Economics v 2010

uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3241476
I'm not going to argue that it isn't a fiat system. I might argue that faith has value... That could be a fun paper...
There's no question that faith has value. If the value of a given currency can be equivocated to God, so much the better.
Oh that reminds me, I'll go see if I can't still log into my old schools library system and find some articles about Brazil...
Nice - please do. I'm interested.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3241497
There is a huge difference between opposing immigration and illegal immigration. There are a few crack pots that think any immigration is bad but that isn't what I have seen to be a mainstream conservative view.
The mainstream conservatives are having a tough time resolving their core issues at all.
On the one hand, they feel a need to oppose both illegal immigration and abortion. On the other, where would they get the votes or the money to support their platform? It takes bodies to make contributions.
They've chosen to eliminate abortion. They cannot, therefore, choose to eliminate illegal immigration as well.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3241502
The mainstream conservatives are having a tough time resolving their core issues at all.
On the one hand, they feel a need to oppose both illegal immigration and abortion. On the other, where would they get the votes or the money to support their platform? It takes bodies to make contributions.
They've chosen to eliminate abortion. They cannot, therefore, choose to eliminate illegal immigration as well.
I am not pro life politically speaking so dumping abortion from the platform is a no brainer for me. Illegal immigration is a whole other story. I really don't understand why people oppose removing people from the country who came in illegally. I grew up in a "mexican" area of so cal in my teen years and those guys hated illegals as bad or worse than white folk. The anti illegal movement just has to be careful not to let the left and media paint them as anti hispanic or immigration.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3241511
I am not pro life politically speaking so dumping abortion from the platform is a no brainer for me. Illegal immigration is a whole other story. I really don't understand why people oppose removing people from the country who came in illegally. I grew up in a "mexican" area of so cal in my teen years and those guys hated illegals as bad or worse than white folk. The anti illegal movement just has to be careful not to let the left and media paint them as anti hispanic or immigration.
You're kinda missing my point.
I don't care about illegal immigration or abortion on a moral level either way. The looming problem is mathematical, not social.
The issue for capitalism is that an increasing number of consumers is necessary to perpetuate the economic model. If you can't get more consumers from one place, they have to be gotten from another.
Perhaps pick both. The bottom line is that nothing is infinite. Population has to be as stringently regulated as the money supply in order for the system to continue working...
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3241527
You're kinda missing my point.
I don't care about illegal immigration or abortion on a moral level either way. The looming problem is mathematical, not social.
The issue for capitalism is that an increasing number of consumers is necessary to perpetuate the economic model. If you can't get more consumers from one place, they have to be gotten from another.
Perhaps pick both. The bottom line is that nothing is infinite. Population has to be as stringently regulated as the money supply in order for the system to continue working...
There was an article in the LA times pointing out the number of illegal aliens working in LA country alone is in the millions. For the most part they pay no income taxes and those who do use identity theft which leads to costs for the government and the individual who's information was stolen. At the same time they make up a significant population of the prison system, their children go to our schools which spend Billions every year to teach them in their native language AND they use our ER's for free medical care.
They are most certainly an economic issue, thus mathmatical.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3241502
The mainstream conservatives are having a tough time resolving their core issues at all.
On the one hand, they feel a need to oppose both illegal immigration and abortion. On the other, where would they get the votes or the money to support their platform? It takes bodies to make contributions.
They've chosen to eliminate abortion. They cannot, therefore, choose to eliminate illegal immigration as well.
IMO they should turn away 2 types of people criminals, and people who go onto welfare. Who are we to tell someone oh you can't come to the land where we believe in rights endowed by the creator. Because we've set a quota for immigrants...
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3241527
You're kinda missing my point.
I don't care about illegal immigration or abortion on a moral level either way. The looming problem is mathematical, not social.
The issue for capitalism is that an increasing number of consumers is necessary to perpetuate the economic model. If you can't get more consumers from one place, they have to be gotten from another.
Perhaps pick both. The bottom line is that nothing is infinite. Population has to be as stringently regulated as the money supply in order for the system to continue working...
Sure you can, it is called international trade... And a fractionary banking system...
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3241662
This article brings to light why the economy is somewhat at a standstill right now:
http://www.ksat.com/money/22768563/detail.html
I buy that to a point. On the other hand, the heads I talk to on a regular basis that aren't hiring and ramping up because they're scared of what is comming down the pipe from government...
In reality, I'm doing better than I could have ever realistically imagined almost 2 years out of school. But I'm a cheapo when it comes to spending money.
 
