Housing Crash #2 Under Way?

[Jhhnn]

I'm talking more about when the food stamps and welfare get cut and we start looking like greece where the have nots will simply riot when their entitlements run out of money.

Thirty years of Non-trickle down Reaganomics will do that. Instead of creating American jobs, American capitalists have found out they make more money with foreign labor, tax cuts for themselves, and loaning the govt money for welfare.

Not to mention the greatest financial fraud of all time, the Ownership Society.

 

[werepossum]

Thirty years of Non-trickle down Reaganomics will do that. Instead of creating American jobs, American capitalists have found out they make more money with foreign labor, tax cuts for themselves, and loaning the govt money for welfare.

Not to mention the greatest financial fraud of all time, the Ownership Society.

Well, Obama has certainly fixed that fraud. Hope you're happy with his replacement, the Food Stamp Society. Down with promoting ownership, up with promoting dependency, read your little red book! Womb to the tomb, baby!

A bit more on topic, I heard yesterday that Atlanta hosing is now valued at 1999 levels.

 

[Jhhnn]

Obama seems to labor under the misconception that modern Republican leaders can be brought to reason through compromise. He's mistaken. They respect nothing beyond wealth & power.

Blaming him is kinda like blaming the first guy who rode into town after Quantrill's raiders just left.. well, except that they haven't left- they still have filibuster power in the Senate, so they have to be dealt with.

 

[Zorkorist]

Commercial Real Estate sux too...Prices declined 4.2% Hit new Post-Bubble Low
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/05/moodys-commercial-real-estate-prices.html

And it will keep going lower and lower and lower like I've been saying 3 years now.

In the end it's all about jobs...No Job...No Income...No Credit...No Money...No Spending...No Demand for businesses...No demand for commercial RE.

Why create Jobs here when Chinese work twice as hard for much much less?
Why create Jobs here with outrageous HC costs as Big 3 found out moving engine plants to Ontario?
Why create Jobs here with ridiculous environmental laws like Intel Chief said 1 Billion more per FAB in USA?

Only thing I've seen going sky high is rural/farm property. People bunkering up for when the shooting starts is my guess...

We can and should be creating jobs here, as because Chinese jobs are in China. It doesn't really matter how hard they work, or how cheap they are, because the advantages of American jobs, are obvious.

Now, the question becomes what is stopping American Jobs?

And the answer, simply, is Government Regulation and Taxation, Insurance, and Lawyers.

Once they get out of the way, and allow America to do what it has always done, then we will be on our way to recovery.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

No matter how much the economy crashes in the US I doubt anybody here can elucidate a scenario in which people are attacking others for food in any meaningful numbers. This is not 1735. All but the most destitute of nations in the world have enough wealth and technology to feed their people on a small percentage of total productivity. The US produces easily enough oil internally to farm its millions of acres and distribute to the population even if half of us were sitting at home twiddling our thumbs.

There could certainly be temporary issues--we've seen that in other countries recently--but a long term idea of getting a rifle in front of your pile of food seems unlikely. A war could change that but more likely the basics would be available and you'd lose certain luxuries like liqour or coffee.

AFAIK, food prices are up, because corn prices are up, because the blasted Government(s) are saying we must have alternative fuels.

Talk about a crazy, downward, spiral.

-John

 

[WhipperSnapper]

We can and should be creating jobs here, as because Chinese jobs are in China. It doesn't really matter how hard they work, or how cheap they are, because the advantages of American jobs, are obvious.

Now, the question becomes what is stopping American Jobs?

And the answer, simply, is Government Regulation and Taxation, Insurance, and Lawyers.

Wrong. What's preventing American employment is the fact that it's much cheaper to hire relatively impoverished people in other countries or to import them into the U.S. and pay them non-American-market wages. Keep in mind that the supply of labor worldwide is relatively infinite compared to the U.S. labor market.

Now, if you can do some actual reasoning (what Rand says to do) and think about this in terms of supply of labor and demand for labor (as opposed to using religious dogmatic type of thinking), you'll see that the end result of wide open markets is that the American standard of living MUST decrease to even out with those of the third world. It's just simple supply-and-demand.

