patrick.net

edvard2 says

zzyzzx says

I don't think it's just a small portion of people abusing welfare benefits. Particularly when half the people on "disability" could easily work a job,

Making things up to prove a point doesn't really make the point very valid. SO you "think" half of the people on welfare are able to work? Hmmm... Curious how that conclusion was arrived at other than just being pulled out of the air.

100% of those on welfare are able to work. The 50% refers to those on SSI and state disability programs.

dodgerfanjohn says

100% of those on welfare are able to work

I can make up crap too. Its easy.
100% of the population LOVES anchovies on their pizzas. True cuz; I said it.

anonymous says

The Nobel economics prize has brought public attention to the Efficient Market Hypothesis.

The hypothesis might work but there is no "price discovery"when there is artificially manipulated interest ratesx and government regulations and subsidies

Conventional wisdom says our own homes are a great place to invest money because the value of a house will inevitably appreciate.

One of Shiller's most eye-popping findings actually says quite the opposite: Historically, between 1890 and 1990, the actual rate of return on owning a home has been virtually non-existent.

We think housing is a great investment.

Shiller says it's not.

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/housing/2013/10/economist-who-just-won-nobel-prize-thinks-housing-terrible-investment/7240/

Dan8267 says

The problem is that economics isn't a science. It's supposed to be but economics refuse to use the scientific method and thus economics is a religion.

Not all sciences are exact sciences. The economy is a black box masking a fantastically complex reality and all we have are a few observations on the outside. Economics make theories and these may be far from capturing the entire mechanism but it doesn't mean they are useless as long as they capture enough of it.

A theory doesn't have to be perfect to be useful. Most of the time Newton's theory of gravity is sufficient to explain reality.

Unfortunately economics are subject to politics and vested interests, which is why it is so hard for it to be purely objective.

John Bailo says

We think housing is a great investment.

Shiller says it's not.

All signs are that we are in an historical abnormal period with regard to housing prices.

Once all the printed money starts getting spent, inflation will hammer housing prices.

Heraclitusstudent says

All signs are that we are in an historical abnormal period with regard to housing prices.

To which signs do you refer?

Heraclitusstudent says

Once all the printed money starts getting spent, inflation will hammer housing prices.

Why would inflation not hit housing as well as everything else?

I guess I was wrong:
http://gma.yahoo.com/walmart-stuck-most-food-stamp-shopping-spree-211120842--abc-news-topstories.html

Walmart is stuck with the bill for letting food stamp queens go nuts with funny money in its stores! Hurray for the taxpayer! I guess

tatupu70 says

Why would inflation not hit housing as well as everything else?

Because they are already inflated.

Heraclitusstudent says

tatupu70 says

Why would inflation not hit housing as well as everything else?

Because they are already inflated.

Housing payments are secondary to food and gas. And the banks have already shown they won't evict immediately.

Bap33 says

Bush's fault. No patnet libs will utter a word about this. It looked like an Obama - Trevon ralley.

We need to stop all giveaway govt. support.
No more EBT,no type of assistance checks, no individual or business subsidies, no entitlements(SSI,Medicare,Medicaid,etc.)
paid for with tax dollars.Since Rep/Con/Teas are such great leaders I'm sure they will be the first to remove themselves from all this Socialism.

Heraclitusstudent says

Because they are already inflated.

lol--OK then.

mell says

I'd say that it beats turning $100 into $200 via a printing press and claiming you have bettered the economy.

Isn't printing money and giving it to the TBTF banks a pretty good example of "supply-side" economics? :-)

Heraclitusstudent says

Unfortunately economics are subject to politics and vested interests, which is why it is so hard for it to be purely objective.

Very true.

Bigsby says

What the major companies do in Asia they'd do in Europe and the US if they had the opportunity. What do you think has contributed to them not being able to do the same anymore?

Jesus loves Good White People more, that's why.*

*There are people who actually believe that America's prosperity is because America is God's Chosen Nation, and invoke Old Testament teachings to make their case.

edvard2 says

Making things up to prove a point doesn't really make the point very valid.

Sure it does. If Fox News says it, it's The Truth.

The whole far-right-wing worldview is based on "appeal to authority."

How old is the earth? 10,000 years. Why? The Bible says so.

Why is homosexual behavior evil? The Bible says so.

Why will a modest increase in capital gains taxes crash the economy? The TV-box said so.

Why are all people on welfare lazy bums? My daddy said so.

Critical thinking is too hard. Let others do the thinking.

freak80 says

edvard2 says

Making things up to prove a point doesn't really make the point very valid.

Sure it does. If Fox News says it, it's The Truth.

The whole far-right-wing worldview is based on "appeal to authority."

How old is the earth? 10,000 years. Why? The Bible says so.

Why is homosexual behavior evil? The Bible says so.

Why will a modest increase in capital gains taxes crash the economy? The TV-box said so.

Why are all people on welfare lazy bums? My daddy said so.

Critical thinking is too hard. Let others do the thinking.

I have no clue if Fox News reports on these matters or not. My experience comes from real life.

