info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
37 Ways To Un-rig The U.S. Economy So It No Longer Favors The Rich
347 views
Skip to first unread message
jon_banquer
May 18, 2015, 12:37:36 AM5/18/15
to
Maybe it's time listen to what experts have to say rather than someone like slow eddy:
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/16/37_ways_to_un_rig_the_u_s_economy_so_it_doesnt_favor_the_rich_partner/
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/16/37_ways_to_un_rig_the_u_s_economy_so_it_doesnt_favor_the_rich_partner/
John Doe
May 18, 2015, 1:17:47 PM5/18/15
to
Google Groups spam/troll...
--
jon_banquer <jonbanquer yahoo.com> wrote in news:9db801c3-0f44-4fdb-b6f9-9a5aa66b1252 googlegroups.com:
--
jon_banquer <jonbanquer yahoo.com> wrote in news:9db801c3-0f44-4fdb-b6f9-9a5aa66b1252 googlegroups.com:
jon_banquer
May 18, 2015, 2:03:05 PM5/18/15
to
On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 10:17:47 AM UTC-7, Anonymous posting pussy "John Doe" failed:
Ed Huntress
May 18, 2015, 2:57:54 PM5/18/15
to
John. Four-flushing ignoramus Jonnie Bonkers quotes left-wing AlterNet
articles and calls them "experts." He should quit his equivocating and
go right to _Das Kapital_.<g>
If he wasn't such a lazy, four-flushing troll he'd have read the
Stiglitz report that the AlterNet "expert" Steven Rosenfeld ("17
States Where You're More Likely To Die From Guns Than Car Crashes")
cherry-picked for his article: "迭ewriting The Rules Of The American
Economy."
Stiglitz, who is a top-drawerer economist and whose heart is in the
right place, happens to be another Internationalist. He just doesn't
like the way free countries negotiate and do business. If Bonkers had
read the report, he'd see that Stiglitz doesn't think much about
United States sovereignty, either. He wants the US investment-dispute
rules, including TPP, to be governed by the International Labor
Organization, an arm of the United Nations.
Maybe Mog and Bonkers can sing us a duet of "Le Internationale":
"So comrades, come rally
And the last fight let us face
The Internationale unites the human race."
--
Ed Huntress
jon_banquer
May 18, 2015, 3:09:51 PM5/18/15
to
On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 11:57:54 AM UTC-7, slow eddy continued to make a fool out of himself:
> Stiglitz, who is a top-drawerer economist and whose heart is in the
> right place, happens to be another Internationalist. He just doesn't
> like the way free countries negotiate and do business. If Bonkers had
> read the report, he'd see that Stiglitz doesn't think much about
> United States sovereignty, either. He wants the US investment-dispute
> rules, including TPP, to be governed by the International Labor
> Organization, an arm of the United Nations.
>
> Maybe Mog and Bonkers can sing us a duet of "Le Internationale":
>
> "So comrades, come rally
> And the last fight let us face
> The Internationale unites the human race."
>
> --
>slow eddy
slow eddy can't handle that experts know far more than he does. Once again we see the wheels coming off the slow eddy crazy train to nowhere.
> Stiglitz, who is a top-drawerer economist and whose heart is in the
> right place, happens to be another Internationalist. He just doesn't
> like the way free countries negotiate and do business. If Bonkers had
> read the report, he'd see that Stiglitz doesn't think much about
> United States sovereignty, either. He wants the US investment-dispute
> rules, including TPP, to be governed by the International Labor
> Organization, an arm of the United Nations.
>
> Maybe Mog and Bonkers can sing us a duet of "Le Internationale":
>
> "So comrades, come rally
> And the last fight let us face
> The Internationale unites the human race."
>
> --
slow eddy can't handle that experts know far more than he does. Once again we see the wheels coming off the slow eddy crazy train to nowhere.
dca...@krl.org
May 18, 2015, 3:33:59 PM5/18/15
to
On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 3:09:51 PM UTC-4, jon_banquer wrote:
>
> slow eddy can't handle that experts know far more than he does. Once again we see the wheels coming off the slow eddy crazy train to nowhere.
I have to agree with Ed. I looked at the whole list and they were pretty much all platitudes. For example
>
> slow eddy can't handle that experts know far more than he does. Once again we see the wheels coming off the slow eddy crazy train to nowhere.
18. Reform monetary policy to give higher priority to full employment.
19. Reinvigorate public investment to lay the foundation for long-term economic performance and job growth, including by investing in large-scale infrastructure renovation: a 10-year campaign to make the U.S. a world leader in innovation, manufacturing, and jobs.
20. Invest in large-scale infrastructure renovation with a 10-year campaign to make the U.S. a world infrastructure innovation, manufacturing, and jobs leader.
21. Expand public transportation to promote equal access to jobs and opportunity.
No concrete ideas here.
Dan
Ed Huntress
May 18, 2015, 3:41:10 PM5/18/15
to
And it isn't fair to Stiglitz. His full report is much more
intelligent than that knee-jerker Rosenfeld's cherry-picked list of
platitudes. It's just that Stiglitz is pretty far left, and better at
analysis than he is at prescriptions or policies.
--
Ed Huntress
jon_banquer
May 18, 2015, 3:59:15 PM5/18/15
to
F. George McDuffee
May 18, 2015, 4:50:25 PM5/18/15
to
Jon:
Even when you have a valid point, you severely undermine
your case by the continual ad hominem [personal] attacks.
Don't confuse a different viewpoint/priorities with an
intellectual handicap or ulterior motivation.
All of us would do well to remember that *ALL*
socioeconomic/political/cultural constructs [SEPCCs] beyond
the basic humanoid [e. g. gorilla, baboon, chimpanzee]
“troop” is a human construct, not a divinely inspired
creation.
There are no, and never will be, any “perfect SEPCCs. Every
SEPCC has its strong and weak points, with the complication
that what some people see as a liability, others see as an
asset, e. g. slavery or absolute monarchy. An adage
attributed to the French “There is no disputing matters of
taste,” applies here.
What can be rationally assessed is the relative performance
of a SEPCC against other SEPCCs across a number of
arbitrarily chosen “performance” metrics, selected
according to the priorities and cultural conditioning of the
rater. These metrics can include relative
longevity/sustainability of the rated SEPCC. This avoids
the common endless “flame wars” and personal attacks on the
one hand, and on the other hand can help the rater avoid the
common error of “there is no reason for it, its just company
policy.”
In my particular case, I am not a great fan of “populism” as
this is susceptible to “pie in the sky” rabble rousing, but
I have also read enough history to know the effects of
concentration of a societies wealth and political power into
a small elite isolated from the majority, e. g. the
transformation of the Roman republic of small freeholders
into the latifundia http://tinyurl.com/p6sg68y based
plutocratic despotism of the Roman Empire.
It is far more useful to suggest priorities and alternative
policies based on verifiable data and identified criteria
rather than calling people with different priorities and
policies, rude names.
--
Unka' George
"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"
-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"
jon_banquer
May 18, 2015, 5:08:44 PM5/18/15
to
Ed Huntress
May 18, 2015, 5:20:09 PM5/18/15
to
appealing to Jonnie's better nature, we've seen some interesting
examples of well-intended but futile advice flying around here lately.
I admire both of your efforts but I'm surprised you guys don't
recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
troubled dude.
So, good luck. He hasn't convinced you of his superiority, which
probably means you'll now be a target for his belittling snarkiness
d8-)
--
Ed Huntress
jon_banquer
May 18, 2015, 5:31:22 PM5/18/15
to
On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 2:20:09 PM UTC-7, slow eddy wrote:
> <g> Between Iggy trying to correct RogerN's religious beliefs, and you
> appealing to Jonnie's better nature, we've seen some interesting
> examples of well-intended but futile advice flying around here lately.
>
> I admire both of your efforts but I'm surprised you guys don't
> recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
> True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
> has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
> neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
> of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
> troubled dude.
>
> So, good luck. He hasn't convinced you of his superiority, which
> probably means you'll now be a target for his belittling snarkiness
> d8-)
>
> --
> slow eddy
> <g> Between Iggy trying to correct RogerN's religious beliefs, and you
> appealing to Jonnie's better nature, we've seen some interesting
> examples of well-intended but futile advice flying around here lately.
>
> I admire both of your efforts but I'm surprised you guys don't
> recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
> True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
> has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
> neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
> of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
> troubled dude.
>
> So, good luck. He hasn't convinced you of his superiority, which
> probably means you'll now be a target for his belittling snarkiness
> d8-)
>
> --
It really sucks to be slow eddy when someone (in this case me) sees how full of shit he truly is and calls him on his bullshit/lies.
slow eddy doesn't give a fuck about anyone working in a machining job shop or the American worker. All slow eddy cares about is protecting the machine tool companies who pay his salary.
slow eddy is little more than a tool who regurgitates whatever he's told in the worthless advertising based rags he works for.
slow eddy has always been all about just one thing... slow eddy.
F. George McDuffee
May 18, 2015, 5:54:17 PM5/18/15
to
On Mon, 18 May 2015 17:20:02 -0400, Ed Huntress
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
<snip>
Indeed, but while this screed was addressed to Jon, my hope
was that some of our other "flamers" would read and profit
from it.
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
<snip>
>I admire both of your efforts but I'm surprised you guys don't
>recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
>True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
>has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
>neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
>of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
>troubled dude.
</snip>
>recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
>True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
>has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
>neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
>of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
>troubled dude.
Indeed, but while this screed was addressed to Jon, my hope
was that some of our other "flamers" would read and profit
from it.
jon_banquer
May 18, 2015, 6:09:36 PM5/18/15
to
My LinkedIn group is for those who are sick in tired of the Pay For Play game that slow eddy lives on. Clearly almost 3,000 members of my group want something better.
I'm 53 years old. I do what works. I have no plans to change.
Ed Huntress
May 18, 2015, 6:22:40 PM5/18/15
to
On Mon, 18 May 2015 16:54:00 -0500, F. George McDuffee
<gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
>On Mon, 18 May 2015 17:20:02 -0400, Ed Huntress
><hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>I admire both of your efforts but I'm surprised you guys don't
>>recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
>>True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
>>has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
>>neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
>>of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
>>troubled dude.
></snip>
>Indeed, but while this screed was addressed to Jon, my hope
>was that some of our other "flamers" would read and profit
>from it.
And here, they accuse *me* of over-the-top optimism. <g>
<gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
>On Mon, 18 May 2015 17:20:02 -0400, Ed Huntress
><hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>I admire both of your efforts but I'm surprised you guys don't
>>recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
>>True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
>>has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
>>neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
>>of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
>>troubled dude.
></snip>
>Indeed, but while this screed was addressed to Jon, my hope
>was that some of our other "flamers" would read and profit
>from it.
Seriously, George, I would not criticize your motivation or your
effort. Somebody has to do something to restore this NG, or it will
continue to attract the trolls and the emotionally disturbed.
--
Ed Huntress
jon_banquer
May 18, 2015, 6:31:30 PM5/18/15
to
On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 3:22:40 PM UTC-7, slow eddy failed:
> And here, they accuse *me* of over-the-top optimism. <g>
>
> Seriously, George, I would not criticize your motivation or your
> effort. Somebody has to do something to restore this NG, or it will
> continue to attract the trolls and the emotionally disturbed.
>
> --
> slow eddy
What really hurts this groups metalworking content are:
Idiots like slow eddy will continue to respond to Jonathan Ball and Ray Keller's posts
Modern social business media has replaced Usenet.
Question for the group:
When Precision Machinist left this group did anyone really notice besides me?
> And here, they accuse *me* of over-the-top optimism. <g>
>
> Seriously, George, I would not criticize your motivation or your
> effort. Somebody has to do something to restore this NG, or it will
> continue to attract the trolls and the emotionally disturbed.
>
> --
What really hurts this groups metalworking content are:
Idiots like slow eddy will continue to respond to Jonathan Ball and Ray Keller's posts
Modern social business media has replaced Usenet.
Question for the group:
When Precision Machinist left this group did anyone really notice besides me?
dca...@krl.org
May 18, 2015, 7:51:24 PM5/18/15
to
On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 6:09:36 PM UTC-4, jon_banquer wrote:
>
> I'm 53 years old. I do what works. I have no plans to change.