Other nations may not have labor and environmental regulations like the U.S. has, which also reduces the cost of doing business--at the expense of the quality of life for citizens of those nations.

 

[Zorkorist]

There's no "lowering of our standard of living," involved. AFAIK, this thread started as how bad many people's "standard of living" has become. So wash that notion from your head.

The answer, is to increase American's standard of living by allowing them to have jobs, or employ others.

This can be done by reducing Government Regulation, Taxation, and the influence/costs of Lawyers and Insurance companies.

-John

 

[spidey07]

Obama seems to labor under the misconception that modern Republican leaders can be brought to reason through compromise. He's mistaken. They respect nothing beyond wealth & power.

Blaming him is kinda like blaming the first guy who rode into town after Quantrill's raiders just left.. well, except that they haven't left- they still have filibuster power in the Senate, so they have to be dealt with.

Yes. We can thank god for taking Kennedy.

Fucking liberal. You're pissed because obama isn't communist enough. That's good don't vote.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yes. We can thank god for taking Kennedy.

Fucking liberal. You're pissed because obama isn't communist enough. That's good don't vote.

Your contributions seem to be a continuous self righteous snit fit, an unwitting self parody wrapped in total denial that's utterly sublime. You never cease to amaze.

 

[werepossum]

Wrong. What's preventing American employment is the fact that it's much cheaper to hire relatively impoverished people in other countries or to import them into the U.S. and pay them non-American-market wages. Keep in mind that the supply of labor worldwide is relatively infinite compared to the U.S. labor market.

Now, if you can do some actual reasoning (what Rand says to do) and think about this in terms of supply of labor and demand for labor (as opposed to using religious dogmatic type of thinking), you'll see that the end result of wide open markets is that the American standard of living MUST decrease to even out with those of the third world. It's just simple supply-and-demand.

Other nations may not have labor and environmental regulations like the U.S. has, which also reduces the cost of doing business--at the expense of the quality of life for citizens of those nations.

Agreed, but there are three different ways just off the top of my head that the American standard of living can decrease. First is that we remove the government regulations and let corporations do whatever they want. That inevitably leads to USSR-style pollution and Third World-style working conditions if we are going to successfully compete with Third World and/or Communist countries which already have lax and/or unenforced regulations and very low standards of living. Personally I think living in a polluted hell hole and working in a sweat shop is a pretty darned big price to pay for cheap plentiful Chinese electronics and toys or their American-made equivalents.

Second is that we continue down the free trade path and allow our standard of living to slowly decrease while the rest of the world's slowly increases. Personally I think that empowers resource owners and multi-national corporations sufficiently that they can move production around enough to prevent much increase in the world's standard of living. (Think Nike closing a plant when labor hits 25 cents an hour.) Also, it leads to an increasingly wealthy minority and an increasingly poor minority, which (IMHO) will inevitably lead to either revolution or hard socialism, and probably neither will recover much of the lost standard of living.

Third is that we begin enacting trade barriers, largely end illegal immigration, and restrict legal immigration to whatever level we truly need at the time. That still leads to an inevitable reduction in our standard of living as imported goods cost more (and thus we can afford to consume less) and restricted exports (from retaliatory barriers) lead to less increased wealth. It does however allow a naturally increased value of labor, which will led to a more even distribution of wealth within the market rather than by government empowerment, seizure, and redistribution. Wealth earned is always superior to wealth given.

It should be pretty obvious that I favor the third option, even while admitting that much of our post-war growth and success was due to the condition of the rest of the world. We should be able to maintain many of the benefits of competition domestically, as long as we don't allow consolidation into a few mega-corps, and also through free-trade agreements with countries which truly do have equivalent standards of living, regulations, human rights, etc.

 

[KlokWyze]

Yes. We can thank god for taking Kennedy.

Fucking liberal. You're pissed because obama isn't communist enough. That's good don't vote.

 

[Zorkorist]

Enacting Trade Barriors, is about as short-sighted a solution as anyone can come up with. Let's dissuade the emerging world from dealing with us.

The only way to compete with the emerging world is to strengthen ourselves internally.

