Forum Replies Created
Are you claiming that there were 3 million cases of voter fraud in the primaries? I get that you’re discontent with things as they are. The pace of change is slow. Things are changing for the better under Obama, and there is absolutely no reason to believe things wouldn’t keep improving under Clinton.
There have been numerous election anomalies in this primary election process in a few states. Then again straightening out our elections process has never been a priority when we have willingly and with premeditation made that situation worse.
what improvement? economically there has been very little positive change
wars are continuing and we have even more now under Obama
and I can keep going on and on with that list
this still doesn’t change the fact that our govt has numerous broken and dysfunctional agencies and isn’t working as intended or designed
Hillary Clinton has earned 3 million more votes than Bernie Sanders. Saying the system is corrupt or doesn’t work at this point is whining, not fact.
given how many failed or failing govt agencies including our elections system there are no it is a fact
Oh they’re both sane, they’re just crafty. I consider Hillary to be more qualified because of her experience as a Senator, First Lady and Secretary of State.
her track record is one of disaster
She isn’t sane, she’s a sociopath that knowingly supports a multitude of polices that are destroying this nation and is willing to lie about it in serial fashion to maintain her power and enrich her pocketbook while selling out the people of this country in the process.
this absolutely the worst kind of person you want in government period
you gotta work on your logic snarf….to support Hillary in the general might be the lesser of 2 evils and it is the only sane choice.
neither Trump or Clinton have anything to do with sanity
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>stechs02 wrote:</div>
This is cute… It is a good thing the unemployment rate doesn’t include discouraged workers or workers who are not looking for a job. Here is an interesting fact, 33% of Americans 16 or over are not participating in the workforce, the highest since 1978…
Workforce participation is tracked, separately, as evidenced by your ability to quickly provide the numbers. My question is why should non-participants be tracked in the “Unemployment Rate”? If someone doesn’t want a job badly enough to actively look for one or create one themselves, then why should they be counted as “unemployed”? They obviously don’t need a job that badly, and are able to live somehow and have a phone to answer the survey.
To provide an overall perspective of the employment situation. Having the work force shrink due to unemployment isn’t good just like unemployment rising while the available workforce stays the same isn’t good either. It would be a different story if wages and income levels were allowing many to voluntarily leave the work force because they are wealthy enough to do so but this isn’t the case at all. The middle class is being wiped out and the lower class is growing while the gap between very wealthy and poor is increasing pretty quickly.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ned23 wrote:</div>
You haven’t seen the rates rise because we haven’t hit full employment, but if we were to hit full employment, they would start to raise interest rates. Basically they guarantee a small amount of unemployment to prevent any true price equilibrium in the labor market, because they think people are more afraid of inflation than being unemployed.
I think it is more like they care about the people that are afraid of inflation more than those that are afraid of unemployment.
The central banks have been desperately trying to generate inflation for 8 years and failing. Over indebted people dont borrow voluntarily and banks dont lend when the risk of default is high. We are in what the keynesians call a liquidity trap. Plenty of almost free to borrow money available and no takers. The credit cycle is basically stuck in a trap of its own making. The banks and lack of law enforcement and regulation allowed a world record sized lending bubble on housing to form and then blow up. This is the consequence when the bad debts are not allowed to be cleared out. The banks were taken care of and made whole again but john q taxpayer paid for it, and is still paying for it, and has been left twisting in the wind up to his nutsack in debt. People upside down on their house dont borrow more $$. Then to make matters worse we lost a whole chunk of ok paying jobs and replaced them with minimum wage jobs. When you destroy your workforce ability to earn they dont voluntarily borrow and banks dont lend to them.
Our present situation is a culmination of decades of really stupid policies and criminal behavior, it isn’t going away anytime soon. The FED is doing its job, protecting the ponzi and itself. That is all it cares about.
no, not even close
a half dozen or more economic indicators and situations blow that idea away
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Shako wrote:</div>
Sounds more like resentment toward the wealthy than whether or not columbus should have a 15 dollar minimum wage (which was the intended discussion)…
Any board of directors is free to offer their ceo less and any worker is free to hold out and not accept a job unless the wage is high enough. One thing markets do okay is establishing prices.
