my zip code around? In the 85006 people "get" this. Rob
Ultralight
6-10-16, 11:04am
Maybe a third option for our mythical investment banker would be to go to South Sudan in a management/advisory role. She could recommend cutting the wages of the relief workers to 2/3 of a sack of rice. When they complain that they can no longer feed their families she could generously offer to hire on their wives and teenage kids, but only at 1/3 of a bag of rice per week since they'd likely be less efficient workers. The families would still be able to eat and now the organization could do even more good work. A win all the way around!
I nominate you for a promotion.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 11:05am
I find this call out of place. Given that I am now crossing the border to access expertise at a price I'm OK with.....why the judgement call here? If anything, one would think I should be respected for offshoring. See why I throw my zip code around? In the 85006 people "get" this. Rob
Silly Rob... lol
Offshoring is for the wealthy! Not for workin' schlubs like you.
gimmethesimplelife
6-10-16, 11:12am
Silly Rob... lol
Offshoring is for the wealthy! Not for workin' schlubs like you.I beg to differ. In this case, what's good for those living in North Scottsdale, Cave Creek, or Paradise Valley is good for those living in the 85006 too.....It's just that the motivations are different. The former offshore to build yet more wealth, the latter offshore to access basic human rights they are not worth in the US. Rob
I find this call out of place. Given that I am now crossing the border to access expertise at a price I'm OK with.....why the judgement call here? If anything, one would think I should be respected for offshoring. See why I throw my zip code around? In the 85006 people "get" this. RobIt's not a judgment call as much as a questioning of your expectations. You've told us hundreds of times, if not more, of your dis-satisfaction with the United States over the cost of medical care, and advocated for governmental intrusion of markets, along with increased taxpayer responsibility to ensure end user costs you find acceptable, all the while asserting your 'right' to receive services from others under the guidelines you've established. You continued to complain when you received no-cost-to-you healthcare services under your states Medicare program as well as when the citizens subsidized your current insurance coverage.
I'm sorry if you feel judged by the responses to the one subject you consistently bring up. My responses are always aimed at the notion that any of us have a 'right' to the services of another at costs outside of the providers control, but I don't think the point is getting across, even after all this time.
As for your parting question, there are approximately 43,000 zip codes in the United States and I'm not sure what relevance the 85006 area has to a discussion of national importance, so No, I don't see why you throw it around.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 11:26am
... the notion that any of us have a 'right' to the services of another at costs outside of the providers control...
Do you get any services of another at costs outside of the provider's control?
Do you get any services of another at costs outside of the provider's control?Not outside of negotiated prices for services rendered and even then I wouldn't have the 'right' to set the terms the provider must adhere to.
If I attempted that, I'd expect the service provider to suggest I find someone else.
gimmethesimplelife
6-10-16, 11:39am
Not outside of negotiated prices for services rendered and even then I wouldn't have the 'right' to set the terms the provider must adhere to.
If I attempted that, I'd expect the service provider to suggest I find someone else.Maybe I need to state my point diffetently, then. By crossing the border, I take back some of the power over pricing - that's quite likely where the intense joy I feel once I cross the turnstile (sp?) and am in Mexico comes from. I refuse the role of victim by doing so and I vote with my feet. Rob
Ultralight
6-10-16, 11:40am
Not outside of negotiated prices for services rendered and even then I wouldn't have the 'right' to set the terms the provider must adhere to.
If I attempted that, I'd expect the service provider to suggest I find someone else.
You get the services of public roads. The costs are not outside the provider's control?
You get the services of public roads. The costs are not outside the provider's control?Well that brings up the subject of public vs private. Would you suggest that your use of a toll road involves negotiable pricing for the user?
Or, on the public side, would you suggest that I have a 'right' to pay a lower fuel tax?
Ultralight
6-10-16, 11:45am
Well that brings up the subject of public vs private. Would you suggest that your use of a toll road involves negotiable pricing for the user?
Excellent non-answer.
Excellent non-answer.An answer not to your liking is still an answer. Try asking a more relevant question. Likening a public resource to a private provider only confuses people who can't see the difference.
