WTF?????
Gunner Asch
Money Expert: We’ll Be in Recession By End of Year
Friday, 15 Apr 2011 06:03 PM
By Forrest Jones
A respected economic expert is warning that a recession is definite by
December and that U.S. stock prices are going to plunge, thanks to
Federal Reserve strategies and the soaring price of crude.
John Taylor, founder of the FX Concepts hedge fund and former vice
president at Citibank, says the U.S. economic recovery has taken place
thanks in large part to the Federal Reserve's money printing Recession,
Economy, Stock Prices, John Taylor, Martin Feldsteincampaign, known as
quantitative easing, which ends in June.
"Recovery has never really gotten off the ground. It's all government
stimulated," Taylor tells CNBC. "We'll be in a recession by the end of
the year."
Oil prices continue to rise, thanks in part to a cheap dollar, which
will further hamper economic recovery, Taylor said.
Meanwhile, the cost of living in the U.S. rose in March for a ninth
consecutive month, led by increases in food and fuel costs that have yet
to filter down to other goods and services.
Further oil price hikes could do serious damage to the U.S. economy, Oil
Price Information Service chief oil analyst Tom Kloza recently told The
Associated Press.
For consumers, "gas prices have more relevance on an emotional level
than a lot of other things that they pay for," Kloza said. "People pay
more attention to gasoline than phone service, cable TV or other
services.”
Kloza said it may not be long before the national average tests the
all-time record of $4.11 per gallon set in July 2008.
Those warnings are being echoed by Mark Zandi, chief economist at
Moody's Analytics.
"The surge in oil prices since the end of last year is already doing
significant damage to the economy," Zandi told the AP.
Another economic expert isn't as adamant in insisting that a new
recession is guaranteed, but he says the specter is very real. And even
if high oil prices don't trigger another recession, they'll dampen
economic growth, says Martin Feldstein, former chairman of the Council
of Economic Advisors.
"It certainly could happen," Feldstein tells CNBC when asked if a
recession were possible. "It is certainly not the most likely outcome,
but I think continued low growth held down by things like the high level
of energy prices could give us a number much closer 2 percent (GDP) than
the kind of 4 percent number that's being forecast — and it could be
south of 2 percent."
But while oil prices are a problem for consumers in the United States
and abroad, the Federal Reserve isn't to blame, Feldstein says.
Monetary authorities have kept interest rates low and are printing money
in order to spur more robust economic activity, which weakens the dollar
and sends investors racing to oil as a hedge.
Yet basic supply and demand is the culprit, Feldstein says.
"I think the strong demand in some places for oil like China and then
all of the problems in the Middle East raise great uncertainties about
what our oil supply is going to be worldwide," Feldstein says.
Nevertheless, soaring oil prices are acting like a tax on consumers
here.
"The U.S. imports 4 billion barrels of oil a year, so a $40 increase in
the price of oil, which is what we've seen since last year, that's $160
billion that American consumers are turning over to oil producers
outside this country," Feldstein says.
"That's 1 percent of GDP, so it makes the fiscal discussion about $38
billion or $60 billion or $20 billion — those are small numbers in
comparison to the $160 billion tax that the oil producers have put on
us."
Meanwhile, the Consumer Price Index rose 0.5 percent in March, the Labor
Department said Friday. That matched February's increase, the largest
since the recession ended in June 2009. In the past 12 months, the index
has increased 2.7 percent, the biggest rise since December 2009.
Excluding the volatile food and gas categories, the so-called core index
rose 0.1 percent and it is up only 1.2 percent in the past year.
Consumers are spending more, but the steep rise in food and gas prices
could limit their ability to purchase discretionary goods and services.
Consumer spending makes up 70 percent of economic activity.
Rising inflation has caused many analysts to reduce their estimates for
economic growth in the January-March quarter from roughly 3 percent or
higher to as low as 1.5 percent.
Gasoline jumped 5.6 percent last month and has risen nearly 28 percent
in the past year. Consumers paid an average price of $3.81 a gallon
nationwide on Friday according to the travel group AAA.
Manufacturers, food processors and other producers are facing higher
costs for oil, grains and other commodities. But only some of those
increases are reaching the consumer. Many retailers are reluctant to
pass on the higher prices for fear of losing price-conscious customers.
Consumers have seen wages and salaries stagnate in the past year,
limiting their ability to pay more for many goods. According to a
separate government report Friday, average hourly earnings for all
employees, adjusted for inflation, dropped 1 percent in the past 12
months.
Stagnant wages are a big reason that most Federal Reserve policymakers
say the spike in gas and food will have only a modest and temporary
impact on inflation.
But a top Federal Reserve official said he expected commodity prices to
stabilize and have a minimal effect on underlying U.S. inflation trends,
even if costly fuel did put a dent on household budgets, Reuters
reported.
Dennis Lockhart, president of the Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank, said
historically, prices for industrial commodities "have tended to exert a
relatively small effect on most consumer prices."
"This is not to say there will be no pass-through effect on inflation.
The point is the effect is likely to be muted."
© Newsmax. All rights reserved.
I thought we were already IN a recession??
Gunner
Jim Wilkins
> Money Expert: We’ll Be in Recession By End of Year
>
> Friday, 15 Apr 2011 06:03 PM
>
> By Forrest Jones
>
> A respected economic expert is warning that a recession is definite by
> December and that U.S. stock prices are going to plunge, thanks to
> Federal Reserve strategies and the soaring price of crude.
>
> Gunner
Despite all the vengeful Bush-beating and simplistic efforts to put a
(banker's) face on an diffuse, intangible malaise the economy rises
and falls with one thing, the price of oil.
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/04/22/oil-shock-did-high-oil-prices-cause-the-recession/
Oil spikes caused 5 out of the last 6 recessions:
http://www.jpods.com/JPods/010Economy/Recession/OilSpikesRecessions.png
jsw
jsw
Doug White
news:kpolq6leg22bgilro...@4ax.com:
>
> Money Expert: We’ll Be in Recession By End of Year
>
> Friday, 15 Apr 2011 06:03 PM
>
> By Forrest Jones
>
> A respected economic expert is warning that a recession is definite by
> December and that U.S. stock prices are going to plunge, thanks to
> Federal Reserve strategies and the soaring price of crude.
>
> John Taylor, founder of the FX Concepts hedge fund and former vice
> president at Citibank, says the U.S. economic recovery has taken place
> thanks in large part to the Federal Reserve's money printing Recession,
> Economy, Stock Prices, John Taylor, Martin Feldsteincampaign, known as
> quantitative easing, which ends in June.
As a "former VP of Citibank", I view this bozos credentials as an
economic expert as zilch. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Citibank
one of the outfits that helped to get us into this mess?
Doug White
Carl
Yeh, when did the last recession end? I didn't get that memo. I
thought we still had 11% unemployment.
CarlBoyd
robert bowman
> A respected economic expert is warning that a recession is definite by
> December and that U.S. stock prices are going to plunge, thanks to
> Federal Reserve strategies and the soaring price of crude.
My daily dose of humor is visiting www.bloomberg.com and reading the
tortured spins they produce to explain why their panel of 57 economic
experts blew another prediction. They make the NOAA meteorologists look
good.
Spehro Pefhany
<carl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>Yeh, when did the last recession end? I didn't get that memo. I
>thought we still had 11% unemployment.
Unemmployment rate is a lagging indicator.
A recession is defined (roughly) by two consecutive quarters of _real
GDP decline_. The decline began in the fourth quarter of 2007 and
ended in June of 2009 according to the NBER.
According to their definitions, a recession does not end when things
get back to the way they were at some point before, it ends when the
_decline_ ceases and growth again resumes. Which it has, so far.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
11% unemployment? Heads up..its closer to 22% or higher.
Keep in mind, that when ones unemployment benefits expire..they run out
of unemployment benefits...those people are no longer counted as being
unemployed and they fall off the chart.
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1340457/pg1
Gunner
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>On Apr 17, 8:57 am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
Play this video and learn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bI_PAiCh0w
Gunner
Ed Huntress
"Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nnkmq61qv4enlbvkj...@4ax.com...
>>> south of 2 percent."
>>>
>>> But while oil prices are a problem for consumers in the United States
>>> and abroad, the Federal Reserve isn't to blame, Feldstein says.
>>>
>>> Monetary authorities have kept interest rates low and are printing money
>>> in order to spur more robust economic activity, which weakens the dollar
>>> and sends investors racing to oil as a hedge.
>>>
>>> Yet basic supply and demand is the culprit, Feldstein says.
>>>
>>> "I think the strong demand in some places for oil like China and then
>>> all of the problems in the Middle East raise great uncertainties about
>>> what our oil supply is going to be worldwide," Feldstein says.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, soaring oil prices are acting like a tax on consumers
>>> here.
>>>
>>> "The U.S. imports 4 billion barrels of oil a year, so a $40 increase in
>>> the price of oil, which is what we've seen since last year, that's $160
>>> billion that American consumers are turning over to oil producers
>>> outside this country," Feldstein says.