My son is 52. My grandson is 13.
>
> I'm 53 years old. I do what works. I have no plans to change.
Dan
John B.
May 18, 2015, 8:15:25 PM5/18/15
to
On Mon, 18 May 2015 18:22:34 -0400, Ed Huntress
example, unless someone replies to him.
--
Cheers,
John B.
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 18 May 2015 16:54:00 -0500, F. George McDuffee
><gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 18 May 2015 17:20:02 -0400, Ed Huntress
>><hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>>I admire both of your efforts but I'm surprised you guys don't
>>>recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
>>>True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
>>>has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
>>>neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
>>>of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
>>>troubled dude.
>></snip>
>>Indeed, but while this screed was addressed to Jon, my hope
>>was that some of our other "flamers" would read and profit
>>from it.
>
>And here, they accuse *me* of over-the-top optimism. <g>
>
>Seriously, George, I would not criticize your motivation or your
>effort. Somebody has to do something to restore this NG, or it will
>continue to attract the trolls and the emotionally disturbed.
Kill Files are the secret :-) I never see the Infernal Jon, for
>On Mon, 18 May 2015 16:54:00 -0500, F. George McDuffee
><gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 18 May 2015 17:20:02 -0400, Ed Huntress
>><hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>>I admire both of your efforts but I'm surprised you guys don't
>>>recognize what you're dealing with. Roger is a hard-core, committed
>>>True Believer; nobody can change his beliefs but himself. And Banquer
>>>has emotional problems that, as anyone can see, are focused around a
>>>neurotic need for affirmation and approval. This is purely descriptive
>>>of his behavior, not a medical diagnosis. Banquer is an emotionally
>>>troubled dude.
>></snip>
>>Indeed, but while this screed was addressed to Jon, my hope
>>was that some of our other "flamers" would read and profit
>>from it.
>
>And here, they accuse *me* of over-the-top optimism. <g>
>
>Seriously, George, I would not criticize your motivation or your
>effort. Somebody has to do something to restore this NG, or it will
>continue to attract the trolls and the emotionally disturbed.
example, unless someone replies to him.
--
Cheers,
John B.
David R. Birch
May 18, 2015, 9:21:01 PM5/18/15
to
Why would anyone want to read his posts?
David
jon_banquer
May 19, 2015, 2:39:10 AM5/19/15
to
Ed Huntress
May 19, 2015, 6:02:29 AM5/19/15
to
On Tue, 19 May 2015 07:14:24 +0700, John B. <johnbs...@gmail.com>
I should. It will be simpler.
--
Ed Huntress
--
Ed Huntress
Ed Huntress
May 19, 2015, 6:05:55 AM5/19/15
to
ignore. My filter is set to mark Bonkers' posts "read,", and then my
reader skips read files. So I have a sense of when they've left.
>
>Why would anyone want to read his posts?
--
Ed Huntress
>
>David
>
John B.
May 19, 2015, 7:51:51 AM5/19/15
to
On Tue, 19 May 2015 06:02:21 -0400, Ed Huntress
The problem is the universal impulse to "tell it like it really is".
You succumb to that and you are addressing the remarks to someone who
isn't treated as an increase in his knowledge base, rather it is proof
positive that he isn't really an insignificant person - "See Mommy!
They aren't ignoring me, they are talking to me !"
--
Cheers,
John B.
You succumb to that and you are addressing the remarks to someone who
isn't treated as an increase in his knowledge base, rather it is proof
positive that he isn't really an insignificant person - "See Mommy!
They aren't ignoring me, they are talking to me !"
--
Cheers,
John B.
Ed Huntress
May 19, 2015, 8:32:46 AM5/19/15
to
On Tue, 19 May 2015 18:51:39 +0700, John B. <johnbs...@gmail.com>
Oh, sure. There's no doubt that Bonkers has a neurotic need for
affirmation. All of his online communication is a desperate yelp for
affirmation and approval.
A couple of weeks ago I promised I'd ignore his posts, and I have. I
haven't read one since the last time I responded directly to him. I've
responded only to a couple of responses *to* him by other people.
But that's probably too much. A few people still respond to him --
Mog, George, and one or two others. It's probably just enough to keep
him going.
So I'll avoid responding to other respondants. Silence, for Jonnie
Bonkers, is like sprinkling alum on a garden slug.
--
Ed Huntress
affirmation. All of his online communication is a desperate yelp for
affirmation and approval.
A couple of weeks ago I promised I'd ignore his posts, and I have. I
haven't read one since the last time I responded directly to him. I've
responded only to a couple of responses *to* him by other people.
But that's probably too much. A few people still respond to him --
Mog, George, and one or two others. It's probably just enough to keep
him going.
So I'll avoid responding to other respondants. Silence, for Jonnie
Bonkers, is like sprinkling alum on a garden slug.
--
Ed Huntress
Michael A. Terrell
May 19, 2015, 9:41:36 AM5/19/15
to
"John B." wrote:
>
> Kill Files are the secret :-) I never see the Infernal Jon, for
> example, unless someone replies to him.
walter_...@post.com
May 19, 2015, 11:22:43 AM5/19/15
to
> Why would anyone want to read his posts?
Ed Huntress
May 19, 2015, 11:52:15 AM5/19/15
to
On Tue, 19 May 2015 08:22:41 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
wrote:
Gee, "Walter," you have the same IP address as "Mogulah." How did you
manage that??
--
Ed Huntress
wrote:
manage that??
--
Ed Huntress
Gunner Asch
May 19, 2015, 12:52:36 PM5/19/15
to
Gunner
--
Liberals want everyone to think like them.
Conservatives want everyone to think.
jon_banquer
May 19, 2015, 1:55:11 PM5/19/15
to
On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 at 5:32:46 AM UTC-7, slow eddy lied:
> Oh, sure. There's no doubt that Bonkers has a neurotic need for
> affirmation. All of his online communication is a desperate yelp for
> affirmation and approval.
>
> A couple of weeks ago I promised I'd ignore his posts, and I have. I
> haven't read one since the last time I responded directly to him. I've
> responded only to a couple of responses *to* him by other people.
>
> But that's probably too much. A few people still respond to him --
> Mog, George, and one or two others. It's probably just enough to keep
> him going.
>
> So I'll avoid responding to other respondants. Silence, for Jonnie
> Bonkers, is like sprinkling alum on a garden slug.
>
> --
> slow eddy
There is not doubt that the world is changing rapidly and that more and more machinists and CADCAM programmers know that slow eddy's pay for play ad copy writing is full of lies/bullshit.
Smarter machinists and CADCAM programmers rejected slow eddies pay for play ad copy bullshit and make use of modern business social medial like LinkedIn groups to get better information.
slow eddy is a bullshiter. He's been a bullshiter for years and many people now know it.
> Oh, sure. There's no doubt that Bonkers has a neurotic need for
> affirmation. All of his online communication is a desperate yelp for
> affirmation and approval.
>
> A couple of weeks ago I promised I'd ignore his posts, and I have. I
> haven't read one since the last time I responded directly to him. I've
> responded only to a couple of responses *to* him by other people.
>
> But that's probably too much. A few people still respond to him --
> Mog, George, and one or two others. It's probably just enough to keep
> him going.
>
> So I'll avoid responding to other respondants. Silence, for Jonnie
> Bonkers, is like sprinkling alum on a garden slug.
>
> --
There is not doubt that the world is changing rapidly and that more and more machinists and CADCAM programmers know that slow eddy's pay for play ad copy writing is full of lies/bullshit.
Smarter machinists and CADCAM programmers rejected slow eddies pay for play ad copy bullshit and make use of modern business social medial like LinkedIn groups to get better information.
slow eddy is a bullshiter. He's been a bullshiter for years and many people now know it.
jon_banquer
May 19, 2015, 1:55:46 PM5/19/15
to
jon_banquer
May 19, 2015, 2:08:08 PM5/19/15
to
On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 at 3:05:55 AM UTC-7, slow eddy lied:
> I generally don't killfile people, although there are some I simply
> ignore. My filter is set to mark Bonkers' posts "read,", and then my
> reader skips read files. So I have a sense of when they've left.
>
> >
> >Why would anyone want to read his posts?
>
> Trial evidence? <g!>
>
> --
> slow eddy
slow eddy has no choice but to read my posts because in his heart he knows that my over two decades of working in modern, state of the art, CNC machining job shops means he can't match or ever come close to the hands on experience I have that he doesn't and never will have.
There is a reason my LinkedIn group has close to 3,000 members. Membership in my LinkedIn group reads like a who's who of the CADCAM business. My LinkedIn group makes a liar like slow eddy very angry because it's beyond obvious I can build what slow eddy could never build even if he wanted to.
The fact is that slow eddy lies constantly. He's a smarmy little shit that I've broken into a million little pieces by showing with facts just how wrong he is. From pushrod motors to CADCAM slow eddy lies and I often nail him to the wall with his numerous lies.
> I generally don't killfile people, although there are some I simply
> ignore. My filter is set to mark Bonkers' posts "read,", and then my
> reader skips read files. So I have a sense of when they've left.
>
> >
> >Why would anyone want to read his posts?
>
> Trial evidence? <g!>
>
> --
slow eddy has no choice but to read my posts because in his heart he knows that my over two decades of working in modern, state of the art, CNC machining job shops means he can't match or ever come close to the hands on experience I have that he doesn't and never will have.
There is a reason my LinkedIn group has close to 3,000 members. Membership in my LinkedIn group reads like a who's who of the CADCAM business. My LinkedIn group makes a liar like slow eddy very angry because it's beyond obvious I can build what slow eddy could never build even if he wanted to.
The fact is that slow eddy lies constantly. He's a smarmy little shit that I've broken into a million little pieces by showing with facts just how wrong he is. From pushrod motors to CADCAM slow eddy lies and I often nail him to the wall with his numerous lies.
ex-PFC Wintergreen
May 19, 2015, 2:13:27 PM5/19/15
to
On 5/19/2015 9:52 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Tue, 19 May 2015 09:41:33 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "John B." wrote:
>>>
>>> Kill Files are the secret :-) I never see the Infernal Jon, for
>>> example, unless someone replies to him.
>>
>>
>> The same way with Ed. I don't see him, unless someone replies to him.
>
> Ditto
That's because you're a big baby.
> On Tue, 19 May 2015 09:41:33 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "John B." wrote:
>>>
>>> Kill Files are the secret :-) I never see the Infernal Jon, for
>>> example, unless someone replies to him.
>>
>>
>> The same way with Ed. I don't see him, unless someone replies to him.
>
> Ditto
Larry Jaques
May 19, 2015, 9:27:20 PM5/19/15
to
--
Live in the sunshine, swim the sea, drink the wild air…
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
John B.
May 20, 2015, 9:02:22 AM5/20/15
to
On Tue, 19 May 2015 08:32:39 -0400, Ed Huntress
Somewhere I remember a quotation, or similar, that, "The best way to
insult some people is to ignore them".
It sounds like "the Old Farmer's Almanac or maybe Will Rogers :-)
--
Cheers,
John B.
insult some people is to ignore them".
It sounds like "the Old Farmer's Almanac or maybe Will Rogers :-)
--
Cheers,
John B.
Ed Huntress
May 20, 2015, 10:48:13 AM5/20/15
to
On Wed, 20 May 2015 20:02:07 +0700, John B. <johnbs...@gmail.com>
Right. But that applies to people with normal reactions and fairly
normal behavior. Here, we're dealing with something else. It's more
like an autistic kid who beats himself in the head with a stick for
physical stimulus, to remind himself that he is here.
--
Ed Huntress
normal behavior. Here, we're dealing with something else. It's more
like an autistic kid who beats himself in the head with a stick for
physical stimulus, to remind himself that he is here.
--
Ed Huntress
Terry Coombs
May 20, 2015, 11:03:46 AM5/20/15
to
posting ...) but in a thread I started recently , Jon was actually civil and
yes , I did respond to him . Kinda odd , he's in my BozoBin , so I shouldn't
be seeing his posts - if it was in fact Bonquer and not somebody posing as
him ...
--
Snag
Ed Huntress
May 20, 2015, 11:18:03 AM5/20/15
to
On Wed, 20 May 2015 10:03:43 -0500, "Terry Coombs" <snag...@msn.com>
wrote:
No, that's Banquer. That's the bipolar tendency that we used to see a
lot, which shows up as an extreme rush from one enthusiasm to another,
often contradicting his own positions within weeks or months.