Maybe I need to state my point diffetently, then. By crossing the border, I take back some of the power over pricing - that's quite likely where the intense joy I feel once I cross the turnstile (sp?) and am in Mexico comes from. I refuse the role of victim by doing so and I vote with my feet. Rob
I'm sure General Motors and Rockwell feel the same joy. That's why I support free trade.
gimmethesimplelife
6-10-16, 12:18pm
I'm sure General Motors and Rockwell feel the same joy. That's why I support free trade.I see a huge difference here. In my case I am speaking of accessing basic human rights that I would not be priced out of in any other first world country due to socialized medicine. The corporations you speak of don't hold the same moral high ground that my example does......they are merely cutting costs to increase returns to shareholders. Big difference from a human rights perspective. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-10-16, 12:19pm
Excellent non-answer.Agreed. Rob
I see a huge difference here. In my case I am speaking of accessing basic human rights that I would not be priced out of in any other first world country due to socialized medicine. The corporations you speak of don't hold the same moral high ground that my example does......they are merely cutting costs to increase returns to shareholders. Big difference from a human rights perspective. Rob
Why is cost-cutting a basic human right for you but not GM?
Ultralight
6-10-16, 12:22pm
Why is cost-cutting a basic human right for you but not GM?
GM is human?
GM is human?
It's composed of humans. It's struggling to survive in a competitive environment to support employees and shareholders.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 1:12pm
The Aryan Nation is comprised of humans too. Should the Aryan Nation be given human rights?
gimmethesimplelife
6-10-16, 1:22pm
Why is cost-cutting a basic human right for you but not GM?
Access to health care trumps (no reference to Mr. Trump) increasing shareholder wealth. I find it literally terrifying that many Americans don't understand this. Rob
Williamsmith
6-10-16, 1:36pm
You guys remind me of the many domestic disputes I had to respond to. The only way to resolve the argument was to first separate the parties and then look for common ground. And try to do that without getting stabbed, shot or assaulted.
In a way, both of you are right. The only responsibility of business, corporations and executives is to increase profits for the shareholders. As long as it is done in open and free competition without cheating and fraud. And here is where the other side is right. Our current model does not resemble anything like free and open competition.
First off, government threw that baby out with the bath water when they bailed out companies/corporations and executives who chose to take great risk with the shareholders money and lost it. The bailout reinforced attitudes that greater risk than reason would imply can be taken because you could expect to be too big to fail.
Second, shareholders are now prevailing upon their employees, the executives to apply certain social responsibilities to their customers and employees /workers. To be sure, there are still shareholders amongst them that want to simply maximize their profit but stockholders are increasingly becoming socially aware of the needs of their customers. And to some extent it can be a smart strategy for a company to at least fein interest in the environment, wealth redistribution or social issues.
But today's stockholder is increasingly demanding that a balance be struck between the strict rule of maximizing profit and the acceptance of some social responsibility. An executive cannot act in a way to satisfy both views. A political resolution must evolve. The Supreme Court opened Pandora's box further when it allowed corporations to act as individual lobbyists. So to enjoy the benefits of individuality without incurring the social responsibilities of individuals is inconsistent with free and open competition.
Liberals are simply calling out the cheating and hypocracy of it all.
The Aryan Nation is comprised of humans too. Should the Aryan Nation be given human rights?
A member of the Aryan Nations, the CEO of IBM and the Executive Director of the National Rifle Association, along with their respective memberships have rights identical to yours. Otherwise the concept of rights becomes meaningless.
Access to health care trump's (no reference to Mr. Trump) increasing shareholder wealth. I find it literally terrifying that many Americans don't understand this. Rob
The wealth generated by corporations goes to make individuals richer, to fund pensions and retirement accounts, to create insurance reserves, to fund endowments and to pay the taxes needed to fund the things you consider yours by right. Why do your interests supersede any of those purposes? Why shouldn't anyone have the right to purchase services from any source they choose?
A member of the Aryan Nations, the CEO of IBM and the Executive Director of the National Rifle Association, along with their respective memberships have rights identical to yours. Otherwise the concept of rights becomes meaningless.
But I thought rights were only for people we liked? And people we don't like get to go to the camps to be re-educated and learn how to dig ditches and stuff.
Ultralight
6-10-16, 2:48pm
...to fund pensions and retirement accounts...
Now I know you are just goofing around.
Now I know you are just goofing around.
I'm deadly serious. What's the point of the YMOYL paradigm if not to gain your freedom through membership in the rentier class?
I'm deadly serious. What's the point of the YMOYL paradigm if not to gain your freedom through membership in the rentier class?
Exactly so.
I used to build companies from scratch that employed thousands or tens of thousands of people by the time I moved on to the next. (And I couldn't have built them without the help of "evil" investment bankers/Wall Street/shareholders/pension funds/...).
