Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Money and Finance > Economics


Thanks Tree29Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 27th, 2018, 12:56 PM   #41
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
Thank you, but as I've mentioned before, I have no special, formal education other than high school and the necessary course work needed for apprenticeships in machining and tool&diemaking. Although the introduction of CNC(computerized) machines starting in the 80's requires regular upgrading and has changed a lot of the work from manual to programming/though this is all dumb technology, and manual adjustments still have to be made.

But, I work to live/not live to work! So, on my own time...even back when I was in high school, I was always interested in exploring deeper into history and social and physical sciences than any course work offered. I just wanted to know stuff and have questions answered...the part about making any of this a career choice wasn't really on my radar cause I couldn't envision sitting in a classroom after grade 12 or pursuing an academic career...which was a lot easier back then than it is today, where even major scientists and researchers have turned into prostitutes to try to scare up the funding necessary to pursue any work they consider important. Instead of working for institutions, they're really working for corporate sponsors today!

What's sad is that if I go back a previous generation or two, my father...who came of age just as the Great Depression was starting, only had a grade 5 education...like most farm kids on the east coast; yet he had no trouble reading newspapers(that have actually been dumbed down in recent decades) or important papers, do his own income tax, and when WWII broke out, nearly all the men of conscription age who had that similar grade school education were deemed literate enough and sufficient in basic math to pass the induction tests as enlisted men for the Army or Navy. But, most important, people of my father and mother's generation(who was a little younger) seemed to have a greater desire to learn new things than any generation after the TV age that us boomers grew up in. Educators worried that TV was making us less literate and turning children into passive consumers. All this "smart" technology we have today is even worse! The 'smarter' the technology gets/ the dumber the people become!


Most of us...especially outside the Chicago area didn't know about a certain billionheiress named Penny Pritzker, who has been the power behind the scene of Chicago Democratic Party politics. For reasons that nobody really understood when the 08 campaign got going, she got behind an essentially green candidate, who was brand new on the national scene..just arriving at the right time and providing the fresh face the Party wanted for a Senate candidate. And within a year, he's running for president. And it's not a throwaway campaign to build his name nationally, it's a really serious campaign that gathers big donors on Wall Street in a year when it was assumed to be "Her Turn!" That, and all the big money...so big that Obama opted out of the old, inadequate campaign finance reform for matching funds, and just pocketed twice the money the McCain Campaign could take in in the General Election.

With all that, it was pretty damn obvious that Obama would never prosecute fraud on Wall Street, nor bailout mortgageholders with 'liar loans.' And a Democratic Party that failed to take on Wall Street or help mortgageholders had nothing to offer when the fake "Tea Party" got kicked off by CNBC with attacks on those who were bankrupted by this fraud...not to mention their neighbors likewise ruined as foreclosed houses were abandoned and left for arsonists...destroying property values in neighborhoods consigned for gentrification. America discovered it had a rightwing pro-business party and a do-nothing pro-business party!

Yeah, the worst thing about Trump is that he pretended to be something of an FDR or at least a Teddy Roosevelt- who went after the monopolists directly back at the turn of the century. Part of it was Trump has always been faking how much he is actually worth, and he was looking at achieving high political office as a business opportunity above all else! So, he is even more tightly constrained than the usual opportunist seeking high office, since he doesn't seem to care about anything outside of his own personal needs and he is at least as dumb as Reagan if not stupider!
Ouch, ouch, ouch, don't say that! The truth hurts too much. Who wants to think Trump saw the presidency as an opportunity to increase his personal wealth and his family's dynasty? Does anyone want to think the Kennedy's, the Bush's, the Trump's are ordinary families with ordinary dreams? Politics are played on different levels and those families are not playing on the same level of the average family, and I wonder if we can wrap our heads around what is really happening at the top?

The poor boy who makes good is going to owe someone. Only if we get corporate powers out of politics will any of them owe us the people. But unless we are prepared by education to make good decisions, the masses will not make good decisions. So we are back to when someone could function with no more than a 5th-grade education, and they could read their newspaper and get unbiased news. I don't think it was just TV that made the difference. Replacing liberal education, education for independent thinking and good moral judgment, with education for technology for military and industrial purpose, groupthink and leaving moral training to the church, did we get a mass of people in adult bodies functioning like children and blaming others without having a sense of responsibility themselves.