fishtaco

fishtaco

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3241502
The mainstream conservatives are having a tough time resolving their core issues at all.
On the one hand, they feel a need to oppose both illegal immigration and abortion. On the other, where would they get the votes or the money to support their platform? It takes bodies to make contributions.
They've chosen to eliminate abortion. They cannot, therefore, choose to eliminate illegal immigration as well.
I'm not sure I follow your reasoning here, since Bush has left office and the GOP has swung farther right I really don't think they are getting a lot of votes or money from minority voters period and with the tough economy I doubt many minority voters are supporting illegal immigration. Seems like kind of a non-issue.
Fishtaco
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3241621
So is this 'short selling' of homes that would otherwise go into foreclosure good or bad for the economy?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35756755...ew_york_times/
From a short term greedy self serving point of view I am sick and tired of picking up the tab for people who made stupid G-D decisions, be they individuals, banks or investors. For years I have settled for less than I could afford if I wanted to extend my credit to the limit to avoid getting into this kind of problem.
From a purely economic standpoint I would ask which is worse. Letting these houses go into foreclosure now and let those who made the bad decisions take their losses or further extend our national debt with a feel good program that will decrease the losses those involved take on the house? I don't really see a benefit here.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3241669
I buy that to a point. On the other hand, the heads I talk to on a regular basis that aren't hiring and ramping up because they're scared of what is comming down the pipe from government...
In reality, I'm doing better than I could have ever realistically imagined almost 2 years out of school. But I'm a cheapo when it comes to spending money.
Certain segments are doing well. My wife just got a bonus that is slightly more than 21% of her salary. Didn't see that one coming.
The corporation that owns her company has had a wage freeze for about 2 years (doesn't effect the wife's company
)and has cut jobs they never intend to replace. They have just increased the benefits package. At the same time they have been making acquisitions like crazy buying up troubled businesses. These people are making the right moves. I am sitting on a bunch of their stock and may have to buy more. As long as their is no major tort reform in the health care bill its going to be good times once the economy turns.
I've always heard there are more millionaires made coming out of hard times and now I see how it's done. I ain't even close to being a millionaire but I've made a bundle in the stock market the last couple years.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3241707
Certain segments are doing well. My wife just got a bonus that is slightly more than 21% of her salary. Didn't see that one coming.
The corporation that owns her company has had a wage freeze for about 2 years (doesn't effect the wife's company
)and has cut jobs they never intend to replace. They have just increased the benefits package. At the same time they have been making acquisitions like crazy buying up troubled businesses. These people are making the right moves. I am sitting on a bunch of their stock and may have to buy more. As long as their is no major tort reform in the health care bill its going to be good times once the economy turns.
I've always heard there are more millionaires made coming out of hard times and now I see how it's done. I ain't even close to being a millionaire but I've made a bundle in the stock market the last couple years.
percentage changes are where millions are made...
 
fishtaco

fishtaco

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3241700
From a short term greedy self serving point of view I am sick and tired of picking up the tab for people who made stupid G-D decisions, be they individuals, banks or investors. For years I have settled for less than I could afford if I wanted to extend my credit to the limit to avoid getting into this kind of problem.
From a purely economic standpoint I would ask which is worse. Letting these houses go into foreclosure now and let those who made the bad decisions take their losses or further extend our national debt with a feel good program that will decrease the losses those involved take on the house? I don't really see a benefit here.
No kidding, my wife and I owned a home in a crappy neighborhood for 14 years until we saved enough to put down a large down payment on our current home. I don't see the stress involved from being extended to the max as a sane way to live at all. We don't have a vehicle newer than a 2000 (my wifes) and my car is 25 years old, my truck 37 years old, no credit cards and a reasonable

[hr]
and that is what I call living well instead of killing myself working to pay interest and making other people rich. I also don't feel a lot of compassion for those that have made poor financial choices and expect others to pick-up the tab because they had to put a 30,000 dollar kitchen remodel on the credit card to keep up with the Jones.
Fishtaco
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by Fishtaco
http:///forum/post/3241758
No kidding, my wife and I owned a home in a crappy neighborhood for 14 years until we saved enough to put down a large down payment on our current home. I don't see the stress involved from being extended to the max as a sane way to live at all. We don't have a vehicle newer than a 2000 (my wifes) and my car is 25 years old, my truck 37 years old, no credit cards and a reasonable

[hr]
and that is what I call living well instead of killing myself working to pay interest and making other people rich. I also don't feel a lot of compassion for those that have made poor financial choices and expect others to pick-up the tab because they had to put a 30,000 dollar kitchen remodel on the credit card to keep up with the Jones.
Fishtaco

Yep. I really have an issue being forced to fork out more tax dollars to help someone who has a more extravagant life style than me maintain it through government hand outs. I have never begrudged anyone what they went out and earned.
Of course the followers of the leftist pied pipers have been brainwashed to the point they consider not taking as much taxes from someone a government handout.
 
sickboy

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3241621
So is this 'short selling' of homes that would otherwise go into foreclosure good or bad for the economy?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35756755...ew_york_times/
It sounds like the banks would rather force them into bankruptcy for a better deal. But on the other hand, not having the "collateral damage" from a bankruptcy would be a plus to the economy. This way only the

[hr]
holder would loose money instead of everyone that the debtor owes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top