One day I read YMOYL. I sold off my interests in my enterprises a few months later, and "retired" as suggested in YMOYL to reclaim the rest of my life for myself. That was 16+ years ago or so.
Now, I'm clearly not doing my "duty" to society as some envision it, because I'm not busting my ass 80+ hours a week building new technologies, creating new jobs, and so on. I'm not performing fully "according to my ability".
Luckily I already know how to dig ditches and plow fields, so I should be OK when they come to take me to the camps.
But I thought rights were only for people we liked? And people we don't like get to go to the camps to be re-educated and learn how to dig ditches and stuff.
"Human rights are not worthy of the name if they do not protect the people we don't like as well as those we do."
- Trevor Phillips
"IRS Apologizes to Tea Party Groups Over Audits of Applications for Tax Exemption"
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/11/us/politics/irs-apologizes-to-conservative-groups-over-application-audits.html
Do tell, Bae. Rob
I deal in human fulfillment. Can't say more, channel isn't secure. Hint though:
http://img01.deviantart.net/46ef/i/2004/01/3/6/red_umbrella.jpg
Exactly so.
I used to build companies from scratch that employed thousands or tens of thousands of people by the time I moved on to the next. (And I couldn't have built them without the help of "evil" investment bankers/Wall Street/shareholders/pension funds/...).
One day I read YMOYL. I sold off my interests in my enterprises a few months later, and "retired" as suggested in YMOYL to reclaim the rest of my life for myself. That was 16+ years ago or so.
Questions:
Were you discontent working when you read YMOL, or was it like a spiritual awakening/conversion experience?
What were the specific triggers in the book that led you to make such a drastic lifestyle change?
Did you make the transition quickly, and if not, how diid you prepare?
Have you ever regretted the change? Do you ever feel intellectually stagnant?
What did your family and friends say?
I think it's a good thing certain posters here are exposed to my thinking as I doubt they run across the line of thinking often on their daily lives.....just like I don't run across their thinking often. .....how could I possibly be offended by a person's opinion who doesn't get how things really are in the lower classes? ......I also know that fortunes can change overnight and those who don't get it these days may find themselves thrown out of their former position and forced to understand. If that happens to anyone here, perhaps they will remember my realistic advice and I'll then be of service in a way. Rob
Well said. You're a remarkable contributor to this forum. I'm always thankful you post.
gimmethesimplelife
6-10-16, 7:56pm
Well said. You're a remarkable contributor to this forum. I'm always thankful you post.Simone, Thank You for your kind words. They are very much appreciated! Rob
Questions:
Were you discontent working when you read YMOL, or was it like a spiritual awakening/conversion experience?
What were the specific triggers in the book that led you to make such a drastic lifestyle change?
Did you make the transition quickly, and if not, how diid you prepare?
Have you ever regretted the change? Do you ever feel intellectually stagnant?
What did your family and friends say?
1 - I wasn't discontent - work was quite engaging, I was doing very cool stuff, with very cool people. I was discontented with the *place* I was living, Silicon Valley, as was my wife. We had a young daughter, and our community didn't seem like the ideal place to raise a child, too many people working too hard, and no real community in our neighborhood. We began searching around the country for a small-town/rural sort of environment, with many constraints. I took a sabbatical, and this was about the 5th place we looked at, and I happened to read YMOYL while I was here.
2- The key trigger was the math, and the observation that your life isn't a rehearsal for your "real" life, but that every moment is precious. Also, I'd had a good friend and mentor die just a few years previous, in his 30s - he was a world-class athlete (climbed Himalayan peaks), and a super-genius, and he walked past me at work one day, went into his office, sat down, and died from an aneurysm. I found the idea of reclaiming my life ASAP quite compelling.
3- We initially thought we'd buy a piece of property here, spend a few years building The Perfect House, then check out of Silicon Valley and move up here. Instead, we bought an OK house our first week of looking around, went back to Silicon Valley to pack up, and were back up here about a month later. I continued to telecommute for my company for the first year or two, then dropped back to simply consulting now-and-then. I don't know if I would have survived completely downshifting and quitting fully immediately. Also, while I believed the math, emotionally it was quite scary.
4 - I haven't really regretted anything. I worried I'd tire of this place/community after a short while, or find it unappealing, as almost all incomers here do after 1-2 years, but I've continued to grow fonder of it over time. Intellectually stagnant? Perhaps at times, until I redirected my efforts into other pursuits. I think I'm busier and more engaged than when I was "working" for a living, and have had to master several new disciplines over the years.