Now, he either has it medicated or it's settled down a bit. He's
looking for a few allies to support his desperate need for approval.
But it never lasts long.
--
Ed Huntress
wrote:
lot, which shows up as an extreme rush from one enthusiasm to another,
often contradicting his own positions within weeks or months.
Now, he either has it medicated or it's settled down a bit. He's
looking for a few allies to support his desperate need for approval.
But it never lasts long.
--
Ed Huntress
David R. Birch
May 20, 2015, 12:24:14 PM5/20/15
to
On 5/20/2015 9:48 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> Right. But that applies to people with normal reactions and fairly
> normal behavior. Here, we're dealing with something else. It's more
> like an autistic kid who beats himself in the head with a stick for
> physical stimulus, to remind himself that he is here.
Your responding to him is like poking an autistic kid with a stick to
> Right. But that applies to people with normal reactions and fairly
> normal behavior. Here, we're dealing with something else. It's more
> like an autistic kid who beats himself in the head with a stick for
> physical stimulus, to remind himself that he is here.
see how he responds to physical stimulus.
You have nothing positive to gain from this and you annoy those of us
who have plonked JB.
You also have said that you should plonk him, too, but you don't do it.
I don't plonk you because, unlike JB, you make positive contributions,
but poking JB to see him twitch is unworthy of you.
David
Ed Huntress
May 20, 2015, 1:41:46 PM5/20/15
to
On Wed, 20 May 2015 11:23:17 -0500, "David R. Birch"
<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>On 5/20/2015 9:48 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>> Right. But that applies to people with normal reactions and fairly
>> normal behavior. Here, we're dealing with something else. It's more
>> like an autistic kid who beats himself in the head with a stick for
>> physical stimulus, to remind himself that he is here.
>
>Your responding to him is like poking an autistic kid with a stick to
>see how he responds to physical stimulus.
The last time I replied to Bonkers was on April 1st.
<dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>On 5/20/2015 9:48 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>> Right. But that applies to people with normal reactions and fairly
>> normal behavior. Here, we're dealing with something else. It's more
>> like an autistic kid who beats himself in the head with a stick for
>> physical stimulus, to remind himself that he is here.
>
>Your responding to him is like poking an autistic kid with a stick to
>see how he responds to physical stimulus.
>
>You have nothing positive to gain from this and you annoy those of us
>who have plonked JB.
>
>You also have said that you should plonk him, too, but you don't do it.
>
>I don't plonk you because, unlike JB, you make positive contributions,
>but poking JB to see him twitch is unworthy of you.
--
Ed Huntress
>
>David
jon_banquer
May 20, 2015, 1:56:03 PM5/20/15
to
On Wednesday, May 20, 2015 at 7:48:13 AM UTC-7, slow eddy wrote:
> Right. But that applies to people with normal reactions and fairly
> normal behavior. Here, we're dealing with something else. It's more
> like an autistic kid who beats himself in the head with a stick for
> physical stimulus, to remind himself that he is here.
>
> --
> slow eddy
> Right. But that applies to people with normal reactions and fairly
> normal behavior. Here, we're dealing with something else. It's more
> like an autistic kid who beats himself in the head with a stick for
> physical stimulus, to remind himself that he is here.
>
> --
Autism is yet another subject that slow eddy knows nothing about.
technomaNge
May 20, 2015, 1:59:05 PM5/20/15
to
post. Felt too much like a blind pig looking for an acorn.
technomaNge
--
Poor Ed.
jon_banquer
May 20, 2015, 2:00:59 PM5/20/15
to
David R. Bitch works in a sheet metal shop doing IT work. He's not a machinist. He's an idiot with no clues who washed out as a CNC machinist and ended up in a sheet metal shop doing IT work.
jon_banquer
May 20, 2015, 2:04:08 PM5/20/15
to
We both know you're full of shit.
jon_banquer
May 20, 2015, 2:06:46 PM5/20/15
to
On Wednesday, May 20, 2015 at 8:18:03 AM UTC-7, slow eddy lied:
<slow eddy lies snipped>
slow eddy reads everything I post and can never stop talking about me. He proves this constantly. slow eddy is my bitch and I use him in anyway I see fit.
<slow eddy lies snipped>
slow eddy reads everything I post and can never stop talking about me. He proves this constantly. slow eddy is my bitch and I use him in anyway I see fit.
mog...@hotmail.com
May 20, 2015, 3:34:47 PM5/20/15
to
David R. Birch
May 21, 2015, 6:28:04 AM5/21/15
to
possible.
Did you torture small animals as a child? For that matter, do you still
do so?
David
jon_banquer
May 21, 2015, 1:34:43 PM5/21/15
to
David R. Bitch is a CADCAM idiot with no clues.
mog...@hotmail.com
May 21, 2015, 6:42:20 PM5/21/15
to
David R. Birch
May 22, 2015, 5:54:00 AM5/22/15
to
>> David R. Bitch is a CADCAM idiot with no clues.
for one of his attacks.
>
> I guess Dave is a sheet metal guy. Normally, I've worked around
> people who install wire and cable. So I don't know how he thinks.
I think in 4-D and sometimes 5-D when it comes to CAD-CAM and
> I guess Dave is a sheet metal guy. Normally, I've worked around
> people who install wire and cable. So I don't know how he thinks.
programming. I've worked on engine lathes, turret lathes, CNC turning
centers, horizontal mills, vertical mills, CNC machining centers, CNC
LASERS and other odds & ends. Most of these included setup, programing
and operation.
I've used at least 6 different CAD systems and 3 CAM systems.
But now I am a full time Gentleman of Leisure!
:^)
David
jon_banquer
May 22, 2015, 11:40:29 AM5/22/15
to
On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 2:54:00 AM UTC-7, David R. Birch wrote:
> SolidWorks is OK, but turned out to be a less useful tool than I'd hoped.
David R. Bitch was not able to grasp the very basics of SolidWorks despite taking expensive dealer led newbie training.
> SolidWorks is OK, but turned out to be a less useful tool than I'd hoped.
> JB knows nothing about me, but he doesn't have to actually know anything
> for one of his attacks.
> I think in 4-D and sometimes 5-D when it comes to CAD-CAM and
> programming. I've worked on engine lathes, turret lathes, CNC turning
> centers, horizontal mills, vertical mills, CNC machining centers, CNC
> LASERS and other odds & ends. Most of these included setup, programing
> and operation.
> I've used at least 6 different CAD systems and 3 CAM systems.
>
> But now I am a full time Gentleman of Leisure!
Michael A. Terrell
May 22, 2015, 8:14:50 PM5/22/15
to
He can dish things out, but he can't take them. He wasn't worth the
bandwidth.
jon_banquer
May 22, 2015, 8:34:09 PM5/22/15
to
Fix those leaking roofs yet?
Ed Huntress
May 22, 2015, 8:41:04 PM5/22/15
to
the other way around. You started instulting me, calling me a
"libtard" and other obnoxious slurs, while you were trying to push
your reactionary ideas down my throat. So we bantered back and forth
for a couple of months.
Then you were feeling pretty sick, and went into the hospital for some
ailment -- I forget which one it was -- and you signed off by laying
out a string of insults to me as a parting shot.
When you came back online, you decided you'd plonk me. From that
moment on, you've never missed a chance to take a snarky shot,
especially when "world-record motorcyclist" Gunner, or "shoot the
elected representatives if they won't bend to the Tea Party" Larry,
gave you an opening.
And here's the bottom line: You're too rhetorically incompetant to get
beyond "he's a liar," which is the last refuge of a semi-literate
buffoon. It's something you share with Jonnie Bonkers. Neither one of
you could support a single word of it because it is never true.
Where I grew up, we learned that talk like that is a sign of white
trash. You talk and insult like you grew up in a pigsty, Terrell, and
you never grew out of it.
So take that and shove it up your ass.
--
Ed Huntress
jon_banquer
May 22, 2015, 9:00:02 PM5/22/15
to
On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 5:41:04 PM UTC-7, slow eddy wrote:
> Let's set the record straight, you twisted old fart. It was exactly
> the other way around. You started instulting me, calling me a
> "libtard" and other obnoxious slurs, while you were trying to push
> your reactionary ideas down my throat. So we bantered back and forth
> for a couple of months.
>
> Then you were feeling pretty sick, and went into the hospital for some
> ailment -- I forget which one it was -- and you signed off by laying
> out a string of insults to me as a parting shot.
>
> When you came back online, you decided you'd plonk me. From that
> moment on, you've never missed a chance to take a snarky shot,
> especially when "world-record motorcyclist" Gunner, or "shoot the
> elected representatives if they won't bend to the Tea Party" Larry,
> gave you an opening.
>
> And here's the bottom line: You're too rhetorically incompetant to get
> beyond "he's a liar," which is the last refuge of a semi-literate
> buffoon. It's something you share with Jonnie Bonkers. Neither one of
> you could support a single word of it because it is never true.
>
> Where I grew up, we learned that talk like that is a sign of white
> trash. You talk and insult like you grew up in a pigsty, Terrell, and
> you never grew out of it.
>
> So take that and shove it up your ass.
>
> --
> slow eddy
> Let's set the record straight, you twisted old fart. It was exactly
> the other way around. You started instulting me, calling me a
> "libtard" and other obnoxious slurs, while you were trying to push
> your reactionary ideas down my throat. So we bantered back and forth
> for a couple of months.
>
> Then you were feeling pretty sick, and went into the hospital for some
> ailment -- I forget which one it was -- and you signed off by laying
> out a string of insults to me as a parting shot.
>
> When you came back online, you decided you'd plonk me. From that
> moment on, you've never missed a chance to take a snarky shot,
> especially when "world-record motorcyclist" Gunner, or "shoot the
> elected representatives if they won't bend to the Tea Party" Larry,
> gave you an opening.
>
> And here's the bottom line: You're too rhetorically incompetant to get
> beyond "he's a liar," which is the last refuge of a semi-literate
> buffoon. It's something you share with Jonnie Bonkers. Neither one of
> you could support a single word of it because it is never true.
>
> Where I grew up, we learned that talk like that is a sign of white
> trash. You talk and insult like you grew up in a pigsty, Terrell, and
> you never grew out of it.
>
> So take that and shove it up your ass.
>
> --
Reality time for slow eddy:
There is often little or no difference between slow eddy and miserable, handicapped and often bed ridden Terrell.
jon_banquer
May 22, 2015, 9:03:15 PM5/22/15
to
On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 5:14:50 PM UTC-7, Michael Terrell wrote:
Scraper
May 22, 2015, 10:36:35 PM5/22/15
to
You ought to know why. They're shooting blanks and they can't stand being beaten with their own words.
Every year or two I take a look at RCM to see if anything about machine tools is going on, but mostly it's just a lot of stupidity. Banquer is a head case. BeamMeUpScotty probably belongs in a nuthouse. Gunner is so full of shit that it leaks out of his nose. Terrell is some kind of crank.
If you get some kind of pleasure from talking to these freaks, that's your business. There are only three or four people who look like they're worth talking to, but there are two cranks for every one of them.
Best wishes. I'll be back in another year or two and see if they're dead or in jail.
Scraper
Ed Huntress
May 23, 2015, 9:33:12 AM5/23/15
to
>Best wishes. I'll be back in another year or two and see if they're dead or in jail.
>
>Scraper
--
Ed Huntress
jon_banquer
May 23, 2015, 1:28:55 PM5/23/15
to
Gunner Asch
May 23, 2015, 3:20:16 PM5/23/15
to
Gunner
Ignoramus31802
May 23, 2015, 6:15:39 PM5/23/15
to
What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
oncentives without income inequality? Why should some dumb ass make as
much as Bill Gates?
i
oncentives without income inequality? Why should some dumb ass make as
much as Bill Gates?
i
Larry Jaques
May 23, 2015, 10:30:17 PM5/23/15
to
On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
<ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>oncentives without income inequality?
Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
<ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>oncentives without income inequality?
But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
way the gov't throws away money...
--
Win first, Fight later.
--martial principle of the Samurai
Gunner Asch
May 24, 2015, 1:29:44 AM5/24/15
to
think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
I find it fascinating how the poor keep blaming the rich for the
plight of the poor..but the fucking poor has no education worth spit,
has no skills, an inflated sense of self worth and zero ability or
skills to make themselves wanted by even a middle class employer.