I think you said, you had a father who felt responsible for learning and making decisions, and you are following in his footsteps, eager to learn and make your own independent decisions. And the population of those educated to participate in a democracy has been replaced with a population that has been dumbed down and is now passive consumers who are easy to take advantage of. Is that right?

If you disagree, then you are a dumbass and don't know what you are talking about. How is that for an intelligent and meaningful statement?

However, Obama was also supported by Hollywood and people who dream of a better world, and I think we can unite, but we have to be smarter. We can not just be idealists. We need to understand the facts of life and economics. Having a few from father's generation with us, might clean up the mess we are in.
Thanks from right to left
Athena is online now  
Old January 27th, 2018, 01:12 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
When there are major design flaws on a construction site, often the entire structure has to be torn down to the foundation and started over again! I see something similar in how everything called "progressive" and "green" today is all about tinkering with the system we have now than informing people that survival of future generations will require a complete cultural overhaul and a complete end to all notions that we are in any way not subject to nature's cycles. The human race has been in overshoot for decades and local ecosystems do not allow any species..including humans to continue drawing down and degrading their environmental niches beyond what can be replenished.

I wish that, when it comes to all non-renewable mined resources, that people understood the obvious: all metals and minerals taken from the earth are finite resources! They should be used sparingly/not sqaundered by capitalist consumer societies! And as resources are drawn down, the environmental damage increases..because more earth has to be extracted, refined, milled and smelted..requiring ever-greater amounts of energy to be expended. People should look up The Red Queen's Race...yeah that Red Queen from Alice In Wonderland! Lewis Caroll was on to something when he put that in the story. And along with our faster and faster running to stay in place, more and more toxic metals and minerals are brought to the surface unwittingly...poisoning habitats because these elements had been buried for millions and even billions of years...so biological organisms have no defenses against them or tolerance for their effects!
The bible warns of the end days and tells us God is making a new place for us. Just read your bible.

Actually, ancient philosophy associated fire with life and said there would be a time when the fire would need to consume more than what is left to consume. We might be smarter today, but I don't know if we are any wiser?

I have no idea why so many arguments against thinking in terms of a finite world are being made? When I look for links to explain our finite reality, I find explanations about why we don't need to worry about finite reality. It is like the purpose of the internet is to make us stupid!

Last edited by Athena; January 27th, 2018 at 01:15 PM.
Athena is online now  
Old January 27th, 2018, 04:36 PM   #43
Senior Member
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kekistan
Posts: 3,968
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
You are funny. You skipped over the Reagan years and the erroneous idea that deregulation is a good thing. At least you are not giving Trump credit for our improved economy because you said presidents do not have this power. But, I still have deep concerns about how his policies will affect our economy and standing in the world.

The stock market is like watching a troop of chimps who have their moments of excitement and then their moments of being calm. It is much too influenced by emotions and speculations. And I have to say, if all the business folks are making things good now and they could have done so in the past but just chose not to, I would like them to know I think their lack of patriotism and willingness to make things good for everyone, is shameful. Absolutely shameful!
The Reagan years speak for themselves. Every time I hear the Reagan blame game it is always the same narrative. Its never that something bad happened during the Reagan years, it was always something much much later. Proof is in the numbers. Reagan years was very good years due to the fact we had a extremely popular President and a Democrat speaker of the house who understood he had to deal with Reagan and did so. Tip O'Neal has was a good speaker for the Reagan years. Reagan and O'Neal made compromises to get things done. Albeit many of the compromises were not so grand. Such as the big dig in Boston.
guy39 is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 08:14 AM   #44
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
The Reagan years speak for themselves. Every time I hear the Reagan blame game it is always the same narrative. Its never that something bad happened during the Reagan years, it was always something much much later. Proof is in the numbers. Reagan years was very good years due to the fact we had a extremely popular President and a Democrat speaker of the house who understood he had to deal with Reagan and did so. Tip O'Neal has was a good speaker for the Reagan years. Reagan and O'Neal made compromises to get things done. Albeit many of the compromises were not so grand. Such as the big dig in Boston.
The bad thing that happened is the oil counties united and the US lost control of the oil industry. Carter's response to that was to invest in alternative energy and tell us we need to conserve so our real oil supply from our own oil wells would be enough to meet our needs.

