You said the 1% was receiving tax credits though. Unless that was a typo.

I Wear Pants;950436 wrote:You said the 1% was receiving tax credits though. Unless that was a typo.

On the worlds scale $47,500 and above is the 1%. In the US some at or above this income level do receive not just tax credits but payments for the difference when it exceeds their tax liability.

majorspark;950437 wrote:On the worlds scale $47,500 and above is the 1%. In the US some at or above this income level do receive not just tax credits but payments for the difference when it exceeds their tax liability.

So now everything is to be talked about one the world's scale?

I Wear Pants;950445 wrote:So now everything is to be talked about one the world's scale?

Its claimed to be a world movement. Corporations are international.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/25/occupy-movement-tahrir-square-cairo

I Wear Pants;950445 wrote:So now everything is to be talked about one the world's scale?

some people just dont realize how good they have it either. oh no, i wont have a harvard education or an iPhone 4s, oh the horrors!

majorspark;950118 wrote:Think of how many pot bellied kids struggling to survive on fly infested gruel that would feed.

The point you're trying to make really just makes the lamentations of the "spoiled" college kids claiming to represent the 99% all the more poignant. The 8.4 trillion in global bank bailouts could have ended extreme poverty around the world for 50 years and put us on the path to ending it forever. http://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressrelease/2009-04-01/bank-bailout-could-end-poverty

Additionally, being in the 10% is part of the 99%. Perhaps that is the argument you should make rather than constantly deride these "99 percenters" the majority of which would go away if they could find a decent job. Most of these spoiled brats you look down upon worked just as hard as you did, got an education like you will tell your children to and instead of seeing an economy ripe for human flourishing they face debtors prison and no place to put their talent to productive use. This notion that this nation's young people aren't "self reliant" and just want a free handout is largely nonsense. I mean there are girls with MBAs turning tricks just to pay student loan bills. They need to eat their peas though...stupid of them to think they could borrow for an MBA and think there would be a job for them that could pay back those loans.



This country is in a legitimate employment crisis and nobody with power is doing anything to stop it and conservatives support policies that will make it even worse. Christy Romer had a good op-ed in the Times today challenging Ben Bernanke to be that man.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/business/economy/ben-bernanke-needs-a-volcker-moment.html

BoatShoes;950833 wrote:The point you're trying to make really just makes the lamentations of the "spoiled" college kids claiming to represent the 99% all the more poignant. The 8.4 trillion in global bank bailouts could have ended extreme poverty around the world for 50 years and put us on the path to ending it forever. http://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressrelease/2009-04-01/bank-bailout-could-end-poverty

If only it would be that easy. Have you checked out the nations where extreme poverty exists. The G20 would have to invade and occupy many of those nations to be sure their political leaders would not squander it. If you don't take over many of these nations the people will never see the money. Its a pipe dream.

BoatShoes;950833 wrote:Additionally, being in the 10% is part of the 99%.

But not part of the 89%.

BoatShoes;950833 wrote:Perhaps that is the argument you should make rather than constantly deride these "99 percenters" the majority of which would go away if they could find a decent job. Most of these spoiled brats you look down upon worked just as hard as you did, got an education like you will tell your children to and instead of seeing an economy ripe for human flourishing they face debtors prison and no place to put their talent to productive use. This notion that this nation's young people aren't "self reliant" and just want a free handout is largely nonsense. I mean there are girls with MBAs turning tricks just to pay student loan bills. They need to eat their peas though...stupid of them to think they could borrow for an MBA and think there would be a job for them that could pay back those loans.

Debtors prison? I was not aware they were jailing people for not paying their student loans. Back in the 80's when I was growing up my Dad worked in the strip mines. Unemployment levels were near or above where they are at today. Dad lost his job. Never bitched about the rich or corporations. Dad did not graduate high school so he took what skills he had to take care of his family. He was good at wood working so he made shelves, picture frames, etc.. our of our garage. It tided us over until he was able to get a job with another strip mining company.