Shit..thats why Mexican illegals make up a very large portion of
todays work force. They will actually show up, do their job to the
best of their ability and keep on doing it day after day, month after
month and year after year, working their way up the ladder.
We have here..a bunch of Occupy morons demanding "their fair share"
and are not willing to do the slightest thing to earn it.
Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
has been..and damned sure never will be.
Gunner
pyotr filipivich
May 24, 2015, 1:44:27 AM5/24/15
to
Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Sat, 23 May 2015
19:30:41 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
guys. You are mistaking "salary" with "net worth" as if the pay rates
of the company have anything to with net worth.
If Memory Serves, when Bill Gates worked for Microsoft, had a
salary in on the order of $250,000. That's all. He didn't get paid 79
billion dollars to head the company he founded. That Bill Gates is
worth seventy nine billion dollars has nothing to do with the salary
schedule of Microsoft Inc (which is capitalized at 383 billion
dollars. That means, as of the close of the market on Friday May 22,
2015, there is 383 billion dollars in stock. And Bill Gates still
owns a big chunk of the company, to the tune of seventy nine billion
dollars.
Now, to put it in a perspective you might understand - do you want
your income tax based upon the amount of income you actually had last
year, the amount left over after expenses, or your net worth?
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
19:30:41 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>
>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>
>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>way the gov't throws away money...
So sorry to see two individuals as ignorant of economics as you
>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>
>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>way the gov't throws away money...
guys. You are mistaking "salary" with "net worth" as if the pay rates
of the company have anything to with net worth.
If Memory Serves, when Bill Gates worked for Microsoft, had a
salary in on the order of $250,000. That's all. He didn't get paid 79
billion dollars to head the company he founded. That Bill Gates is
worth seventy nine billion dollars has nothing to do with the salary
schedule of Microsoft Inc (which is capitalized at 383 billion
dollars. That means, as of the close of the market on Friday May 22,
2015, there is 383 billion dollars in stock. And Bill Gates still
owns a big chunk of the company, to the tune of seventy nine billion
dollars.
Now, to put it in a perspective you might understand - do you want
your income tax based upon the amount of income you actually had last
year, the amount left over after expenses, or your net worth?
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
Larry Jaques
May 24, 2015, 1:48:17 AM5/24/15
to
On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:30:57 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
jobs right now? And I'm not talking the lazy bastards who didn't work
before.
>All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
>the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
Then where is it, while 25% of Americans lose their homes and jobs?
>I find it fascinating how the poor keep blaming the rich for the
>plight of the poor..but the fucking poor has no education worth spit,
>has no skills, an inflated sense of self worth and zero ability or
>skills to make themselves wanted by even a middle class employer.
That sickens me, too.
>Shit..thats why Mexican illegals make up a very large portion of
>todays work force. They will actually show up, do their job to the
>best of their ability and keep on doing it day after day, month after
>month and year after year, working their way up the ladder.
Yes, many of them do have a very good work ethic.
>We have here..a bunch of Occupy morons demanding "their fair share"
>and are not willing to do the slightest thing to earn it.
Let them eat lead! Oops, I meant cake. Yeah, that's it.
>Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
>has been..and damned sure never will be.
No, but is a fifty million to one billion a year salary really
necessary? I don't happen to think so. You didn't address that
portion. The floor is yours.
wrote:
>On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>><ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>>oncentives without income inequality?
>>
>>Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>>But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>>addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>>Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>
>>
>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>way the gov't throws away money...
>
>Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
If they invest so much, why are tens of millions of Americans without
>On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>><ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>>oncentives without income inequality?
>>
>>Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>>But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>>addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>>Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>
>>
>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>way the gov't throws away money...
>
>Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
jobs right now? And I'm not talking the lazy bastards who didn't work
before.
>All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
>the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
>I find it fascinating how the poor keep blaming the rich for the
>plight of the poor..but the fucking poor has no education worth spit,
>has no skills, an inflated sense of self worth and zero ability or
>skills to make themselves wanted by even a middle class employer.
>Shit..thats why Mexican illegals make up a very large portion of
>todays work force. They will actually show up, do their job to the
>best of their ability and keep on doing it day after day, month after
>month and year after year, working their way up the ladder.
>We have here..a bunch of Occupy morons demanding "their fair share"
>and are not willing to do the slightest thing to earn it.
>Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
>has been..and damned sure never will be.
necessary? I don't happen to think so. You didn't address that
portion. The floor is yours.
jim
May 24, 2015, 7:36:21 AM5/24/15
to
Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
> <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>> <ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>> oncentives without income inequality?
>>
>> Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>> But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>> addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>> Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>
>>
>>> Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>> They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>> et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>> manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>> the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>> way the gov't throws away money...
>
> Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
> think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
You are telling a story that is mostly fiction.
> On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
> <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>> <ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>> oncentives without income inequality?
>>
>> Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>> But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>> addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>> Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>
>>
>>> Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>> They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>> et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>> manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>> the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>> way the gov't throws away money...
>
> Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
> think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
The money of billionaires is not needed for
investment.
A lot of investment comes from banks.
Banks don't lend existing money. They create
new money with every loan. That is how money gets
created. The act of bank lending finances new
production and increases the money supply at
the same rate. At least that is how it works if
banks are appropriately regulated.
Billionaires tend to put their money into
things that inflate asset prices but do not
contribute to GDP. For instance buying existing
shares in a corporation just inflates the price of
shares but does zero to increase production.
Larry Jaques
May 24, 2015, 8:39:01 AM5/24/15
to
On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:40:41 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Sat, 23 May 2015
>19:30:41 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>
>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>way the gov't throws away money...
>
> So sorry to see two individuals as ignorant of economics as you
>guys. You are mistaking "salary" with "net worth" as if the pay rates
>of the company have anything to with net worth.
Yes, to some extent, but there are still people being paid millions to
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Sat, 23 May 2015
>19:30:41 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>
>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>way the gov't throws away money...
>
> So sorry to see two individuals as ignorant of economics as you
>guys. You are mistaking "salary" with "net worth" as if the pay rates
>of the company have anything to with net worth.
billions per year for their services. That's a salary.
> If Memory Serves, when Bill Gates worked for Microsoft, had a
>salary in on the order of $250,000. That's all. He didn't get paid 79
>billion dollars to head the company he founded. That Bill Gates is
>worth seventy nine billion dollars has nothing to do with the salary
>schedule of Microsoft Inc (which is capitalized at 383 billion
>dollars. That means, as of the close of the market on Friday May 22,
>2015, there is 383 billion dollars in stock. And Bill Gates still
>owns a big chunk of the company, to the tune of seventy nine billion
>dollars.
richer than Crom Himself.
> Now, to put it in a perspective you might understand - do you want
>your income tax based upon the amount of income you actually had last
>year, the amount left over after expenses, or your net worth?
John B.
May 24, 2015, 8:58:31 AM5/24/15
to
On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:48:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
current U.S. wages is stupid. Farm it out to the Chinese who will do
it cheaper and sell it in the "developed" countries where high prices
are "normal".
>
>>All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
>>the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
>
>Then where is it, while 25% of Americans lose their homes and jobs?
What has a rich man's money got to do with the U.S. labour market?
Don't you realize that the ever increasing wage wages that you have
essentially prices y'all out of the world labour marketplace?
WalMart - perhaps the largest retail marketer in the world relies on
cheap goods primarily from the developing countries and sells to rich
Americans.
Harbour Freight - started with a single container of really cheap
Chinese made tools and is now a Billion Dollar business, selling the
cheapest stuff they can find to rich Americans.
The U.S. could (1) decrease wages, which in turn would cause a major
financial crash, or (2) Place substantial import duties on everything
brought into the U.S. which would immediately increase jobs and
probably cause a world financial disaster, or (3) Start a big war
which would also increase available jobs by drafting all the men.
Why not face reality. You can isolate yourself from the world and live
with your own industry making everything that is sold in the country,
or you can join the rest of the world. But if you join the rest of the
world you have to play with their rules.
>
>>I find it fascinating how the poor keep blaming the rich for the
>>plight of the poor..but the fucking poor has no education worth spit,
>>has no skills, an inflated sense of self worth and zero ability or
>>skills to make themselves wanted by even a middle class employer.
>
>That sickens me, too.
>
>
>>Shit..thats why Mexican illegals make up a very large portion of
>>todays work force. They will actually show up, do their job to the
>>best of their ability and keep on doing it day after day, month after
>>month and year after year, working their way up the ladder.
>
>Yes, many of them do have a very good work ethic.
>
>
>>We have here..a bunch of Occupy morons demanding "their fair share"
>>and are not willing to do the slightest thing to earn it.
>
>Let them eat lead! Oops, I meant cake. Yeah, that's it.
>
>
>>Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
>>has been..and damned sure never will be.
>
>No, but is a fifty million to one billion a year salary really
>necessary? I don't happen to think so. You didn't address that
>portion. The floor is yours.
--
Cheers,
John B.
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:30:57 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
>><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>>><ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>>>oncentives without income inequality?
>>>
>>>Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>>>But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>>>addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>>>Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>>
>>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>>way the gov't throws away money...
>>
>>Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>
>If they invest so much, why are tens of millions of Americans without
>jobs right now? And I'm not talking the lazy bastards who didn't work
>before.
>
Because investing in a business that hires a lot of laborers at
>On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:30:57 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
>><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>>><ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>>>oncentives without income inequality?
>>>
>>>Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>>>But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>>>addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>>>Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>>
>>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>>way the gov't throws away money...
>>
>>Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>
>If they invest so much, why are tens of millions of Americans without
>jobs right now? And I'm not talking the lazy bastards who didn't work
>before.
>
current U.S. wages is stupid. Farm it out to the Chinese who will do
it cheaper and sell it in the "developed" countries where high prices
are "normal".
>
>>All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
>>the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
>
>Then where is it, while 25% of Americans lose their homes and jobs?
Don't you realize that the ever increasing wage wages that you have
essentially prices y'all out of the world labour marketplace?
WalMart - perhaps the largest retail marketer in the world relies on
cheap goods primarily from the developing countries and sells to rich
Americans.
Harbour Freight - started with a single container of really cheap
Chinese made tools and is now a Billion Dollar business, selling the
cheapest stuff they can find to rich Americans.
The U.S. could (1) decrease wages, which in turn would cause a major
financial crash, or (2) Place substantial import duties on everything
brought into the U.S. which would immediately increase jobs and
probably cause a world financial disaster, or (3) Start a big war
which would also increase available jobs by drafting all the men.
Why not face reality. You can isolate yourself from the world and live
with your own industry making everything that is sold in the country,
or you can join the rest of the world. But if you join the rest of the
world you have to play with their rules.
>
>>I find it fascinating how the poor keep blaming the rich for the
>>plight of the poor..but the fucking poor has no education worth spit,
>>has no skills, an inflated sense of self worth and zero ability or
>>skills to make themselves wanted by even a middle class employer.
>
>That sickens me, too.
>
>
>>Shit..thats why Mexican illegals make up a very large portion of
>>todays work force. They will actually show up, do their job to the
>>best of their ability and keep on doing it day after day, month after
>>month and year after year, working their way up the ladder.
>
>Yes, many of them do have a very good work ethic.
>
>
>>We have here..a bunch of Occupy morons demanding "their fair share"
>>and are not willing to do the slightest thing to earn it.
>
>Let them eat lead! Oops, I meant cake. Yeah, that's it.
>
>
>>Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
>>has been..and damned sure never will be.
>
>No, but is a fifty million to one billion a year salary really
>necessary? I don't happen to think so. You didn't address that
>portion. The floor is yours.
--
John B.
Jim Wilkins
May 24, 2015, 9:19:20 AM5/24/15
to
"John B." <johnbs...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:68h3ma9a4rlbhgs0h...@4ax.com...
> --
> Cheers,
> John B.
But, but, we're just helpless pawns of The System who -can't- be held
responsible for our problems. There must be some rich and powerful
authority figures to blame.
news:68h3ma9a4rlbhgs0h...@4ax.com...
> Cheers,
> John B.