5 - my wife/daughter loved the idea. My wife's parents were dubious, and remained so. My mother liked the idea so much she moved here as well about a year after us, "retiring" early to do so. My Dad also, upon hearing my reasoning, retired early and moved with his husband to their dream "retirement" location, where he is busier than when he was working for real as well. Our friends-who-were-merely-acquaintances were/are dubious, and many drifted away. Our real friends seemingly understand, visit frequently, and some have purchased seasonal places here. We provoked a minor wave of early check-out/retirements in Silicon Valley, almost always to some island or mountain top somewhere.
So, YMOYL was a good thing to read at that time in my life.
Thanks, bae. Really interesting story, and helpful.
... The only responsibility of business, corporations and executives is to increase profits for the shareholders. As long as it is done in open and free competition without cheating and fraud. And here is where the other side is right. Our current model does not resemble anything like free and open competition.
First off, government threw that baby out with the bath water when they bailed out companies/corporations and executives who chose to take great risk with the shareholders money and lost it. The bailout reinforced attitudes that greater risk than reason would imply can be taken because you could expect to be too big to fail.
Second, shareholders are now prevailing upon their employees, the executives to apply certain social responsibilities to their customers and employees /workers. To be sure, there are still shareholders amongst them that want to simply maximize their profit but stockholders are increasingly becoming socially aware of the needs of their customers. And to some extent it can be a smart strategy for a company to at least fein interest in the environment, wealth redistribution or social issues.
But today's stockholder is increasingly demanding that a balance be struck between the strict rule of maximizing profit and the acceptance of some social responsibility. An executive cannot act in a way to satisfy both views. A political resolution must evolve. The Supreme Court opened Pandora's box further when it allowed corporations to act as individual lobbyists. So to enjoy the benefits of individuality without incurring the social responsibilities of individuals is inconsistent with free and open competition.
Liberals are simply calling out the cheating and hypocracy of it all.
Very well said.
CEO Pay Climbs Again, Even As Their Stock Prices Don't
http://www.continuityinsights.com/news/2016/05/ceo-pay-climbs-again-even-their-stock-prices-dont
gimmethesimplelife
6-11-16, 10:36am
CEO Pay Climbs Again, Even As Their Stock Prices Don't
http://www.continuityinsights.com/news/2016/05/ceo-pay-climbs-agaat in-even-their-stock-prices-dontI often wonder, how long can this keep going on? How much longer can this be sustained? At what point are the pitchforks sharpened? At what point are they put in use? My biggest takeaway question is this.....why the assumption/belief that there will not be progressive consequences for this type of income inequality? Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-11-16, 10:44am
You guys remind me of the many domestic disputes I had to respond to. The only way to resolve the argument was to first separate the parties and then look for common ground. And try to do that without getting stabbed, shot or assaulted.
In a way, both of you are right. The only responsibility of business, corporations and executives is to increase profits for the shareholders. As long as it is done in open and free competition without cheating and fraud. And here is where the other side is right. Our current model does not resemble anything like free and open competition.
First off, government threw that baby out with the bath water when they bailed out companies/corporations and executives who chose to take great risk with the shareholders money and lost it. The bailout reinforced attitudes that greater risk than reason would imply can be taken because you could expect to be too big to fail.
Second, shareholders are now prevailing upon their employees, the executives to apply certain social responsibilities to their customers and employees /workers. To be sure, there are still shareholders amongst them that want to simply maximize their profit but stockholders are increasingly becoming socially aware of the needs of their customers. And to some extent it can be a smart strategy for a company to at least fein interest in the environment, wealth redistribution or social issues.
But today's stockholder is increasingly demanding that a balance be struck between the strict rule of maximizing profit and the acceptance of some social responsibility. An executive cannot act in a way to satisfy both views. A political resolution must evolve. The Supreme Court opened Pandora's box further when it allowed corporations to act as individual lobbyists. So to enjoy the benefits of individuality without incurring the social responsibilities of individuals is inconsistent with free and open competition.
