I can whistle the Internationale, but the words never sounded very good in English. The Internationale always sounds better in German, French, Spanish, Danish. Everyone working for the government, or government taking over all jobs, is socialism, in the crudest and most ignorant sense.
I still like Bill Haywood's model, not Lenin's.
It's not looking like 'the International will be the human race' unless you mean the IMF.
Still the Marseillaise has always had a purity and power, as militant as the words are.
The second part of the riddle is if everybody governs, who are the governed? Do they all just try to boss each other and protect turf like bureaucracies, corporate and public?
Ever wonder how the cleaning agencies get by E-Verify these days? You get one clean set of valid documents and reprocess the other crews on the valid ids. Works like a charm. I have no faith in licensing or e-verify.
Our amigos in Radiant Info Systems (Slave Labor Out of Indian Prisons) are writing RFPs for State Departments of Transportation in Washington and California. Hey, why not just hire slaves? Keep it simple.
Ending the Corporate Domestic International Sales credit/deduction is very difficult when the same company employees who will buy your congressional seat, are the ones who would vote down changing the tax laws. Their lobbyists in the CoC will remind you quickly, senator.
Now they can pay for as many propaganda campaign videos and ads as necessary.
We have said before that a progressive solution to illegal immigration magnets of construction, landscaping, ag, and food service would be unionization. Even if those unions had modified strike privileges, like compulsory arbitration. No business owners could get screwed that way.
Of course, the criminal element, like the Chamber of Commerce would oppose anything that says 'Union'. Both MLK and Cesar Chavez fought for unionization of these 4 industries until the dates of their deaths. Maybe you explain like that. Or maybe you say, this is real border security.
See "Wealth of Nations" on the Dutch Tulip Mania.
It does not matter if you can afford it. It is a matter of whether you can actually buy real estate. A humane form of government would find ways to make shelter available. This might involve
adjusting the amortization of mortgages for partial pay-off, with ReFi. Usurers and speculators will never allow any such notion.
That's what I'm referring to and don't forget, in the House unemployment version are a host of corporate tax modifications that remove the incentives to offshore outsource your job. That's what I want passed.
So, my complaint is the focus on public sector jobs, whereas the real focus should be on private sector jobs and that would be manufacturing and STEM, that's what is needed here.
The government could create a host of service jobs in a heart beat. All they would have to do is ban the offshore outsourcing of state and federal contracts. There are millions of jobs, but these are public sector jobs, which could be created if they were brought back to the U.S.
But construction jobs I would say you're creating jobs for illegals frankly. The wages dropped like a stone due to the use of illegal labor in a lot of these areas. That's why IBEW parts ways with the SEIU on illegal immigration. They have been hit hard with illegal labor, non-trained, not certified, workers and so on.
So instead of 'raising up the private sector' as you suggest Obama wants another $50 Billion dedicated to the public sector. Thats why I posted what I did. The admins emphasis is on the healthiest segment of the economy rather than where it needs help.
Am I wrong about that?
If I am show me where the admin is doing anything for the private sector and please no reference to the $400 work credit since that is distributed to everyone. Any thing to do with Government contracts is also public sector since those are bid rigged and in someones pocket before the ink is dry.
It seems to me that the ONLY thing of any importance here is public sector jobs period.
I also highly doubt that with the GLUT of unsold homes on the market that we are ANYWHERE near another housing bubble.
What I can't understand is why it seems my only choices appear to be spending tax money to support banks or public employees? Thats the retort when ever I say there is too much emphasis on public employment although the illegals is a new twist - I know better than to get into that because if I ranted about illegals stealing work from citizens I'd be labeled a racist whether its true or not. McCarthyism at its best.
The report also featured large downward revisions to sales rates for April (446,000 vs. 504,000 previously) and March (389,000 vs. 439,000) that raise questions about the power of this stimulus, which was extended from a November 30 deadline (for completed sales) to April 30 (for signed contracts) and June 30 (for completed sales).
The median sale price for a new home is now at its lowest level since 2003.
Of course construction collapsed, it's seriously overbuilt. Prices are just still too high, out of alignment with the median wage.
I just don't understand why you keep railing on gov. workers, the reality is the private sector needs to be raised up to where the gov. workers are, not pull the gov. workers down.
Private sector means good paying manufacturing jobs. The high unemployment rates on construction, well, frankly, illegals did come into construction and greatly lower wages, union bust, just like meatpacking, various service sector jobs, agriculture, and other areas.