Spend some time in the courthouses in Long Beach or Compton(or better yet the juvenile courts...Kenyon and Eastlake will suffice), and report back.

I'll be waiting.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/food-stamp-free-for-all-after-ebt-glitch/

edvard2 says

So my question for all of the righty-wingers who think GM and Chrysler should
have failed, what would that have done to the economy?

The right wingers have selective memory, because there's been some pretty big bailouts handed out by republicans.
Here's some other companies that were bailed out.

http://www.propublica.org/special/government-bailouts
Savings & Loan 1989 After the widespread failure of savings and loan institutions, President George H. W. Bush signed and Congress enacted the Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act in 1989. (What happened after the bailout?) $293.3 billion

Airline Industry 2001 The terrorist attacks of September 11 crippled an already financially troubled industry. To bail out the airlines, President Bush signed into law the Air Transportation Safety and Stabilization Act, which compensated airlines for the mandatory grounding of aircraft after the attacks. The act released $5 billion in compensation and an additional $10 billion in loan guarantees or other federal credit instruments. (What happened after the bailout?)

dodgerfanjohn says

Spend some time in the courthouses in Long Beach or Compton(or better yet the
juvenile courts...Kenyon and Eastlake will suffice), and report back.

I'll be waiting.

Any such "evidence" would be purely anectodal.

Of course some people abuse welfare systems. And it's not a good thing.

To find out the actual extent of the problem, we'd need actual data. Going to a few bad neighborhoods and seeing poor people laying around doesn't prove anything.

Ayn Rand happily took her Social Security check, and used Medicare.

Now, why on Earth would Disability claims be skyrocketing? It wouldn't have anything to do with an aging population, right? I mean, demographic facts, that's Commie-nism!

thunderlips11 says

It wouldn't have anything to do with an aging population, right?

It's because getting on disability is easier than getting a job. Just watch a few episodes of Judge Judy and you will see her questions plenty of able bodies people on disability.

Bap33 says

I did read on here, and on the net, and in the paper, and saw on Fox, that CONSERVATIVES give more to PRIVATE public help "programs" than self-profressed non-conservatives do. Ever heard that?

You've garbled the claim, and there's little reason to believe this assertion:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/10/21/study-conservatives-and-liberals-are-equally-charitable-but-they-give-to-different-charities/

"Charity" is what is usually said, not "private help". Conservatives are more likely to donate to religious groups, and liberals more so to secular ones. You donated to build a new roof on your megachurch, meanwhile there's a veteran sitting on the stoop begging for money great work!

Vicente says

"Charity" is what is usually said, not "private help". And as pointed out in
this article quite a lot of tithing and church donations may not go directly to
helping individuals. You donated to build a new roof on your megachurch,
meanwhile there's a veteran sitting on the stoop begging for money great
work!

This is an excellent point. When T. Boone Pickens gives $165M to Oklahoma State Football, that is hardly "charity." It is leveraging taxpayer money (because he would have payed taxes on a portion of this donation) to specifically benefit one portion of the state's budget.

Cronyism at its finest.

Say hey! This was in the Wall Street Journal on March 30, 1999. Note "... how much it will buy."

Holy cow/interesting/compelling ...!

And where is it up to date??? Right here ... see the first chart shown in this thread.
Recent Dow day is Wednesday, October 16, 2013 __ Level is 98.1

WOW! It is hideous that this is hidden! Is there any such "Homes, Inflation Adjusted"? Yes indeed, go here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1219038&c=999083#comment-999083

what lib program is not funded by taxpayers or Soros?

I get my disability check and *POW*! Down to Pants n' Nat!

Wait, college sports isn't already corrupt?

Bap33 says

I did read on here, and on the net, and in the paper, and saw on Fox, that
CONSERVATIVES give more to PRIVATE public help "programs" than self-profressed
non-conservatives do. Ever heard that?

You mean like this one?

Sean Hannity’s Freedom CONcert Scam: Almost None of Charity’s $ Went to Injured Troops, Kids of Fallen Troops; G5s for Vannity?

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/6938/sean-hannitys-freedom-concert-scam-only-7-of-charitys-money-went-to-injured-troops-kids-of-fallen-troops-g5s-g6s-for-vannity/

Or this?

Non-Profit Pays Bristol Palin $262,500, Donates Only $35,000 to Charity

I knew there was a lot of money to be made in the non-profit industry, but I didn’t know anyone would so blatantly abuse their position at a supposed charity. For every dollar Bristol gave to the cause, she gave $7.50 to herself.

Her charity, the Candie’s Foundation, also spent $165,000 on advertising. That’s another $4.71 for every dollar given to charity.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/04/06/non-profit-pays-bristol-palin-262500-donates-only-35000-to-charity/

Vicente says

You donated to build a new roof on your megachurch, meanwhile there's a veteran sitting on the stoop begging for money great work!

Well put.

Bap33 says

what lib program is not funded by taxpayers or Soros?