Liberals are simply calling out the cheating and hypocracy of it all.You seem to be touching on socially responsible investing which I believe is a wonderful thing. I just wish the required minumums to invest this way were lower. I've been putting small amounts of money into Acorns to put something away. A survey I did for $8.....spare change..... $20 I found on the street, that kind of thing. I just wish Acorns had a socially responsible option as I do feel guilt investing blindly as I am doing.....who knows what I am subsidizing/rubber stamping/giving tacit approval to? I'm looking into Stash, an app similar to Acorns, with a $5 minimum to get in and they have a Clean and Green investment option that sounds interesting. I can start up again donating plasma and put the money here perhaps. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
6-11-16, 10:59am
1 - I wasn't discontent - work was quite engaging, I was doing very cool stuff, with very cool people. I was discontented with the *place* I was living, Silicon Valley, as was my wife. We had a young daughter, and our community didn't seem like the ideal place to raise a child, too many people working too hard, and no real community in our neighborhood. We began searching around the country for a small-town/rural sort of environment, with many constraints. I took a sabbatical, and this was about the 5th place we looked at, and I happened to read YMOYL while I was here.
2- The key trigger was the math, and the observation that your life isn't a rehearsal for your "real" life, but that every moment is precious. Also, I'd had a good friend and mentor die just a few years previous, in his 30s - he was a world-class athlete (climbed Himalayan peaks), and a super-genius, and he walked past me at work one day, went into his office, sat down, and died from an aneurysm. I found the idea of reclaiming my life ASAP quite compelling.
3- We initially thought we'd buy a piece of property here, spend a few years building The Perfect House, then check out of Silicon Valley and move up here. Instead, we bought an OK house our first week of looking around, went back to Silicon Valley to pack up, and were back up here about a month later. I continued to telecommute for my company for the first year or two, then dropped back to simply consulting now-and-then. I don't know if I would have survived completely downshifting and quitting fully immediately. Also, while I believed the math, emotionally it was quite scary.
4 - I haven't really regretted anything. I worried I'd tire of this place/community after a short while, or find it unappealing, as almost all incomers here do after 1-2 years, but I've continued to grow fonder of it over time. Intellectually stagnant? Perhaps at times, until I redirected my efforts into other pursuits. I think I'm busier and more engaged than when I was "working" for a living, and have had to master several new disciplines over the years.
5 - my wife/daughter loved the idea. My wife's parents were dubious, and remained so. My mother liked the idea so much she moved here as well about a year after us, "retiring" early to do so. My Dad also, upon hearing my reasoning, retired early and moved with his husband to their dream "retirement" location, where he is busier than when he was working for real as well. Our friends-who-were-merely-acquaintances were/are dubious, and many drifted away. Our real friends seemingly understand, visit frequently, and some have purchased seasonal places here. We provoked a minor wave of early check-out/retirements in Silicon Valley, almost always to some island or mountain top somewhere.
So, YMOYL was a good thing to read at that time in my life.Bae, even though we often don't agree I find your story interesting and I also agree that every moment is precious.....you really don't know when your time here ends. Best to enjoy it, which you seem to be doing. Rob
Teacher Terry
6-11-16, 7:16pm
Bae, very interesting story. Not knowing how much time we have left is our main inspiration to travel more at this time. We have lost some friends and I want to make sure I am spending my time and $ the way I want. I have had a few people ask why I still teach my online class and I still do it because I love it and it fills my soul. When that is no longer the case I will not teach it anymore.
1 - I wasn't discontent - work was quite engaging, I was doing very cool stuff, with very cool people. I was discontented with the *place* I was living, Silicon Valley, as was my wife. We had a young daughter, and our community didn't seem like the ideal place to raise a child, too many people working too hard, and no real community in our neighborhood. We began searching around the country for a small-town/rural sort of environment, with many constraints. I took a sabbatical, and this was about the 5th place we looked at, and I happened to read YMOYL while I was here.
2- The key trigger was the math, and the observation that your life isn't a rehearsal for your "real" life, but that every moment is precious. Also, I'd had a good friend and mentor die just a few years previous, in his 30s - he was a world-class athlete (climbed Himalayan peaks), and a super-genius, and he walked past me at work one day, went into his office, sat down, and died from an aneurysm. I found the idea of reclaiming my life ASAP quite compelling.
3- We initially thought we'd buy a piece of property here, spend a few years building The Perfect House, then check out of Silicon Valley and move up here. Instead, we bought an OK house our first week of looking around, went back to Silicon Valley to pack up, and were back up here about a month later. I continued to telecommute for my company for the first year or two, then dropped back to simply consulting now-and-then. I don't know if I would have survived completely downshifting and quitting fully immediately. Also, while I believed the math, emotionally it was quite scary.