Reagan flat out lied to us and a failure in our education system made it possible for him to get away with the lie. He said we do not need to conserve and at that time, the only way that was possible was getting control of oil again. The plan for doing this was using military force, and the result is not only the economic pain resulting from slashing domestic budgets so that money could be poured into military spending but increasing the opposition to US power in all oil countries. When the leader of Iran called the US Satan, this was well founded, and when Bin Laden attacked the military-industrial complex, he was not attacking the citizens of the US. Laden's targets were very specific to the Military Industrial Complex that the Eisenhower administration put into place and Eisenhower warned us about.

The shift in power and wealth following the Reagan years is not my idea of a good thing. Reagan was a good actor and his role as President of the US was his best role and he played it very well. But he is not the person who wrote the script. His understanding of the world was seriously lacking as he lived in a fantasy.
Athena is online now  
Old January 28th, 2018, 10:01 AM   #45
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
The Reagan years speak for themselves. Every time I hear the Reagan blame game it is always the same narrative. Its never that something bad happened during the Reagan years, it was always something much much later. Proof is in the numbers. Reagan years was very good years due to the fact we had a extremely popular President and a Democrat speaker of the house who understood he had to deal with Reagan and did so. Tip O'Neal has was a good speaker for the Reagan years. Reagan and O'Neal made compromises to get things done. Albeit many of the compromises were not so grand. Such as the big dig in Boston.
Thanks for more Reagan mythologizing! The overlooked fact of the 2nd term economic boom attributed to Reagan was that increasing oil supplies ended the OPEC stranglehold on the global oil market, and oil dropped below $10.00 per barrel again. Just as Carter had to deal with malaise of an oil embargo and oil prices hitting 35 to 40 per barrel for the first time in history, Reagan got to be on the job when things went back to normal...same thing happened with Clinton in the 90's, and Bush II's attempt to debt-fuel economic growth as Reagan did, fell apart when rising oil prices started making major investors question whether they would get their money back...good thing that can't happen again!

Sure,, there are many other forces at work in capitalist economics, but the whole game of endless growth is fueled by increasing supplies of cheap oil, yet little attention is given to the fact that conventional and cheap oil is already passed maximum production since 2005, and all the 'tight' oil imaginable can never be mixed in to bring back the good old days! Think of the future as a choice between a spectacular crash and a series of low growth or no growth hits on the way down into the valley! By the time globalism collapses into complete disrepair, the attention deficit survivors will think this is the way it's always been.
Thanks from Athena
right to left is online now  
Old January 28th, 2018, 10:23 AM   #46
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
The bible warns of the end days and tells us God is making a new place for us. Just read your bible.
Just in case someone takes away the wrong lesson here, I have to say the premillenial movements that are always on the lookout for the 2nd Coming and the End of Days, are about the worst kind of religious faith that exists! Start with a religious tradition that had no respect or regard for nature(unlike all earlier pantheistic traditions) and add the concept of "don't worry, everything's going to be annihilated/but God's taking us to a new and better place." Any worthwhile and sensible religion would start with the premise that salvation depends on the continuity of life on Earth.

I'm still stuck on James Inhofe, bringing a snowball into the Senate chamber and declaring it proof that there's no such thing as global warming...cause God's going to destroy this earth with fire next time blah blah blah:


Quote:
Actually, ancient philosophy associated fire with life and said there would be a time when the fire would need to consume more than what is left to consume. We might be smarter today, but I don't know if we are any wiser?
One of the great racist and condescending misperceptions of indigenous practice was that indians indiscriminately set fires to burn up forests and stampede large herds of animals out of the brush for easy hunting. In actual fact, indigenous tribes that had settled permanently in locations did controlled burns, usually in springtime when trees and brush were wet. The fires were set to burn out underbrush and allow easier movement of deer and also bison from the west to migrate through 'runs' for hunting, and also for planting corn, beans and squash for cultivation.

The kind of fires we hear about that would consume the earth after nuclear warheads vaporize cities are the kind of fires that will destroy most life and all of the larger animals(including us) as happened during the K/T extinction 63 million years ago that wiped out the entire order of dinosaurs and other reptiles and amphibians. Carelessly allowing the building and threatening with more nukes, it's just a matter of time before some idiot strikes a match and sets the whole thing off! Any sensible civilization would return the Ban The Bomb movements, instead of marginalizing them out of existence in today's media.