But, but, we're just helpless pawns of The System who -can't- be held
responsible for our problems. There must be some rich and powerful
authority figures to blame.
jim
May 24, 2015, 10:06:06 AM5/24/15
to
pyotr filipivich wrote:
> Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Sat, 23 May 2015
> 19:30:41 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>
>>> Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>> They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>> et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>> manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>> the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>> way the gov't throws away money...
>
> So sorry to see two individuals as ignorant of economics as you
> guys. You are mistaking "salary" with "net worth" as if the pay rates
> of the company have anything to with net worth.
That is the way it works if the system isn't rigged.
> Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Sat, 23 May 2015
> 19:30:41 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>
>>> Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>> They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>> et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>> manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>> the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>> way the gov't throws away money...
>
> So sorry to see two individuals as ignorant of economics as you
> guys. You are mistaking "salary" with "net worth" as if the pay rates
> of the company have anything to with net worth.
>
> If Memory Serves, when Bill Gates worked for Microsoft, had a
> salary in on the order of $250,000. That's all. He didn't get paid 79
> billion dollars to head the company he founded. That Bill Gates is
> worth seventy nine billion dollars has nothing to do with the salary
> schedule of Microsoft Inc (which is capitalized at 383 billion
> dollars. That means, as of the close of the market on Friday May 22,
> 2015, there is 383 billion dollars in stock. And Bill Gates still
> owns a big chunk of the company, to the tune of seventy nine billion
> dollars.
create wealth from non-productive trading of
financial assets and very little wealth is created
by earnings from productive work.
>
> Now, to put it in a perspective you might understand - do you want
> your income tax based upon the amount of income you actually had last
> year, the amount left over after expenses, or your net worth?
tax under the constitution. Tax on wealth would not
be an income tax.
Currently the hamburger flipper has more of his income
taken in tax than a hedge financial trader like Mitt Romney.
If capital gains were taxed higher there wouldn't
be so much accumulated wealth from earnings from
unproductive activities like trading financial assets.
Michael A. Terrell
May 24, 2015, 10:28:53 AM5/24/15
to
corners, as Ed's.
Gunner Asch
May 24, 2015, 10:34:08 AM5/24/15
to
On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:48:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
that WILL fail before long. We live in a vast interlocking
..hum...think of it as a mosaic...better yet..a puzzle made up of
individual pieces that fit in its own special location. If the pieces
around it are not there...adding more money to that individual piece
makes no sense..nothing is going to come in, and its all going to go
out into the empty places. So they currently have two choices...try to
build pieces to match the existing ones..or hold onto their money
until the next rich guy can build a matching piece. Anything less
means they are simply pissing their money away. While it might make
life easier for someone for a short time...those pieces are still
missing and before long..you have poured all your money into the empty
places and you too are now poor.
In Socialist/Marxist/Fascist states this is common. Which is why each
and every such state has failed...miserably.
In manufacturing...much of the infrastructure has left the nation.
Why? Because someone in another country can and will build it cheaper.
Which means that the buyers will buy the gizmo made in Chile rather
than the one built in Cinncinati Ohio. Now the rich guy can still
keep funding the gizmos in Cincinatti..but if no one buys it..its
simply pissing into the wind. The smart guys spend money trying to
either built it cheaper in Ohio..or build a product that everyone
wants in Ohio. Somethings are possible..others..not so much.
The poor bastards who work in the factory in Ohio wants $25 an hour
plus bennies..yet the Chilian worker is happy as hell to get $5 a Day.
So what do you propose to fix this difference? Built bright shiney
factories in Ohio that will pay their workers $5 a day? Hummmm?
>
>
>>All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
>>the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
>
>Then where is it, while 25% of Americans lose their homes and jobs?
So if you cant get a job because your clients are now all poor..I
should give you welfare..instead of the Government ..until my bank
account is empty?.....Comrade>
But is it freedom? Yes..it certainly is. And sooner or later those
companies one by one..are going to go tits up. When they can no
longer pay those wages because their income from the outside world has
fallen to zip shit....they turn off the lights and go home.
http://www.businessinsider.com/33-startups-that-died-reveal-why-they-failed-2013-6?op=1
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericwagner/2013/09/12/five-reasons-8-out-of-10-businesses-fail/
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/24/the-biggest-business-failures-and-successes-of-2013
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/18/us-usa-tax-inversion-insight-idUSKBN0GI0AY20140818
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/29/corporate-tax-rate-us-2012_n_1839693.html
Id STRONGLY recommend reading this article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/02/10/the-states-people-are-fleeing-in-2014/
And read...read..this excerpt:
<https://books.google.com/books?id=CS9lpYUPn5cC&pg=PA217&lpg=PA217&dq=companies+that+have+fled+america&source=bl&ots=wrzBsVoG_L&sig=kHQ4OB8Dj8tfU8rteJumIuKVrSM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=r95hVYXoBYvSsAWZhYDgAw&ved=0CGMQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=companies%20that%20have%20fled%20america&f=false>
Run this search..and start reading at the top of the list..and work
your way down:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=us+business+failure+because+of+competition+from+other+nations&rlz=1C1AVNG_enUS636US637&oq=us+business+failure+because+of+competition+from+other+nations&aqs=chrome..69i57.20208j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8>
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:30:57 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
>><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>>><ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>>>oncentives without income inequality?
>>>
>>>Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>>>But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>>>addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>>>Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>>
>>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>>way the gov't throws away money...
>>
>>Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>
>If they invest so much, why are tens of millions of Americans without
>jobs right now? And I'm not talking the lazy bastards who didn't work
>before.
Because they cant all..shouldnt spend their money supporting business
>On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:30:57 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
>><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>>><ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>>>oncentives without income inequality?
>>>
>>>Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>>>But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>>>addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>>>Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>>
>>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>>way the gov't throws away money...
>>
>>Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>
>If they invest so much, why are tens of millions of Americans without
>jobs right now? And I'm not talking the lazy bastards who didn't work
>before.
that WILL fail before long. We live in a vast interlocking
..hum...think of it as a mosaic...better yet..a puzzle made up of
individual pieces that fit in its own special location. If the pieces
around it are not there...adding more money to that individual piece
makes no sense..nothing is going to come in, and its all going to go
out into the empty places. So they currently have two choices...try to
build pieces to match the existing ones..or hold onto their money
until the next rich guy can build a matching piece. Anything less
means they are simply pissing their money away. While it might make
life easier for someone for a short time...those pieces are still
missing and before long..you have poured all your money into the empty
places and you too are now poor.
In Socialist/Marxist/Fascist states this is common. Which is why each
and every such state has failed...miserably.
In manufacturing...much of the infrastructure has left the nation.
Why? Because someone in another country can and will build it cheaper.
Which means that the buyers will buy the gizmo made in Chile rather
than the one built in Cinncinati Ohio. Now the rich guy can still
keep funding the gizmos in Cincinatti..but if no one buys it..its
simply pissing into the wind. The smart guys spend money trying to
either built it cheaper in Ohio..or build a product that everyone
wants in Ohio. Somethings are possible..others..not so much.
The poor bastards who work in the factory in Ohio wants $25 an hour
plus bennies..yet the Chilian worker is happy as hell to get $5 a Day.
So what do you propose to fix this difference? Built bright shiney
factories in Ohio that will pay their workers $5 a day? Hummmm?
>
>
>>All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
>>the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
>
>Then where is it, while 25% of Americans lose their homes and jobs?
should give you welfare..instead of the Government ..until my bank
account is empty?.....Comrade>
>
>
>>I find it fascinating how the poor keep blaming the rich for the
>>plight of the poor..but the fucking poor has no education worth spit,
>>has no skills, an inflated sense of self worth and zero ability or
>>skills to make themselves wanted by even a middle class employer.
>
>That sickens me, too.
>
>
>>Shit..thats why Mexican illegals make up a very large portion of
>>todays work force. They will actually show up, do their job to the
>>best of their ability and keep on doing it day after day, month after
>>month and year after year, working their way up the ladder.
>
>Yes, many of them do have a very good work ethic.
>
>
>>We have here..a bunch of Occupy morons demanding "their fair share"
>>and are not willing to do the slightest thing to earn it.
>
>Let them eat lead! Oops, I meant cake. Yeah, that's it.
>
>
>>Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
>>has been..and damned sure never will be.
>
>No, but is a fifty million to one billion a year salary really
>necessary? I don't happen to think so. You didn't address that
>portion. The floor is yours.
That position is the choice of each company. Is it fair? Probably not.
>
>>I find it fascinating how the poor keep blaming the rich for the
>>plight of the poor..but the fucking poor has no education worth spit,
>>has no skills, an inflated sense of self worth and zero ability or
>>skills to make themselves wanted by even a middle class employer.
>
>That sickens me, too.
>
>
>>Shit..thats why Mexican illegals make up a very large portion of
>>todays work force. They will actually show up, do their job to the
>>best of their ability and keep on doing it day after day, month after
>>month and year after year, working their way up the ladder.
>
>Yes, many of them do have a very good work ethic.
>
>
>>We have here..a bunch of Occupy morons demanding "their fair share"
>>and are not willing to do the slightest thing to earn it.
>
>Let them eat lead! Oops, I meant cake. Yeah, that's it.
>
>
>>Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
>>has been..and damned sure never will be.
>
>No, but is a fifty million to one billion a year salary really
>necessary? I don't happen to think so. You didn't address that
>portion. The floor is yours.
But is it freedom? Yes..it certainly is. And sooner or later those
companies one by one..are going to go tits up. When they can no
longer pay those wages because their income from the outside world has
fallen to zip shit....they turn off the lights and go home.
http://www.businessinsider.com/33-startups-that-died-reveal-why-they-failed-2013-6?op=1
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericwagner/2013/09/12/five-reasons-8-out-of-10-businesses-fail/
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/24/the-biggest-business-failures-and-successes-of-2013
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/18/us-usa-tax-inversion-insight-idUSKBN0GI0AY20140818
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/29/corporate-tax-rate-us-2012_n_1839693.html
Id STRONGLY recommend reading this article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/02/10/the-states-people-are-fleeing-in-2014/
And read...read..this excerpt:
<https://books.google.com/books?id=CS9lpYUPn5cC&pg=PA217&lpg=PA217&dq=companies+that+have+fled+america&source=bl&ots=wrzBsVoG_L&sig=kHQ4OB8Dj8tfU8rteJumIuKVrSM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=r95hVYXoBYvSsAWZhYDgAw&ved=0CGMQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=companies%20that%20have%20fled%20america&f=false>
Run this search..and start reading at the top of the list..and work
your way down:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=us+business+failure+because+of+competition+from+other+nations&rlz=1C1AVNG_enUS636US637&oq=us+business+failure+because+of+competition+from+other+nations&aqs=chrome..69i57.20208j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8>
Gunner Asch
May 24, 2015, 11:16:28 AM5/24/15
to
say..Texas..then to pack up and move to Texas and get a job. And of
course..demand welfare.
Ed Huntress
May 24, 2015, 11:27:22 AM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 10:28:46 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
There ya' go -- he says you're a crank, and you respond by calling his
wife a whore.
You've convinced us, Terrell: You grew up in a pigsty and you learned
your language from white trash.
--
Ed Huntress
wife a whore.
You've convinced us, Terrell: You grew up in a pigsty and you learned
your language from white trash.
--
Ed Huntress
F. George McDuffee
May 24, 2015, 11:57:22 AM5/24/15
to
<snip>
I suggest that you may be falling into the either/or
fallacy. Like most things of this nature it is "and," with
a changing ratio as the socioeconomic culture changes.
We take for granted the advances in our physical world such
as medical care such as immunizations and pure food & drug
laws, the advances in food production through farming, and
the advances in interior climate control such as central
heating and air conditioning, and indeed clothing.
Why then are we so adamantly opposed to analogous advances
in the economic/financial world? Humanity is no better off
with periodic depressions and collapses than we were with
periodic plagues and famines.
--
Unka' George
"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"
-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"
>But, but, we're just helpless pawns of The System who -can't- be held
>responsible for our problems. There must be some rich and powerful
>authority figures to blame.
================
>responsible for our problems. There must be some rich and powerful
>authority figures to blame.
I suggest that you may be falling into the either/or
fallacy. Like most things of this nature it is "and," with
a changing ratio as the socioeconomic culture changes.
We take for granted the advances in our physical world such
as medical care such as immunizations and pure food & drug
laws, the advances in food production through farming, and
the advances in interior climate control such as central
heating and air conditioning, and indeed clothing.