Dad started out on nights eventually worked his way up to supervisor. A few years after he become supervisor the mining company went bankrupt. Dad was on his own again. This time he started hauling Amish around on errands. He has been doing this ever since. His bread and butter is out of state trips. He has been to 49 states and most of Canada. That is where I learned my work ethic.

I admit when I hear someone in their 30's in grad school at Harvard wanting their $80,000 student loan forgiven I do look down on them. When my Dad with not even a high school diploma in an equally shitty job market found ways to make money and pay his bills. And never once would he even think of demanding someone else pay his bills.

BoatShoes;950833 wrote:This country is in a legitimate employment crisis and nobody with power is doing anything to stop it and conservatives support policies that will make it even worse. Christy Romer had a good op-ed in the Times today challenging Ben Bernanke to be that man.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/business/economy/ben-bernanke-needs-a-volcker-moment.html

What a sad state this nation is in if we rest our hopes in one man. Is that what we have become? We used to be a nation of rugged individuals that would make their own way. Now we are so centrally controlled that one man can do it all? Some elitist at the Fed? God save the Republic.

http://boingboing.net/2011/10/29/top-us-foreclosure-law-firm-threw-halloween-party-where-staff-dressed-as-homeless-foreclosed-upon-americans.html

BoatShoes;950833 wrote: This country is in a legitimate employment crisis and nobody with power is doing anything to stop it and conservatives support policies that will make it even worse. Christy Romer had a good op-ed in the Times today challenging Ben Bernanke to be that man.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/business/economy/ben-bernanke-needs-a-volcker-moment.html

Romer mentions Volcker raising interest rates in the early 1980s to allow the necessary correction and fix unemployment, and then calls for the opposite and Bernanke to step up the inflation.. LOL. If we use the CPI they used back in Volcker's day then we are already at double digit inflation, so Helicopter Ben is already doing more than she calls for.

Knowing Bernanke's views, he has never been shy about printing money. If he needs to be prodded to print more, that should set off alarm bells in your head. At some point he will have printed so much that he will have no control over how fast prices rise.

We need higher (market) interest rates now and to have our correction, but unlike 1980, our national debt is now larger than our economy, and if we raise interest rates the federal government will not be able to make the interest payments. Have fun trying to fix your unsustaiable, centrally planned mess.

Cleveland Buck;951546 wrote:Romer mentions Volcker raising interest rates in the early 1980s to allow the necessary correction and fix unemployment, and then calls for the opposite and Bernanke to step up the inflation.. LOL. If we use the CPI they used back in Volcker's day then we are already at double digit inflation, so Helicopter Ben is already doing more than she calls for.

Knowing Bernanke's views, he has never been shy about printing money. If he needs to be prodded to print more, that should set off alarm bells in your head. At some point he will have printed so much that he will have no control over how fast prices rise.

We need higher (market) interest rates now and to have our correction, but unlike 1980, our national debt is now larger than our economy, and if we raise interest rates the federal government will not be able to make the interest payments. Have fun trying to fix your unsustaiable, centrally planned mess.

Because he said the problems are different.

I Wear Pants;951554 wrote:Because he said the problems are different.

She has no idea what the problems are. What is funny is that the problems are exactly the same and so are the solutions, but she calls for the opposite of the solution because she thinks we only have 3.5% inflation right now when if we used the same stats Volcker did it would be similar to what it was back then. Then she would see Bernanke is already doing what she is calling for.

I Wear Pants;951528 wrote:http://boingboing.net/2011/10/29/top-us-foreclosure-law-firm-threw-halloween-party-where-staff-dressed-as-homeless-foreclosed-upon-americans.html

This should surprise no one. They make their money in throwing people out of their homes for being delinquent. The more they toss, the bigger their Christmas bonuses.

That they throw parties in celebration is simply a microcosm of what the human sprtit has become. We used to strive in keeping up with the Joneses. Now, we prefer to call them losers and stomp on them with out boot.