4 - I haven't really regretted anything. I worried I'd tire of this place/community after a short while, or find it unappealing, as almost all incomers here do after 1-2 years, but I've continued to grow fonder of it over time. Intellectually stagnant? Perhaps at times, until I redirected my efforts into other pursuits. I think I'm busier and more engaged than when I was "working" for a living, and have had to master several new disciplines over the years.
5 - my wife/daughter loved the idea. My wife's parents were dubious, and remained so. My mother liked the idea so much she moved here as well about a year after us, "retiring" early to do so. My Dad also, upon hearing my reasoning, retired early and moved with his husband to their dream "retirement" location, where he is busier than when he was working for real as well. Our friends-who-were-merely-acquaintances were/are dubious, and many drifted away. Our real friends seemingly understand, visit frequently, and some have purchased seasonal places here. We provoked a minor wave of early check-out/retirements in Silicon Valley, almost always to some island or mountain top somewhere.
So, YMOYL was a good thing to read at that time in my life.
I read YMOYL my last year of college, to my great benefit. My take, after scraping off the 1960s-70s New Age candy coating, was that time is the finite resource that we should seek to maximize through the disciplined and intelligent management of our careers, finances and personal lives. The most important element to me was the necessity of a long-term plan, even if that plan needed frequent recalibration as life unfolded.
I seem to recall you once mentioning that during your transitional period you decided to give away a considerable portion of your net worth. As someone not particularly burdened by substantial wealth, I'm curious about how you determined how much to keep and whether you had a formal plan for converting assets into income.
I'm sad that Williamsmith is not here to continue the discussion he started, as Bernie is "berning" out of his amazing run challenging Hillary Clinton.
How are the other Bernie supporters here planning on proceeding? Vote for Hill? Write in Bernie? Vote for Trump?
I honestly don't know what I'll do, and that's because I am a bit emotional about the shortfall in votes Bernie had and the inevitability of his withdrawal from the race.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but knowing the Clintons (and BTW I loved Bill Clinton as POTUS) I don't trust the voting results. There have been reports of votes not counted, voter names missing, etc which led to Bernie not achieving expected results in states like CA. Power wields the privilege to bend the rules, so who knows what happened there? In politics, anything is possible.
My instinct is to write in Bernie, but OTOH, as one Bernie supporter said in an NPR article "I would probably vote for Trump, to burst the bubble, to finally pop the zit."
I simply can't/don't trust Hillary. Those Clintons know how to play the game.
RoseQuartz
6-15-16, 3:10pm
.
ApatheticNoMore
6-15-16, 3:27pm
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but knowing the Clintons (and BTW I loved Bill Clinton as POTUS) I don't trust the voting results. There have been reports of votes not counted, voter names missing, etc which led to Bernie not achieving expected results in states like CA.
CALIFORNIA HAS NOT FULLY BEEN COUNTED. That's not even a conspiracy theory. It's a FACT. As counting proceeds some counties in California are flipping toward Bernie (not the huge ones yet but nonetheless). The California election results are not in. I make no prediction on what they would be if they were in (if I had to probably a very slim margin for Hills), but they just aren't in.
There was a lot of voter disenfranchisement in many places across the country, but in California the results of actually cast ballots have not even been counted yet.
Not that this state matters much but I plan to vote 3rd party, if you can't run a decent candidate (ie you are running Hillary), why should I vote for your bad candidates. Makes no sense.
Ultralight
6-15-16, 3:29pm
I am just going to stay home.
I am just going to stay home.
I was thinking of voting for the first female nominee for President - Jill Stein (not that she was really the first, either, but especially given this is her second time the title should not be handed to Clinton).
iris lilies
6-15-16, 4:51pm
...
I simply can't/don't trust Hillary. Those Clintons know how to play the game.
here in the urban core, during the primary the new voter computerized list went down and so they let a anyone in to vote. Yes, Voting early and often was happening just down the street. Me, I didnt get all up in arms because I knew that no votes were being taken away from any Republicans, theynwould have all been votnv for Hillary. A loss for Bernie and for democracy, of course.
It really is too bad.
freshstart
6-15-16, 5:30pm
I also was a fan of Bill as POTUS, I even liked Hillary when she was our Senator and Secretary of State, but Bernie has my heart. I think he could've done amazing things for this country. I would never vote for Trump, even if that "zit needs to be popped" and I would never not vote. So Hillary for me. But I am bitter over Bernie
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.