>>>
>>> "That's 1 percent of GDP, so it makes the fiscal discussion about $38
NO. Jesus, Gunner, quit reading that mind-dissolving right-wing propaganda
and go find out how they're actually counted.
Unemployed persons are:
a.. All persons who did not have a job at all during the survey reference
week, made at least one specific active effort to find a job during the
prior 4 weeks, and were available for work (unless temporarily ill).
b.. All persons who were not working and were waiting to be called back to
a job from which they had been laid off (they need not be looking for work
to be classified as unemployed).
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#ui
--
Ed Huntress
pyotr filipivich
<carl...@earthlink.net> reported Elvis on Sun, 17 Apr 2011 11:57:12
-0700 (PDT) in misc.survivalism:
>
>> Stagnant wages are a big reason that most Federal Reserve policymakers
>> say the spike in gas and food will have only a modest and temporary
>> impact on inflation.
>>
>> But a top Federal Reserve official said he expected commodity prices to
>> stabilize and have a minimal effect on underlying U.S. inflation trends,
>> even if costly fuel did put a dent on household budgets, Reuters
>> reported.
>>
>> Dennis Lockhart, president of the Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank, said
>> historically, prices for industrial commodities "have tended to exert a
>> relatively small effect on most consumer prices."
>>
>> "This is not to say there will be no pass-through effect on inflation.
>> The point is the effect is likely to be muted."
>>
>> © Newsmax. All rights reserved.
>>
>> I thought we were already IN a recession??
>>
>> Gunner
>
>
>
>Yeh, when did the last recession end?
Officially, July of 2009. "Officially".
But of course, "officially" inflation is only 2.3%. Which it is,
if you don't buy food, or gasoline.
>I didn't get that memo. I thought we still had 11% unemployment.
No, no no - we now have "officially" 9% unemployment. They've
just shrunk the labor pool to make the numbers fit.
--
pyotr filipivich
Just when you think you see the light at the end of the tunnel,
you find out it's a 900lb gorilla with a flashlight!!
robert bowman
> No, no no - we now have "officially" 9% unemployment. They've
> just shrunk the labor pool to make the numbers fit.
Didn't Orwell write a story something like this?
robert bowman
> a.. All persons who did not have a job at all during the survey reference
> week, made at least one specific active effort to find a job during the
> prior 4 weeks, and were available for work (unless temporarily ill).
And there's the rub... All those persons who haven't been able to find work
in a year and who have given up are not counted. All the women who have
went back to being full time mothers because they can't find work are not
counted.
Needs Fixin'
"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
> "Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:nnkmq61qv4enlbvkj...@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 11:57:12 -0700 (PDT), Carl <carl...@earthlink.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>On Apr 17, 8:57 am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Money Expert: We'll Be in Recession By End of Year
> >>>
> >>> I thought we were already IN a recession??
> >>>
> >>> Gunner
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Yeh, when did the last recession end? I didn't get that memo. I
> >>thought we still had 11% unemployment.
> >>
> >>CarlBoyd
> >
> >
> > 11% unemployment? Heads up..its closer to 22% or higher.
> >
> > Keep in mind, that when ones unemployment benefits expire..they run out
> > of unemployment benefits...those people are no longer counted as being
> > unemployed and they fall off the chart.
> >
> > http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1340457/pg1
> >
> > Gunner
>
>
> NO. Jesus, Gunner, quit reading that mind-dissolving right-wing propaganda
> and go find out how they're actually counted.
>
> Unemployed persons are:
>
> a.. All persons who did not have a job at all during the survey reference
> week, made at least one specific active effort to find a job during the
> prior 4 weeks, and were available for work (unless temporarily ill).
> b.. All persons who were not working and were waiting to be called back to
> a job from which they had been laid off (they need not be looking for work
> to be classified as unemployed).
> http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#ui
>
> --
> Ed Huntress
That assumes all unemployed persons are reporting their status
(somehow) after they no longer qualify for unemployment. Once
they're no longer entitled and off the active rolls of check
disbursement, how are they tracked then?
California has counties reporting over 25% unemployment. To be
sure, some of those areas had little or no revenue generating
jobs to begin with. A fair number of inhabitants live there
because it's cheap and they commuted.
There are a number of things working against Americans in
California right now. Because of the Mexican influx of cheaper
workers, legal or not, employers are gambling that they will not
get caught and hiring the Mexicans. In some of the service
industries, computer services for example, Indian outfits are
killing American technologists by lowballing jobs, then subbing
the work back to those Americans desperate for work at 31% off
list. IBM, HP, Oracle and now Dell are helping the Indian
companies do this. Dell was hiring cheap Mexican techs and
targeting Hispanic run hospitals when they got nailed by Social
Security and Ice. One of the Mexicans was renting his fake SSN
to dozens of others for a cut of their paychecks. Nope, it
hasn't made the news yet but they did fire all the Mexican
violators and replace them with Indians.
Another big problem is money leaving the American economy and
not coming back. $30 billion may not sound like much in this
day and age, but that's about what leaves the U. S. economy
every year to Mexico and never comes back. $1 billion is still
a staggering number.
pyotr filipivich
<bow...@montana.com> reported Elvis on Sun, 17 Apr 2011 19:49:57
-0600 in misc.survivalism:
DemSoc Bellyfeel. Oldthinker unbellyfeel DemSoc.
But so far, chocolate isn't rationed. Yet.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>> >
>> > http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1340457/pg1
>> >
>> > Gunner
>>
>>
>> NO. Jesus, Gunner, quit reading that mind-dissolving right-wing propaganda
>> and go find out how they're actually counted.
>>
>> Unemployed persons are:
>>
>> a.. All persons who did not have a job at all during the survey reference
>> week, made at least one specific active effort to find a job during the
>> prior 4 weeks, and were available for work (unless temporarily ill).
>> b.. All persons who were not working and were waiting to be called back to
>> a job from which they had been laid off (they need not be looking for work
>> to be classified as unemployed).
>> http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#ui
>>
>> --
>> Ed Huntress
>
>That assumes all unemployed persons are reporting their status
>(somehow) after they no longer qualify for unemployment. Once
>they're no longer entitled and off the active rolls of check
>disbursement, how are they tracked then?
>
>California has counties reporting over 25% unemployment.
Indeed.
Once again..Ed fails to impress with his scant knowledge of the subject.
Pity
Gunner
Ed Huntress
"Needs Fixin'" <br...@broker.com> wrote in message
news:0a1921cd5d14399f...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
Through very large surveys. Why don't you go to the sources and find out for
yourself? They report their methodology.
There are two sources: The American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau):
http://www.census.gov/acs/www/methodology/methodology_main/
...and the U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics' Current
Employment Statistics:
http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesmetho.htm#3
>
> California has counties reporting over 25% unemployment. To be
> sure, some of those areas had little or no revenue generating
> jobs to begin with. A fair number of inhabitants live there
> because it's cheap and they commuted.
>
> There are a number of things working against Americans in
> California right now. Because of the Mexican influx of cheaper
> workers, legal or not, employers are gambling that they will not
> get caught and hiring the Mexicans. In some of the service
> industries, computer services for example, Indian outfits are
> killing American technologists by lowballing jobs, then subbing
> the work back to those Americans desperate for work at 31% off
> list. IBM, HP, Oracle and now Dell are helping the Indian
> companies do this. Dell was hiring cheap Mexican techs and
> targeting Hispanic run hospitals when they got nailed by Social
> Security and Ice. One of the Mexicans was renting his fake SSN
> to dozens of others for a cut of their paychecks. Nope, it
> hasn't made the news yet but they did fire all the Mexican
> violators and replace them with Indians.
>
> Another big problem is money leaving the American economy and
> not coming back. $30 billion may not sound like much in this
> day and age, but that's about what leaves the U. S. economy
> every year to Mexico and never comes back. $1 billion is still
> a staggering number.
Jeez, it sounds almost like Alaska, the Roach Motel for federal tax money.
<g>
Here's the problem with statements like the ones you make above: They may be
perfectly accurate -- as anecdotes. People who are looking for answers often
seize on those things and, given a handful of them, they think they have
their answer.
But they usually don't. If the question is why we have unemployment
problems, the first thing you have to do is look at the numbers -- much more
than just the raw unemployment numbers, but actually dig into the structural
patterns, consumption levels, and so on -- to get the big picture. Then
you'll know which of the anecdotes are telling and which are just oddities
that have no measurable influence.
Anecdotes give you no clue about what the big picture is, but the big
picture can help you judge the worth of an anecdote.
--
Ed Huntress
Ed Huntress
Gunner, instead of spending your time finding ezcuses and blaming others for
why you wound up being a health care welfare queen living on the edge, why
don't you spend more of it figuring out a better way to handle your life,
including a more sensible line of work?