No different than the abortion clinics that have their yearly graphs showing huge increases in throwing out dead babies.

Footwedge;951695 wrote:No different than the abortion clinics that have their yearly graphs showing huge increases in throwing out dead babies.

Except the babies lost their lives.

majorspark;951515 wrote:If only it would be that easy. Have you checked out the nations where extreme poverty exists. The G20 would have to invade and occupy many of those nations to be sure their political leaders would not squander it. If you don't take over many of these nations the people will never see the money. Its a pipe dream.



But not part of the 89%.



Debtors prison? I was not aware they were jailing people for not paying their student loans. Back in the 80's when I was growing up my Dad worked in the strip mines. Unemployment levels were near or above where they are at today. Dad lost his job. Never bitched about the rich or corporations. Dad did not graduate high school so he took what skills he had to take care of his family. He was good at wood working so he made shelves, picture frames, etc.. our of our garage. It tided us over until he was able to get a job with another strip mining company.

Dad started out on nights eventually worked his way up to supervisor. A few years after he become supervisor the mining company went bankrupt. Dad was on his own again. This time he started hauling Amish around on errands. He has been doing this ever since. His bread and butter is out of state trips. He has been to 49 states and most of Canada. That is where I learned my work ethic.

I admit when I hear someone in their 30's in grad school at Harvard wanting their $80,000 student loan forgiven I do look down on them. When my Dad with not even a high school diploma in an equally shitty job market found ways to make money and pay his bills. And never once would he even think of demanding someone else pay his bills.



What a sad state this nation is in if we rest our hopes in one man. Is that what we have become? We used to be a nation of rugged individuals that would make their own way. Now we are so centrally controlled that one man can do it all? Some elitist at the Fed? God save the Republic.

Surely there is no doubt about the values your father adhered to and instilled in you. However, plenty of people will tell the individual micro-level story of the person they know who strapped up his bootstraps and found work during hard times. This fails to look at it from a Macro-Level. The unemployment rate is the percentage of the population that is willing and able to work for the current market wage for someone of his or her skill level but cannot find employment.

So, if tomorrow all of the whiny, spoiled, Occupy Wall Streeters were to magically become as hard-working and determined as your father, willing to do anything to earn a wage and take every available opportunity with perfect knowledge of those opportunities, 9% of those people could not find work regardless of how determined or hard working they are. Even if suddenly all the commies and liberals became honest hard-working, personally responsible conservatives there would still be people who couldn't find work even shoveling gravel or cleaning up poo.

You also say, "always found a way to pay his bills." Student Loan bills have outpaced inflation dramatically. A lot of it is student's faults (people who major in Gender Studies, etc.) but there are even individuals with legitimate degrees facing problems. A kid with a Civil Engineering degree and 100k in student debt can drive as many amish around as he wants and not be able to pay that bill, let alone any that would exist in the kind of life he bargained for. And that is just on a micro-level.

You call the tax code an "albatross around our necks" but individuals who borrowed for an education in good faith faced with a decade of low-wage retail jobs, to get by as your father did, have to put off marriage, having children, home ownership, etc. because of their good faith reliance a higher education would lead to flourishing as they have been preached that message their entire life. I'm not doubting your Father's perseverance or your honor for having paid off your student loans. I'm lucky enough to have a wage that supports paying back my education loans. However, I think you're underestimating the impact that the lack of jobs that will support these loans students bargained for. An unemployed Software Engineer busting his ass in low-wage gigs off of Craigslist may not be able to pay back his student loans no matter how hard he works in those jobs. And policy makers waiting around for the confidence fairy scared of imaginary inflation and invisible bond vigilantes while he mires in misery won't make things better.

Millenials who are and have been self-reliant are realizing that no matter how hard they work they're not going to be able to pay these bills that they bargained for. And, they cannot be discharged in bankruptcy which you often tout as a method individuals can use to remain self-reliant in the event of bad bargains (such as your argument that individuals without adequate health insurance can use bankruptcy protection, etc.)


