comments by housingcasino4865

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Wed, 18 Jul 2012, 9:41am PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 1

All calculated and planned. How to devalue a currency: limit the supply of goods, let prices rise, then increase the supply.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Thu, 12 Jul 2012, 5:39pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 2

Dan8267 says

The Earth is clearly getting warmer and man, by burning massive quantities of fossil fuels, is clearly the reason. The only reason to deny global warming and climate change is to keep up short-term profits at the expense of destroying the planet's ecosystem.

Do you have any proof that "man" has caused global warming? Guess what, there isn't any. Global warming is about limiting production to make the cost of living go up or at the very least, not go down. We live in a world where technology continues putting upward pressures on all currencies, most of which are fiat. The only way to devalue is to price-fix. Global warming/carbon trading achieves this goal.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Tue, 10 Jul 2012, 8:16pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 3

wthrfrk80 says

Cloud seeding isn't going to have a "massive" impact on weather. And it's too imprecise to use as some kind of economic "weapon."

So after 50 years, we've made no progress in weather modification technology? Looks like you're the loon.

As for the economic impact, well, here ya go buddy:

As usual, the trading is "insider" based.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Mon, 9 Jul 2012, 12:35pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 4

http://worldvisionportal.org/lln/index.php/2011/09/one-cell-one-light-rosalind-peterson/

"One Cell One Light: Rosalind Peterson on Weather Modification, Hedge Funds and Derivatives

September 14, 2011: Guest Rosalind Peterson

While controlling the weather is most often presented as fantasy, such as the super powers of Marvel Comics character Storm, modern technology has made it relatively easy to influence certain weather patterns. In fact, there are weather modification programs ongoing in over seventy countries throughout the world – including here in the United States. These programs are far from secret, as many are advertised and government-run. But what most people don’t realize is the extent to which these programs can also influence our economy – and not in ways you’d expect."

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Mon, 9 Jul 2012, 12:22pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 5

http://www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org/?q=weather-modifications

"Welcome to the Weather Modification Section of the ADC Website

Weather modification has been ongoing for decades in the United States. It was perfected during the Vietnam War leading to the ENMOD Treaty signed by the United States. However, this has not stopped a whole host of weather modification programs and experiments being initiated or are now ongoing in the United States and with increasing frequency in many foreign countries.

The profound impact of these ever-increasing and highly sophisticated weather experiments and programs are radically changing our climate and local weather conditions in many areas. Your local weathermen are not reporting these events leading many to believe that some man-made weather is either extreme or unusual...thus, the public is unaware of many of these programs."

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Mon, 9 Jul 2012, 12:19pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 6

wthrfrk80 says

housingcasino4865 says

I meant to say, actively and *openly* modifying the weather. If you haven't found that out yet, try removing the rock that's above your head.

rotfl! Are you nuts or just trolling?

Boy, you are a d***ass. Just one example:

http://cwcb.state.co.us/water-management/water-projects-programs/Pages/%C2%ADWeatherModificationProgram.aspx

"Weather Modification Program New Draft Rules and Rulemaking Hearing The CWCB has drafted updated Colorado Weather Modification Rules and Regulations for the Department of Natural Resources. These rules are specific to the permitting of ongoing commercial weather modification operations in Colorado. "

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Mon, 9 Jul 2012, 12:13pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 7

wthrfrk80 says

housingcasino4865 says

And we know that governments and corporations are now actively modifying the weather.

You're kidding right? With what? A giant "laser" up on the moon?

I meant to say, actively and *openly* modifying the weather. If you haven't found that out yet, try removing the rock that's above your head.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Mon, 9 Jul 2012, 12:06pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 8

robertoaribas says

tatupu70 says

wthrfrk80 says

tatupu70 says

The most commonly accepted definition of inflation is simply--rising prices.

So that means when we finally run out of fossil energy to power our machines, we will have "massive inflation." Even if it's really just a reflection of the fact that we won't be able to produce 1% of what we did before.