--
Ed Huntress
Stormin Mormon
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"robert bowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:911jm5...@mid.individual.net...
pyotr filipivich wrote:
> No, no no - we now have "officially" 9% unemployment. Â
Just Me
> "Gunner Asch" <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Because to Gunner living in a double wide at the end of a dirt road
out in the Antelope Valley is the pinnacle of success,gives him lots
of time to find the "proof" of his fantasies .
Gunner Asch
4 lies in your 3 line post.
Dont you EVER get anything right? Or are you simply mentally ill and
lies are just as valid as truth?
Shrug...of course you are mentally ill. You afterall..are a Leftwinger.
Gunner
--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " Jonah Goldberg (modified)
Just Me
Then be a dear and educate me, tell me which I got wrong :-)
Stuart Wheaton
> Anecdotes give you no clue about what the big picture is, but the big
> picture can help you judge the worth of an anecdote.
>
In other words,
The plural of 'anecdote' is NOT 'data'...
Ed Huntress
"Stuart Wheaton" <sdwh...@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:dc70$4dacaf3f$4a532858$10...@FUSE.NET...
I like that.
--
Ed Huntress
Gunner Asch
Actually..on reading it..you lied 5 times, not 4.
And there is absolutely no hope of educating you..you are a leftwinger.
<VBG>
Dumb as shit and mentally ill.
So why bother? Pearls before swine and all that.
<VBG>
So its now well established that you have no compunctions about
lying..repeatedly..so why should anyone read your dreck?
Gunner
Just Me
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:46:08 -0700 (PDT), Just Me
>
>
>
So anything you don't agree with or that you have no answer to is
classified a lie to you huh?
As usual you rant and rave and when asked specifically and you can't
follow through,
I made a smart arse comment about where you live and what you thought
of as success and I'm told that in 3 lines I made 4 mistakes,plus your
usual highbrow insults,I asked you to elucidate and the response was
you miscounted and more of your highbrow put downs,so you prove once
again there is nothing between your ears but vacuum
Gunner Asch
<mutantm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> So its now well established that you have no compunctions about
>> lying..repeatedly..so why should anyone read your dreck?
>>
>So anything you don't agree with or that you have no answer to is
>classified a lie to you huh?
Actually..no..,Im not a Leftwinger..so I dont work that way. You on the
other hand...
>
>As usual you rant and rave and when asked specifically and you can't
>follow through,
>I made a smart arse comment about where you live and what you thought
>of as success and I'm told that in 3 lines I made 4 mistakes,plus your
>usual highbrow insults,I asked you to elucidate and the response was
>you miscounted and more of your highbrow put downs,so you prove once
>again there is nothing between your ears but vacuum
So now a "smart arese comment" really isnt a series of lies?
Oddly enough..that appears to simply be you trying to cover your
ignorant ass.
Sorry bumpkin..didnt work.
But hey...some day you may get SOMETHING right.
Better luck next time.
Fucklips like you never give up.
Gunner
Just Me
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:11:45 -0700 (PDT), Just Me
>
so once again you have demonstrated that you don't comprehend the
written word and your only response is insult-that is probably so
automatic that you don't even know you are doing it- or was I close to
the truth about your home setting,and you are embarrassed about it.For
the record I don't care where you live and what you live in or for
that matter your definition of success,but a smart arse comment and
you got all riled up and will not clear the record .If you had read
and thought about it you could have simple said no I live on a 45 ft
boat in MDR and that would have been that-I don't care I was being a
smart arse- but you just gotta "prove" how superior you are to all who
don;t share your view of thing that any error(real or imagined) is
reason to start in insult rant,so here is another shot.
Hawke
>
> Dennis Lockhart, president of the Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank, said
> historically, prices for industrial commodities "have tended to exert a
> relatively small effect on most consumer prices."
>
> "This is not to say there will be no pass-through effect on inflation.
> The point is the effect is likely to be muted."
>
> © Newsmax. All rights reserved.
>
>
>
> I thought we were already IN a recession??
>
> Gunner
>
You just wake up or something? We've been out of recession for more than
14 months. No wonder you don't think Obama has done anything right. You
missed all the good news that has happened in the last year. Now go back
to sleep.
Hawke
Jessica Wabbit
I have been away from this list for weeks now, and I come back to the
same old people trying to get gumbo to stop being stupid ... what
next, you going to try and teach welding to a monkey?
PrecisionmachinisT
"Jessica Wabbit" <ja...@rock.com> wrote in message
news:f732eed5-1dce-4911...@k40g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 21, 11:18 am, Hawke <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
> On 4/17/2011 5:57 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>>
>> > Gunner
>>
>> You just wake up or something? We've been out of recession for more than
>> 14 months. No wonder you don't think Obama has done anything right. You
>> missed all the good news that has happened in the last year. Now go back
>> to sleep.
>>
>> Hawke
> I have been away from this list for weeks now, and > I come back to the
> same old people trying to get gumbo to stop being
> stupid ... what
> next, you going to try and teach welding to a
> monkey?
Already been tried--monkeys definately can't be taught to weld...
Jessica Wabbit
wrote:
and that should tel you all you need to know about getting gumbo to
not being stupid.
Gunner Asch
<mutantm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> So now a "smart arese comment" really isnt a series of lies?
>>
>> Oddly enough..that appears to simply be you trying to cover your
>> ignorant ass.
>>
>> Sorry bumpkin..didnt work.
>>
>> But hey...some day you may get SOMETHING right.
>>
>> Better luck next time.
>>
>> Fucklips like you never give up.
>>
>> Gunner
>
>so once again you have demonstrated that you don't comprehend the
>written word and your only response is insult-that is probably so
>automatic that you don't even know you are doing it- or was I close to
>the truth about your home setting,and you are embarrassed about it.For
>the record I don't care where you live and what you live in or for
>that matter your definition of success,but a smart arse comment and
>you got all riled up and will not clear the record .If you had read
>and thought about it you could have simple said no I live on a 45 ft
>boat in MDR and that would have been that-I don't care I was being a
>smart arse- but you just gotta "prove" how superior you are to all who
>don;t share your view of thing that any error(real or imagined) is
>reason to start in insult rant,so here is another shot.
Your welcome.
Keep up the good work and maybe...maybe ... someday you will be as
reviled as Zepp Weasel and Lee Harrison and others of that sort.
Or you can simply leave that Leftwing mindset behind, grow a pair and
be a mensch.
Gunner
Gunner Asch
Someone might want to teach Leftwingers something about economics..and
that a Depression isnt over simply because the talking heads and the
Whitehouse proclaim its over.
Gunner, who lost another customer this week. Tits up and out of
business they go.
Gunner Asch
You did notice that was from Oct 6 2004, right?
That was 7 yrs ago......chuckle...
Ever use one of those Harbor Freight mig welders? I take it you have
used very few MIGs if any.....
Based on your commentary..and your failure to actually know anything
about welding as determined by your "comprehension" of the contents of
that post...Id say you know dick about welding in the first place.
https://picasaweb.google.com/gunnerasch/WeldingStuff#
https://picasaweb.google.com/gunnerasch/1943HobartGasolineWelder#
https://picasaweb.google.com/gunnerasch/Ranger9#
https://picasaweb.google.com/gunnerasch/RangerHead#
Now thats only a fraction of the machines I own, and run on a regular
basis.
Id suppose at best..you have a really nice Lincoln tombstone
AC225....right? And maybe a pound or so of 6013 and you are good to
go..right?
Gunner
Esab Squarewave 250 *tig)
Airco Squarewave 300 (tig)
Miller DialArc250
DanMig 220
Miller 35 (2..one for steel, one for aluminum with a Cobramatic 300
feeder)
Airco PhaseArc 350
Lincoln Ranger 9 Stick/MIG/tig
Miller 55G Stick/Mig/Tig *with Cobra feeder*
1941 Hobart Bro 300 amp welder with Chrysler straight 6
Lincoln Weldpack 100
Miller 2050 plasma cutter (3/4")
Lincoln LN8
Miller 302 with feeder
The Airco PhaseArc 350 mig (300 amps, spray transfers just peachy) and
the Hobart Brothers trailer mounted stick welder are currently for
sale if anyone is interested. The Airco is 220/380/440 3ph and runs
like a fine watch. The Hobart welder runs and welds just hunky
dorey..though the leads on the genny should be reinsultated with slip
on as the insulation is starting to fall off..it is 70 some years
old...
Gunner
>
>
>
>
Gunner Asch
That should show you all about the negatives of Jessies reading
comprehension and her abilities...or lack of them....lol
Gunner
Jessica Wabbit
yes, people who hire gumbo do go out of business a lot <laugh> <laugh>
<laugh>
'
Jessica Wabbit
rangerssuck
Why don't you sell all of that and pay your debs, you fucking no good
piece of shit deadbeat?
pyotr filipivich
<gunne...@NOSPAMgmail.com> reported Elvis on Fri, 22 Apr 2011
01:20:55 -0700 in misc.survivalism:
Most excellent article in the Wall Street Journal today by John
Fund on the subject. California has seen 70 business announce moves
out of state - that's 4.7 a week (on average), vs 3.9 last year.
