patrick.net

Ugh, revisionist history to promote a political agenda isn't proof. Just because an academic who is infatuated with St. Reagan wrote an article that is an opinion piece that agrees with your opinion doesn't mean that your hypothesis is proven. Again, there is a huge difference between fact and opinion or belief.

China is very different than the former USSR. Here's a hint... China is a country with only a few different ethnicities. The USSR was an empire with many different ethnicities that all hate each other. It was a an empire of very different countries patched together through force. Comparing apples to oranges isn't helping to prove your hypothesis.

Dan8267 says

To be fair, some of the increase in the price in gold is justified. I just don't think the lion's share is.

It depends on what year's dollar purchasing power you are using to measure gold, because the purchasing power of the dollar has been steadily declining.

For instance, see this chart:

corntrollio says

immigrant says

Speaking of coins, read this interesting article on how some people have scammed the system to gain travel miles!

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/113129/fly-for-free-us-mint-forbes?mod=bb-budgeting

You guys realize that people have been doing this for years, right? Check out FatWallet or some similar site.

My impression, however, was that credit card companies had started cracking down on this too -- e.g. in some cases calling this a cash transaction instead of a normal purchase, or alternatively excluding these sorts of purchases from points.

Why would the credit card company care? Wouldn't they be making the 2-3% from the mint?

This occurred when Reagan was president? Really?

No it did not happen during Reagan's presidency.

And what is wrong with what Obama said. He is 100% correct:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/06/poll-swing-state-voters-tax-wealthy-deficit_n_891485.html

Depends on the poll and the wording, as always. Big difference between "Do you support raising taxes?" and "Do you support raising taxes on millionaires to help solve the budget problem?"

When it's phrased the second way, you get the numbers Obama is talking about, and with good reason.

80% of Americans support being taxed

80% of Americans are patriots willing to tax someone else more likely

In WW2 when millions of people were putting their bodies on the line the rich were expected to put their fortunes to work with up to 88% marginal tax rates (50% marginal rate hit at $200,000 income in today's money).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1942#Tax_on_individuals

I'm all for cutting back big government to avoid high taxes on the rich. Knock yourselves out, conservatives.

archaeonflux says

When it's phrased the second way, you get the numbers Obama is talking about, and with good reason.

The biggest lie going today is equating millionaires with "job creators".

Just the usual Republican bullshit messaging/propaganda.

The Bush tax cuts sure as hell didn't create any jobs, and the Clinton tax rises actually did. Funny how that worked.

I wonder what percentage of Teabaggers do not pay federal income taxes. I'm guessing that a decent percentage of the 47% that Teabaggers always claim don't pay taxes are Teabaggers. That's almost one in two, maybe you?

I fail to see the endless fascination with gold. I'm glad idiots are buying and hoarding it though because it is buffing my mining stocks.

I imagine there is some Scrooge McDuck sitting in a cave somewhere on top of his pile of gold like a leathery dragon thinking to himself, "I'm rich my precious, rich!"

Where is your daughter, old man? Oh yeah, she's smoking a J and banging the Mexican pool boy. Follow my investment advice: Sex, Drugs, and Hip Hop. These are paths to great wealth.

Truthplease says

No it did not happen during Reagan's presidency.

Then it's irrelevant to the discussion because we were talking about St. Reagan's alleged role in "defeating" the Soviet Union.

It's interesting how extreme political thinkers simply rewrite history to suit their ideological needs for propaganda.

Don't expect the rest of us to share in the delusion, OK?

I believe Reagan was great and that is all that matters to me.

Reagan sucked. Over-committed us to military spending, which we had to cut back on in the 1990s, and none of that was a good investment, except for the part that was necessary to boot Saddam out of Kuwait with minimal casualties.

Along with the Democratic Congress, tripled the national debt:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=18H

and by deregulating financial oversight too much allowed the S&L crisis to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars.

His biggest crime was nominating Scalia to the supreme court. What a clown that guy has been.

simchaland says

China is very different than the former USSR.

Right on.

Another Major difference: The Chinese economy revolves around making consumer goods for import using a great deal of imported raw materials; Russia was the opposite - exporting raw materials for hard currency and finished goods.

When Oil prices plummeted in the 80s, Russia's means of generating hard cash evaporated.

Scanning the thousands of hopped-up faces in the crowd, I am immediately struck by two things. One is that there isn't a single black person here. The other is the truly awesome quantity of medical hardware: Seemingly every third person in the place is sucking oxygen from a tank or propping their giant atrophied glutes on motorized wheelchair-scooters. As Palin launches into her Ronald Reagan impression — "Government's not the solution! Government's the problem!" — the person sitting next to me leans over and explains.

"The scooters are because of Medicare," he whispers helpfully. "They have these commercials down here: 'You won't even have to pay for your scooter! Medicare will pay!' Practically everyone in Kentucky has one."

A hall full of elderly white people in Medicare-paid scooters, railing against government spending and imagining themselves revolutionaries as they cheer on the vice-presidential puppet hand-picked by the GOP establishment. If there exists a better snapshot of everything the Tea Party represents, I can't imagine it.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/210904

If you ever go to a Tea Party, do NOT smoke. If there is a spark, BOOM, there goes half the Republican base.

Yeah, HW.

Here's more Taibbi Greatness, this time addressing what Troy said above about millionaires.

