Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 13, 2011 at 3:15 PM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732853
DomoArigato
ParticipantIt’s time to break out this classic piece from The Onion.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-passionate-defender-of-what-he-imagines-c,2849/
November 13, 2011 at 1:54 PM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732846Participant[quote=EconProf] Anyway, to address the charge of hypocrisy, my pension of $540/month and health care I see as deferred compensation for years of relatively low pay.[/quote]
[Sarcasm]That makes you so different from every other government employee.[/Sarcasm]
November 13, 2011 at 1:52 PM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732845Participant[quote=AN]To all who call EconProf a hypocrite, how many of you have 401(k)/IRA/etc., own a home, profited from the many bubbles/busts?[/quote]
I have a 401(k). What is your point?
November 13, 2011 at 1:51 PM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732844Participant[quote=bearishgurl]Let me ask you Piggs calling EconProf a “hypocrite” if YOU would give back the benes you “earned” and not avail yourself of them if you were in his place.[/quote]
I have no problem with EconProf taking his pension. I do have a problem with him taking the monthly pension and then trying to prevent others from getting the same benefit that he gets. Such action is the very definition of a hypocrite.
If EconProf would reject his pension and advocate against other government employees getting a pension, then I could at least respect his view. I would still disagree with his viewpoint but at least his actions would be consistent with his words. As it is now, his words are nothing but hot air because he is practicing the exact opposite of what he preaches.
November 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732835Participant[quote=Shadowfax][
One word: hypocrite: a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.[/quote]Paul Krugman had an article in his blog on this the other day. The right has redefined hypocrite to mean someone that advocates against their own interests while someone like Econprof who made his living off the government and is now retired on the taxpayer’s dime but who advocates against anyone else getting the same great deal he got is considered to have principles. Whatever it takes for a right-winger to be able to sleep at night I guess.
In my experience, the further to the right one is, the more likely they are to derive any money they make directly from the government.
November 13, 2011 at 10:45 AM in reply to: CA Revenue comes in 6.5% lower than expected (and some common sense solutions) #732834Participant[quote=EconProf]Got a small pension at 50 and free health care for family. Way too generous and no I’m not giving it back.[/quote]
So you’re an ‘I got mine to hell with everyone else’ type of person. Thanks for admitting that you’re a hypocrite. I’ll be sure to discount everything you say about pensions from now on.
I foresee a vote for that unprincipled flip-flopper and Obamacare architect Mat Romney in your future. You two appear to be a perfect match.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
I thought one of the most educational points of the night was when Ron Paul described the difference between Crony Capitalism and real capitalism. I never thought of it this way but he was dead on. Companies that get rich from GOV bailouts, fed bailouts, sweetheart GOV contracts, etc are crony capitalism. Real capitalism is when Steve Jobs creates something unique for the market place and they love it. Real capitalism is when Starbucks started up from nothing, etc.[/quote]What do you call it when Rand Paul stands in the way of regulation of the oil and gas industry that would save people’s lives?
A senator who opposes federal regulation on philosophical grounds is single-handedly blocking legislation that would strengthen safety rules for oil and gas pipelines, a bill that even the pipeline industry and companies in his own state support. Republican Sen. Rand Paul’s opposition to the bill hasn’t wavered even after a gas pipeline rupture last week shook people awake in three counties in his home state of Kentucky.
…
A deadly gas pipeline explosion near San Francisco last year — along with other recent gas explosions and oil pipeline spills — has created consensus in Congress, as well as in the industry, that there are gaps in federal safety regulations.
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/09/sen_rand_paul_blocks_pipeline.html
If only the world was as simple as Libertarian pea-brains think it to be.
ParticipantThe Jesus:
[img_assist|nid=15550|title=Jesus|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=150|height=200]
How to spot a pedophile:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=spot_the_pedo
Case closed.
Participant[quote=briansd1]
Long term, Greece wants to be part an economic union that includes rich countries of the north. Better than forever staying the poor cousin looking in.[/quote]I disagree. Greece should default and then exchange the Euros of its citizens for a Greek-backed currency.
Default and currency-control is the path to prosperity (look at Argentina and Iceland) while austerity and being forced to pay back debt accrued by the top 1% is the path to country-wide depression (look at Ireland).
ParticipantAK,
Why does it matter to you whether holders of Greek debt get a bailout? Did you make a bet that the EU would try and force Greek taxpayers to make good on that debt and lose?
Participant[quote=AK]If I were Greek, I’d be overjoyed about having 50% to 60% of my foreign debt written off. That’s a substantially better deal than developing nations got in the Brady Bonds deal back in the ’80s.[/quote]
I hope Greece repudiates all of its debts. There’s no reason for the people of Greece to pay the debts of the top 1%. What you are witnessing is democracy in action.
If this keeps up, I suspect we’ll see many more former ex-Government Sachs employees blow themselves up as they don’t know how to operate in an environment in which the government doesn’t continuously bail them out.
The bankruptcy of MF Global demonstrates that the 1% of crony capitalists in America are now subject to the same risks of economic losses as the other 99% of us. Led by former Goldman Sachs Chairman Jon Corzine, MF Global engaged in speculating on the bonds of Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain (PIGS) with shareholder money; they then tried to hedge their bets with derivatives called Credit Default Swaps (CDS). The firm relied on Corzine’s inside expectation that crony politicians in Germany and France would stick taxpayers with the cost of bailing-out bondholders, like MF Global. The bet buckled when voters rebelled and demanded bondholders suffer losses. Once subject to capitalist risks, MF Global collapsed.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
You keep missing the point. Under the gold standards there will be short term downswings when industries become obsolete. We are accepting that under Austrian Economics. You could fix the current dollar to the current value of gold and audit the fed properly and reestablish a gold standard over night. It’s not that hard. The price of gold might go up though![/quote]No, you keep missing the point. Fixed-exchange rate currencies always fail, so there is no reason to go back to the gold standard or any other type of fixed exchange rate.
Essentially, you are living in a fantasy world where a fixed exchange rate to gold fixes all our problems. It doesn’t. Please cite to one time in history where a fixed-exchange rate currency did not fail.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
It wasn’t backed properly like we had it backed for 200 years in this country. Doesn’t this gradual reduction of the Gold/Silver standard for paying or war sound just like us? Shouldn’t that alarm the heck out of you?
[/quote]So your solution is what, exactly? Travel back in time to the 1930’s and make it so that the U.S. doesn’t go off the gold standard? Why do you think the U.S. went off the gold standard in the first place? Do you think maybe there were some problems with it? If the gold standard failed in the 1930’s, what is to stop it from failing again?
And it’s not like economic crises only come about during times of fiat currencies. Read about the Long Depression that lasted from 1873-1896.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Depression
But, but, we were on the gold standard then. How could there be a depression?
Participant[quote=markmax33]
IT DOESN’T HAVE TO FAIL IF YOU DON’T GO TO POINTLESS WARS AND INSTALL INFINITE SOCIAL PROGRAMS! The average fiat currency lasts 27 years and we are already at 40 since 1971.Why don’t you stand up and protect your children from this? We know what is going to happen if we don’t get Ron Paul elected. The national debt will be $20T by the end of Obama’s next 4 years.[/quote]
22% of U.S. children live in poverty. How is cutting back their programs going to protect them? Do you think children that are near starvation and living in squalor give a shit about the deficit?
-
AuthorPosts