How long before there are no more businesses in California which
can move?
tschus
pyotr
John R. Carroll
Every machine shop I know in California is busy right now.
Many are swamped and the ones that aren't busy just aren't very good.
One guy that I know wants to move to Phoenix but it's to get well away from
a divorce and his Ex.
He'd planned to move three months ago but is so busy and making such a pile
of money that he's put off moving until at least summers end.
I'd bet that if he finds himself a new lady friend in California, he'll
never leave.
--
John R. Carroll
i-SEENSEE
> pile of money that he's put off moving until at least summers end.
> I'd bet that if he finds himself a new lady friend in California, he'll
> never leave.
>
> --
> John R. Carroll
MAY I INQUIRE ahem as to the general nature of his work ? cnc shop
fairly newish equipment ,4 or 5 axis , aerospace general don't give
trade secrets . I'm curious as I'm assuming its all military related uav.
John R. Carroll
>> He'd planned to move three months ago but is so busy and making such
>> a pile of money that he's put off moving until at least summers end.
>> I'd bet that if he finds himself a new lady friend in California,
>> he'll never leave.
>>
>
>
> fairly newish equipment ,4 or 5 axis , aerospace general don't give
> trade secrets . I'm curious as I'm assuming its all military related
> uav.
Commercial and medical stuff mostly. Some aerospace.
All three axis and largely things like aluminum chassis.
His equipment consists of three Hurco's that are about ten years old, maybe
a little newer.
That and the other crap you need to be a machine shop but nothing to write
home about.
He's in rented space. Looks like about 1,500-2,000 Sq. feet or so.
--
John R. Carroll
Spehro Pefhany
Let's see.. 3.2 million businesses - if no more are moving in at all -
about 13,100 years, give or take.
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Gunner Asch
Ive lost 17 clients in the past 26 months.
6 moved out of state, 11 have gone tits up.
And California is loosing population like a hole in a dike.
www.csub.edu/kej/documents/happening/2011-03-21_population.pdf
http://www.drudge.com/archive/115978/california-losing-population
http://www.winecountryrambles.com/2010/12/california-losing-residents-eight-years-in-a-row/
Some of the ones previously mentioned...and a shitload more...
http://jan.ocregister.com/2011/04/15/more-firms-move-jobs-facilities-out-of-california/57653/
725 new California laws of interest in 2011...
http://lamesa.patch.com/articles/there-outta-be-a-law-californians-getting-725-new-ones-in-2011
Gunner Asch
You mean the Survivors are busy?
The 50% that managed to not go out of business in the last 36 months?
Those survivors?
You must not know very many machine shops.
I have about half mine working at 75% capacity..the rest at 50%
Or you are simply lying again. You tend to do that an awful lot.
pyotr filipivich
<spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> reported Elvis on Fri, 22 Apr
2011 19:03:34 -0400 in misc.survivalism:
How many business were there in California last year? The year
before? In 2006? Is there a trend line? Why is it that "Battle:
Los Angeles," which is set in California, was filmed in Louisiana?
Of those 3.2 million - how many are the "Big Ones"? The ones with
a customer base outside of California, or a payroll of more than a
dozen people?
The other thing to keep in mind, 70 firms left the State of
California so far this year alone. That is seventy companies which
issued a press release, then relocated, lock stock and barrel. How
many other companies didn't relocate, just closed?
Some years ago, I was working part time while going to school.
Nobody (aside from me, the boss and the other guy) noticed when he
closed up shop. How many similar small employers in California just
disappeared?
I should find the link*, but one "detail" mentioned is that in
California, it takes between six months and two years to secure
permits to build a new restaurant. In Texas, it is six weeks. Where
would you rather attempt to open another restaurant to expand your
business?
Decades ago, Converse and Associates was ready to expand, they had
the business. But they didn't - because the cost of doing so, and the
return on the investment, was not worth the effort. They stayed a
small sized firm, because expanding didn't "pencil out".
The point to the article, The political climate in California is
anti-business. Since the first of the year, seventy companies have
_announced_ plans to leave California. That is more than last year at
this time. But unheralded are the companies which did not make any
such announcement, but just moved. Or did not make the move, just
flat closed.
tschus
pyotr
*link
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704570704576275051374356340.html
--
pyotr filipivich
"Hey, remember when gas was $2.20 a gallon and the unemployment rate
was 4.4%? What happened with that?
Oh, right, the Democrats won the 2006 Congressional elections." Moe Lane
John R. Carroll
By your own account your customers all seem to be on their way out of
business.
Were that not the case, they wouldn't be your customers.
--
John R. Carroll
Gunner Asch
<spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
>
>Let's see.. 3.2 million businesses - if no more are moving in at all -
>about 13,100 years, give or take.
>
Now Im curious. Of that 3.2 million businesses...how many are nail
parlors, barber shops, lawn care and other businesses that actually dont
produce anything, but simply scrub each others back?
Btw...lawn care companies are going tits up in an avalance.
Check Craigslist for lawn care trailers, complete with all tools.
They are becoming rather..cheap
Spehro Pefhany
<gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Ive lost 17 clients in the past 26 months.
>
>6 moved out of state, 11 have gone tits up.
>
>And California is loosing population like a hole in a dike.
This is interesting..
http://www.edd.ca.gov/About_EDD/pdf/urate201104.pdf
Government perhaps shedding jobs, but twice the employment of
manufacturing.
Excellent site:
The bars are the NBER recession dates
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CANA?cid=27286
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TXNA?cid=27326
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ILNA?cid=150
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/NYNA?cid=27314
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FLNA?cid=27291
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AKNA?cid=27326
wow.. MI has been in free-fall for a decade.. only now turning up
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MINA?cid=27304
Having a lot of natural resources apparently doesn't hurt.
Jessica Wabbit
> Decades ago, Converse and Associates was ready to expand, they had
> the business. But they didn't - because the cost of doing so, and the
> return on the investment, was not worth the effort. They stayed a
> small sized firm, because expanding didn't "pencil out".
and this proves what, other than Converse not being well managed?
Spehro Pefhany
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
> How many business were there in California last year? The year
>before? In 2006? Is there a trend line? Why is it that "Battle:
>Los Angeles," which is set in California, was filmed in Louisiana?
>
> Of those 3.2 million - how many are the "Big Ones"?
About 2.2 million are probably taco stands..
> The ones with
>a customer base outside of California, or a payroll of more than a
>dozen people?
> The other thing to keep in mind, 70 firms left the State of
>California so far this year alone. That is seventy companies which
>issued a press release, then relocated, lock stock and barrel. How
>many other companies didn't relocate, just closed?
>
> Some years ago, I was working part time while going to school.
>Nobody (aside from me, the boss and the other guy) noticed when he
>closed up shop. How many similar small employers in California just
>disappeared?
Yeah, manufacturing isn't enough of the employment to get much
respect.
> I should find the link*, but one "detail" mentioned is that in
>California, it takes between six months and two years to secure
>permits to build a new restaurant. In Texas, it is six weeks. Where
>would you rather attempt to open another restaurant to expand your
>business?
I saw that in the Fund article, though it was anecdotal (doesn't mean
it isn't true, but stats are better). For example, brownfield
developments can be very time consuming. Try putting a restaurant
where a gas station or scrapyard used to be, let alone something
really dirty.
http://jan.ocregister.com/2011/04/08/calif-politicians-to-check-out-texas-business/57353/
...Texas has attracted 153 companies from the Golden State between
January and August of 2010. He is citing Dun & Bradstreet information,
but doesn’t note that 92 companies moved from Texas to California
during the same period...
another story from that paper
http://jan.ocregister.com/2010/10/12/calif-vs-texas-no-contest/46980/
pyotr filipivich
(PDT) typed in alt.machines.cnc the following:
It proves that if you raise the tax rates to soak the rich, not
only are less tax revenues collected, but fewer payrolls expand. This
is something progressives seem incapable of grasping.
I realize that your knowledge base is limited, but the decisions
to not expand the business had to do with a progressive tax scheme at
both the State and Federal Level: the more money you make, the more
the government insists you "share". Now I realize you don't know from
high income which is reported to the government, but at some point, it
isn't worth the effort. Converse and Associates didn't "grow" until
the tax rates dropped.
Back when the Beatles wrote "Taxman" Roll-Royce said that the
Prime Minister of the UK was their greatest salesman. That is to say,
with the new "soak the rich" tax scheme, it was more cost effective to
just buy another Rolls rather than invest the money in something, and
turn 95% of your return over to the government.
jim
pyotr filipivich wrote:
>
> Jessica Wabbit <ja...@rock.com> on Sat, 23 Apr 2011 05:17:49 -0700
> (PDT) typed in alt.machines.cnc the following:
> >On Apr 23, 7:13 pm, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Decades ago, Converse and Associates was ready to expand, they had
> >> the business. But they didn't - because the cost of doing so, and the
> >> return on the investment, was not worth the effort. They stayed a
> >> small sized firm, because expanding didn't "pencil out".