I don't know about you, but considering the high unemployment rates, the last thing I'm concerned about is creating jobs for illegals over U.S. citizens.
That said, 63% of GDP is the Banksters and that isn't creating jobs here at all, so instead of playing glorified gambling and buying U.S. treasuries on free money, playing the spread, forcing the financial sector to invest in the real economy...
that would create some real jobs, the production economy, the one that makes stuff.
but this continual focus on government workers is just off the wall at this point. You do not want to pull them down simply because private sector workers are getting shafted so badly. We want to pull the private sector up and past the gov. workers wages, job security, pensions, retirement and benefits.
The construction sector already has over 20% unemployment while government sector unemployment is at 3.4% nationwide.
From the tone of whats written here you'd think that the government sector was in much worse shape.
There are less people working in the private sector in order to maintain public sector employment. Public sector jobs are tax negative no matter how someone spins it.
The top card in the mortgage house of cards was the Credit Default Swap. There was a thought to have real credit insurance but that lost to the synthetic security. As long as the billions poured in, no questions asked.
Insiders at AIG will tell you that Greenberg personally allowed Cassano (Drexell, Barbarians at the Gate) to set up shop in London with minimal adult supervision, fully aware that law and regulation were both scoffed.
Elizabeth Warren of CBO is warning that AIG will not repay the TARP fully. We will be stuck for $35 billion that AIG attempted to dodge through selling itself to Prudential PLC in Hong Kong. Liz points the finger for the AIG mess at Geitner as NY Fed Chief.
We should be screaming aloud that we are trying to negotiate with criminals. Looks like Joe Lieberman & Co. need the Kill Switch. Lieberman insists that "civil libertarians" reviewed the legislation and there is nothing we should fear. I say, that there is a reason he got that kiss from W at the 2003 State of the Union Speech.
I have kind of given up. Congress and indeed much, if not all, of govt is so captured, at this point, that nothing of significance is going to be done, and we all know it. It is more important to fund boondoggles to the middle east and provide a nonstop stream of corporate welfare than it is to fix our economic problems here at home.
By the mathematics, these things are not mathematically valid. Then, on top of it, one cannot computationally, prove they are not "stuffed" or biased.
Congress, regulators, politicians just completely ignore this, or any analysis from the scientific or even the structured finance/statistics experts.
How can one build a product, put a price on that, when the model itself is flawed?
So, how anyone can "trade" in structured/securitized CDOs, CDSes and other derivatives that don't even hold up by the mathematics, never mind there is no way to verify their holdings are not "stuffed" or biased (Abacus, etc.), I don't see how they are allowed.
Then, on top of it, I agree, with no escrow, collateral, capitalization, this is just pure folly. It's like a glorified dutch tulip bulb trade.
I read today that Russ Feingold is introducing new legislation, pushing for real reform. But I imagine just like health care, once this bill is passed, it's off the legislative agenda to actually reform anything. There is even debate to make the SEC "self financing", i.e. no funding to hire the right people, fund enforcement, investigations on some of the regulators.
The true test of financial reform has always been whether Synthetic securities like CDOs and CDS's require meaningful escrow coverage.
This last financial crisis has made the word "security" into an oxymoron as financial institutions have been allowed to issue these securities with nothing backing them up.
In order to estimate the escrow requirements, we need to estimate the correlated risk just as is done routinely by issuers of insurance under regulation of the insurance commissioner.
Fire insurance written on homes sprinkled over the US for example, might require only 5 or 10% of the face value (eg value at risk) to be placed in escrow. Hurricane insurance written on properties in Miami Beach, on the other hand, would require 50% or more of insured value to be placed in escrow.
The financial collapse of 2008 proved that the losses associated with the financial instruments being issued was highly correlated--everything went South at the same time. Therefore meaningful financial reform must include putting at least a third of the value at risk in escrow. I would suggest that it is only fair that this escrow be held in the form of US treasuries as a great amount of them was created to cover the risks previously taken.
The graph doesn't cover up to 2010. 1984 u6 matches 1927 u6 for a short period. Society is different. I.E. back then if you needed a house the community would get together dig a basement with shovels and then build you a house for a few thousand, well much cheaper than what it is today. Comparing these things are apple to oranges. The biggest thing that I'm trying to say is social factors are not taken into account. Women work now for instance. Woman may still have a social fabric as social customs linger.
I can whistle the Internationale, but the words never sounded very good in English. The Internationale always sounds better in German, French, Spanish, Danish. Everyone working for the government, or government taking over all jobs, is socialism, in the crudest and most ignorant sense.