Why then are we so adamantly opposed to analogous advances
in the economic/financial world? Humanity is no better off
with periodic depressions and collapses than we were with
periodic plagues and famines.
--
Unka' George
"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"
-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"
walter_...@post.com
May 24, 2015, 12:39:47 PM5/24/15
to
You're saying that mog, me and banquet are all the same person, right? Go ahead and say it.
walter_...@post.com
May 24, 2015, 12:53:41 PM5/24/15
to
> At 11:57 AM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
>
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 09:19:34 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
> <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > But, but, we're just helpless pawns of The System who -can't- be held
> >responsible for our problems. There must be some rich and powerful
> > authority figures to blame.
> ================
> I suggest that you may be falling into the either/or
> fallacy. Like most things of this nature it is "and," with
> a changing ratio as the socioeconomic culture changes.
Banks aren't the problem. Just a highly regulated symptom. But the problem is that activists blame bankers who carry less personal influence than Mutual Fund Managers, as the White House says. There's so little difference between mutual fund managers and billionaires. They can get new jobs and higher salaries going faster than banks (who are tied up by regulations).
>
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 09:19:34 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
> <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > But, but, we're just helpless pawns of The System who -can't- be held
> >responsible for our problems. There must be some rich and powerful
> > authority figures to blame.
> ================
> I suggest that you may be falling into the either/or
> fallacy. Like most things of this nature it is "and," with
> a changing ratio as the socioeconomic culture changes.
> We take for granted the advances in our physical world ...
And people don't contribute to that improvement without higher pay, more jobs, etc... If corporations hord cash due to intimidation from Mutual Fund Managers, then how can the world advance? It just continues to be more bottle-necked.
Ed Huntress
May 24, 2015, 12:54:37 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 09:39:45 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
wrote:
>You're saying that mog, me and banquet are all the same person, right? Go ahead and say it.
Are you talking to me? If you don't post as a reply, we can't tell.
If you are talking to me, then no, I said no such thing. I asked how
you and Mog managed to have the same IP address.
--
Ed Huntress
wrote:
>You're saying that mog, me and banquet are all the same person, right? Go ahead and say it.
If you are talking to me, then no, I said no such thing. I asked how
you and Mog managed to have the same IP address.
--
Ed Huntress
Larry Jaques
May 24, 2015, 2:02:16 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 07:35:10 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
No, retool an old factory and pay decent wages, avoiding unions which
simply double costs with no tangible gain anywhere. Build things that
people want/need/can afford. There is a very large and growing group
of people who want to buy American if they could only find that
product built here. Dozens of niches abound. I just wish the money
would find them.
Yeah, I know that it's an extremely complex mosaic.
>>>All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
>>>the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
>>
>>Then where is it, while 25% of Americans lose their homes and jobs?
>
>So if you cant get a job because your clients are now all poor..I
>should give you welfare..instead of the Government ..until my bank
>account is empty?.....Comrade>
No, and I don't believe in states paying out 4 years of unemployment
bennies, either. Folks getting bennies should take any job to get
back into the game, but it's not pushed by the states. People are
allowed to turn down anything which isn't exactly what they were
doing, and I feel that's wrong. Grab a job and start looking for the
-right- one while you're working, please, Mr. & Mrs. Unemployed.
>>>Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
>>>has been..and damned sure never will be.
>>
>>No, but is a fifty million to one billion a year salary really
>>necessary? I don't happen to think so. You didn't address that
>>portion. The floor is yours.
>
>That position is the choice of each company. Is it fair? Probably not.
>But is it freedom? Yes..it certainly is. And sooner or later those
>companies one by one..are going to go tits up. When they can no
>longer pay those wages because their income from the outside world has
>fallen to zip shit....they turn off the lights and go home.
>
>http://www.businessinsider.com/33-startups-that-died-reveal-why-they-failed-2013-6?op=1
>http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericwagner/2013/09/12/five-reasons-8-out-of-10-businesses-fail/
>
>http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/24/the-biggest-business-failures-and-successes-of-2013
>
>http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/18/us-usa-tax-inversion-insight-idUSKBN0GI0AY20140818
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/29/corporate-tax-rate-us-2012_n_1839693.html
Right.
>Id STRONGLY recommend reading this article:
>
>http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/02/10/the-states-people-are-fleeing-in-2014/
What? People are leaving overinhabited, frozen, liberal bastions like
Jersey (Hi, Mr. Ed), NY, and IL? Imagine that! CA's losing lots,
too. I wish OR would lose more liberals.
>And read...read..this excerpt:
>
><https://books.google.com/books?id=CS9lpYUPn5cC&pg=PA217&lpg=PA217&dq=companies+that+have+fled+america&source=bl&ots=wrzBsVoG_L&sig=kHQ4OB8Dj8tfU8rteJumIuKVrSM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=r95hVYXoBYvSsAWZhYDgAw&ved=0CGMQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=companies%20that%20have%20fled%20america&f=false>
>Run this search..and start reading at the top of the list..and work
>your way down:
>
><https://www.google.com/search?q=us+business+failure+because+of+competition+from+other+nations&rlz=1C1AVNG_enUS636US637&oq=us+business+failure+because+of+competition+from+other+nations&aqs=chrome..69i57.20208j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8>
So, if you're a businessman wanting to invest, simply do something
_else_. Y'know, maybe a startup NOT found on that list? <shrug>
simply double costs with no tangible gain anywhere. Build things that
people want/need/can afford. There is a very large and growing group
of people who want to buy American if they could only find that
product built here. Dozens of niches abound. I just wish the money
would find them.
Yeah, I know that it's an extremely complex mosaic.
>>>All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
>>>the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
>>
>>Then where is it, while 25% of Americans lose their homes and jobs?
>
>So if you cant get a job because your clients are now all poor..I
>should give you welfare..instead of the Government ..until my bank
>account is empty?.....Comrade>
bennies, either. Folks getting bennies should take any job to get
back into the game, but it's not pushed by the states. People are
allowed to turn down anything which isn't exactly what they were
doing, and I feel that's wrong. Grab a job and start looking for the
-right- one while you're working, please, Mr. & Mrs. Unemployed.
>>>Sorry boys and girls..there aint no such thing as a free lunch. Never
>>>has been..and damned sure never will be.
>>
>>No, but is a fifty million to one billion a year salary really
>>necessary? I don't happen to think so. You didn't address that
>>portion. The floor is yours.
>
>That position is the choice of each company. Is it fair? Probably not.
>But is it freedom? Yes..it certainly is. And sooner or later those
>companies one by one..are going to go tits up. When they can no
>longer pay those wages because their income from the outside world has
>fallen to zip shit....they turn off the lights and go home.
>
>http://www.businessinsider.com/33-startups-that-died-reveal-why-they-failed-2013-6?op=1
>http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericwagner/2013/09/12/five-reasons-8-out-of-10-businesses-fail/
>
>http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/24/the-biggest-business-failures-and-successes-of-2013
>
>http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/18/us-usa-tax-inversion-insight-idUSKBN0GI0AY20140818
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/29/corporate-tax-rate-us-2012_n_1839693.html
>Id STRONGLY recommend reading this article:
>
>http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/02/10/the-states-people-are-fleeing-in-2014/
Jersey (Hi, Mr. Ed), NY, and IL? Imagine that! CA's losing lots,
too. I wish OR would lose more liberals.
>And read...read..this excerpt:
>
><https://books.google.com/books?id=CS9lpYUPn5cC&pg=PA217&lpg=PA217&dq=companies+that+have+fled+america&source=bl&ots=wrzBsVoG_L&sig=kHQ4OB8Dj8tfU8rteJumIuKVrSM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=r95hVYXoBYvSsAWZhYDgAw&ved=0CGMQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=companies%20that%20have%20fled%20america&f=false>
>Run this search..and start reading at the top of the list..and work
>your way down:
>
><https://www.google.com/search?q=us+business+failure+because+of+competition+from+other+nations&rlz=1C1AVNG_enUS636US637&oq=us+business+failure+because+of+competition+from+other+nations&aqs=chrome..69i57.20208j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8>
_else_. Y'know, maybe a startup NOT found on that list? <shrug>
walter_...@post.com
May 24, 2015, 3:27:58 PM5/24/15
to
walter_...@post.com
May 24, 2015, 3:52:10 PM5/24/15
to
2:02 PMLarry Jaques
>No, retool an old factory and pay decent wages, avoiding unions which
>simply double costs with no tangible gain anywhere.
Those workers' organizers determine that, not you.
>simply double costs with no tangible gain anywhere.
One-size-fits-all solutions rarely work, otherwise.
> Build things that
> people want/need/can afford. There is a very large and growing group
> of people who want to buy American if they could only find that
> product built here. Dozens of niches abound. I just wish the money
> would find them.
> Yeah, I know that it's an extremely complex mosaic.
> No, and I don't believe in states paying out 4 years of unemployment
Imagine if anyone in this world actually took YOUR advice... Ha!
> ...
> What? People are leaving overinhabited, frozen, liberal bastions like
> Jersey (Hi, Mr. Ed),
And Oregon is not frozen? Anyway what does anyone care who leaves and goes where? NJ is crowded anyway, and plus they aren't financially do-or-die like they were when they first approved of gambling. Switzerland has become more bold... they now allow drinking and drug use... NJ should try that on the boardwalks, then the money would be flowing again.... instead of like with where you and your buddies are.
> Jersey (Hi, Mr. Ed),
> NY, and IL? Imagine that! CA's losing lots,
> too. I wish OR would lose more liberals.
> ... if you're a businessman wanting to invest, simply do
> something _else_. Y'know, maybe a startup NOT found on
> that list? <shrug>
Really original of you, Larry.
> that list? <shrug>
Ed Huntress
May 24, 2015, 3:59:34 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:27:56 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
wrote:
Posting from public libraries in Queens seems to help, too.
<g>...("Basement Bandy"?...jeez...)
--
Ed Huntress
wrote:
<g>...("Basement Bandy"?...jeez...)
--
Ed Huntress
walter_...@post.com
May 24, 2015, 4:23:30 PM5/24/15
to
Ed Huntress wrote:
>
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:27:56 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
> wrote:
>
> Posting from public libraries in Queens seems to help, too.
> <g>...("Basement Bandy"?...jeez...)
Through a USB port from a phone to a tower? ... or through the cpu's keyboard?
>
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:27:56 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
> wrote:
>
> Posting from public libraries in Queens seems to help, too.
> <g>...("Basement Bandy"?...jeez...)
Ed Huntress
May 24, 2015, 4:36:12 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 13:23:28 -0700 (PDT), walter_...@post.com
wrote:
From a library's registered IP.
You left an easy trail,
Mog/Walter/Hokey/Republliphilia/fuxnoise/repugliars/Transition
Zone...etc., etc...
--
Ed Huntress
wrote:
You left an easy trail,
Mog/Walter/Hokey/Republliphilia/fuxnoise/repugliars/Transition
Zone...etc., etc...
--
Ed Huntress
jon_banquer
May 24, 2015, 5:32:55 PM5/24/15
to
slow eddy just wants to show us over and over how he's so smart and how he knows everything.
slow eddy is a liar and a fraud who is often just plain wrong.
jon_banquer
May 24, 2015, 6:26:52 PM5/24/15
to
John B.
May 24, 2015, 10:54:37 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 05:38:56 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:40:41 -0700, pyotr filipivich
><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Sat, 23 May 2015
>>19:30:41 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>>
>>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>>
>>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>>way the gov't throws away money...
>>
>> So sorry to see two individuals as ignorant of economics as you
>>guys. You are mistaking "salary" with "net worth" as if the pay rates
>>of the company have anything to with net worth.
>
>Yes, to some extent, but there are still people being paid millions to
>billions per year for their services. That's a salary.
>
Yes, although I doubt the "billions" figure.
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 23 May 2015 22:40:41 -0700, pyotr filipivich
><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> on Sat, 23 May 2015
>>19:30:41 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>>>
>>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>>
>>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>>way the gov't throws away money...
>>
>> So sorry to see two individuals as ignorant of economics as you
>>guys. You are mistaking "salary" with "net worth" as if the pay rates
>>of the company have anything to with net worth.
>
>Yes, to some extent, but there are still people being paid millions to
>billions per year for their services. That's a salary.