> >
> >
> >and this proves what, other than Converse not being well managed?
>
> It proves that if you raise the tax rates to soak the rich, not
> only are less tax revenues collected, but fewer payrolls expand. This
> is something progressives seem incapable of grasping.
When have tax rates ever been adjusted "to soak the rich"?
John R. Carroll
1941, 1942, 1943
In the early 50's the top rate was 94%.
In the early 70's it was over 70%.
Carter started the tax cut binge by cutting the to rate to 48%.
--
John R. Carroll
Gunner Asch
<nunyab...@dev.null> wrote:
There you go again. Have you consulted a mental health professional
yet about that lying business you are suffering from?
John R. Carroll
No, there your customer went again.
"Gunner, who lost another customer this week. Tits up and out of business
they go."
--
John R. Carroll
Gunner Asch
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> The other thing to keep in mind, 70 firms left the State of
>California so far this year alone. That is seventy companies which
>issued a press release, then relocated, lock stock and barrel. How
>many other companies didn't relocate, just closed?
One simply has to drive around the industrial areas of Southern
California and look for the empty parking lots and For Sale/For Lease
signs cluttering up the landscape.
Im not sure if we will ever find a source of total numbers of shops
gone..but I drive through those areas...and they are empty..empty..empty
John R. Carroll
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 00:13:36 -0700, pyotr filipivich
> <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> The other thing to keep in mind, 70 firms left the State of
>> California so far this year alone. That is seventy companies which
>> issued a press release, then relocated, lock stock and barrel. How
>> many other companies didn't relocate, just closed?
>
> One simply has to drive around the industrial areas of Southern
> California and look for the empty parking lots and For Sale/For Lease
> signs cluttering up the landscape.
>
> Im not sure if we will ever find a source of total numbers of shops
> gone..but I drive through those areas...and they are
> empty..empty..empty
Industrial vacancy rates in the five county Los Angeles area are less than
3.5%.
Do you ever check your halucinatory observations against reported and
recorded data?
Never mind. Of course yuo don't.
One look at actual numbers and your diaper would be full again.
--
John R. Carroll
Spehro Pefhany
The current issue of _The Economist_ blames democracy for California's
woes...
http://www.economist.com/node/18586520?Story_ID=18586520&CFID=162878260&CFTOKEN=41240308
Jessica Wabbit
> Jessica Wabbit <ja...@rock.com> on Sat, 23 Apr 2011 05:17:49 -0700
> (PDT) typed in alt.machines.cnc the following:
>
> >On Apr 23, 7:13 pm, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> Decades ago, Converse and Associates was ready to expand, they had
> >> the business. But they didn't - because the cost of doing so, and the
> >> return on the investment, was not worth the effort. They stayed a
> >> small sized firm, because expanding didn't "pencil out".
>
> >and this proves what, other than Converse not being well managed?
>
> It proves that if you raise the tax rates to soak the rich, not
> only are less tax revenues collected, but fewer payrolls expand. This
> is something progressives seem incapable of grasping.
>
> I realize that your knowledge base is limited,
you know nothing of my knowledge base and you are just posting
unsubstantiated claims that you can't back up.
John R. Carroll
This isn't a secret.
Californian's love to mandate spending and reduce revenues.
--
John R. Carroll
Just Me
why is it that in the 50's and 60's when the peronal tax was higher
and corprate tax was higher, it is now thought of as the pinnicle of
US manufacturing.blue collar had good benifits,white collar had good
benifits,there was a comfortable living to be made without working 60+
hrs a week,most people could afford a house,and could take a couple of
weeks off a year without problems,and the CEO's still had thier
castles.
Spehro Pefhany
The rest of the world was pretty much pulverized as a result of WWII
so there was not only negligible competition, but strong demand from
rebuilding.
ATP
"Spehro Pefhany" <spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
news:uer6r6pe0ho27kll6...@4ax.com...
John R. Carroll
Income distribution through a very progressive federal income tax and a
massive set of government programs.
The Serviceman's Readjustment Act of 1944 provided a free education to all
veterans and low down 30 year fixed rate mortgages gauranteed by rhe
Veterans Administration.
13.5 million veterans went to school. Millions of renters became home
owners. Education ceased to be an elite excercise that discriminated based
on class, social status or wealth.
The Interstate Highway System and other extensive investments in America's
energy, transportation and water treatment infrastructure transformed the
ability of businesses to effectively deliver products and services and of
the middle class to pay for and recieve what was delivered. All were heavily
regulated oligopolies.
Military aviation, space exploration and basic research were well funded and
the commercial outflow was equally significant. Axiation infrastructure
construction exploded.
The American middle class benefited from strong labor unions even if they
weren't members and also had an organized voice in government.
Fraternal organizations like the American Legion, FOE, VFW and others also
had large membership roles and were active in educating their members
politically.
Banking and financial services were boring occupations as opposed to
predatory, rapacious enterprises.
Financial activities that didn't benefit the real world of business or Main
Street weren't either allowed or pursued.
That's a start.
--
John R. Carroll
John R. Carroll
Demand which wouldn't have been realized without government programs like
the European Recovery Program, otherwise known as the Marshall Plan.
By 1952 as the funding ended, the economy of every participant state had
surpassed pre-war levels.
For all Marshall Plan recipients, output in 1951 was 35% higher than in
1938.
Bretton Woods also establishes the United States as the worlds banker as
well as specifying how trade would be financed between nations.
--
John R. Carroll
Spehro Pefhany
<walter...@unforgiven.com> wrote:
>
>> The rest of the world was pretty much pulverized as a result of WWII
>> so there was not only negligible competition, but strong demand from
>> rebuilding.
>>
>How can we recreate those conditions?
Fake some kind of incident and start some more wars, preferably with
countries that have money and a work ethic instead of just oil and/or
sand.
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
Strabo
Back when the beginning hourly wage was .50, bread was .15 a loaf
and men went to barber shops...
1. The US monetary system was still backed by gold and silver. Federal
and state spending was held within realistic budgets. Deficits and
inflation were very low.
2. Income tax (state and federal) for low to medium income earners
was small. After dependent and home deductions, the typical
tax payer paid about 3-5%.
3. 80% of 2011 federal and state welfare programs didn't exist.
4. Only about 10% of females worked outside the home. This made for
a stable society and low unemployment.
- Nationally about 80% of high school students graduated.
- Births out of wedlock were about 15%.
- Violent crime rates per thousand were perhaps a fourth of those today.
But the Socialists had been busy before WWII burrowing into the federal
government and academe.
Then came the civil rights activists, feminists, Viet Nam, the
'Great Society' programs, rise in unionism, demise of gold backed
currency, etc.
Now that everyone is better off, there's no looking back.
pyotr filipivich
-0700 in misc.survivalism:
>On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 00:13:36 -0700, pyotr filipivich
><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> The other thing to keep in mind, 70 firms left the State of
>>California so far this year alone. That is seventy companies which
>>issued a press release, then relocated, lock stock and barrel. How
>>many other companies didn't relocate, just closed?
>
>One simply has to drive around the industrial areas of Southern
>California and look for the empty parking lots and For Sale/For Lease
>signs cluttering up the landscape.
>
>Im not sure if we will ever find a source of total numbers of shops
>gone..but I drive through those areas...and they are empty..empty..empty
>
Saddest thing I saw while I was in Spokane, was an outlet mall,
with only three stores open.
pyotr filipivich
<"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net> reported Elvis on Sat, 23 Apr 2011
14:43:28 -0500 in misc.survivalism:
Let me see, 1933? And again in 1942, to pay for the War of
course. And oh yeah, there was that surcharge levied under LBJ, to
try and fund his little "kinetic military operations".
Say, when was that luxury tax on yachts, private airplanes and
expensive automobiles passed? I know that one was suppose to get the
rich to 'pay their share' but all it managed to really do was shut
down the yacht building yards in the Puget Sound south of the 49th
parallel.
pyotr filipivich
<ja...@rock.com> reported Elvis on Sat, 23 Apr 2011 15:46:02 -0700
(PDT) in misc.survivalism:
From what you post, I can only conclude that your knowledge base
is limited. Feh, like I should care what you feel.
toodles
jim
pyotr filipivich wrote:
>
> I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that jim
> <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net> reported Elvis on Sat, 23 Apr 2011
> 14:43:28 -0500 in misc.survivalism:
> >
> >
> >pyotr filipivich wrote:
> >>
> >> Jessica Wabbit <ja...@rock.com> on Sat, 23 Apr 2011 05:17:49 -0700
> >> (PDT) typed in alt.machines.cnc the following:
> >> >On Apr 23, 7:13 pm, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Decades ago, Converse and Associates was ready to expand, they had
> >> >> the business. But they didn't - because the cost of doing so, and the
> >> >> return on the investment, was not worth the effort. They stayed a
> >> >> small sized firm, because expanding didn't "pencil out".