The “market” would work fine if the Fed would allow full employment – but they don’t. They tighten the money money supply to prevent full employment because it would cause wages to rise too quickly in a true competitive market. Hence the need for a minimum. So they can keep unemployment from going no lower than 4%.
1. triffins paradox
2. FED lost control quite awhile ago, rates are essentially negative and the credit cycle is stuck because the debt load remains way too high and losses are being prevented from being realized
3. the employment rate means nothing w/o the labor force participation rate
4. the amount of govt/bank interference in all markets encourages a road to serfdom for most people
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>lazyfish wrote:</div>
how about we tax the upper earners more and redistribute the savings…..CEO’s and those making more than 200K should take pay cuts to help lower wage earners.
You can not beat poverty through wage redistribution. What you want is retribution. you want to punish a segment of society. A large portion of this country already pays no tax on their wages, they in fact receive money. That really hasn’t helped social mobility has it.
A small segment of society has used govt influence and corruption to enable their enrichment and promoted income inequality, this needs dealt with and isn’t just taxes. We have trade policies, tax policies, etc etc that are very much set up to create the deteriorating situation we have today. Hell our banking system and its upper echelon of employees and stockholders are now basically immune from responsibility for failure, it gets put on the tax payers. That is a failure in multiple areas and extends into other businesses as well. The whole system must be altered.
Mindset must also be changed. Take Uber for example, low priced human transport that is unsustainable for the drivers bu great for the users. The users don’t see the damage they are causing. The only ones making money are the actual Uber owners and employees, the contractors get screwed. Shop at Walmart or any other big box store? Same deal, you are participating in a race to the bottom. Actions have consequences.
Socializing losses and privatizing profits while removing responsibility for actions, our whole corporate law and ownership structure is designed to do this and it does it very well. The game is rigged and results predictable, we have seen this before.
Minimum wage changes is a bandaid with ugly side effects, why not deal with underlying causes which at some point must be dealt with and are long past due?
How many people here are willing to see significant tax increases especially property and sales taxes to pay for the thousands of public employees that would get almost 25% pay raises @ $15/hr? That doesn’t even get into how many service businesses and restaurants that would be faced with serious business threatening margin issues. Labor is a cost of business which is leveraged, final product prices are multiples of costs. It isn’t linear. You raise my labor costs by 50% and my product prices don’t jump by 50%, they might go up quite a bit more. They might not even be able to be raised enough to cope, it may force the business to stop altogether. The great depression has lots of lessons in it about business. This is definitely one of those pull one lever and expecting predictable results to happen in response is pretty dumb situations. Still , as a nation we are quite able and should provide some sort of floor on labor exploitation. I think it would be prudent though to deal with the other issues at the same time or ahead of this first.
my 2 cents
Fannie Mae is back into subprime lending. 3% down 620 FICO.
Oh and the GSE’s are about to need another bailout too.
This country still has well over half its mortgages impaired by fraudulent paperwork LOL.
It is called corruption and fraud plain and simple. It has not been fixed.
The only thing more disgusting than Trump are his supporters.
fascism plays well in the US
he is making Goebbles proud
From their perspective (and I tend to agree…), there’s nothing about being Syrian that makes one refugee more worthy of help than another from somewhere else… and we do currently have plenty of refugees that need help from other parts of the world.
Oh I dunno, our govt has certainly participated in creating a big part of the cause for the refugee situation trying to overthrow Assad’s govt using mercenaries and terrorists to do so.
that and it is almost 100% backed/underwritten by the GSE’s and almost zero private lending
and the GSE’s recently warned they will need more $$
Carlucci’s on Smoky Row in Powell. Their crust is as about as close to a cracker-pastry as you can get. Stone ovens cooked the old fashioned way.