Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
December 19, 2014, 06:41:53 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Beemaster's official FACEBOOK page
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: On The Right Track.....  (Read 4455 times)
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2010, 05:30:24 PM »

 lau  lau  lau

wow dude, serious chip on that shoulder huh?   I don't know about "God" but when I pray to the Creator, that's not what I usually refer with.  (For the record,  I use the name "Teyocoyani" but hey, how could you expect to know that right?)

 I guess you also assumed I am a christian.  (further on the record,  I am topixqui) you silly little bee nut you.

if nothing else, you got one heck of an imagination there.  but, you do one heck of a job how easy you jump to conclusions and stereotype people.

at least I'm getting plenty for my entertainment dollar out of this thread.

Big Bear

Logged
CountryBee
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329


Location: Central, NY


« Reply #21 on: September 15, 2010, 05:36:09 PM »

I am a Christian and I am sorry for you beek4018.  I do think of my children and the big tax bill, to get out of a hole we must stop digging.  That is how you fix it, not spend more.  How do you pay bills, you stop spending and save up right.  That is what my family does.  That is what my country has to do. Smiley 
Logged
Bee Happy
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1656


Location: Between Panama city, Florida and Dothan Al.

that's me - setting a phoenix free


« Reply #22 on: September 15, 2010, 05:44:34 PM »

I think it's a bit simplistic to say the housing market tax breaks controls the economy.  Get a grip on yourself, and your place in the world...


Oops, while we were busy fighting over wrong and wrongerer, another boatload of US money just went into some political cronie's pocket
Logged

be happy and make others happy.
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15319


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #23 on: September 15, 2010, 06:53:07 PM »

Quote
And, those tax breaks conservatives are so hot to make permanent were in force when we got into this trouble


wow...i go away for a couple of days....   evil

so...please explain your above statement.  we were in a recession when bush too office.  the "surplus" that he supposedly wasted never had materialized.  it was a projected surplus and when the economy started to tank, and that began in '98, the projection proved to be incorrect.  in addition to the recession that bush inherited (to borrow from the current rulers) we then had 9/11 on top of it.  the tax cuts did what they always do.  they put money into the hands of the people and business and we had some of the biggest growth in GDP and lowest unemployment that we have ever had.  

what went wrong? a couple of things.  one had to do with the way housing is financed and you have to go back to the '70's and then again the '90's to see how groups like Acorn and the libs in congress engineered that.  Barney Franks and Chris Dodd were the ring leaders on that in the '90's. even in the early 2000's when bush was wanting to reform Freddie and Fannie, franks was assuring everyone that F&F were fine!  the other thing is that we over spent.  while war spending remained more or less stable, the spending by congress took huge jumps after the dems were elected. the dems are not the only big spenders, but as a group, they seem to have a particular talent for it.  because of the massive spending, when things in finance when wrong, we had no choice but to borrow.  unfortunately, we borrowed to grow government, rather than doing what we know works, and making the growth of  private enterprise the priority.

if you want to grow the economy, you grow the private sector.  because government produces nothing and earns nothing, you can not improve the economy or the pay down the debt through bigger government.  in order for the government to stimulate, it must take money from those who earn (private sector) or it must print money.  neither of those things work.

Obama has followed the FDR plan for getting out of trouble.  studies have been done on the great depression and the government programs that were supposed to fix it.

here's an article from the Cato Institute, not known for being conservative, that lists some of the studies that have been done.  if you read this through, you'll see that obama has followed the FDR mistakes like a blueprint.

 http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v25n4/powell.pdf

here's some more.  these are about the same study, but one is an overview.
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx
http://www.today.ucla.edu/portal/ut/misguided-government-policies-80595.aspx

it is interesting that the libs screamed about the tax cuts only helping the wealthy, but now want to extend the tax cuts to the "90%" who are middle class and benefited from the tax cuts.  you can't have it both ways, folks.

i don't know why this is so hard for libs to understand.  it's pretty simple stuff.  even Europe is getting it.