Yep. If you look back at the stagflation in the late 70s--much of it was attributable to oil prices...

both of you have no idea what inflation is... the change in price of any one commodity or asset class is NOT inflation or deflation. Inflation or deflation are changes in the amount of MONEY chasing all commodities and assets...

We have seen computers and many other items get much cheaper due to technological innovation, but that has nothing to do with deflation...

I respectfully disagree with Robert and I concur with tatupu70. While the correct definition of inflation is an expansion in the money supply, most people including top investors such as Marc Faber tend to describe it as rising prices. I myself don't care how much money is in circulation, and whether it is expanding or contracting is immaterial. What matters is the cost of living, which is usually rising. For the monetary purists vs. lay folks: inflation = price inflation. No need to argue over it.

Now as to why prices tend to go up, especially in the USA, for the most part, it's due to price manipulation, not supply and demand, at least, not in the long term. That is, supply chains are often disrupted temporarily to get prices to go up. But the supply usually recovers. The objective is to make prices "stick" at higher price levels.

Examples:

1. Water quotas in California that create artificial shortages so agriculture prices are driven up. Once everyone has accepted the higher prices, quotas are lifted. If prices go down, quotas are reinstated.

2. Agriculture 2: bacteria scares are often used as an excuse to force farmers to dump millions of pounds of perfectly good fruits and vegetables: lettuce, tomatoes, peppers, etc. Because of the (temporary) shortage, prices go up. After a few months, people will accept the higher prices and production will return. Don't forget this makes land prices go up too. So, if you (as a farmer) were planning on lowering prices after full production, your lease might now be higher.

3. Agriculture 3: "bad weather" is often used to temporarily limit the supply. And we know that governments and corporations are now actively modifying the weather.

4. Government sponsored "kill" programs for local cattle farmers to reduce the supply of beef, milk, etc. As local farmers are eliminated, shortages are created, prices go up, then corporate farms take over and eventually increase the supply. But at higher price levels, of course.

5. Over-hyped natural disasters (and manufactured disasters) such as the Indonesian hard drive shortage that was supposedly due to excessive flooding.

6. More on electronics: in 2006, all electronics mfgs were required to be RoHS compliant in the name of public safety. In actuality, RoHS compliance was/and still is about consumer electronic price-inflation. It has been estimated that electronics went up 10% on average.

7. Oil prices are driven up in different ways: middle eastern instability, environmentalists/regulators responding to phony disasters such as the gulf platform explosion, etc. In the case of oil spills, the people will demand: "something must be done!" Then politicians are used to demonize the oil industry. The solution: shut down the refineries. In other words, shut down production so prices can go up.

8. Energy: phony disasters such as the Fukushima nuclear plant flooding. The intention was to shutdown the Fukushima plant and many others in Japan and around the world. Grand purpose? Make energy prices up.

I can go on and on. The point is, price-inflation is usually the result of price-fixing, not supply and demand. This is how governments devalue their currency.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Wed, 27 Jun 2012, 4:19pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 9

It's not the interest rate. It's affordability, which is determined by total household income (or whoever is paying the mortgage). And you must inflation adjust all variables.

You can make a case for any outcome (house prices up or down) if you only pick one variable.

Example: inflation -3%, total household income +5%, interest rates +2%. Then you can say, Golly Gee! See, aw told you, houses prices go up when interest rates go up!!! Hardy harrr.

Reverse example: inflation -3%, household incomes -15% (layoffs, depression, etc), interest rates at -3% = house prices go down!

A more realistic example: inflation +7%, household incomes +5%, interest rates +3%: house prices go up. Obviously they'll go up because affordability goes up.

On the other hand, this what a lot of people believe today: inflation +%6, household incomes +1%, interest rates +2% = houses prices go down.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Sun, 17 Jun 2012, 2:22pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 10

Patrick says

Why is it that places with basically no democracy or human rights (Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Venezeuela) have all the oil?

Because we want it that way, Patrick.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Tue, 8 May 2012, 8:49pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 11

wthrfrk80 says

samsmom says

ALL GONE!! I think we now pay over 50% of our income to taxes. Why even bother working hard??