Even if everyone was a rugged individual we would still have 9% unemployment. Larger macroeconomic factors matter much more. There are a great many rugged individuals making their way in Haiti but I doubt you'd suggest they're flourishing. Steve Jobs running around the slums of Port-Au-Prince doesn't create the Iphone. The rugged individual who finds work shoveling gravel when there is not sufficient demand for the goods and services the unemployed rugged individuals can produce in the aggregate is the exception and not the rule.

It seems every generation thinks the younger ones are lazy, entitled and lack the core values the previous ones had only to be largely proven wrong, especially in America. I think you may be making that same mistake.

They chose poorly.

Maybe they shouldn't have went away to school. Maybe they should have commuted and worked while in school.

Their "good faith" gamble was a bad decision. Someone else shouldn't foot the bill.

In addition, although the national unemployment rate may be around 9% the unemployment rate for those with a college degree is around 4%.

Cleveland Buck;951574 wrote:She has no idea what the problems are. What is funny is that the problems are exactly the same and so are the solutions, but she calls for the opposite of the solution because she thinks we only have 3.5% inflation right now when if we used the same stats Volcker did it would be similar to what it was back then. Then she would see Bernanke is already doing what she is calling for.

"She has no idea what the problems are." I mean jeez. What an outrageous statement to make. The woman has forgotten more about economics than you will ever know.

And, will you stop peddling this nonsense about the "real inflation" the BLS is hiding from us? You keep saying this but do you have a link? Let me guess. Shadow Government Stats right? LOL.

Your suggestion that inflation statistics would be higher if we still used the Laspeyres formula, etc. is off base. Here is the BLS refuting these notions that inflation is understated. http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/08/art1full.pdf

Please provide a source to support your erroneous claims that inflation is as high as it was in the early 80's.

BoatShoes;951910 wrote:Please provide a source to support your erroneous claims that inflation is as high as it was in the early 80's.

Easy as pie.

Gas prices in January, 2009 - http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2009/01/average-gas-pricesjanuary-26-2009.html

Gas prices today are $3.39 according to the Speedway on the corner. Doing a little math, that's an 84% price increase in 33 months, or a yearly increase of 30.6% The BLS doesn't track energy or food costs in their published Consumer Price Index because they would frighten most Americans. When they're peddling quantitative easing, it's not in their best interests to also point out inflation is eating away at Americans like an unlevied tax. It's one rising boat that effects everyone equally...where's the egalitarian taxation minstrels on this issue, eh???

Con_Alma;951905 wrote:They chose poorly.

Maybe they shouldn't have went away to school. Maybe they should have commuted and worked while in school.

Their "good faith" gamble was a bad decision. Someone else shouldn't foot the bill.

In addition, although the national unemployment rate may be around 9% the unemployment rate for those with a college degree is around 4%.

How would a would be student in 2005 have any reason to believe that their choice was poor? Would skipping college and going to quickie mart have been better? Students in the 90's are better economic decision makers than students in the last decade?

Oh and even if you suppose it was a "bad decision" and the results really aren't just the amalgamation of larger economic realities, they ought to at least be able to discharge their bad investments in bankruptcy (at least with private student loans wherein the private banks were taking the risk).

Students, almost by definition are not credit-worthy. Bankers are supposed to be capitalists and assess the borrower's risk and yet they lent anyways because they walked into the Halls of congress and got Republicans to pass the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005 and made it so private student loans could no longer be discharged through bankruptcy.

Free from the normal business risk of loan default they could levy whatever terms they wanted and threaten permanent servitude.

You say they made a poor decision but yet they cannot cut the losses from their poor decision. If I take out a loan to start a business or buy a home and it turns out to be a bad decision I can discharge my debts through bankruptcy.

A student who can't keep up with the forever rising cost of education who takes out a loan from a private lender to pursue a college education is not treated like other debtors in the market place.

