Show Comments That Contain...
  • On 18 Sep 2014 in Instead of QE, the Fed Could Have Given $56,000 to Every Household in America, Reality said:

    control point says

    Reality says

    Instead of QE or cash hand-outs, what would have worked was a 1-2 year tax holiday. Tons of jobs would have been created.

    Except the opposite is true. A tax holiday would have only encouraged profit taking and would not have not created jobs or investment.

    The primary beneficiary of a tax holiday would be the middle class and upper middle class ($60k-350k annual income range), the real job creators, through their small businesses and their discretionary spending. They are also the ones facing the highest effective tax rate. It's the 25-30% income tax + 15% payroll tax crowd that would benefit the most in percentage terms and discretionary spending terms from a year-long tax holiday, not the 15% capital gain tax crowd.

    Why invest in the future when you will have to pay taxes on the return, when you can put 100% to the bottom line today?

    The same reason why investing at all at any time: the expectation of higher returns. Keeping 100% in cash can mean only one thing: 0% return at the best.

  • On 18 Sep 2014 in Instead of QE, the Fed Could Have Given $56,000 to Every Household in America, Reality said:

    Strategist says

    Look at it this way.......we would be lining up in soup kitchens if we went into a severe depression. The $4 trillion prevented that.

    No. The pictures of soup kitchen lines during the early 1930's were results of Hoover and FDR policies preventing market from clearing. When the market rapidly liquidated and cleared during the more severe but short-lived 1921-22 recession when Harding refused to intervene, long soup kitchen lines did not materialize. What the $4trillion has done is keeping many financial criminals out of jail as the depositors have not lost money on paper therefore not calling for their heads, while the careers of the millions of young and the retirement of millions of middle-aged are jeopardized by the massive transfer of wealth to make up for the losses.

  • On 18 Sep 2014 in Instead of QE, the Fed Could Have Given $56,000 to Every Household in America, Reality said:

    Peter P says

    I think using that to back small-business loans would be more productive.

    Government backing for any loan is a bad idea. What's missing in this economy is profitability. More mediocre players kept afloat in any industry by loans would only result in even lower profit margins (and money siphoned from the industry to the banksters). The competent businesses have cash reserves to finance their own expansions into new lines of business. No loans required.

  • On 18 Sep 2014 in Instead of QE, the Fed Could Have Given $56,000 to Every Household in America, Reality said:

    Instead of QE or cash hand-outs, what would have worked was a 1-2 year tax holiday. Tons of jobs would have been created.

  • On 17 Sep 2014 in Iwog Idiocy Strikes Again, Reality said:

    Iwog says

    You acknowledge that wages have increased or even surpassed purchasing power during the entire time the dollar has fallen in value.

    Improving living standards has been the norm since Industrial Revolution (or the "industrious revolution" preceding it, meaning the rapidly increasing volume of trade that preceded and enabled the Industrial Revolution itself). The crucial issue is rate of improvement. The rate of real wage increase for the working class had been much faster prior to the scourge of fiat money stealing their fruits of labor. 2-4% annual real wage increase was the norm in the late 19th century and early 20th century US, prior to the ever increasing intervention of the central bank and its cronies since 1913.

    If someone held cash for a hundred years they would get hurt, but who does that?

    Those who are less wealthy are likely to have far greater percentage of their net worth in the form of cash, simply because they do not have the wherewitheral to invest in assets that grow with inflation, such as stocks and real estate. The wealthy are far more likely to be leveraged in investing in those assets. Notice, leverqage in investment, not leverage in consumptive personal debt due to lack of income keeping pace with inflation.

    However at the same time, you pretend that deflation will help everyone because things will be cheaper.

    Deflation would bankrupt the badly run companies and make people making loans to those badly run companies eat the result of their own bad investments, making room for new and better run companies. It is this Darwinian process for corporations/businesses that make the market place efficient and benefit real humans. When the government intervene to save badly run companies, it passes the Darwinian selective pressure onto the real human beings instead!

    bob2356 says:

    What is so hard to grasp about the concept that "purchasing power" is a function of work compared to goods and services, not a function of the number on a piece of paper. If you do the same amount of work for the same amount of goods and services then you have the same purchasing power. Period.