We have an appt with a new CPA on thursday to see if we can get our tax structure reworked so we can keep more of our money and finally buy a house!!

The solution is to raise the capital gains taxes on ultra high net worth individuals. And to quit getting into endless wars that we can't win.

Eventually we'll need to introduce euthanasia since we won't be able to afford care of all the baby boomers.

Here we go with the capital gains tax. Do any of you realize that much, and in some cases all of the capital gains are inflation?

You buy shares for $100,000

18.5 years later you sell at $200,000

With the historical annual rate of inflation of 3.5%, over those 18.5 years your purchasing power is reduced by 50%.

Net gain in real terms = $0.00

In nominal terms = $100,000

Now you pay a tax of $15,000!?

With this type of investment you lose 7.5% of your purchasing power. Better than losing 50%, but still, you lose.

And people want to raise capital gains taxes!???

Do you not realize this is a game the government plays: wealth confiscation through inflation?

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Tue, 8 May 2012, 6:57pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 12

samsmom says

How are all these people only paying 24% taxes over 200k? My husband is a "salaried partner" who works 80 hours per week, and finally got a raise last year after 5 years of building a business to 12 employees including 7 lawyers. All of his raise went to taxes. Not only does the govt take about 44% per paycheck, they asked for another 26k on April 15 which was the money we saved to put toward a downpayment on a house. ALL GONE!! I think we now pay over 50% of our income to taxes. Why even bother working hard??

We have an appt with a new CPA on thursday to see if we can get our tax structure reworked so we can keep more of our money and finally buy a house!!

The reason it's showing 23% is probably because of deductions like real estate depreciation for investment properties. Sadly, it's only a temporary tax reduction because when you sell, all that depreciation is "recaptured". So their real tax rates are higher.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Tue, 8 May 2012, 6:53pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 13

xenogear3 says

housingcasino4865 says

I can only imagine how many loopholes they exploited to get it down to that number: 23% !!! 'Believe that?? A mere 23% while everyone else is paying 5%-14% !!!!

The poor people also pay the 7% Social Security Tax.

The chart only shows >$200k. It includes some poor people who make less than $1 million.

If you look at >$10 million, the tax rate is only 15%.

Someone who makes $200K a year and has over a million in assets is a "millionaire". Isn't that who you want to raise taxes on? If it's 10-millonaires and over then why don't you socialists say it from the start? Most millionaires that I know are paying far more than 23% in taxes.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Mon, 7 May 2012, 11:09pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 14

I can't believe this! Everyone is paying between 5%-14% while the top tier is paying only 23%!!!! Those rat bastards!

I can only imagine how many loopholes they exploited to get it down to that number: 23% !!! 'Believe that?? A mere 23% while everyone else is paying 5%-14% !!!! Raise their taxes!!! Make 'em pay their fair share!!! Come on... everyone else does!

EAT THE RICH!

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Mon, 23 Apr 2012, 3:09am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 15

They're supposed to adjust for size, but I'm not 100% sure. Relative to the rest of the world, food prices are actually still too cheap. Or you could say the rest of the world is paying too much. Back in the 60's 24% of Americans were overweight. Today over 60% are overweight. In 2011 there was a slight decline. I wonder why...

"For the first time in more than three years, more Americans are a normal weight (36.6%) than are overweight (35.8%)."

Note: 27.6% are obese. So the majority are still overweight.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/149975/americans-normal-weight-overweight.aspx

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Sun, 22 Apr 2012, 7:38am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 16

thunderlips11 says

The very headline is manufacturing consent:

"Disagree with how the official statistics are measured, and you're a conspiracy theorist on par with Moon Landing Deniers."

Using substitute goods is a valid principle, but unnecessary when measuring CPI.

Why?

The principle of substitute goods will effect the price of the item being tracked, so there is no good reason to 'switch' to tracking a substitute good. And then you are no longer measuring the price of the original good or service.