Federal loans are different because they're insured by the taxpayer. But, even in that instance, if the debt is forgiven, the discharge of that debt counts as income and will be taxed.

Private lenders were able to waltz into the halls of Congress and get Republicans to place Student lenders of private loans in the same category as tax cheats, criminals who owe reparations and deadbeat fathers. And Majorspark acts like Private Lenders are some kind virtuous ilk for lending to students. They engaged in a scam that has created an enormously oppressive debt problem.

And is there really a choice? It's either go to college and risk indentured servitude with low wages and little opportunity or face a life of even lower wages and even less opportunity.

Conservatives that live paycheck to paycheck and have less opportunity and freedom are the army for the 1% and support policies that will make them less free and less prosperous. Tories in every sense of the word. Yet they claim to be beholden to the views of the Founding Fathers.

The Founders believed that equality of citizenship was impossible in a nation where massive inequality of wealth remained the rule. They believed that democracy was incompatible with massive concentrations of wealth. Congress first passed the estate tax in 1797 with all the Founders around with the reason of mitigating wealth concentration. Jefferson cited Adam Smith in the Virginia Legislature in 1777 saying "A power to dispose of estates forever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fullness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no rightto bind it up from posterity."

Yet, this is our reality...



This is correlated with the Reagan Revolution and current conservative dogma and utterly contrary to the Founding Fathers vision. Majorspark claims they'd be upset over our modern tax code. I'm confident they'd be much more concerned about our modern plutocracy and banana republic. They would not be with the Tea Party claiming the plutocrats are taxed enough already. Yet the modern republican party wants to do everything that will make this graph even worse.

BGFalcons82;951987 wrote:Easy as pie.

Gas prices in January, 2009 - http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2009/01/average-gas-pricesjanuary-26-2009.html

Gas prices today are $3.39 according to the Speedway on the corner. Doing a little math, that's an 84% price increase in 33 months, or a yearly increase of 30.6% The BLS doesn't track energy or food costs in their published Consumer Price Index because they would frighten most Americans. When they're peddling quantitative easing, it's not in their best interests to also point out inflation is eating away at Americans like an unlevied tax. It's one rising boat that effects everyone equally...where's the egalitarian taxation minstrels on this issue, eh???

Please see the link I provided in the post you quoted. Also volatile commodity prices and food costs are tracked in headline inflation statistics which track the Core CPI. I've pointed this out to you numerous times.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-25/inflation-peaking-in-u-s-with-prices-tumbling-in-bear-market-commodities.html

BoatShoes;952037 wrote:How would a would be student in 2005 have any reason to believe that their choice was poor? Would skipping college and going to quickie mart have been better? Students in the 90's are better economic decision makers than students in the last decade?..."

They wouldn't know. There is uncertainty in the decision. They are taking a risk. They have the means to minimize that risk with different decisions such as attending school locally, living at home and working. A student in the 90s isn't necessarily better able to make the decision it just so happened that their risk wasn't realized.

BoatShoes;952037 wrote:...Oh and even if you suppose it was a "bad decision" and the results really aren't just the amalgamation of larger economic realities, they ought to at least be able to discharge their bad investments in bankruptcy (at least with private student loans wherein the private banks were taking the risk). ...

I disagree. If this were an option every student would be eligible for bankruptcy for their net worth is negative. In addition, the availability of funds from banks would be near zero if this were the case making it even more difficult for individuals to access any money at all. The money that would be available would have significantly higher rates seeing how it would be unsecured debt. Making these debts not able to be discharged has provided a significant benefit to many a student by providing funds at much more reasonable rate than would be the case if they could be relieved of liability through bankruptcy.

Students, almost by definition are not credit-worthy. Bankers are supposed to be capitalists and assess the borrower's risk and yet they lent anyways because they walked into the Halls of congress and got Republicans to pass the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005 and made it so private student loans could no longer be discharged through bankruptcy.