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >and this proves what, other than Converse not being well managed?
> >>
> >> It proves that if you raise the tax rates to soak the rich, not
> >> only are less tax revenues collected, but fewer payrolls expand. This
> >> is something progressives seem incapable of grasping.
> >
> >When have tax rates ever been adjusted "to soak the rich"?
>
> Let me see, 1933? And again in 1942, to pay for the War of
> course. And oh yeah, there was that surcharge levied under LBJ, to
> try and fund his little "kinetic military operations".
In other words, in the long ago distant past
that is well beyond your experience
And in the recent past the wealthy
have received enormous tax cuts
And that did not do one thing to help the economy
as you imagined it would
The reason payrolls have been shrinking
(particularly in the last few years) is because
businesses have not been able to sell
their products and services and so they laid off workers
You're not going to fix that by giving
top-down tax breaks to employers
because they aren't going to hire back workers
or expand or start-up new businesses
if they still can't sell their products and services
If you give the tax breaks to the folks that purchase
the products and services
you might actually accomplish something
Jessica Wabbit
> I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that Jessica Wabbit
> <ja...@rock.com> reported Elvis on Sat, 23 Apr 2011 15:46:02 -0700
> (PDT) in misc.survivalism:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 24, 6:31 am, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> Jessica Wabbit <ja...@rock.com> on Sat, 23 Apr 2011 05:17:49 -0700
> >> (PDT) typed in alt.machines.cnc the following:
>
> >> >On Apr 23, 7:13 pm, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> Decades ago, Converse and Associates was ready to expand, they had
> >> >> the business. But they didn't - because the cost of doing so, and the
> >> >> return on the investment, was not worth the effort. They stayed a
> >> >> small sized firm, because expanding didn't "pencil out".
>
> >> >and this proves what, other than Converse not being well managed?
>
> >> It proves that if you raise the tax rates to soak the rich, not
> >> only are less tax revenues collected, but fewer payrolls expand. This
> >> is something progressives seem incapable of grasping.
>
> >> I realize that your knowledge base is limited,
>
> >you know nothing of my knowledge base and you are just posting
> >unsubstantiated claims that you can't back up.
>
> From what you post, I can only conclude that your knowledge base
> is limited. Feh, like I should care what you feel.
you know nothing of my knowledge base and you are just posting
unsubstantiated claims that you can't back up; when pressed for any
substance you do a gunner.
Gunner Asch
<nunyab...@dev.null> wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 00:13:36 -0700, pyotr filipivich
>> <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The other thing to keep in mind, 70 firms left the State of
>>> California so far this year alone. That is seventy companies which
>>> issued a press release, then relocated, lock stock and barrel. How
>>> many other companies didn't relocate, just closed?
>>
>> One simply has to drive around the industrial areas of Southern
>> California and look for the empty parking lots and For Sale/For Lease
>> signs cluttering up the landscape.
>>
>> Im not sure if we will ever find a source of total numbers of shops
>> gone..but I drive through those areas...and they are
>> empty..empty..empty
>
>Industrial vacancy rates in the five county Los Angeles area are less than
>3.5%.
Cites?
Snicker...you simply dont have a clue do you?
Ill take some video next week when I go back down.
>
>Do you ever check your halucinatory observations against reported and
>recorded data?
>Never mind. Of course yuo don't.
>One look at actual numbers and your diaper would be full again.
Lets see some "actual" cites
While you are fumbling around seperating the insurance companies and the
stock brokers from the manufacturing....check out these cites
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/end-is-near-for-southern-californias.html
http://jan.ocregister.com/2010/02/24/list-names-100-companies-leaving-california/31805/
http://www.kineticdiecasting.com/kdc/del-mar-die-casting-company-leaving-california/
http://www.cmta.net/mpowered_blog.php?tag=291
Another CA manufacturer gone, but we fail to acknowledge the problem
Posted by Gino DiCaro, Vice President, Communications on Feb. 23, 2011
Yesterday the Inland Daily Bulletin wrote about a California-based
hydrogen-powered fuel cell company, Bing Energy, deciding to locate its
manufacturing, along with a headquarters and a technology lab, in
Tallahassee, Florida.
Bing officials indicated clearly that it was 15 percent cheaper to
operate in Florida and that the Sunshine state unequivocally wanted them
there.
In the same article, Chris Thornberg of Beacon economics countered,
"we've lost a lot of manufacturing jobs, but a lot less than in other
states. California (manufacturing) is weathering the storm better than
the nation overall."
The Public Policy Institute of California similarly countered that,
"only a small fraction of the state's job losses are due to businesses
leaving the state."
Brad Kemp, also of Beacon Economics, indicated that any statements about
California's negative business climate become a self-fulfilling
prophecy.
What? These are highly respected economists and institutions, but we
can't just will this problem away.
I offer the following retort:
To Thornberg's "CA losing less" remark: California lost 37 percent of
it's manufacturing base since 1990 while the country lost 34 percent.
This period included the high technology boom in California so we are
really losing ground in traditional manufacturing employment. But more
important - look at recent manufacturing investment and facility growth
compared to other states. This tells us our future. It's not good.
Since 2007, California is among the worst in investment dollars and new
facilities.
New manufacturing investment has come in at only $235 per person in
California but a whopping $1,335 per person nationally. chart
New and expanded manufacturing facilities have been built or expanded at
only 3.7 facilities per million people in California compared to 28.7
per million nationally. chart
This tells us all we need to know about the climate for manufacturing in
California. We are near the bottom in new manufacturing growth.
To PPIC's "fraction of job losses due to leaving" remark: California
businesses actually picking up and moving entire operations to other
states has always been just a part of the equation. The important
question is who is expanding in the state? It's the lack of new growth
that is the most troubling.
To Kemp's "self-fulfilling prophecy" remark: If mere words repeated
again and again could improve the business climate for California
manufacturing, this blog would be shouting to the rooftops. Sadly,
investors actually run the numbers prior to putting millions of dollars
at risk. I don't think Bing Energy, the subject of the article, looked
to comments made in the news about California's business climate to make
their decision.
This raises a troubling question: If we can’t count on economists to
avoid magical thinking, how can we expect legislators to govern with a
higher standard?
Gunner Asch
Ayup. Another California manufacturing business went tits up.
And you claim all is just fucking swell in California.
You are insane.
But then..we did know that.
John R. Carroll
I've posted links to here more than once.
One time in response to your idiocy.
Reasonably complete data including historical information is very clear.
Your anecdotes are only a reflection of your personal experience, not that
of the real world that lies beyond those dillusions.
The plural of 'anecdote' is NOT 'data'...
That was a good one and entirely appropriate to your ignorant rantings.
--
John R. Carroll
Gunner Asch
Odd that ALL the current cites Ive posted refute your buffoonery..isnt
it?
Gunner
Ed Huntress
"Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7fd7r69tsd0g2scf5...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 14:33:53 -0700, "John R. Carroll"
> <nunyab...@dev.null> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> By your own account your customers all seem to be on their way out of
>>>> business.
>>>> Were that not the case, they wouldn't be your customers.
>>>
>>> There you go again.
>>
>>
>>No, there your customer went again.
>>
>>"Gunner, who lost another customer this week. Tits up and out of business
>>they go."
>>
>>
>>--
>>John R. Carroll
>
>
> Ayup. Another California manufacturing business went tits up.
>
> And you claim all is just fucking swell in California.
>
> You are insane.
>
Gunner, if so many of them are going tits up, and you depend on them for
your livelihood, how sane is it to keep doing the same thing while expecting
a different result?
As Einstein allegedly put it, that's insanity.
--
Ed Huntress
John R. Carroll
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 22:43:36 -0700, "John R. Carroll"
> <nunyab...@dev.null> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> Do you ever check your halucinatory observations against reported
>>>> and recorded data?
>>>> Never mind. Of course yuo don't.
>>>> One look at actual numbers and your diaper would be full again.
>>>
>>> Lets see some "actual" cites
>>
>> I've posted links to here more than once.
>> One time in response to your idiocy.
>>
>> Reasonably complete data including historical information is very
>> clear. Your anecdotes are only a reflection of your personal
>> experience, not that of the real world that lies beyond those
>> dillusions.
>>
>> The plural of 'anecdote' is NOT 'data'...
>> That was a good one and entirely appropriate to your ignorant
>> rantings.
>
>
> Odd that ALL the current cites Ive posted refute your buffoonery..isnt
> it?
Not odd at all. What would be odd, and new for you, would be a post
including actual facts and data.
You'd like to think that your pathetic state is anyones fault but your own.
I'd expect a whiner like you to post cites that attempted to support that.
That doesn't mean it's true. It means you aren't man or responsible enough
to grasp reality.
That's what the actual facts reveal.
--
John R. Carroll
John R. Carroll
Apparently there are one or two left stancing, Ed.
From the 2011 report issued on LA County:
"The shortage of modern manufacturing facilities in Los Angeles County has
cost the region an opportunity to create high wage jobs.
The vacancy rate for industrial space has declined steadily from a high of
13.1% in the early 1990s to less than 2.0% during much of 2000-2008.
Although the Los Angeles County industrial market held up relatively well
during the downturn, it was by no means immune to the deteriorating job
market and drop-off in demand.
Vacancy rates began to climb in mid-2008. By the third quarter of 2010, the
county's average vacancy rate stood at 3.3%. Nonetheless, Los Angeles County
continues to have the tightest
industrial real estate market in the country."
"Permit values for new industrial construction plunged during the
recession - from $134.6 million in 2008 to just $40.1 million in 2009.
Through November 2010, industrial permit values showed moderate improvement,
rising by +18.7% compared with the same period in 2009.
Los Angeles County greatly benefited from the 2010 bounce-back in
international trade. Strong demand for U.S. goods overseas boosted local
manufacturing firms. In the U.S. the need to restock warehouses and fill
distribution pipelines also contributed to stabilizing demand for
industrial space. Vacancy rates held steady most of the year. Asking rental
rates also appear to be stabilizing (although at a 12-year low)."
--
John R. Carroll
John R. Carroll
Apparently there are one or two left stancing, Ed.
Ed Huntress
"John R. Carroll" <nunyab...@dev.null> wrote in message
news:85udnQKOYMoqpinQ...@giganews.com...
As you probably suspect, I went to the Bureau of Labor Statistics to see
what the story was when you two started to argue. d8-)
In general, California's manufacturing and metalworking employment and
establishment data almost exactly parallel that of the country as a whole.
Some Midwestern states have taken a considerably larger hit.
The BLS data gets down to the county and MSA level, but it becomes very
tedious to make comparisons, so I didn't look into that.
--
Ed Huntress
John R. Carroll
> see what the story was when you two started to argue. d8-)
>
> In general, California's manufacturing and metalworking employment and
> establishment data almost exactly parallel that of the country as a
> whole. Some Midwestern states have taken a considerably larger hit.
>
> The BLS data gets down to the county and MSA level, but it becomes
> very tedious to make comparisons, so I didn't look into that.
I think I sent you the LAEDC report at one point.
It's all there.
Employment isn't the entire story by any measure.
The LAC-5 is the largest manufacturing area in America.
By far.
Employment has been declining for a decade.Wages, however, have nearly
doubled in many segments IIRC.
That has nothing to do with the health or growth of manufacturing in the
area.
--
John R. Carroll
Ed Huntress
"John R. Carroll" <nunyab...@dev.null> wrote in message
news:85udnQKOYMoqpinQ...@giganews.com...
Having followed metalworking statistics since around 1974, there is
something that I haven't seen mentioned here that I believe is relevant.
Machine shops are very volatile enterprises, like small retail businesses
are. When there is expansion in a market, new ones sprout up like mushrooms.
Most are undercapitalized and poorly managed; they hang on by living on the
overflow of jobbing work that's coming from an expanding economy.
When things turn down, they're the ones that go belly-up. A really extreme
example of this was the moldmaking business in northwestern PA during the
2001 etc. downturn. They dropped like flies.
Meantime, the well-run and well capitalized shops survive, and then are
poised to thrive when the economy turns back up. The number of
establishments has dropped; the number of employees may or may not recover,
because the well-run shops are generally more efficient. The long-term trend
overall is a decline in the number of employees even while volume is
climbing, because of the huge gains in productivity since the introduction
of computers to small shops, and higher machining speeds.
This has been the pattern at least since the 1950s. I suspect that Gunner is
focusing on a lot of these bottom-feeders who had no chance when the cream
came off the top.
--
Ed Huntress
John R. Carroll
That's right.
One thing that is inhibiting startups today is the lack of home equity and
an lender's unwillingness to provide cash out refi's.
I don't see this as a bad thing in and of itself. The market is keeping
people who shouldn't be in business from ruination.
>
> When things turn down, they're the ones that go belly-up. A really
> extreme example of this was the moldmaking business in northwestern
> PA during the 2001 etc. downturn. They dropped like flies.
>
> Meantime, the well-run and well capitalized shops survive, and then
> are poised to thrive when the economy turns back up. The number of
> establishments has dropped; the number of employees may or may not
> recover, because the well-run shops are generally more efficient. The
> long-term trend overall is a decline in the number of employees even
> while volume is climbing, because of the huge gains in productivity
> since the introduction of computers to small shops, and higher
> machining speeds.
> This has been the pattern at least since the 1950s. I suspect that
> Gunner is focusing on a lot of these bottom-feeders who had no chance
> when the cream came off the top.
He has to.
You need actual applicable skills to compete effectively for business placed
by modern well run companies.
His ability and training are what drive his poverty, not the real economy.
The rule in manufacturing is, and always has been, Be Well Capitalized.
That and wear a cup.
This is especially true in California, a State populated by some of the
smartest and hardest working people on the planet.
I don't know why you haven't seen it mentioned here. It's been elaborated on
more than once - several times by yours truly.
The last was in another of these interminable exchanges with Mark "Fact
Free" Wieber his own self.
From a December 2010 Post:
The number of shops has certainly decreased but not for want of profitable
business.
The value of manufactured goods in California has risen consistently
throughout the latest downturn.
What has dissapeared is the ability of O&O's to finance operations.
Your "group of machinery dealers" is providing info that is a little
overstated but the important part is that the conclusion you chose to draw
is at odds with the facts and numbers.
It's also irrelevant.
Most, if not all of the losses in numbers, are due to the effects of under
capitalization and the reliance by guys with a FADAL in their garage have on
the value of their homes to secure the credit required to finance
operations. The value of single family residential housing, something that
directly impacts start up's and mom and pop shops most, declined by another
$2 trillion dollars in the first three quarters of 2010. That brings the
total to about $11 trillion since 2007 when this all started.
The balance are people that failed to reinvest in modern equipment or
otherwise strengthen their balance sheets.
Manufacturing has seen a steady decline in the number of jobs produced per
dollar of sales for more than a decade. That is the actual truth.
Capital has been substituted for labor and the result has been more value to
the market - not less.
2009 was the first year in two generations- more really - that saw fewer
new start up's than closures in California.
The reason is plain. No equity or even when that isn't the case, banks
aren't lending to finance recievables in those instances where an asset such
as property or a home underlies their secured interest.
In the long run, this is actually a good thing.
--
John R. Carroll
Ed Huntress
"John R. Carroll" <nunyab...@dev.null> wrote in message
I probably got lost in the maze. <g>
Gunner Asch
<nunyab...@dev.null> wrote:
so you have a filter on your Usenet reader that filters out all the
sites Ive posted?
Why?
Do you simply like looking stupid?
John R. Carroll
I read your posts.
What they are is little more than solitations for a pity fuck.
The world isn't out to get you.
Nobody else, as far as I know, is either.
Your thousands of posts can be distilled down to "Boohoo, buy my crap. I'm a
poor downtrodden waife. Clinton/Obama/XXX did it".
You are just an irresponsible, untrained, and ignorant fuck up.
You can stop any time you can muster the balls to suck it up and become
useful and productive.
--
John R. Carroll
Gunner Asch
<nunyab...@dev.null> wrote:
So you Do have a filter that wipes out URLs and sites that I post.
Get a life Jonboi.
And Id sure like the $190.00 9" Milwaukee right angle grinder that I
loaned you 3 yrs ago, back as well.
The rest of your spew is buffoonery at its funniest.
pyotr filipivich
-0700 in misc.survivalism:
>
>I offer the following retort:
>
>To Thornberg's "CA losing less" remark: California lost 37 percent of
>it's manufacturing base since 1990 while the country lost 34 percent.
>This period included the high technology boom in California so we are
>really losing ground in traditional manufacturing employment. But more
>important - look at recent manufacturing investment and facility growth
>compared to other states. This tells us our future. It's not good.
>Since 2007, California is among the worst in investment dollars and new
>facilities.
>
>New manufacturing investment has come in at only $235 per person in
>California but a whopping $1,335 per person nationally. chart
I would not be surprised that if you exclude the California data,
the national average would be much higher.
>
>New and expanded manufacturing facilities have been built or expanded at
>only 3.7 facilities per million people in California compared to 28.7
>per million nationally. chart
again, I'm sure that the California data is skewing the national
average down.
>
>This tells us all we need to know about the climate for manufacturing in
>California. We are near the bottom in new manufacturing growth.
But have no fear - the Obama Administration is trying to enforce
an "Anti-Dog Eat Dog" act through their NLRB ruling that Boeing is not
to open a plant in (right to work) South Carolina, rather than in
(Union strike every four years) Everett WA.
That will fix things.
tschus
pyotr
pyotr filipivich
<gunne...@gmail.com> reported Elvis on Sat, 23 Apr 2011 22:23:43
-0700 in misc.survivalism:
>
>businesses actually picking up and moving entire operations to other
>states has always been just a part of the equation. The important
>question is who is expanding in the state? It's the lack of new growth
>that is the most troubling.
>
>To Kemp's "self-fulfilling prophecy" remark: If mere words repeated
>again and again could improve the business climate for California
>manufacturing, this blog would be shouting to the rooftops. Sadly,
>investors actually run the numbers prior to putting millions of dollars
>at risk. I don't think Bing Energy, the subject of the article, looked
>to comments made in the news about California's business climate to make
>their decision.
One of the details which is missed: The other jobs which develop
due to Enormous Corp being there. E.G., Bing Energy is also taking
its market for copier paper, office furniture, cleaning supplies,
trash collection, houses and apartments, cars, trucks and vans, RC
helicopters, table saws, soda pop, groceries, ipods, Barbie dolls, etc
etc, etcetera, to Florida. Oh, almost forgot the tourist dollars.
Those are more likely to go to Disneyworld than Disneyland. Which
means Anaheim is out hotel rentals, car rentals, laundry servicing,
meal prep , etc, etc.
pyotr filipivich
<"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net> reported Elvis on Sat, 23 Apr 2011
>
>
>pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>
>> I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that jim
>> <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net> reported Elvis on Sat, 23 Apr 2011
>> 14:43:28 -0500 in misc.survivalism:
>> >
>> >
>> >pyotr filipivich wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Jessica Wabbit <ja...@rock.com> on Sat, 23 Apr 2011 05:17:49 -0700
>> >> (PDT) typed in alt.machines.cnc the following:
>> >> >On Apr 23, 7:13 pm, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Decades ago, Converse and Associates was ready to expand, they had
>> >> >> the business. But they didn't - because the cost of doing so, and the
>> >> >> return on the investment, was not worth the effort. They stayed a
>> >> >> small sized firm, because expanding didn't "pencil out".
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >and this proves what, other than Converse not being well managed?
>> >>
>> >> It proves that if you raise the tax rates to soak the rich, not
>> >> only are less tax revenues collected, but fewer payrolls expand. This
>> >> is something progressives seem incapable of grasping.
>> >
>> >When have tax rates ever been adjusted "to soak the rich"?
>>
>> Let me see, 1933? And again in 1942, to pay for the War of
>> course. And oh yeah, there was that surcharge levied under LBJ, to
>> try and fund his little "kinetic military operations".
>
>In other words, in the long ago distant past
>that is well beyond your experience
minimum tax", and the entire Income Tax scheme in general.
Say, didn't New York and California just recently pass tax
surcharges to "soak the rich" - and are discovering again that capital
is mobile.
>
>And in the recent past the wealthy
>have received enormous tax cuts
>And that did not do one thing to help the economy
>as you imagined it would
I see you have no expectations of ever becoming rich.
Well, that does seem to be the basis of the Progressive mind set:
we're not able to get rich, so it must be the Luck of Life's Lottery
which made them rich, which is Immoral, so They must be Punished.
>
>The reason payrolls have been shrinking
>(particularly in the last few years) is because
>businesses have not been able to sell
>their products and services and so they laid off workers
>
>You're not going to fix that by giving
>top-down tax breaks to employers
>because they aren't going to hire back workers
>or expand or start-up new businesses
>if they still can't sell their products and services
>
>If you give the tax breaks to the folks that purchase
>the products and services
>you might actually accomplish something
So you agree that the idea of drastically increasing the money
supply is a bad one. Because that is working to lower the value of
the dollars in the paychecks of the people who purchase the products
and services. In effect, that is Yet Another Tax on those unwealthy,
uncolored and unpoor.
Say, how about that increase in the price of gasoline? Hows that
working to help out those who are to purchase the products and
services necessary to get the economy rolling?
John R. Carroll
All you have to do is come and get it when I'm avaliable. You know how to
reach me and make arrangements.
And you didn't exactly loan it to me. You left it behind when you abandoned
what you were working on.
All of that paid for crap went into the basura long ago.
--
John R. Carroll
Gunner Asch
<nunyab...@dev.null> wrote:
So again you lie. I loaned that grinder..and the cup wire wheel to you
at YOUR REQUEST.
Say..you didnt have a stroke..or have been sampling the coke too much
again have you?
John R. Carroll
No, you didn't.
In fact, as you have apparently forgotten, I didn't really want you to leave
it at all.
Here is a little reminder of the sort of "sterling" person you are form our
original public discussion.
Basically Gunner. You fucked me.
I just didn't care.
His grinder is right where he left it.
He can pick it up at his leisure and the only reason it is here at all is
that he left it so I could pay ONE OF MY GUYS to do a job I'd already more
than paid him in full , in advance and on his word that he'd finish up, to
do.
He also said he'd pick it up on one of his many trips through the area.
You can toodle on by for him if that's his wish but I'm not spending another
nickle on the welfare queen.
He was using it to clean up a piece of junk that I bought from him.
Getting it going was part of the deal if I'd buy brushes for the traction
motor - the only thing he said he'd need.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
$500 dollars worth of parts later and the thing is still a rusted out piece
of useless crap.
As for his "prowess" as an electrical trouble shooter, I picked up a
complete service manual with all of the electrical diagrams and his "Fix"
for the failed components was to bypass the fuses - TO THE CHARGING
CIRCUIT - and baste everything in PB Blaster. There wasn't anything wrong
with the charging circuit. The batteries he had cobbled together were shit.
I picked up a set from Big Joe and, miracle of miracles, the relay's and
solenoinds suddenly started working. It was pretty obvious at that point
that his real skill is bull shitting. A ten year old could have made perfect
sense of the electrical drawings but not Gunner.
What he seemed to have a handled on was smoking my cigarrettes, and guzzling
energy drinks like a speed freak when he wasn't downing Mountain Dew or
beating his dog.
Frankly, I felt sorry for him so I stuck an extra couple hundred in cash in
his hands and bid him on his way. I needed my helper back to do what I pay
him for and it didn't look to me that Gunner would get his job done
regardless the time or money allowed.
At that point, he offered to leave his POS grinder so my guys could finish
his work. I said no, but he persisted and when he agreed to pick the thing
up on one of his trips through the area, I relented. I just wanted the guy
on his way.
John R. Carroll
--
John R. Carroll
Gunner Asch
9 significant lies in your post above.
How do you sleep at night?
jim
> I see you have no expectations of ever becoming rich.
>
> Well, that does seem to be the basis of the Progressive mind set:
> we're not able to get rich, so it must be the Luck of Life's Lottery
> which made them rich, which is Immoral, so They must be Punished.
That is your fantasy not mine.
You are the one trying to make a useless moral argument.
> >
> >The reason payrolls have been shrinking
> >(particularly in the last few years) is because
> >businesses have not been able to sell
> >their products and services and so they laid off workers
> >
> >You're not going to fix that by giving
> >top-down tax breaks to employers
> >because they aren't going to hire back workers
> >or expand or start-up new businesses
> >if they still can't sell their products and services
> >
> >If you give the tax breaks to the folks that purchase
> >the products and services
> >you might actually accomplish something
>
> So you agree that the idea of drastically increasing the money
> supply is a bad one.
What gave you that idea?
I pointed out the fallacy in your claim that
lowering taxes on the wealthy
will create investment and growth
It won't for the simple reason that growth stopped
because sales fell
That means
it doesn't matter how much money is available for investment
nobody wants to produce stuff they can't sell
You ignore that your argument fell apart and instead
try to introduce another topic
The tax cut from last December was a notice to the wealthy
That they have 2 more years to pull their investments out of
the marketplace at a reduced tax rate
The wealthy are aware that eventually
the public is going to wise up
The government doesn't tax investment (that would be insanity)
The government taxes the liquidation of investments.
And that is done not out of jealousy
it is a matter of self preservation
> Because that is working to lower the value of
> the dollars in the paychecks of the people who purchase the products
> and services. In effect, that is Yet Another Tax on those unwealthy,
> uncolored and unpoor.
Paychecks have been declining for 30 years - nothing new there
If you have cash you can now get some very nice deals on houses.
that looks to me like cash has just gotten a whole lot more valuable
>
> Say, how about that increase in the price of gasoline? Hows that
> working to help out those who are to purchase the products and
> services necessary to get the economy rolling?
It is not going to help the economy at all.
The markets are free to set their prices
when demand goes up, prices go up
that's how it works
Perhaps you would like to put an end
to all that free-market crap
Would you like the US to engage in armed robbery
and just steal the oil we want?
Michael A. Terrell
Someone hits him with a rubber mallet?
--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a Band-Aid™ on it, because it's
Teflon coated.