I still like Bill Haywood's model, not Lenin's.
It's not looking like 'the International will be the human race' unless you mean the IMF.
Still the Marseillaise has always had a purity and power, as militant as the words are.
The second part of the riddle is if everybody governs, who are the governed? Do they all just try to boss each other and protect turf like bureaucracies, corporate and public?
Ever wonder how the cleaning agencies get by E-Verify these days? You get one clean set of valid documents and reprocess the other crews on the valid ids. Works like a charm. I have no faith in licensing or e-verify.
Our amigos in Radiant Info Systems (Slave Labor Out of Indian Prisons) are writing RFPs for State Departments of Transportation in Washington and California. Hey, why not just hire slaves? Keep it simple.
Ending the Corporate Domestic International Sales credit/deduction is very difficult when the same company employees who will buy your congressional seat, are the ones who would vote down changing the tax laws. Their lobbyists in the CoC will remind you quickly, senator.
Now they can pay for as many propaganda campaign videos and ads as necessary.
How many public sector jobs are needed to pay the wages of a single public sector job through taxes?
We have said before that a progressive solution to illegal immigration magnets of construction, landscaping, ag, and food service would be unionization. Even if those unions had modified strike privileges, like compulsory arbitration. No business owners could get screwed that way.
Of course, the criminal element, like the Chamber of Commerce would oppose anything that says 'Union'. Both MLK and Cesar Chavez fought for unionization of these 4 industries until the dates of their deaths. Maybe you explain like that. Or maybe you say, this is real border security.
See "Wealth of Nations" on the Dutch Tulip Mania.
It does not matter if you can afford it. It is a matter of whether you can actually buy real estate. A humane form of government would find ways to make shelter available. This might involve
adjusting the amortization of mortgages for partial pay-off, with ReFi. Usurers and speculators will never allow any such notion.
That's what I'm referring to and don't forget, in the House unemployment version are a host of corporate tax modifications that remove the incentives to offshore outsource your job. That's what I want passed.
So, my complaint is the focus on public sector jobs, whereas the real focus should be on private sector jobs and that would be manufacturing and STEM, that's what is needed here.
The government could create a host of service jobs in a heart beat. All they would have to do is ban the offshore outsourcing of state and federal contracts. There are millions of jobs, but these are public sector jobs, which could be created if they were brought back to the U.S.
But construction jobs I would say you're creating jobs for illegals frankly. The wages dropped like a stone due to the use of illegal labor in a lot of these areas. That's why IBEW parts ways with the SEIU on illegal immigration. They have been hit hard with illegal labor, non-trained, not certified, workers and so on.
So instead of 'raising up the private sector' as you suggest Obama wants another $50 Billion dedicated to the public sector. Thats why I posted what I did. The admins emphasis is on the healthiest segment of the economy rather than where it needs help.
Am I wrong about that?
If I am show me where the admin is doing anything for the private sector and please no reference to the $400 work credit since that is distributed to everyone. Any thing to do with Government contracts is also public sector since those are bid rigged and in someones pocket before the ink is dry.
It seems to me that the ONLY thing of any importance here is public sector jobs period.
I also highly doubt that with the GLUT of unsold homes on the market that we are ANYWHERE near another housing bubble.
What I can't understand is why it seems my only choices appear to be spending tax money to support banks or public employees? Thats the retort when ever I say there is too much emphasis on public employment although the illegals is a new twist - I know better than to get into that because if I ranted about illegals stealing work from citizens I'd be labeled a racist whether its true or not. McCarthyism at its best.
existing home sales median price was $179k.
With wages stagnant plus unemployment so high, that's still a house payment of about $1600 a month around, with property taxes and insurance.
Who can afford that? Also, property taxes are out of control in many regions.
Past month sales were revised lower as well:
The median sale price for a new home is now at its lowest level since 2003.
Of course construction collapsed, it's seriously overbuilt. Prices are just still too high, out of alignment with the median wage.
I just don't understand why you keep railing on gov. workers, the reality is the private sector needs to be raised up to where the gov. workers are, not pull the gov. workers down.
Private sector means good paying manufacturing jobs. The high unemployment rates on construction, well, frankly, illegals did come into construction and greatly lower wages, union bust, just like meatpacking, various service sector jobs, agriculture, and other areas.
I don't know about you, but considering the high unemployment rates, the last thing I'm concerned about is creating jobs for illegals over U.S. citizens.