To most people, the undeserving rich guy is the ex-police lieutenant down the street who's been collecting a six-figure pension for years after spending two decades writing traffic tickets before retiring at 43. Seeing that guy lounging in the dugout pool you paid for with your constantly rising property taxes is enough to piss anyone off, which is why it's not hard to understand where a lot of that Tea Party anger is coming from.

But if you want to see a real asshole, you have to somehow get invited to things like the $5 million birthday party of another guy on Sirota's list, private equity creep Steven Schwarzman. After throwing his elaborate fete for himself, Schwarzman -- who is said to make $400 million a year, and made $600 million when his company went public -- compared Barack Obama to Hitler for even considering rolling back his carried-interest exemption, which, again, allows him to pay 15% taxes while some of the rest of us pay twice that or more. "It's a war," he said. "It's like when Hitler invaded Poland."

If you think your local Andy Griffith is a greedy pig because he retired in his forties and built an addition to his garage with your tax money, try hanging out with a guy who eats $400 crabs, throws himself $5 million parties where he is serenaded by Rod Stewart and Patti Labelle (who sang "Happy Birthday"), and then compares the president to Hitler when word leaks out that he might have to pay taxes at the same rate as a firefighter or a kindergarten teacher.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/the-new-let-them-eat-cake-20110713

The Antoinette Class. I'm definitely using that one.

thunderlips11 says

"The scooters are because of Medicare," he whispers helpfully. "They have these commercials down here: 'You won't even have to pay for your scooter! Medicare will pay!' Practically everyone in Kentucky has one."

"GET YUR GUMMINT HANDS OFF MAH MEDICARE!"

Seriously, the Republicans are good at marketing. How else do you take a bunch of people who aren't well off, convince them that a bunch of lib'ruls and commies want to take their jobs (not really, because those people want skilled jobs), that a bunch of tax hikes to millionaires and deregulation for big corporations will make their lives better, etc. and then f**k them in the a** while doing so? They are so much better than the Democrats at getting people to vote against their own economic interests.

Just read all the ignorant comments by Teabaggers on that link the OP sent. Then look at the HuffPo link HousingWatcher said.

Troy, don't forget the Iran-Contra Affair. Where's Ollie North these days?

simchaland says

Troy, don't forget the Iran-Contra Affair. Where's Ollie North these days?

I'm a proud Gemorran

On Fox News. Where else?

i'm too old to be a porn star, don't have connections to be a drug dealer and not black so can't do hip hop. I'm a bit SOL here.

SoCal Renter says

Follow my investment advice: Sex, Drugs, and Hip Hop. These are paths to great wealth.

This is going to blow big time. Do not touch metals.

Troy says

Reagan sucked. Over-committed us to military spending, which we had to cut back on in the 1990s, and none of that was a good investment, except for the part that was necessary to boot Saddam out of Kuwait with minimal casualties.

Reagan was great; I might use that name for my next born son. I am sure anybody on here could just tear down any president they wanted to.

I''ll admit that Reagan had a personality that was very good for a figure head.

He was the don't worry, Daddy will make everything okay president.

He was the "don't worry, just consume and be happy" president who was ideal for our self centered narcissistic populace. He helped us to put off facing up to making necessary improvements in our government and our culture.

Aside from that, and making possible the terrible debt situation we have today, he was great.

hmm, Reagan did in fact elevate Bullshit over Governance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit

after it quadruples maybe

That's funny Troy.

I think we should start a movement to get Regean to replace Franklin on the one hundred dollar bill. Also, it is time to expand Mount Rushmore. Regean would fit just next to Lincoln.

If they ever build the asses of the presidents on the back side, that would be a fitting tribute to GW Bush.

leoj707 says

Troy says

One would like to think folks like Shrek are getting paid to post their BS

I have often suspected this. Or hoped rather, because yeah the alternative is worse.

If someone is paying 'em to write this crap, they're not getting their money's worth. They could at least hire someone with the ability to formulate thoughts into coherent sentences.

ppexx says

This is going to blow big time. Do not touch metals.

1600

Where can it stop? I am watching the price since it was on $1400 something and stopped investigating in it thinking it will come down.

Behold,...Shreks logic skills.

shrekgrinch says

Really? Tell us: Did you ever get a job from a poor man?

That is among the dumbest things you have ever said. So every restaurant owner is rich? Bill Gates was rich when he started Microsoft?

Even if being rich was a requirement to be an employer, it says nothing about whether being rich makes someone an employer. As someone else suggested recently, maybe to Shrek, learn about biconditional statements, ie if and only if, ie "necessary and sufficient" conditions.

How did short plays go?

I have been on vacation almost a month not watching stocks.

But pleased to see my AAPL doing fine.

Vicente says

How did short plays go?

I'm guessing that's a rhetorical question? Or just a poke with a sharp stick?

Murdoch getting grilled today in London...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2011/jul/19/phone-hacking-rupert-murdoch-rebekah-brooks-mps

... and he got pie in the face - literally!

marcus says

Even if being rich was a requirement to be an employer, it says nothing about whether being rich makes someone an employer. As someone else suggested recently, maybe to Shrek, learn about biconditional statements, ie if and only if, ie "necessary and sufficient" conditions.

You should be asheamed of yourself marcus. Didn't you get the memo? Your not supposed to say "rich." Your supposed to say "job creator."