    Inflation does not hit all sectors of the market place evenly. Those closer to the money printing (the cronies) get the newly printed money first, and therefore achieve greater purchasing power at the expense of those who get the money later.

  • On 16 Sep 2014 in White House makes it official, US at War with ISIL, Reality said:

    thunderlips11 says

    If we enforced a Middle East Arms embargo, they would be back to spears and swords because the whole region, except for perhaps Israel, is incapable of producing an indigenous musket, much less a fighter or a tank.

    However, giving them fighters and tanks would also mean they can't fight anyone in any war without us selling them ammo and replacement parts.

  • On 16 Sep 2014 in Rin's corroboration with a female ex-classmate, Reality said:

    Rin,

    Go hit the campuses then. Mt. Holyoke??

  • On 16 Sep 2014 in Rin's corroboration with a female ex-classmate, Reality said:

    Don't get married, don't settle down. Do consider having some kids.

  • On 16 Sep 2014 in Iwog Idiocy Strikes Again, Reality said:

    Iwog wrote:

    The Professor says

    The real cause of the dollars demise is these endless wars.

    The Professor says

    Wow, I never noticed how steep the dollar crashing slope went after creation of the fed!

    Translation: Reality is whatever you decide it is.

    Actually, central banking and the government's ability to wage wars are related. The founding of the FED at the end of 1913 was quickly followed by WWI in the summer of 1914. The central bank was also a major enabling factor in allowing WWI (1914-1918) to continue for as long as it did, then followed by WWII (1939-1945), instead of being a short war like everyone had expected.

  • On 16 Sep 2014 in Iwog Idiocy Strikes Again, Reality said:

    Iwog wrote:

    What you see in the red circle below is a first class fucking brought on by the California gold rush. You'll notice that the slope is greater and the loss more destructive than any other time on the graph including after the creation of the federal reserve.

    The steepest part of dollar purchasing power decline in the 19th century was due to the Civil War. The cited graph itself is rather problematic: the granuality of the plotting seems to be one data point per decade, then using straight line segments to connect those dots, resulting in a misleading graph due to sampling rate being too coarse. The late 1850's actually saw money supply tightening due to the Californian gold rush ending. The steep decline in the graph from mid-1850's to mid-1860's was misrepresented by that straight line segment. It should have been a rise in the late 1850's, followed by the Civil War massive monetary expansion and debasement in the first half decade of the 1860's.

    Furthermore most people in involved in this massive devaluation died before seeing any kind of recovery.

    The Californian gold rush started in the late 1840's, and by the late 1850's, the mine output was slowing down. That crunch contributed significantly to the arrival of the Civil War. It's dishonest to claim natural gold or silver discovery would lead to sustained monetary expansion that cause prolonged one way debasement longer than a typical life time. The Californian gold rush lasted less than a decade (1849-1855). After the war started, government borrowing and printing became the driving force for debasing the dollar. Even then, money value was increasing by the late 1860's, and then rapidly (too rapidly) after the 1873 Coinage Act demonetizing silver. It's a lie to claim most people died before the 6-7 year long gold rush was over.

    The reason why Austrians lie is that if they didn't, they wouldn't have anything to say at all.

    What's presented above has little to do with "Austrian Economics"; they are just basic economics and basic history.

  • On 16 Sep 2014 in Iwog deleted my comment because he is a pussy, and has NO sense of humor, Reality said:

    iwog says

    There was a point when he wanted to fuck with the board, but decided against it. He picked "rentingsusan" because being anonymous was a novelty.

    Anyway he's 18 now and doesn't really care anymore.

    Are you morons really trying to start a conversation about where my wife's allegiance lies? If you want to know the truth, she reads this blog and is often stunned at the stupidity. That is why she bumped all the crybaby threads.

    Haha, allegedly 18yo son who has identity crisis and wants to "fuck with the board" LOL. Like father like son, I suppose, even for made-up characters.

  • On 6 Sep 2014 in Iwog deleted my comment because he is a pussy, and has NO sense of humor, Reality said:

    iwog says

    Call it Crazy says

    Looks like Iwog is busy with his Alt accounts today...

    It's no secret that my wife and son are on this board. If you actually looked at her comments, you'd know this already.

    Wow! How old is your "son"? and why is he calling himself "Susan" and pretending to be renting?

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Rin,
    Howard Hughes was married 2 or 3 times in his life. The last one lasted nearly a decade and half after dating the girl for a decade. The divorce resulted in the equivalent of about $2mil per year in alimony payment to her (70,000 per year in 1971 dollars)

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Exactly. In a eusocial society, some are worker bees, some are reproductive bees.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Iwog Idiocy Strikes Again, Reality said:

    It was not in one continuous bubble the last 30 years, because it was not in a continuous rise the last 30 years. Was part of the last 30 years in _a_ bubble? Including the latest run-ups? Entirely possible.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Duh, obviously don't waste any time with any women past the late 20's, unless she has a meal ticket from you for having born a child for you.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Why taking anyone to candlelight dinner or dance if you don't want to plough her? Why waste your time?

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Yes, that guy in Saigon is enjoying a lease, not paying for a time share or by the hour rental. Not only is she exclusive for him, I bet he could tell her to secure a 3 some for him if he wants to. Don't be afraid of woman. Just because women picked meat heads over you in college doesn't mean you are still at the lower rung now. Men's value increase over time if you make something of yourself.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Rin,

    I was not asking why you spend money and time on providers abroad, but why money and time on women with whom you are not planning on having sex or baby.

    With more shacking abroad and "I don't give a shit, my way or highway," on top of your career success, you will soon be pulling 7 ' s and 8's.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    ZDX did not have the new direct ignition engine. The new direct ignition engine delivers much more lower end torque than previous Honda engines. I just bought a new MDX with SH-AWD. It drives like a sports car despite being an SUV. In fact turns faster than my previous BMW 5 series sedan without dynamic torque distribution. The X6 with dynamic torque distribution similarly equipped would cost close to $100k.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    4000lbs, 300hp, SH-AWD, dynamic cruise control with automatic following/braking and lane keeping during the 4-5 hours drive on I-91 to Montreal. I see Rin spending $40 - 60k on an Acura TLX or MDX (the latter has the best crash results among any car not requiring a commercial driver's license) before the year is over.

    Edit: just saw your "will do" after posting. Haha. Engineering minds think alike.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Iwog Idiocy Strikes Again, Reality said:

    tatupu70 says

    Reality says

    You were essentially asking why the sky is purple. The answer is you are

    hallucinating.

    Let me refresh your memory--I asked whether you thought the Bay Area was in a bubble for the last 30 years.

    I don't think that's asking if the sky is purple. If you think it's ridiculous--then a simple "no" would seem the appropriate answer.

    The implied assumption in your question was that prices kept going up throughout those 30 years. That assumption is not correct, as I pointed out earlier, there was a retracement in the early 2000's. Asking the question that you did is akin to asking why the sky is purple assuming everyone else is seeing a purple sky, when sober people are seeing a blue sky.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Rin, here are some of the things that you are missing:
    1. Massive acceleration with dynamic torque distribution enhanced handling. Porsche and BMW charge an arm and leg for it, but Acura is offering it at reasonable price under the moniker SH-AWD. At least upgrade that Accord to a new TLX, which costs a small fraction of what you are blowing on the girls. Winter trips to Montreal is safer with AWD.

    2. Unprotected sex with an exclusive partner.

    3. Not being timed. A full weekend with one of your providers would probably cost much more. You are comparing timeshare to full ownership or lease. You can get a Porsche for a couple hundred for the day but it is not the same as even a 3 yr lease at $1k/mo.

    4. Volunteer house cleaner, and gift shopper for other family members; I.e. A personal assistant.

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Rin, why do you waste time and money on the women at all if you are not even interested in their poon or reproductivity?

  • On 2 Sep 2014 in Why do ppl promote the lie, 'Money Doesn't Bring Happiness' ?, Reality said:

    Rin, that $3.6k is per year, not per month. I'd suspect your hobby costs about $3k/mo.

    The $1k per month cost fir the Porsche includes depreciation too, on a 3-5 yr replacement cycle.

Home   Tips and Tricks   Questions or suggestions? Mail p@patrick.net   Thank you for your kind donations

Page took 241 milliseconds to create.