Quote:
I have no idea why so many arguments against thinking in terms of a finite world are being made? When I look for links to explain our finite reality, I find explanations about why we don't need to worry about finite reality. It is like the purpose of the internet is to make us stupid!
Michael Pollan and other foodies have said that most people don't know where their food comes from anymore, and I mentioned non-renewable resources yesterday because anyone with even a sliver of familiarity with metals and mining operations has got to be baffled by how few people get the fact that everything made today is made with finite resources out of the ground! Unless this dream of harvesting asteroids for metals or setting up colonies in space actually gets off the ground, we are all stuck here on a finite planet rapidly using up the dwindling supplies of resources we have now.
Thanks from Athena
right to left is online now  
Old January 28th, 2018, 11:00 AM   #47
Senior Member
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kekistan
Posts: 3,968
[QUOTE=Athena;1138090]
Quote:
The bad thing that happened is the oil counties united and the US lost control of the oil industry. Carter's response to that was to invest in alternative energy and tell us we need to conserve so our real oil supply from our own oil wells would be enough to meet our needs.
OPEC. Carter had not response to OPEC at all. What alternative solutions in 1978? Corn fuel? What a fucking waste. Solar? Was about a half a click from a James Bond movie at that time. There was no viable alternative at all. Carter made tactical mistakes by not allowing an increase in oil production.
Quote:
Reagan flat out lied to us and a failure in our education system made it possible for him to get away with the lie. He said we do not need to conserve and at that time, the only way that was possible was getting control of oil again. The plan for doing this was using military force, and the result is not only the economic pain resulting from slashing domestic budgets so that money could be poured into military spending but increasing the opposition to US power in all oil countries. When the leader of Iran called the US Satan, this was well founded, and when Bin Laden attacked the military-industrial complex, he was not attacking the citizens of the US. Laden's targets were very specific to the Military Industrial Complex that the Eisenhower administration put into place and Eisenhower warned us about.
What military force did Reagan use to control oil?
The leader of Iran called the US Satan and you agree. Goddamn America!
Bin Laden attacked military industrial complexes only? How the hell can I take you seriously?
Quote:
The shift in power and wealth following the Reagan years is not my idea of a good thing. Reagan was a good actor and his role as President of the US was his best role and he played it very well. But he is not the person who wrote the script. His understanding of the world was seriously lacking as he lived in a fantasy.
Before you accuse someone else of the koolaid, you should look at what you are drinking.
guy39 is offline  
Old January 29th, 2018, 06:05 AM   #48
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,719
[QUOTE=guy39;1138141]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
OPEC. Carter had not response to OPEC at all. What alternative solutions in 1978? Corn fuel? What a fucking waste. Solar? Was about a half a click from a James Bond movie at that time. There was no viable alternative at all. Carter made tactical mistakes by not allowing an increase in oil production.
What military force did Reagan use to control oil?
The leader of Iran called the US Satan and you agree. Goddamn America!
Bin Laden attacked military industrial complexes only? How the hell can I take you seriously?

Before you accuse someone else of the koolaid, you should look at what you are drinking.
Carter did respond to OPEC. It was not the military response of Reagan. He told us we need to conserve and look for new sources of energy. Which response do you think is the better one?

I think you are mistaken about Carter not allowing an increase in oil production. He asked us to reduce our consumption and we would not be the evil nation if we had listened to Carter instead of turning to military force to take back control of oil. Why do you think an increase in production was possible?

Yes, what I said is true. How do you explain why the US gave Saddam and Bin Laden arms and military training, and then they became our enemies?

The US was on very good terms with Iran until, during the Eisenhower administration, the US used the CIA to stir up a revolt, overthrowing Iran's elected leader and putting a tyrant in his place?

Quote:
64 Years Later, CIA Finally Releases Details of Iranian Coup ...
foreignpolicy.com/.../64-years-later-cia-finally-releases-details-of-iranian-coup-iran-te...
Jun 20, 2017 - Known as Operation Ajax, the CIA plot was ultimately about oil. Western firms had for decades controlled the region's oil wealth, whether Arabian-American Oil Company in Saudi Arabia, or the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company in Iran. When the U.S. firm in Saudi Arabia bowed to pressure in late 1950 and agreed ...
Are you aware that the mid-east countries we talk about are less than 100 years old and the result of how the Allies decided to divide things for their own self-interest? This is about oil and who controls it. And it is about Israel and why we defend it and why Arab countries oppose that. Israel is not a democracy with equality but is for Jews. Israel is strategically important.