That said, 63% of GDP is the Banksters and that isn't creating jobs here at all, so instead of playing glorified gambling and buying U.S. treasuries on free money, playing the spread, forcing the financial sector to invest in the real economy...
that would create some real jobs, the production economy, the one that makes stuff.
but this continual focus on government workers is just off the wall at this point. You do not want to pull them down simply because private sector workers are getting shafted so badly. We want to pull the private sector up and past the gov. workers wages, job security, pensions, retirement and benefits.
The construction sector already has over 20% unemployment while government sector unemployment is at 3.4% nationwide.
From the tone of whats written here you'd think that the government sector was in much worse shape.
There are less people working in the private sector in order to maintain public sector employment. Public sector jobs are tax negative no matter how someone spins it.
I would like to see the rating agencies held to a higher standard. I mean in what world is it feasible that an MBS would get a AAA rating?!?
The top card in the mortgage house of cards was the Credit Default Swap. There was a thought to have real credit insurance but that lost to the synthetic security. As long as the billions poured in, no questions asked.
Insiders at AIG will tell you that Greenberg personally allowed Cassano (Drexell, Barbarians at the Gate) to set up shop in London with minimal adult supervision, fully aware that law and regulation were both scoffed.
Elizabeth Warren of CBO is warning that AIG will not repay the TARP fully. We will be stuck for $35 billion that AIG attempted to dodge through selling itself to Prudential PLC in Hong Kong. Liz points the finger for the AIG mess at Geitner as NY Fed Chief.
We should be screaming aloud that we are trying to negotiate with criminals. Looks like Joe Lieberman & Co. need the Kill Switch. Lieberman insists that "civil libertarians" reviewed the legislation and there is nothing we should fear. I say, that there is a reason he got that kiss from W at the 2003 State of the Union Speech.
I have kind of given up. Congress and indeed much, if not all, of govt is so captured, at this point, that nothing of significance is going to be done, and we all know it. It is more important to fund boondoggles to the middle east and provide a nonstop stream of corporate welfare than it is to fix our economic problems here at home.
By the mathematics, these things are not mathematically valid. Then, on top of it, one cannot computationally, prove they are not "stuffed" or biased.
Congress, regulators, politicians just completely ignore this, or any analysis from the scientific or even the structured finance/statistics experts.
How can one build a product, put a price on that, when the model itself is flawed?
So, how anyone can "trade" in structured/securitized CDOs, CDSes and other derivatives that don't even hold up by the mathematics, never mind there is no way to verify their holdings are not "stuffed" or biased (Abacus, etc.), I don't see how they are allowed.
Then, on top of it, I agree, with no escrow, collateral, capitalization, this is just pure folly. It's like a glorified dutch tulip bulb trade.
I read today that Russ Feingold is introducing new legislation, pushing for real reform. But I imagine just like health care, once this bill is passed, it's off the legislative agenda to actually reform anything. There is even debate to make the SEC "self financing", i.e. no funding to hire the right people, fund enforcement, investigations on some of the regulators.
The true test of financial reform has always been whether Synthetic securities like CDOs and CDS's require meaningful escrow coverage.
This last financial crisis has made the word "security" into an oxymoron as financial institutions have been allowed to issue these securities with nothing backing them up.
In order to estimate the escrow requirements, we need to estimate the correlated risk just as is done routinely by issuers of insurance under regulation of the insurance commissioner.
Fire insurance written on homes sprinkled over the US for example, might require only 5 or 10% of the face value (eg value at risk) to be placed in escrow. Hurricane insurance written on properties in Miami Beach, on the other hand, would require 50% or more of insured value to be placed in escrow.
The financial collapse of 2008 proved that the losses associated with the financial instruments being issued was highly correlated--everything went South at the same time. Therefore meaningful financial reform must include putting at least a third of the value at risk in escrow. I would suggest that it is only fair that this escrow be held in the form of US treasuries as a great amount of them was created to cover the risks previously taken.
Is everyone just absolutely so disgusted with all that is going on they are silent?
Myself, considering how you cannot get the right things done on almost every issue am assuredly in that camp, but still, I'm hoping people pipe up.
The graph doesn't cover up to 2010. 1984 u6 matches 1927 u6 for a short period. Society is different. I.E. back then if you needed a house the community would get together dig a basement with shovels and then build you a house for a few thousand, well much cheaper than what it is today. Comparing these things are apple to oranges. The biggest thing that I'm trying to say is social factors are not taken into account. Women work now for instance. Woman may still have a social fabric as social customs linger.
from the GDP report government spending is factoring in very little as it is. The growth was primarily inventory changes and then consumer spending.
Pages