You state Russia, and third-world working conditions, as something to look down upon, pollution, whatever; but Russia is a rising state, China, India.

Our state is falling, and you would just like to bottle it up, so we fall slowly. A fall, that seems. like flying.

"A little way, from the branch to the earth,
a little fear of mingling with the common dust,
a fall, that feels like flying."

Cyrano de Bergerac.

-John

 

[werepossum]

Enacting Trade Barriors, is about as short-sighted a solution as anyone can come up with. Let's dissuade the emerging world from dealing with us.

The only way to compete with the emerging world is to strengthen ourselves internally.

You state Russia, and third-world working conditions, as something to look down upon, pollution, whatever; but Russia is a rising state, China, India.

Our state is falling, and you would just like to bottle it up, so we fall slowly. A fall, that seems. like flying.

"A little way, from the branch to the earth,
a little fear of mingling with the common dust,
a fall, that feels like flying."

Cyrano de Bergerac.

-John

Yes, I definitely look down on pollution, and I'm willing to pay a price in prosperity to not live in a polluted country.

Most people wouldn't guess it because some of my other views are so right wing and so many people expect (if not demand) that everyone be a doctrinaire follower of one party or another, but I'm a tree hugger. I'm one of those people who vote fish over farmers, who supports setting aside land for an endangered darter or lizard or salamander or frog. (I do draw a bit of a line at insects, unless they are very unique or ecologically very important.) Chinese-style environmental law is too high a price to pay for Chinese-style prosperity - especially when you realize that China barely squeaks into the top 100 in standard of living.

 

[Zorkorist]

Yes, I definitely look down on pollution, and I'm willing to pay a price in prosperity to not live in a polluted country.

Most people wouldn't guess it because some of my other views are so right wing and so many people expect (if not demand) that everyone be a doctrinaire follower of one party or another, but I'm a tree hugger. I'm one of those people who vote fish over farmers, who supports setting aside land for an endangered darter or lizard or salamander or frog. (I do draw a bit of a line at insects, unless they are very unique or ecologically very important.) Chinese-style environmental law is too high a price to pay for Chinese-style prosperity - especially when you realize that China barely squeaks into the top 100 in standard of living.

Suffice it to say, that I am not a tree-hugger.

-John

 

[spidey07]

Here's the quote, one needs to learn how the liberal mind works (think severe mental illness with no basis in reality) to read between their lines.

Obama seems to labor under the misconception that modern Republican leaders can be brought to reason through compromise. He's mistaken. They respect nothing beyond wealth & power.

Blaming him is kinda like blaming the first guy who rode into town after Quantrill's raiders just left.. well, except that they haven't left- they still have filibuster power in the Senate, so they have to be dealt with.

He's saying "don't blame obama with near super majority democrat house/senate", it's the republicans fault for Obama having to "compromise". That's code for "I'm dissappointed Obama isn't ramming his community organizer communist agenda fast enough, damn those 41 republican senators".

Eitherway, The Obama Economy has been going for well over two years now, all indicators are it's getting worse, unemployment numbers out today = unemployment has RISEN! Home prices still dropping, less jobs, gas prices soaring, cost of living skyrocketing. In case this sounds familiar, think Carter. You're doing a heck of a job "Barry'. Remember, he said he wanted to fundamentally change America, BHO is only doing what he said he would do. May fuck be upon him.

 

[Zebo]

Thirty years of Non-trickle down Reaganomics will do that. Instead of creating American jobs, American capitalists have found out they make more money with foreign labor, tax cuts for themselves, and loaning the govt money for welfare.

Not to mention the greatest financial fraud of all time, the Ownership Society.

This

Even honest Republicans will tell you so...like Reagan's for treasury secretary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX7M3w02Bfw&feature=player_embedded

 

[Zebo]

"competing" is a race to the bottom not to mention will break us due to foolish debt load.

1. Americans debt is based on being serviceable by American wages not China wages, w/o being able to service it we go bankrupt at every level. Govts, banks, businesses.

2. China wages and working conditions don't allow for Saturday softball games with friends and family, Sunday pickniks with the same, No you're a slave - personally, I work to live not live to work.

3. China style environmental standards look like this:

 

[KlokWyze]

Zebo's new avatar is an ominous sign of the dark times ahead.

 

[Zebo]

Here's the quote, one needs to learn how the liberal mind works (think severe mental illness with no basis in reality) to read between their lines.



He's saying "don't blame obama with near super majority democrat house/senate", it's the republicans fault for Obama having to "compromise". That's code for "I'm dissappointed Obama isn't ramming his community organizer communist agenda fast enough, damn those 41 republican senators".

Eitherway, The Obama Economy has been going for well over two years now, all indicators are it's getting worse, unemployment numbers out today = unemployment has RISEN! Home prices still dropping, less jobs, gas prices soaring, cost of living skyrocketing. In case this sounds familiar, think Carter. You're doing a heck of a job "Barry'. Remember, he said he wanted to fundamentally change America, BHO is only doing what he said he would do. May fuck be upon him.

Problem is right does not have a clue how to build a strong economy either anymore. You think you do, low taxes, free trade, etc, like we did, been there done that, but all we did is borrow like crazy, at every level, to mask the destruction and profit taking by top 1%.

What many conservatives consider America's epoch, the 1950's, ran by Republicans y'all today would consider down right communist today. That's how fucked up your heads got from talk radio.

-Eisenhower with a republican house and senate raised top marginal rates to 92% to pay off crushing war debts and build the greatest public works projects in human history.
-Unions which you deride were strong so only Dad had to work
-We had high tariffs as to not put our high standard of living in jeopardy to rest of the world.
- Ike liked unions, Start medicare with Kerr-Mills, hated the MIC and unilateralism and he was one tough hombre, as tough as they come.
etc

What a commie..fact is Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) would be a Flaming Liberal today in your warped minds.


What's biggest joke of all is y'all want to to cut govt spending and when government is not spending America practically has no economy left - free traders - free marketeers made sure of that. This extent of dependency on government spending for our economy to function is not very well understood by the society today who clamors for cuts, but it's all we have left. It is not complicated if you factor millions on social security, millions on unemployment, millions on welfare, millions on food stamps, millions of government workers (like your wife), millions of government contractors, millions on government subsidized health care. Everyone is dependent on government spending to function these days, even Wal-Mart who cashes Social Security checks. 2/3 depend directly on govt to eat. Government spending is over HALF of GDP and HALF of that is done on debt.

Republicans in the house aren't so stupid though, unlike you, they understand there is no economy left without massive borrowing and handouts, and just put up a show for you when they argue about 30-70 billion in cuts in a 2 trillion dollar federal deficit economy. Laugh is on you (and your children) while the great rip off continues.

 

[jhu]

Suffice it to say, that I am not a tree-hugger.

-John

Well then why don't you move to China or India where you can breathe the thick smoggy air and drink the polluted water?

 

[Doppel]

Both sides favor trickle down. Pubbies favor cutting taxes under the theory that the saved wealth of resource owners will trickle down, the obvious flaw being that since resource owners get to be resource owners by spending less than they take in, inevitably a portion of that money does not trickle. Dems favor increasing taxes under the theory that the seized wealth will trickle down from government, the obvious flaw being that since government consumes a good portion of that wealth in the taking and distributing, inevitably a portion of that money does not trickle.

This. Both sides are part of the problem, neither a solution.

 

[werepossum]

Problem is right does not have a clue how to build a strong economy either anymore. You think you do, low taxes, free trade, etc, like we did, been there done that, but all we did is borrow like crazy, at every level, to mask the destruction and profit taking by top 1%.

What many conservatives consider America's epoch, the 1950's, ran by Republicans y'all today would consider down right communist today. That's how fucked up your heads got from talk radio.

-Eisenhower with a republican house and senate raised top marginal rates to 92% to pay off crushing war debts and build the greatest public works projects in human history.
-Unions which you deride were strong so only Dad had to work
-We had high tariffs as to not put our high standard of living in jeopardy to rest of the world.
- Ike liked unions, Start medicare with Kerr-Mills, hated the MIC and unilateralism and he was one tough hombre, as tough as they come.
etc

What a commie..fact is Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) would be a Flaming Liberal today in your warped minds.


What's biggest joke of all is y'all want to to cut govt spending and when government is not spending America practically has no economy left - free traders - free marketeers made sure of that. This extent of dependency on government spending for our economy to function is not very well understood by the society today who clamors for cuts, but it's all we have left. It is not complicated if you factor millions on social security, millions on unemployment, millions on welfare, millions on food stamps, millions of government workers (like your wife), millions of government contractors, millions on government subsidized health care. Everyone is dependent on government spending to function these days, even Wal-Mart who cashes Social Security checks. 2/3 depend directly on govt to eat. Government spending is over HALF of GDP and HALF of that is done on debt.

Republicans in the house aren't so stupid though, unlike you, they understand there is no economy left without massive borrowing and handouts, and just put up a show for you when they argue about 30-70 billion in cuts in a 2 trillion dollar federal deficit economy. Laugh is on you (and your children) while the great rip off continues.

That makes no sense. You're arguing that although government spending is over half of GDP and half of that is done on debt, what we need is MORE spending and MORE debt. Government produces no wealth; at best, it can confiscate some money and spend part of it with the private sector to produce some form of wealth, consuming the remainder in the process.

The more we grow government, the less private sector is left to support government.

 

[Zebo]

hehe- I'm not saying we NEED more deleterious debt, I'm saying that's the only plan that's surfaced in the last 30 years to prevent rioting in the streets and WILL break us.

 

[spidey07]

hehe- I'm not saying we NEED more deleterious debt, I'm saying that's the only plan that's surfaced in the last 30 years to prevent rioting in the streets and WILL break us.

Rice, beans, bullets, fresh water supply, GOOD first aid kit and how to use it (eagle scout here). I'm prepped I suggest all others to do the same. Got all kinds of cold weather gear from camping/hiking/fishing so I'm covered there. When it comes, and it is coming, be prepared.

 

[Craig234]

That makes no sense. You're arguing that although government spending is over half of GDP and half of that is done on debt, what we need is MORE spending and MORE debt. Government produces no wealth; at best, it can confiscate some money and spend part of it with the private sector to produce some form of wealth, consuming the remainder in the process.

The more we grow government, the less private sector is left to support government.

Your lies are seemingly unlimited. Government's role isn't to directly produce wealth, it's to implement the will of the people, which is does though imperfectly, part of which is to increase wealth through countless things it does to help others directly create it - providing security, providing a currency, providing a marketplace with less fraud and non-productive manipulation (since FDR), and ensuring that productivity isn't in a system of economic slavery of robber barons and a people in total poverty.

Our country is hugely wealthier because of the role government plays; you can't show me a society in human history that has been wealthy without a government.

You lie about 'the best government can do'. When government spends money to establish, say, financial regulations that prevent Savings and Loans from the sorts of fraudulent activities that took place under Reagan, to investigate and prosecute lawbreakers deterring more crime, the country benefits far more from that than "confiscate some money and spend part of it with the private sector to produce some form of wealth, consuming the remainder in the process."

This is why the policies you back are a disaster - you are clueless about their effect.

People without your huge difficulties can understand the history lessons of why the laissez-faire you advocate does not work for a society. Why boarding up the government and handing the keys to Wall Street to do as they will doesn't lead to a thriving society as you claim.

When I defend freedom, I can point to North Korea without it, and our country with it, and discuss the demonstrated benefits.

When you defend that government does nothing good for society, at best only taking its wealth and wasting it, you can't show any society working without government.

If you go back to the most primitive agrarian tribes, you can show societies that didn't need sophisticated financial regulations, but you can bet even they had rules.

So, you are here advocating a policy to remove any role for government, since 'at best all it can do is confiscate and waste money', at a time when the government regulating Wall Street schemes less was a key cause of allowing a few on Wall Street to do things that led to a threat to the global economic system. You are in effect demanding we do more of those harmful things and causing a global depression.

I suspect you will now want to backtrack, change what you said, to try to look for some squiggle room where you didn't mean what you said; you said it.

In so doing, you show there's no point in repeating this response for your edited effort after edited effort - you got it wrong, showing you are an ignorant ideologue.