https://www.ueunion.org/ue-news-feat...for-ue-members

Reagan and war for oil

Quote:
U.S. STRIKES 2 IRANIAN OIL RIGS AND HITS 6 WARSHIPS IN ...
http://www.nytimes.com/.../us-strike...s-over-mining-...
Apr 19, 1988 - The attacks began when six American ships destroyed two Iranian oil platforms in what the Reagan Administration said was retaliation for the mining that damaged a Navy vessel last week. The worst fighting between Iranian and American forces coincided with heavy clashes in the Persian Gulf war ...
This is one way Reagan paid for our military buildup

Quote:
Ronald Reagan and The Great Social Security Heist : FedSmith.com
https://www.fedsmith.com/2013/10/......l-security-hei...
Oct 11, 2013 - The Social Security Amendments of 1983 laid the foundation for 30-years of federal embezzlement of Social Security money in order to use the money to pay for wars, tax cuts and other government programs. The payroll tax hike of 1983 generated a total of $2.7 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue.
He also slashed domestic budget and poured money into military spending.
Thanks from imaginethat and RNG

Last edited by Athena; January 29th, 2018 at 06:14 AM.
Athena is online now  
Old January 30th, 2018, 05:34 AM   #49
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,719
Do we have an agreement that conserving our oil would have been a better way to go, than the path to war? And are there also those who argue the path to war is the right way to go? Reagan said we do not have to conserve and took us the path of war. Does anyone want to argue that is not so? Does anyone want to praise Reagan for his leadership into war? Yes, the economy got better, and our military spending is killing us, while we have made enemies around the world.

I microfilmed old newspapers at the U of O and on a back page of a 1920 newspaper was a small article that said, "Given our known oil supply and rate of consumption, we are headed for economic disaster and possibly war." We know all industrial economies crashed and the world went to war. I think something is very wrong that today we still do not understand the connection between oil, economics, and war. Since the 1920's our path to war could have been prevented and does anyone doubt Cheney took Bush into a war that should not have happened? The neocon's wanted military control of the mid-east longer before 911 and I find it hard to believe they had nothing to do with 911. Even if the neocon's had nothing to do with 911, they had full intentions of taking military control of the mid-east and had a web sight bragging about this called the New Century American Project.
Athena is online now  
Old February 1st, 2018, 12:40 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
I could have presented this information in a couple of threads, but I want to focus the discussion on the world economy. Major industries are returning to the US and this has to be good for the US people wanting jobs, at least in the short term, but is it good for the world economy and will the change be good for the US in the long run? I really don't know. I am very worried that it well be bad for the countries loosing the jobs and that in the long run, this will be bad for everyone?

https://investorplace.com/2017/01/10.../#.WmIbwfmnEnQ

Athenia, My primary concern is not for nations that cannot or will not properly compensate their laborers; my primary concern's for USA employees and their dependents which are by far the overwhelming majority portion of U.S. Families.

Proponents of reduced corporate taxes attribute any favorable occurrences to the recent reduction of corporate taxes; as Gershwin wrote, “It ain't necessarily so”.
Favorable tax considerations for incomes earned beyond our borders certainly induce preferences for investing into and importing from foreign producing enterprises; it promotes USA's chronic annual trade deficits.

Trade deficits of goods are certainly net detrimental to our GDP and numbers of jobs. Beyond the immediate consequences, reduced tax rates for foreign earnings will net reduce future federal tax revenues more than otherwise. But I would not be opposed to reduced tax rate for incomes earned beyond our borders if our trade policy didn't also induce USA's chronic annual trade deficits of goods.

I’m among the proponents of an “Import Certificates”, a proposed policy for USA’s foreign trade.

It's a unilateral, substantially a more market rather than government driven policy that's only recommended for a nation that would otherwise suffer chronic annual trade deficits of goods.
Annual trade deficits are ALWAYS (more than otherwise) net detrimental to their nation's GDP and numbers of jobs; (otherwise being if the nation had not experienced an annual trade deficit).

The policy as described within Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article is self-funding and does not favor or disfavor any enterprise, or foreign nation. If we consider importing an exporting as a single global trade industry, the policy doesn't favor any particular industry.

Refer to Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article.
Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from imaginethat
Supposn is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Money and Finance > Economics

Tags
jobs, returning



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trump tells Black citizens he will protect their jobs and create new jobs johnwk Current Events 10 August 26th, 2016 04:10 AM
US Troops Will Not Be Returning To Iraq skews13 Current Events 6 January 5th, 2014 03:25 PM
Media interest in returning war dead wanes CNN Current Events 1 April 9th, 2010 07:20 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.