Student loans are not treated the same because by holding them ultimately accountable less risk is associated with the loan and thus making more funds available to more people.

At the end of the day people need to mitigate their risks as much as possible when agreeing to take on such large amounts of liability with little certainty that they will have the means of earning an income to pay their promise.

BoatShoes;951896 wrote:Steve Jobs running around the slums of Port-Au-Prince doesn't create the Iphone. The rugged individual who finds work shoveling gravel when there is not sufficient demand for the goods and services the unemployed rugged individuals can produce in the aggregate is the exception and not the rule.

Steve Jobs dropped out of college after one semester because he realized that he chose a college that was too expensive. He decided he was not going to put others money at risk (his parents at the time). He did not see the value in it. Any today we have the Iphone. Perhaps some these kids running up $100,000 in studen loan debt should take note.

Boat - What the hell?

Your first chart, according to the tags, shows the, "CPI Excluding Motor Fuels" and the title of the chart is, "CPI Running on Motor Fuels". Not that it's disingenuous or anything like that. :huh: It also completely ignores the rise in motor fuels of 84%, as noted by simply taking today's price and comparing to the price prior to Barry's market intervention. I have no idea what the CPI for Urban Consumers is all about. Really? They chart this as compared to Suburban Consumers? What in the hell is that all about? Who the hell is dshort.com?

"Headline Inflation Statistics"? What in the hell? Why not just deal in the truth instead of concocting figures to match an agenda rather than measuring an agenda with figures? Ditto for "Global Warming". Oops, I mean Global Cooling...err....Climate Change. It's no wonder we're so screwed up in this country with so many "facts" backing up the story rather than vice versa.

I gotta hand it to ya, though. Despite motor fuels and food rising quite significantly since QE1 and QE2, you have managed to find charts and graphs showing they've even declined since King Obama started wielding his Marxism.

BGFalcons82;951987 wrote:Easy as pie.

Gas prices in January, 2009 - http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2009/01/average-gas-pricesjanuary-26-2009.html

Gas prices today are $3.39 according to the Speedway on the corner. Doing a little math, that's an 84% price increase in 33 months, or a yearly increase of 30.6% The BLS doesn't track energy or food costs in their published Consumer Price Index because they would frighten most Americans. When they're peddling quantitative easing, it's not in their best interests to also point out inflation is eating away at Americans like an unlevied tax. It's one rising boat that effects everyone equally...where's the egalitarian taxation minstrels on this issue, eh???

You did not answer BS's question. Citing one commodity hardly validates your argument, especially given the volativity of that commodity caused outside the normal realm. The question is INFLATION. We have a deflated market and have had one for several years. This...inspite of the the monetary and fiscal policies that have been used in order to heat the economy up. Our interest rates are at it's lowest level ever. Taxes remain at record lows collectively. We continunue to monetize our debt through the printing presses. These are the exact same policies utilized for over 60 years in an attempt to kick start an ailing economy. It hasn't worked...and the question beckons...why?

Well, IMHO, you can place the blame squarely on the impact of globalization...and the continuing outsourcing of American prosperity. How ironic is it...that a large segment of our society are oh so pro "nation sovereignty" and "Constitution" and all....but turn a blind eye to doing what is in the best interests of our own sovereignty and our own people.

BGFalcons82;952637 wrote:Boat - What the hell?

" ...since King Obama started wielding his Marxism.

Exactly how has "King Obama's" policies differed from King George the 43rd? It's truly a head scratcher to me to read such nonsense. Bush 43 exerted more executive powers than the new guy has. Care to explain that?

King George started a few wars....none of them declared by Congress either. Not saying Obama is any cleaner in this regard....it's just that both their names would be mentioned during role call.

BoatShoes;951910 wrote:"She has no idea what the problems are." I mean jeez. What an outrageous statement to make. The woman has forgotten more about economics than you will ever know.

She's forgotten more about economics than she ever knew. She forfeited whatever credibility she might have had during her stimulus sales pitch 2 1/2 years ago.