Sure you want to go there? The ENTIRE Tea Party is basically one giant astroturf, invented front created by conservative billionaires whom use it as a cover, telling their eager followers one thing- that any and all things that benefit them like air, water, and environmental regulations, healthcare, taxation, social programs, energy policy and so on are all a bunch of liberal/socialist/communist ideas and then using that misplaced influence to get what they want through government.

As we have just seen, the tea-party led government shutdown cost the US economy 10's of Billions of dollars. So in other words, ironically the Tea Party did exactly the OPPOSITE of what its supposed stated mission was- which was to reduce spending. Well they cost us a LOT of money instead.

In other news, it's a great time to buy. NAR says so.

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Comptroller says

It was pure as the driven snow until the REALTORs started twisting it.

Jerry Sandusky was a REALTOR.

Facebooksux says

Better switch positions and buy while you can.

Mind if I permalink your comment? ;-)

We'll see what happens a year from now...

I don't buy a lot of precious metals just a few collectible coins for fun. I will buy more when price drops below 1000.

freak80 says

Facebooksux says

Better switch positions and buy while you can.

Mind if I permalink your comment? ;-)

We'll see what happens a year from now...

Not at all.

SJ says

I don't buy a lot of precious metals just a few collectible coins for fun. I will buy more when price drops below 1000.

Realize that collectible coins are a huge ripoff. You get more for your BERNANKEbux by simply buying modern coins.

Here is another story of a Realtor who baited, kidnapped, held for hostage, and then murdered a super model.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/16/fehmina-chaudhry-pakistani-murdered_n_4110955.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D392696

http://www.professionalrealtygroup.net/content/agentpage.html/519914

He specializes in first time buyers and new houses. I guess that means he gets kickbacks from the builder's for bringing in the suckers.

edvard2 says

It was his presidency in which this law was passed. Nuff said. Either way, this President has certainly gotten more done, and of those- better things done- than his predecessor.

Yeah, well Nixon pretty much proposed/invented the EPA around 1970, which was "created for the purpose of protecting human health and the environment by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress", yet I don't see liberals falling over themselves in celebrating Nixon's efforts on this.. 'nuff said.....

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

Yeah, Obama's gotten a lot done, or UN-done.

- You think the Middle-East is more stable or less stable siince he took office?

- Do you think our allies (UK, Turkey, Israel, Japan, etc) trust us more or less since Obama took office?

- Do you think small business owners and entrepreneurs are facing a more hostile or less hostile environment since Obama took office?

- Do you think Americans feel their privacy is more intact or less intact since we've learned about Obama's abuse of the NSA and in particular the IRS being used as a weapon of political nature?

- Since the abortion called Obamacare was rolled out a couple of weeks ago, you think Americans trust the gov't more in how our health care is managed, or trusts the gov't less since Obama lied to us about 'keeping our doctors', that 'rates will go down'?

Face it, those too naive to see it, Obamacare is a massive voter-buying wealth re-distrubition whirlpool of shit. He's ruined a system that gave 300 million Americans a decent (but not perfect) healthcare industry, all in the name of getting 17 million poor people health care. That's it in a nutshell. Wait till more and more companies health care contracts expire. More and more voters will get fucked and dumped into Obamacare. They will lose their doctors, and pay more for less service....

AAAAAND, they will remember Obama's lies back in 2009/10 when they vote in 2014.

AverageBear says

Yeah, well Nixon pretty much proposed/invented the EPA around 1970, which was "created for the purpose of protecting human health and the environment by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress", yet I don't see liberals falling over themselves in celebrating Nixon's efforts on this.. 'nuff said.....

Its not like Nixon was totally enthralled with the EPA when it passed. Ever since then the GOP has been trying its damnedest to have the powers of the EPA reduced. So if your narrative is about the supposed good-hearted, well-intentioned Republicans then your point is sort of pointless given how the GOP acts in regards to environmental protection.

Pretty much everything else on your list was in play well before not only the current administration, but well before the last, and the one before that. And so I find it ironic that you are somehow attaching these as things that have been "Un-done" since it wasn't this administrations.... "Doing" in the first place.

As far as the "wealth distribution" bullshit, when will that crap ever die? It never had a premise when it started other than some lame yakking point from the McCain campaign, and it doesn't have a premise now.

lastly, after this latest GOP/Tea Party induced debacle, where the shutdown THEY and THEY ALONE created, and did so despite even members of the GOP themselves saying the shutdown over Obamacare was doomed to fail, this cost the US economy something like over 20 BILLION dollars.

So anyone who thoughtlessly and unquestionably believes and follows every little whim that the GOP or Tea Party says has zero rational grounds to make any sort of claim against Democrats when their party themselves did more to damage the economy and take money out of people's pockets than the make-believe. hocus-pocus liberals they always like to blame things on as a means to detract from their own failings. So you want to complain about Redistribution? The GOP JUST DID THAT VERY THING!

In the end, the historical outcome is the same. Conservative Americans are wrong this time, every bit as wrong as they have always been in this country, and no matter how many times they use the same McCarthy-era scare tactics ( oooohhh! Communists/Socialists!", I personally take comfort in knowing that despite their noise they will lose. every. single. time. Just like they did last night, and just as they will going forward.