>
In fact I know a chap that is the chief oil trader for a financial
house in Singapore. His pay is a base salary, which he tells me is
about his cost of rent and groceries and then he receives bonuses
based on the profit he makes for the company. Big profit = big bonus.
No profit = lost job.
It seems fair to me.
What is a fair salary for a bloke who manages a company valued at 383
billion dollars, and increases sales so that the company is worth say
2 percent more money?
Maybe 10% of the amount that his management increased the value of the
company?
>
>> If Memory Serves, when Bill Gates worked for Microsoft, had a
>>salary in on the order of $250,000. That's all. He didn't get paid 79
>>billion dollars to head the company he founded. That Bill Gates is
>>worth seventy nine billion dollars has nothing to do with the salary
>>schedule of Microsoft Inc (which is capitalized at 383 billion
>>dollars. That means, as of the close of the market on Friday May 22,
>>2015, there is 383 billion dollars in stock. And Bill Gates still
>>owns a big chunk of the company, to the tune of seventy nine billion
>>dollars.
>
>And Melinda has been helping him see how he really doesn't need to be
>richer than Crom Himself.
>
>
>> Now, to put it in a perspective you might understand - do you want
>>your income tax based upon the amount of income you actually had last
>>year, the amount left over after expenses, or your net worth?
>
>Income, please. ;)
--
John B.
John B.
May 24, 2015, 10:54:37 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 06:36:17 -0500, jim <""sjedgingN0Sp\"@m...@mwt.net">
wrote:
Ah, but Billionaires don't put their money into stocks that do not
either gain in value, or pay a good dividend, so in essence unless a
company increases their income people do not invest.
In fact I would suspect that billionaires don't put much money into
the stock market as bonds are a far safer investment. And some bonds
have a non-taxable dividend.
On the other hand, contrary to popular myth the bulk of the
millionaires, at least in the U.S. are self made millionaires and
probably put any surplus funds into something tangible like real
estate.
--
Cheers,
John B.
wrote:
either gain in value, or pay a good dividend, so in essence unless a
company increases their income people do not invest.
In fact I would suspect that billionaires don't put much money into
the stock market as bonds are a far safer investment. And some bonds
have a non-taxable dividend.
On the other hand, contrary to popular myth the bulk of the
millionaires, at least in the U.S. are self made millionaires and
probably put any surplus funds into something tangible like real
estate.
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
May 24, 2015, 10:54:37 PM5/24/15
to
Me, of course not.
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
May 24, 2015, 10:54:38 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 08:17:06 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
I think it is a bit more than that.
There was a study done in Detroit years and years ago when the car
makers were still there, maybe in the 1950's - 60's. Some group got
together and convinced the car companies to make available some
unskilled jobs that could be given to people who were unemployed.
They placed some of these people who had been "on the dole" in these
positions and found that in general, the people didn't last, usually
because they didn't bother to come to work.
The study was abandoned as a failure, however the same group did
further study on people who at the time were as much as third
generation unemployed and it seemed that they had no understanding of
the concept of a "day's work for a day's pay".
California has a similar experience. I don't remember all the details
but it basically it seemed that someone in California denied some sort
of work permit to Mexicans who legally came across to work in the
fields.
The farmers, of course , rose up in arms about not having any labor
and the State said that they would send people drawing unemployment to
work in the fields. And they did. The first day a lot of people went
out and worked in the fields, the next day, less came and by the third
day hardly nobody came. It seems that "stoop labor" in the hot sun is
hard work and the unemployed reckoned it was easier to just lay about
and draw the dole.
As I say, I don't remember the details but an article in the newspaper
said that there was an emergency effort by the State to recruited
Mexicans (who would have come voluntarily if they had been allowed to)
to get the harvest in. I was living in Riverside so it must have been
in the early 1970's.
It appears that, perhaps, a large percentage of the U.S. unemployed
may well be this third and forth generation of people who have never
worked.
If it is true what I have read about 30 year old grandmothers in some
of the places then 2015 - 1960 = 55 years divided by 15 = 3.66.
--
Cheers,
John B.
There was a study done in Detroit years and years ago when the car
makers were still there, maybe in the 1950's - 60's. Some group got
together and convinced the car companies to make available some
unskilled jobs that could be given to people who were unemployed.
They placed some of these people who had been "on the dole" in these
positions and found that in general, the people didn't last, usually
because they didn't bother to come to work.
The study was abandoned as a failure, however the same group did
further study on people who at the time were as much as third
generation unemployed and it seemed that they had no understanding of
the concept of a "day's work for a day's pay".
California has a similar experience. I don't remember all the details
but it basically it seemed that someone in California denied some sort
of work permit to Mexicans who legally came across to work in the
fields.
The farmers, of course , rose up in arms about not having any labor
and the State said that they would send people drawing unemployment to
work in the fields. And they did. The first day a lot of people went
out and worked in the fields, the next day, less came and by the third
day hardly nobody came. It seems that "stoop labor" in the hot sun is
hard work and the unemployed reckoned it was easier to just lay about
and draw the dole.
As I say, I don't remember the details but an article in the newspaper
said that there was an emergency effort by the State to recruited
Mexicans (who would have come voluntarily if they had been allowed to)
to get the harvest in. I was living in Riverside so it must have been
in the early 1970's.
It appears that, perhaps, a large percentage of the U.S. unemployed
may well be this third and forth generation of people who have never
worked.
If it is true what I have read about 30 year old grandmothers in some
of the places then 2015 - 1960 = 55 years divided by 15 = 3.66.
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
May 24, 2015, 10:54:38 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 10:57:01 -0500, F. George McDuffee
<gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
>On Sun, 24 May 2015 09:19:34 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
><murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>But, but, we're just helpless pawns of The System who -can't- be held
>>responsible for our problems. There must be some rich and powerful
>>authority figures to blame.
>================
>I suggest that you may be falling into the either/or
>fallacy. Like most things of this nature it is "and," with
>a changing ratio as the socioeconomic culture changes.
>
>We take for granted the advances in our physical world such
>as medical care such as immunizations and pure food & drug
>laws, the advances in food production through farming, and
>the advances in interior climate control such as central
>heating and air conditioning, and indeed clothing.
>
>Why then are we so adamantly opposed to analogous advances
>in the economic/financial world? Humanity is no better off
>with periodic depressions and collapses than we were with
>periodic plagues and famines.
Because y'all don't face reality.
<gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
>On Sun, 24 May 2015 09:19:34 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
><murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>But, but, we're just helpless pawns of The System who -can't- be held
>>responsible for our problems. There must be some rich and powerful
>>authority figures to blame.
>================
>I suggest that you may be falling into the either/or
>fallacy. Like most things of this nature it is "and," with
>a changing ratio as the socioeconomic culture changes.
>
>We take for granted the advances in our physical world such
>as medical care such as immunizations and pure food & drug
>laws, the advances in food production through farming, and
>the advances in interior climate control such as central
>heating and air conditioning, and indeed clothing.
>
>Why then are we so adamantly opposed to analogous advances
>in the economic/financial world? Humanity is no better off
>with periodic depressions and collapses than we were with
>periodic plagues and famines.
If you rampage around and get the minimum wage up to 9 dollars and
something that I've read about here it would seem like common sense to
figure that whatever it is that you are making has got to be sold for
a higher price then the place where a working stiff makes, say 5
dollars an hour.
Which means that the 5 dollar place sells more whatevers than the 9
dollar place so the 9 dollar places moves their manufacturing to India
where it only costs 1 dollar an hour. (take that you 5 dollar pricks).
The result is a huge loss of jobs in the 9 and 5 dollar places and an
equally huge gain in jobs in the 1 dollar place.
The U.S. answer seems to be automation, which of course, reduces the
need for humans even more.
And, of course, your modern medical miracles only exaggerate the
problem by decreasing deaths and prolonging life. A good epidemic
would reduce the unemployed figures substantially :-)
So, that is the problem. What is the solution?
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
May 24, 2015, 10:54:39 PM5/24/15
to
On Sun, 24 May 2015 11:02:14 -0700, Larry Jaques
I really do wonder whether that is really true, or not.
Example: I read here post after post about people buying from Harbor
Freight and even going on and on about discount coupons. Now Harbor
Freight is a company that started by importing a shipping container of
cheap Chinese tools and selling them out of a garage and is now a
Billion dollar plus business doing the same thing, but with stores
now.
Now here is a multi billion dollar selling cheap Chinese stuff while
Snap-On isn't doing all that well these days. Is selling expensive
American stuff really what the Great American Public really wants?
I suggest that what is happening is that people say that "yes, yes, I
want to buy American", but when it is time to front up the cash they
are off down to the Harbor Freight store in a flash.
Cheers,
John B.
Example: I read here post after post about people buying from Harbor
Freight and even going on and on about discount coupons. Now Harbor
Freight is a company that started by importing a shipping container of
cheap Chinese tools and selling them out of a garage and is now a
Billion dollar plus business doing the same thing, but with stores
now.
Now here is a multi billion dollar selling cheap Chinese stuff while
Snap-On isn't doing all that well these days. Is selling expensive
American stuff really what the Great American Public really wants?
I suggest that what is happening is that people say that "yes, yes, I
want to buy American", but when it is time to front up the cash they
are off down to the Harbor Freight store in a flash.
John B.
Ignoramus7316
May 24, 2015, 11:02:01 PM5/24/15
to
On 2015-05-24, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>><ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>>oncentives without income inequality?
>>
>>Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>>But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>>addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>>Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>
>>
>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>way the gov't throws away money...
>
> Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
> think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>
> On Sat, 23 May 2015 19:30:41 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 May 2015 17:15:37 -0500, Ignoramus31802
>><ignoram...@NOSPAM.31802.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>What is so bad about income inequality? How can ou have any kind of
>>>oncentives without income inequality?
>>
>>Yes, incentives breed ingenuity and harder work, both good things.
>>But I think the 1500:1 ratio of income inequality situations should be
>>addressed. Bankers who lose billions shouldn't be given bonuses, etc.
>>Greed is a very bad thing and huge ratios only increase it.
>>
>>
>>>Why should some dumb ass make as much as Bill Gates?
>>
>>They shouldn't. Then again, NOBODY should make as much as Bill Gates,
>>et al. Prices should be lowered so everyone can afford the things
>>manufacturers sell. It's too bad that billionaires don't invest in
>>the US infrastructure to keep us going, and striving to be #1. But the
>>way the gov't throws away money...
>
> Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
> think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>
> All their money isnt sitting in offshore accounts by any stretch of
> the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
There is several things to note about inequality.
> the imagination. In fact..damned little of it is.
One is that it is absolutely necessary, if we want people to be
interested in improving their life through economic activity.
The other is that people's incomes vary over time, as they grow up,
lose and find jobs, and as their fortunes change in general.
For example, two individuals, in the same occupation, with the same
general place in life, will have extremely differing incomes if one of
them is out of a job, for example. Over time, though, they are not as
unequal as it would seem to be at the moment when one of them is
unemployed.
Finally, many people work for cash and theur income is not properly
reported, and they appear to be extremely poor, whereas, in fact they
have a regular lifestyle.
As Warren Buffett noted two days ago, the modern economy has
diminished need for people of limited intellectual abilities, and
educating them will not help. If you take a dumb individual and teach
him to perform arithmetic calculations, he will still remain a dumb
individual and a computer will still perform arithmetic a million
times faster without mistakes.
i
Ignoramus7316
May 24, 2015, 11:07:19 PM5/24/15
to
On 2015-05-24, Larry Jaques <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>
>>Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>
> If they invest so much, why are tens of millions of Americans
> without jobs right now? And I'm not talking the lazy bastards who
> didn't work before.
They are without jobs because computers and robots are cheaper.
> without jobs right now? And I'm not talking the lazy bastards who
> didn't work before.
Billionaires invested in robots and computers. A robot does not need
health insurance and minimum wage.
i
Larry Jaques
May 25, 2015, 12:47:20 AM5/25/15
to
in 2008/9 didn't lose their houses or jobs from automation. Most
didn't, anyway. The rest are losing their jobs to offshoring. Much of
that is going to low-wage countries like Vietnam, Thailand, and China,
rather than bots.
My buddy in SoCal is automating small businesses and has been really,
really busy on the CA78 corridor, between Oceanside and Escondido for
the past 5 years. Those people are definitely displaced by bots.