So there is no reason to incorporate that into CPI metrics - unless one is trying to make inflation look lower than it is.

Homo Economicus. A Legendary Creature, like Bigfoot, claimed to exist by Pseudoscientists.

Conspiracy theorist!

It's a propaganda piece. Why stop at bananas, how about the entire produce dept, then the meat dept? The truth is, there's even more inflation than people realize, waiting to be unleashed. Producers have been eating higher input costs for a long time now.

Anyhow, since they're talking out of the rears, I'll make this observation: back in 1994 Charmin Toilet Tissue 4 PK cost $1.89 for an everyday discounted price. Today it's $3.89. Annual rate of inflation after 18 years: 4.1%. BLS's claim: 2.46%.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Sun, 22 Apr 2012, 6:40am PDT   Share   Quote   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 17

rowemoore says

SiO2 says

Rowemore, you do pay a lot more on FICA, with both spouses self-employed. I'm the sole earner at a w2 job so pay much less FICA than you do. The worst case for that would be a dual-self-employed where both spouses make $100k. They'd pay around 15% in FICA alone, before fed and state tax. Whereas a sole earner making 200k with a stay-home spouse would pay about 6% since SS tax only goes to 100k. That doesn't seem fair.

I have a friend, trust fund baby, who makes more than twice what I make and pays much less in federal taxes. Investment income.

And he should pay much less. Chances are the money he's receiving from his trust was already taxed once. Are you in favor of double taxation? Everyone should realize the reason we have estate taxes is to keep the upper middle class and quasi millionaire (5-10 mil) from rising up to the level of the 100+ millionaire and billionaire elites. For obvious reasons. Socialist policies discourage investment and hard work and more importantly: competition, which is a perfect thing for bigwig socialists like Warren Buffett.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Sun, 22 Apr 2012, 5:15am PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 18

SiO2 says

Housing casino,

Can I ask, how can you pay more than 45%? The highest I can imagine is 35% fed, 9% ca, 2.9% Medicare if one is self employed and pays both ends of Medicare tax. The total is 46.9%, but on income over 388k, and assuming no deductions whatsoever. So it looks really difficult to pay this much. I make mid six figures (I won't claim to be middle class with such income), pay about 23% fed and 8% ca, due to deductions. But I don't really have anything warren buffet-like; no carried interest, not much capital gains, no real estate depreciation.

Please educate me, I really don't see how someone could pay that high percentage in taxes under current law.

California tax rate does not max out at 9.3%.

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Sun, 22 Apr 2012, 3:19am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 19

Meccos says

I think its easy to say taxes should be higher if you are not already paying 43.9% (federal and state), like I am.

Well you're lucky. Many of us are paying more than that. And that doesn't include property taxes, sales taxes, hidden taxes (fuel, energy, etc). But in the end, I guess it really doesn't matter because the rich always find a way to pass the tax burden onto the citizens. Either through rent increases (property owners), price hikes (business owners), and layoffs/pay cuts/wage freezes/etc. The ultra rich understand this dynamic, that's why the majority are socialists. Go ahead, vote for taxing the rich. That's what was sold to everyone before the introduction of the Income Tax. It was only meant for rich people. Now everyone pays it. The AMT was only meant for a certain group of rich people, which were in the hundreds back in the 70's, but now 10s of millions of Americans are paying.

If you want to make the argument that capital gains should be raised, I can perhaps see an argument to that.

Anyone who thinks that capital gains tax is too low should consider inflation-adjusting these supposed gains. What if your investment only keeps up with inflation? Suppose you keep $100,000 in the bank for 10 years and there is no inflation, would it be right for the government to take $15,000 because one day you decide to pull the money out?

housingcasino4865   befriend   ignore   Sun, 22 Apr 2012, 3:17am PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 20

"I have known that Limbaugh and other Right-wingers have been lying and finally decided to present the facts in graphical form, as shown below."

And by calling republican right-wingers liars are you suggesting that left-wingers are honest?

home   top   share   link sharer   users   register   best comments   about