« Last Edit: September 15, 2010, 08:13:49 PM by kathyp » Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
CountryBee
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329


Location: Central, NY


« Reply #24 on: September 15, 2010, 08:10:38 PM »

 applause
Logged
tecumseh
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 391

Location: College Station, Tx


« Reply #25 on: September 15, 2010, 09:37:45 PM »

country bee writes:
That is what my family does.  That is what my country has to do.

tecumseh:
you are confusing micro and macro issues.  a company, a corporation or a country does not need to abide by the ethics of 'neither a borrower nor lender be'.   if you individually are a good market capitalist you wouldn't want to adhere to this ethic either.  most real live folks don't have the wealth or the income that they can adhere to this moralistic nonsense anyway.

kathyp writes:
here's an article from the Cato Institute, not known for being conservative

tecumseh:
I assume you are saying this in pure jest?  Seems like everyone that knows what the Cato Institute does thinks they very much are?


another kathyp snip..
what went wrong? a couple of things.

tecumseh:
first your attempt to blame Acorn and Freddie Mac (+ a list of buggy men all dressed in democratic attire) is pretty lame.  I do give you credit for having a good imagination.

secondly I would say this list is a bit longer than 'a couple of things'.  I would also suggest that the beginning of the list goes way back before GW Bush showed up on the scene.  GW didn't make the matters any better by pursing a couple of wars (accounted for off the books... whatever that means).  GW also didn't make matter any better by allowing big oil to charge whatever they wanted (essentially mugging the public every time they filled up at the pump).  nor the addition of another governmental agency called homeland security... which can do just about anything it wants no matter what the law of the land might be and the fact that 80% of the personal are political appointees should make everybody especially happy.

long term a lot of well though out restriction and regulations that worked extremely well since the crash of '29 were tossed because some folks had the delusional thinking that deregulation would make things better.  it did make a handful of folks extremely rich.   

short term I lay more blame at the feet of Alan Greenspan than just about any other individual.  by the end of his tenure he appeared to me to be more concerned about making GW economic numbers look right than in doing his job.  when even he spoke of known excess he didn't seem to know how to apply the breaks.  ps... the federal reserve rate (one tool of the fed) does nothing for you the saver besides driving the earning of your saving account lower.  for the borrower it obviously means nothing either since at the same time the fed rate was lowered to almost zero home loan rates were rising... the net effect being the banks were making more and more on each and every loan they made.

 
Logged

I am 'the panther that passes in the night'... tecumseh.
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15319


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #26 on: September 15, 2010, 10:00:28 PM »

Quote
GW also didn't make matter any better by allowing big oil to charge whatever they wanted


1st, i think it would be easier on you if you learned cut, paste, and quote.  it would probably be easier to read your posts, but it's up to you.

2nd, you are very good at not speaking to the point and then throwing weird stuff like the above into the conversation.  since GWB and the US government don't own the oil companies, and up until this president (in my lifetime) it was pretty unthinkable the the government would dictate stuff like price of product....and then there's that whole OPEC thing that we don't control....you have no point.


Quote
first your attempt to blame Acorn and Freddie Mac (+ a list of buggy men all dressed in democratic attire) is pretty lame.  I do give you credit for having a good imagination.

this is a fact and you may go back and look at the congressional record and the acorn protests to verify.  the specific legislation was the Community Reinvestment Act and it was fist done in the '70's and revised and revitalized in the '90's.  there is also a public record of Frank asserting that F&F were in good shape and not to worry.

i agree with you about Homeland security.  unneeded and expensive.  same with TSA.  as for political appointees, that happens with every admin. in every single department.

Quote
long term a lot of well though out restriction and regulations that worked extremely well since the crash of '29 were tossed because some folks had the delusional thinking that deregulation would make things better.  it did make a handful of folks extremely rich.    


such as??

agree on Greenspan.  never liked him and he still doesn't have it right.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
tecumseh
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 391

Location: College Station, Tx


« Reply #27 on: September 15, 2010, 10:30:21 PM »

well thanks for the advice...

another kathyp snip..
since GWB and the US government don't own the oil companies, and up until this president (in my lifetime) it was pretty unthinkable the the government would dictate stuff like price of product

tecumseh:
you must be very young?

let see... I think up until about the time of Richard Nixon oil prices were very much controlled by the US Government via anti competition law.  Nixon tossed those out at about the end of his first term (got lots of money from the domestic oil folk for his reelection) which then set the stage for the first bank hoist (oil embargo) by our middle eastern friends.  Nixon  also installed wage and price control (which was really wage controls since no effort was given to holding down price of anything) during the same era.  You could 'get around' the wage controls if you were properly connected.  During WWII the entire country was on a system of wage and price controls (I think??? John Kenneth Galbreath ran this program for FDR).

I might suspect from you writing that you also think the fact that the price of gasoline and diesel at the pump (or by the barrel) has fallen and fallen since Mr Bush left office is purely a random event or perhaps some counter intuitive market force at play?

   
Logged

I am 'the panther that passes in the night'... tecumseh.
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15319


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #28 on: September 15, 2010, 10:56:52 PM »

the oil embargo came with our support of Israel in the '70's and then with our problems with Iran.  OPEC found it's power and used our actions as a way to  make a lot of money.  

yes, wage and price control, retirement age, etc. have been tried before and failed.  FDR had the most success with control, but even most of his actions were eventually overturned.  it's the same with tariffs and other trade interference.

what i am talking about if buying, dictating to, and threatening companies.  that's not to say that private companies have not been threatened before, and most notably, the banks by Franks, Dodd, and Co. but there has never been such a blatant attempt to dictate to businesses the way this admin has.

and no, i am not young.  

no, i don't think there was a grand conspiracy to keep oil prices high under bush. it's the left that has pushed for higher taxes on oil to intentionally drive the price up.  they are the ones who routinely block drilling on our own land.  at the moment, the price is down a bit because of the economic state of the world.  you think our prices are high, check out Europe.  they don't drive anywhere unless they have to.  less demand.  lower price.  if libs thought they could get away with it, they would have their 10 dollars a gallon, but so far they have been restrained by the fear of what it would do to the economy.

you are welcome for the advice.  if you are unsure how to work the quote icon, send me a PM and i'll walk you through it  grin
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
tecumseh
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 391

Location: College Station, Tx


« Reply #29 on: September 17, 2010, 08:06:29 AM »

grand conspiracy...
perhaps you need to reference Adam Smith and see what he has to say in regards to this?

like I said previously... perhaps you can construct a purely a random or perhaps counter intuitive market force at play in regards to fuel and energy prices during the Bush years.

another kathyp snip..
the oil embargo came with our support of Israel in the '70's and then with our problems with Iran.  OPEC found it's power and used our actions as a way to  make a lot of money. 

tecumseh:
you need to reference something more than Cliff Notes on modern history since the above is somewhat to totally incorrect.  During the first oil embargo (it should be point out that prior to this time the OPEC Cartel* drove the price of fuel in the US down to extremely low level to measure the elasticity of demand for that product... this bit of economic information is extremely valuable when you wish to promote a bit of price gouging**) Iran was totally controlled by the Shaw of Iran and the Iranian revolution would not play itself out until about 8 years or so later.  Up till this time what OPEC did would have exposed it to monopolist laws here which had held oil price per barrel at about $6/barrel.

fast forward 30 years later and the price of oil at the front side of the Bush administration is about $18/barrel.  what follows (at least if you follow the stock market) it 8 years of constant economic weakness and yet the $/barrel rises almost ten fold while the economy grows constantly weaker.

*the word Cartel is prima facia evidence that the participants are actively pursing monopolistic control over a given market.

**It became fairly evident at this time that one of the primary component of market equalibrum theory (sometimes referred to by the lay as free market theory) that acceptable SUBSTITUTES largely did not exist for this market.  This should suggest to the 'free market true believers' at least one reason why their beliefs are not always such a good match with real world reality.     
Logged

I am 'the panther that passes in the night'... tecumseh.
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #30 on: September 17, 2010, 08:28:58 AM »

and your reference for all that is?  a different set of cliffs notes?

your good at demanding it of others yet guilty of not doing what you expect.

tsk tsk.

Big Bear
Logged
L Daxon
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 669


Location: Oklahoma City


« Reply #31 on: September 17, 2010, 11:19:58 AM »

tecumseh to Kathy:
you must be very young?

Kathy may be very young but I'm not.  Been an political activist all my life (as in wife of statewide elected official, wife of gubernatorial nominee, wife of state party chairman, paid campaign staff member and volunteer for candidates since Goldwater, etc.) and I agree with everything Kathy said, except one thing:  "the government doesn't produce anything."  Now that the government owns the majority stake in GM you could say the government is "producing" cars, but that just means GM cars will be undrivable/unsellable soon. grin

P.S. Kathy, I am very impressed with how well read you see to be and your ability to articulate your position.  What are you doing living in Oregon?
Logged

linda d
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15319


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #32 on: September 17, 2010, 01:01:59 PM »

i don't live in the crazy part.  i live out with the real people.  most of the state is conservative, but the people who glob together in the city have the numbers to make the rules.  smiley

i am only young at heart.  in years, i have been around a long time.   evil
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
CountryBee
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329


Location: Central, NY


« Reply #33 on: September 17, 2010, 05:11:39 PM »

Does the government still own a stake in GM?  I remember the so called pay off that was only a small percentage of what they got but not sure about the stocks and government control on them.  I see they are closing pontiac and another division this year.  Good thing I drive and buy Fords. grin
Logged
L Daxon
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 669


Location: Oklahoma City


« Reply #34 on: September 18, 2010, 12:03:42 PM »

U.S. gov't owns a 60% stake in GM.  Feds announced about a week ago that they are going to begin selling off the stock (probably at a big loss) after the November elections and analysts think it could take a couple of years before it is all sold off.
Logged

linda d
CountryBee
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329


Location: Central, NY


« Reply #35 on: September 19, 2010, 07:43:08 AM »

Wow, does anyone even want that stock now?  60% stake, sold soul to devil!  Poor GM, good thing I buy Fords only! grin
Logged
AllenF
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8186

Location: Hiram, Georgia


« Reply #36 on: September 19, 2010, 02:09:02 PM »

I would still buy in at the "right" price.   Also, think about it, the government will not let a company fail when it owns part of it, but they may run it into the ground where it can never make a profit.   Think about anything the government tries.
Logged
AllenF
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8186

Location: Hiram, Georgia


« Reply #37 on: September 19, 2010, 06:03:51 PM »

I found this on yahoo and thought is would be good for this tread to show the right track:

Ever since his inauguration, obama has said that he "inherited" the federal budget deficit from his predecessor. But immediately upon taking office, obama signed two new bills, the $787B stimulus and the $410B omnibus, that together about equal the $1.2T deficit he "inherited." Now that the fiscal year has ended, we see that the feds ran a $1.58T deficit for FY 2009, the all-time record and the first deficit over a trillion bucks. This deficit is 3.4 times the $459B deficit of 2008, and 10 times the $160B deficit of 2007, which began when Republicans were still in control of Congress. The reason obama is so keen on laying blame for the deficit on Bush is that he's caught in the Democrats' old lie: The president is responsible for the budget. The Democrats are aided and abetted in this lie by the establishment media. It is Congress that is responsible for budgets and budget deficits. Appropriations and budgets are set by the legislature not the president. And Congress has been controlled by Democrats for nearly 4 years now, during which time they've set the two highest deficits in history, this year's record being almost four times the Republican record of 2004. A survey the OMB's Historical Tables (page 21) going back to the inception of the income tax in 1913, shows that no matter how we look at it, a Republican Congress does better at balancing the budget than does a Democrat Congress. Republican Congresses have produced the most recent surpluses, the largest surpluses, the most back-to-back surpluses, the most surpluses under a president of either party, etc. This is why the Democrats and their media lapdogs lay the responsibility for budgets and deficits on the president
According to the OMB's Mid-Session Review (page 26) from August 25, total revenue for FY 2009 was down by $450 billion from FY 2008, yet the deficit was up by more than $1.1 trillion. So the problem is spending, not revenue. And in the middle of this massive shortfall, Congress is trying to saddle America with even more debt, with "initiatives" like healthcare reform, cap-and-trade, and "green" ventures. The latest OMB projections predict huge deficits for the next decade. These projections do not take into account Congress' spending spree in legislation that is still under consideration. Now, one could point out that the economy was doing just fine until Democrats took over Congress. But that would be so simplistic. It's undeniable, however, that barack hussein obama voted for the $700B TARP when he was the junior senator from Illinois in the U.S. Congress. He didn't vote "present;" he took responsibility.
So obama "inherited" the deficit from himself ... and the rest of Congress..
Logged
CountryBee
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329


Location: Central, NY


« Reply #38 on: September 20, 2010, 06:28:21 AM »

 applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause..............
Logged
tecumseh
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 391

Location: College Station, Tx


« Reply #39 on: September 20, 2010, 08:33:17 AM »

bigbearomaha writes:
and your reference for all that is?  a different set of cliffs notes?

your good at demanding it of others yet guilty of not doing what you expect.

tecumseh:
perhaps you might point out to the crowd here EXACTLY WHERE I demand anything of anyone?  you seem quite adapt at reading stuff into what I write that ain't there.

I did provide an Adam Smith reference... would a more exact quote do it for ya' brother.

I have tried in this little thread to correct a few inaccurate (false) statement here and the intermingling of historical events that did not happen till a decade later.  I can understand why some folks pushing an agenda might have a problem with that.


Logged

I am 'the panther that passes in the night'... tecumseh.
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.301 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page December 10, 2014, 01:43:52 PM
anything