F. George McDuffee
May 25, 2015, 2:04:46 AM5/25/15
to
On Mon, 25 May 2015 09:54:22 +0700, John B.
<johnbs...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
Indeed. "Work" is a habit and social/cultural norm like
everything else. This is why it is so hard to eliminate
poverty, and so dangerous to allow extended unemployment.
"Work," as most in the middle class understand it, with a
regular paycheck, and FICA/tax deductions, is as foreign to
long-term and never employed individuals, as the lifestyles
and mores of the 1% are to us in the middle-class.
Can this be overcome?
Yes, but this requires intensive/extensive [almost
one-on-one] and long-term [translation: expensive] group
therapy for the adults, and extensive/intensive intervention
with the children, to the extent of removing them from their
"parents" and placing them in appropriate foster care and/or
group homes [rationale: culturalization of the children into
poverty is child abuse with long term effects], thus
eradicating a culture of poverty, which is increasingly
counter-productive in the surging technoglobal economy.
This rapidly increasing problem [the most dangerous person
in the word is one who has nothing to lose in this world,
and everything to gain in the next, e. g. ISIS] is not going
away by itself on the one hand, and on the other hand, the
cheap, frequently "black" or "off-the-books" casual labor
provided by these unfortunate people are necessary to the
middle and upper classes in several sectors, such as
food/beverage services, landscaping, and house keeping.
==>The American socioeconomy has painted all of us into a
corner.<== Clearly things cannot continue, but we won't
[not can't] solve the problem, and in truth the rapidly
increasing problem of marginally or non employable "workers"
may have no human or ethical solutions, requiring abhorrent
actions such as negative eugenics by "stealth" birth
control, but this would be long-term and would eliminate the
necessary pool of cheap/expendable/casual labor.
<johnbs...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>It appears that, perhaps, a large percentage of the U.S. unemployed
>may well be this third and forth generation of people who have never
>worked.
</snip>
>may well be this third and forth generation of people who have never
>worked.
Indeed. "Work" is a habit and social/cultural norm like
everything else. This is why it is so hard to eliminate
poverty, and so dangerous to allow extended unemployment.
"Work," as most in the middle class understand it, with a
regular paycheck, and FICA/tax deductions, is as foreign to
long-term and never employed individuals, as the lifestyles
and mores of the 1% are to us in the middle-class.
Can this be overcome?
Yes, but this requires intensive/extensive [almost
one-on-one] and long-term [translation: expensive] group
therapy for the adults, and extensive/intensive intervention
with the children, to the extent of removing them from their
"parents" and placing them in appropriate foster care and/or
group homes [rationale: culturalization of the children into
poverty is child abuse with long term effects], thus
eradicating a culture of poverty, which is increasingly
counter-productive in the surging technoglobal economy.
This rapidly increasing problem [the most dangerous person
in the word is one who has nothing to lose in this world,
and everything to gain in the next, e. g. ISIS] is not going
away by itself on the one hand, and on the other hand, the
cheap, frequently "black" or "off-the-books" casual labor
provided by these unfortunate people are necessary to the
middle and upper classes in several sectors, such as
food/beverage services, landscaping, and house keeping.
==>The American socioeconomy has painted all of us into a
corner.<== Clearly things cannot continue, but we won't
[not can't] solve the problem, and in truth the rapidly
increasing problem of marginally or non employable "workers"
may have no human or ethical solutions, requiring abhorrent
actions such as negative eugenics by "stealth" birth
control, but this would be long-term and would eliminate the
necessary pool of cheap/expendable/casual labor.
jim
May 25, 2015, 6:54:06 AM5/25/15
to
John B. wrote:
>>> Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>> think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>>
>> You are telling a story that is mostly fiction.
>> The money of billionaires is not needed for
>> investment.
>>
>> A lot of investment comes from banks.
>> Banks don't lend existing money. They create
>> new money with every loan. That is how money gets
>> created. The act of bank lending finances new
>> production and increases the money supply at
>> the same rate. At least that is how it works if
>> banks are appropriately regulated.
>>
>> Billionaires tend to put their money into
>> things that inflate asset prices but do not
>> contribute to GDP. For instance buying existing
>> shares in a corporation just inflates the price of
>> shares but does zero to increase production.
>
> Ah, but Billionaires don't put their money into stocks that do not
> either gain in value, or pay a good dividend, so in essence unless a
> company increases their income people do not invest.
Buying existing stock does nothing to
>>> Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>> think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>>
>> You are telling a story that is mostly fiction.
>> The money of billionaires is not needed for
>> investment.
>>
>> A lot of investment comes from banks.
>> Banks don't lend existing money. They create
>> new money with every loan. That is how money gets
>> created. The act of bank lending finances new
>> production and increases the money supply at
>> the same rate. At least that is how it works if
>> banks are appropriately regulated.
>>
>> Billionaires tend to put their money into
>> things that inflate asset prices but do not
>> contribute to GDP. For instance buying existing
>> shares in a corporation just inflates the price of
>> shares but does zero to increase production.
>
> Ah, but Billionaires don't put their money into stocks that do not
> either gain in value, or pay a good dividend, so in essence unless a
> company increases their income people do not invest.
increase GDP.
>
> In fact I would suspect that billionaires don't put much money into
> the stock market as bonds are a far safer investment. And some bonds
> have a non-taxable dividend.
>
billionaire buys bonds instead of stock, when
the company uses the proceeds to buy back its
own stock?
Either way, all that is happening is inflating
asset prices.
You haven't provided any support for the claim that
billionaires are needed for financing "infrastructure" or
"startups" or plant "improvements".
Jim Wilkins
May 25, 2015, 7:20:24 AM5/25/15
to
"John B." <johnbs...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8305madlrn3467t8q...@4ax.com...
>
> I think it is a bit more than that.
>
> There was a study done in Detroit years and years ago when the car
> makers were still there, maybe in the 1950's - 60's. Some group got
> together and convinced the car companies to make available some
> unskilled jobs that could be given to people who were unemployed.
>
> They placed some of these people who had been "on the dole" in these
> positions and found that in general, the people didn't last, usually
> because they didn't bother to come to work.
>
> The study was abandoned as a failure, however the same group did
> further study on people who at the time were as much as third
> generation unemployed and it seemed that they had no understanding
> of
> the concept of a "day's work for a day's pay".
> ..
> I think it is a bit more than that.
>
> There was a study done in Detroit years and years ago when the car
> makers were still there, maybe in the 1950's - 60's. Some group got
> together and convinced the car companies to make available some
> unskilled jobs that could be given to people who were unemployed.
>
> They placed some of these people who had been "on the dole" in these
> positions and found that in general, the people didn't last, usually
> because they didn't bother to come to work.
>
> The study was abandoned as a failure, however the same group did
> further study on people who at the time were as much as third
> generation unemployed and it seemed that they had no understanding
> of
> the concept of a "day's work for a day's pay".
> John B.
During the Depression my father found a job running a laundry in
Atlanta. The local Black employees did good work for him so he gave
them a raise. Then they stopped coming in on Fridays because they
already had enough money.
-jsw
dca...@krl.org
May 25, 2015, 7:45:39 AM5/25/15
to
On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 10:54:39 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> I suggest that what is happening is that people say that "yes, yes, I
> want to buy American", but when it is time to front up the cash they
> are off down to the Harbor Freight store in a flash.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> I suggest that what is happening is that people say that "yes, yes, I
> want to buy American", but when it is time to front up the cash they
> are off down to the Harbor Freight store in a flash.
>
>
>
>
> John B.
I say " yes, yes I want to buy well made things " , but only things that are made on earth " I do not judge whether it comes from the U.S., Germany, Poland, Taiwan , or China.
Dan
Jim Wilkins
May 25, 2015, 8:13:15 AM5/25/15
to
"John B." <johnbs...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:en25ma169k2b3olcn...@4ax.com...
>
> I really do wonder whether that is really true, or not.
>
> Example: I read here post after post about people buying from Harbor
> Freight and even going on and on about discount coupons. Now Harbor
> Freight is a company that started by importing a shipping container
> of
> cheap Chinese tools and selling them out of a garage and is now a
> Billion dollar plus business doing the same thing, but with stores
> now.
>
> Now here is a multi billion dollar selling cheap Chinese stuff while
> Snap-On isn't doing all that well these days. Is selling expensive
> American stuff really what the Great American Public really wants?
>
> I suggest that what is happening is that people say that "yes, yes,
> I
> want to buy American", but when it is time to front up the cash they
> are off down to the Harbor Freight store in a flash.
>
> John B.
> I really do wonder whether that is really true, or not.
>
> Example: I read here post after post about people buying from Harbor
> Freight and even going on and on about discount coupons. Now Harbor
> Freight is a company that started by importing a shipping container
> of
> cheap Chinese tools and selling them out of a garage and is now a
> Billion dollar plus business doing the same thing, but with stores
> now.
>
> Now here is a multi billion dollar selling cheap Chinese stuff while
> Snap-On isn't doing all that well these days. Is selling expensive
> American stuff really what the Great American Public really wants?
>
> I suggest that what is happening is that people say that "yes, yes,
> I
> want to buy American", but when it is time to front up the cash they
> are off down to the Harbor Freight store in a flash.
>
In the 1970's when I worked in a factory that built custom machinery
we found that only Milwaukee power tools would last, the B&D etc stuff
from Sears died in a month, for me as well as everyone else. Sears'
best wrenches wore out or broke in constant heavy use too. Yet at home
I hardly ever break anything.
Harbor Freight has the reputation of being good enough only for home
shops, not commercial or industrial use. They and Enco et.al. filled a
gap in low-cost, light-duty industrial type tools for hobbyists that
was neglected by American manufacturers after Sears abandoned it.
When I wanted a small air compressor in 1975 I had to assemble it from
Grainger's replacement parts. Before the Asian imports arrived there
was hardly any hobby sized metal working equipment available new at
reasonable prices. A Unimat lathe was too small and I couldn't afford
a Maximat. The older American-made model shop sized machine tools I
have now became affordable only after CNC made them unprofitable.
Snap-On sells from trucks that visit garages and factories during
working hours. They and Mac don't try to reach homeowners and are
difficult to find when we do need something from them.
-jsw
Ignoramus8524
May 25, 2015, 8:14:24 AM5/25/15
to
On 2015-05-25, jim <""> wrote:
> John B. wrote:
>
>>>> Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>>> think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>>>
>>> You are telling a story that is mostly fiction.
>>> The money of billionaires is not needed for
>>> investment.
>>>
>>> A lot of investment comes from banks.
>>> Banks don't lend existing money. They create
>>> new money with every loan. That is how money gets
>>> created. The act of bank lending finances new
>>> production and increases the money supply at
>>> the same rate. At least that is how it works if
>>> banks are appropriately regulated.
>>>
>>> Billionaires tend to put their money into
>>> things that inflate asset prices but do not
>>> contribute to GDP. For instance buying existing
>>> shares in a corporation just inflates the price of
>>> shares but does zero to increase production.
>>
>> Ah, but Billionaires don't put their money into stocks that do not
>> either gain in value, or pay a good dividend, so in essence unless a
>> company increases their income people do not invest.
>
> Buying existing stock does nothing to
> increase GDP.
There is no such thing as "net buying", as for every buer, there is a
> John B. wrote:
>
>>>> Billionaires DO invest in US infrastructure. Where the fuck do you
>>>> think the money comes from for startups and plant improvements?
>>>
>>> You are telling a story that is mostly fiction.
>>> The money of billionaires is not needed for
>>> investment.
>>>
>>> A lot of investment comes from banks.
>>> Banks don't lend existing money. They create
>>> new money with every loan. That is how money gets
>>> created. The act of bank lending finances new
>>> production and increases the money supply at
>>> the same rate. At least that is how it works if
>>> banks are appropriately regulated.
>>>
>>> Billionaires tend to put their money into
>>> things that inflate asset prices but do not
>>> contribute to GDP. For instance buying existing
>>> shares in a corporation just inflates the price of
>>> shares but does zero to increase production.
>>
>> Ah, but Billionaires don't put their money into stocks that do not
>> either gain in value, or pay a good dividend, so in essence unless a
>> company increases their income people do not invest.
>
> Buying existing stock does nothing to
> increase GDP.
seller.
i
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages