The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

MSNBC is reporting that the double dip recession has arrived.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43946055/ns/business-us_business/

We may already be at the nadir of the trend, so it's important that any additional burden put on private industry is avoided to steer us away from disaster. 

We've been steered into uncharted water now.  Typically we could just unharness business and throttle out of it, but we know that's not going to happen.  Hopefully, most private industry is smart enough to conserve and hold on until the storm passes, but that's not going to help most people.

Perhaps we are going to start clawing our way out of this, but we have some looming burdens that impact all businesses in 2014, and the implications of those burdens are not yet measurable by the small business owner.  As for now they are a light in the tunnel.  Could be a train, could be the other side, but either way, it is wise to move slowly.

Perception is a hell of a drug

Or lack of it. ;)

That was a prediction by TTC if more money wasn't printed.

A minor recession has resulted from extortion politics. 

It amazes me how reactionary forum posters are when the light hits the dark.

Business has been unharnessed, G. They've been too busy doing the stock buybacks and paying dividends to hire. (I don't blame them; demand is low because everyone who isn't pumping up their stock price is paying off debt)

This would be a good time to lay off more government workers, teachers etcetera and stop paying any unemployment claims. We wouldn't want people to be consumers or pay their mortgages right now.

Quote from: carltonplace on August 02, 2011, 03:30:07 PM
This would be a good time to lay off more government workers, teachers etcetera and stop paying any unemployment claims. 

Now your talking...

Quote from: guido911 on August 02, 2011, 03:32:21 PM
Now your talking...

Now you're talking!!!

Thanks for making me chuckle gweed.

Quote from: carltonplace on August 02, 2011, 03:40:34 PM
Now you're talking!!!

Thanks for making me chuckle gweed.

And thanks for getting the joke.

These [smiley faced friends] have been trying to act like the recession ever ended....   My [buttocks]

I've been wondering what the next thing will be, since we're now officially done with the debt ceiling (at least for 6 more months or so when the SuperCommittee starts cutting revenue again)  Everyone seems to agree in public statements that the jobs crisis should be at the top of the agenda, though it remains to be seen whether that will actually get addressed or if we'll move on to another ideological battleground. 

My guess is that the budget is the next place to fight the war.  The Ryan budget will be the GOP template and will be marketed as a job creator in the Gaspar vein -- unharnessing the rich and business interests by unharnessing them from tax obligations and regulation.  It'll be a retread, but the Ryan budget at this point is too rich and too untapped a vein to be taken off the table entirely. 

The result of the debt ceiling battle means we're now definitively in an austerity spiral (in some ways like Greece but probably more like Britain) and so our options are now limited to more austerity and/or more dereg and/or more tax cuts.  The government will not now be investing any more money in the economy and is now boxed in entirely by the GOP view of things.  If we actually double dip, the chances of us learning a lesson and realizing that stimulus is a useful tool is greatly diminished. It's much more likely that we double down with our double dip, and cut more away.

What's sad is that the austerity period is going to continue unabated through the 2012 election cycle.  Obama's cast his lot with the rightie economic frame, so no matter who wins that election (I still can't see anyone in the GOP actually winning at this point), the result will look the same at least through 2016:  more austerity.     

Quote from: we vs us on August 03, 2011, 06:35:20 AM
I've been wondering what the next thing will be, since we're now officially done with the debt ceiling (at least for 6 more months or so when the SuperCommittee starts cutting revenue again)  Everyone seems to agree in public statements that the jobs crisis should be at the top of the agenda, though it remains to be seen whether that will actually get addressed or if we'll move on to another ideological battleground. 

My guess is that the budget is the next place to fight the war.  The Ryan budget will be the GOP template and will be marketed as a job creator in the Gaspar vein -- unharnessing the rich and business interests by unharnessing them from tax obligations and regulation.  It'll be a retread, but the Ryan budget at this point is too rich and too untapped a vein to be taken off the table entirely. 

The result of the debt ceiling battle means we're now definitively in an austerity spiral (in some ways like Greece but probably more like Britain) and so our options are now limited to more austerity and/or more dereg and/or more tax cuts.  The government will not now be investing any more money in the economy and is now boxed in entirely by the GOP view of things.  If we actually double dip, the chances of us learning a lesson and realizing that stimulus is a useful tool is greatly diminished. It's much more likely that we double down with our double dip, and cut more away.

What's sad is that the austerity period is going to continue unabated through the 2012 election cycle.  Obama's cast his lot with the rightie economic frame, so no matter who wins that election (I still can't see anyone in the GOP actually winning at this point), the result will look the same at least through 2016:  more austerity.     

There is still a great deal of reserve capital in the private sector.  It's like a loaded cannon.  If we can bring up confidence through the passage of a Ryanesque budget then I think we can fire the cannon.

There still is the question of Obamacare looming over the private sector.  I still have yet to meet anyone in business (and I deal with CFOs all day, every day) who has an understanding of what it will mean to their company.  A significant amount of corporate reserve capital is either being held or invested in technologies to mitigate future hiring as a result.

I don't know what the solution to that is going to be.   It may be necessary for congress to take a different approach and target the mechanisms responsible for medical insurance increases, in the hopes that that will deflate the Obamacare monster, and make healthcare affordable without making it a mandate.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 03, 2011, 07:36:57 AM
I still have yet to meet anyone in business (and I deal with CFOs all day, every day) who has an understanding of what it will mean to their company.  A significant amount of corporate reserve capital is either being held or invested in technologies to mitigate future hiring as a result.

I don't know what the solution to that is going to be.   It may be necessary for congress to take a different approach and target the mechanisms responsible for medical insurance increases, in the hopes that that will deflate the Obamacare monster, and make healthcare affordable without making it a mandate.

Whew, so it's not just the company I work for and the myriad of companies I do business with every day who still don't know all the ramifications.  This hoarding of capital has been crassly mischaracterized by the left as greed when they have zero understanding what kind of doubt Obamacare has created.  Am I wrong in stating that much of that capital (and more is getting hoarded as profits continue to increase) may not return to the playing field until after 2014, if even then?

I honestly don't think people who have never owned a business or created a job have any sort of understanding of how much uncertainty and doubt plays in an economy.  It's not a simple matter of pouring a dumpster load of money out and things will get better (stimulus).  When the government is not working in concert with business to improve the overall jobs and business picture, all they are doing is pouring money into the street and watching it go down the storm sewer.  It provides temporary relief for some sectors but zero incentive to re-invest in more jobs, new plants and other capital expenditures once it's all gone if at the other end of that largesse, companies see the big boot of government prepared to stand firmly on their head.

And Wevus, you make it sound like government spending will dry up.  It won't.  There will be enough accounting gimmicks to ensure that no one has to go home to their district without fresh slabs of bacon.  I hope I'm wrong about that though and the government can figure out how to turn some of their entitlements into an exchange for productivity, like extended unemployment benefits.  Instead of paying someone to make three or five (or whatever the requirement is) job inquiries per week, put a shovel in their hand or a laptop in their lap and at least get a needed service in return.  I hardly find that heartless and cruel.  It's a proven fact that someone who has a job has a better sense of self worth and accomplishment.  It's good for them mentally and could give them new job skills even.  That's a social program I could believe in.

Social programs and government spending doesn't become a problem until they are used to pay people to NOT be productive.  That's one of the major problems facing countries like Greece: too many people on the dole, too many people on the government payroll who get 6 weeks of vacation a year, great benefits, and they retire when they are 58.  It's not terribly unlike one of the main issues which bankrupted GM.  Too many retirees in their 50's and 60's on the payroll with too many benefits.

Quote from: Conan71 on August 03, 2011, 08:40:52 AM

Social programs and government spending doesn't become a problem until they are used to pay people to NOT be productive.  

I really like that Conan.  That sums it up in a logical and irrefutable manner.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 03, 2011, 08:55:59 AM
I really like that Conan.  That sums it up in a logical and irrefutable manner.

So when the government pays agri-business to not produce in order to manage the industry's natural greed, greed that would produce binge/purge economic failures, then that is a problem? Lots of other examples in energy, conservation, manufacturing.

All generalities are false, including this one.

You guys make way too much of "ObamaCare". Really? Business is so scared of health care costs that they retract from their mission of serving the public at a profit for their stockholders...who are the public? Weird business. Short sighted business. Maybe things have changed that much. I doubt it. Businesses simply don't hoard their capital from fear of rising costs. At least not for long. They may pass them on, they may adjust their structures, but well run businesses don't sit on their capital.

Two things you can always depend on in politics and business. Recurring cycles and the effort to capitalize on them.

I think the problem arrives when government spending on social programs is co-opted by the interests of political power and business. Those are practically one and the same now. But they didn't used to be. You couldn't find a conservative in the 1930's/40's's/50's/60's who could get props for what you guys routinely consider irrefutable logic now. Those conservative folks were voices in the wilderness because, wrong or right, they were out of synch with the population. Goldwater had some well reasoned arguments but a party that was driven by leftover Hooverites was totally out of synch with a young, dynamic population.

That is what is happening now. Decades of largesse and new generations who never experienced the failure of economies driven by and for industry have combined to make mortal enemies out of those in synch with a dumbed down population (I don't mean you guys, we know our population is generally sheep) vs those out of synch. Doesn't mean liberals are wrong, they are merely the voices in the wilderness now. They lack the power that a determined, mindless "winning!" mentality commands. In this last struggle over a debt ceiling, Obama had to recognize, that politically, his country has a short historical memory and a Dali-esque view of the world. The only thing that will save him, and our country's economic viability is another young, dynamic, well educated generation. I do believe it is their time of flowering.

Quote from: AquaMan on August 03, 2011, 09:34:04 AM

You guys make way too much of "ObamaCare". Really? Business is so scared of health care costs that they retract from their mission of serving the public at a profit for their stockholders...who are the public? Weird business. Short sighted business. Maybe things have changed that much. I doubt it. Businesses simply don't hoard their capital from fear of rising costs. At least not for long. They may pass them on, they may adjust their structures, but well run businesses don't sit on their capital.

This this this.  Very good.  ObamaCare may engender some fear and uncertainty (much of it ginned up), but there're plenty of other HUGE problems with our economy, including lack of demand and crushing unemployment.  People aren't buying because people aren't employed, and companies aren't hiring because people aren't buying. It's the classic recessionary spiral. Add to the mix that people and businesses are still deleveraging their credit burden (another demand killer) and a low-to-medium boil Eurozone panic -- and that would be enough right there to stultify growth.

AquaMan is also right, re: Obamacare:  companies will do what they've always done with these ancillary employment costs (if there really are many) -- they will just pass them along to either the employee or into the price of their services/goods or both.  No way will the companies themselves volunteer to eat much of an outsize raise in fees.  For proof I offer you way business has been dealing to-date (over a decade now?)with healthcare cost increases which regularly outpace inflation by double digits:  they lower benefits and raise prices. Ta-da!

Also:  I really do believe that given the round of cutting we've just seen with the debt ceiling, the Tea Party folks can now count on holding up all fiscal measures -- budgets, appropriations, etc -- until further pounds of flesh are extracted.  This austerity thing isn't over by a long shot, and especially because Obama and the Dems (and mostly Obama) caved so completely, the rounds of cutting will continue unabated for years to come without any moral imperative to stop.

Quote from: AquaMan on August 03, 2011, 09:34:04 AM
So when the government pays agri-business to not produce in order to manage the industry's natural greed. . .

So greed is the liberal term for when a businesses strives to be more profitable, more efficient, and less expensive.

Got it!

. . .and you can mitigate greed by giving away money?  You can pay people to be less greedy? 

Does anyone else find this to be about the most hilarious thing they have ever read?

Perhaps the federal government should pay Wall Street Bankers to be less greedy?

Lets send the oil industry several trillion dollars not to drill.   This would solve our perceived global warming problems.

Heck! I'll promise not to rob any banks, sell drugs, or kill anyone if the government sends me bags of cash every month.

Purchasing behavior is the stupidest surrender our government engages in, and it is unfair to the tax payer who becomes a slave to whatever industry is being paid not to labor.

Obama did cave and I have to think he either doesn't care for the job, was overcome by Congressional lifers, or realizes that their success is their undoing and time is on his side. The resulting loss of public service jobs, the loss of Tea Partier's very own dearly held government benefits, the loss of security that depression era politicians provided us eroding before there very eyes will not feed the economy. It will rob confidence that we know how to do anything correctly and are beholden to religion and corporatism.

How do Republicans put up a candidate for office in 2012 who championed blood letting and bullied a country into submission to minority interests? All he has to say is, "I'm not like them".

Quote from: Gaspar on August 03, 2011, 10:26:18 AM
So greed is the liberal term for when a businesses strives to be more profitable, more efficient, and less expensive.

Got it!

. . .and you can mitigate greed by giving away money?  You can pay people to be less greedy? 

Does anyone else find this to be about the most hilarious thing they have ever read?

Perhaps the federal government should pay Wall Street Bankers to be less greedy?

Lets send the oil industry several trillion dollars not to drill.   This would solve our perceived global warming problems.

Heck! I'll promise not to rob any banks, sell drugs, or kill anyone if the government sends me bags of cash every month.

Purchasing behavior is the stupidest surrender our government engages in, and it is unfair to the tax payer who becomes a slave to whatever industry is being paid not to labor.

You missed the anecdote completely:
Paying mom's disability not to work = bad
Paying the farmer not to plant crops = good
Subsidizing a college education = bad
Subsidizing an oil company = good

Quote from: Gaspar on August 03, 2011, 10:26:18 AM
So greed is the liberal term for when a businesses strives to be more profitable, more efficient, and less expensive.

Got it!

. . .and you can mitigate greed by giving away money?  You can pay people to be less greedy? 

Does anyone else find this to be about the most hilarious thing they have ever read?

Perhaps the federal government should pay Wall Street Bankers to be less greedy?

Lets send the oil industry several trillion dollars not to drill.   This would solve our perceived global warming problems.

Heck! I'll promise not to rob any banks, sell drugs, or kill anyone if the government sends me bags of cash every month.

Purchasing behavior is the stupidest surrender our government engages in, and it is unfair to the tax payer who becomes a slave to whatever industry is being paid not to labor.

Can't be as hilarious as your sophomoric understanding of economic history and simple posts. I didn't realize the depth of your pathology. ;)

Greed in business is neither good or bad, it simply exists. Just like nature. It can however, be manipulated for the public good and for the industry's own good. Without some bigger picture entity (sometimes industrial associations, sometimes governments, sometimes both) everyone gets totally screwed. If you don't understand that, any further conversation is waste.

And yes dear boy, we do pay people and businesses using tax codes, grants, preferable financing terms etc. to accomplish this manipulation. Because greed is part of nature. Poor taxpayers. They would have it so good if it were just like the Gilded Era when unmanaged greed created Vanderbilts and Rockefellers while everyone else worked for them.

Steve Wynn's rant on the Obama Administration being a "wet blanket" on business is right on target and addresses the frustration and fear a lot of business leaders are facing, as well as consumers.  If I were afraid I could lose my job, I sure as hell wouldn't be out spending money like a plundering viking out in Vegas right now.

A lack of confidence, not a lack of money is creating slack demand.

"I believe in Las Vegas. I think its best days are ahead of it. But I'm afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. You watch television and see what's going on, on this debt ceiling issue. And what I consider to be a total lack of leadership from the President and nothing's going to get fixed until the President himself steps up and wrangles both parties in Congress....

...And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems -- that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration. And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America. You bet. And until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it's not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President.

And a lot of people don't want to say that. They'll say, "Oh God, don't be attacking Obama." Well, this is Obama's deal, and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America. The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution, and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest or holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody's afraid of the government, and there's no need to soft peddling it, it's the truth. It is the truth. And that's true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I'm telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs."

http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2011/07/20/steve_wynn_anti_obama_rant/index.html

Just curious how many jobs Andrew Leonard (the article's snarky author) has ever created?

Quote from: Conan71 on August 03, 2011, 11:20:57 AM
Steve Wynn's rant on the Obama Administration being a "wet blanket" on business is right on target and addresses the frustration and fear a lot of business leaders are facing, as well as consumers.  If I were afraid I could lose my job, I sure as hell wouldn't be out spending money like a plundering viking out in Vegas right now.

A lack of confidence, not a lack of money is creating slack demand.

"I believe in Las Vegas. I think its best days are ahead of it. But I'm afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. You watch television and see what's going on, on this debt ceiling issue. And what I consider to be a total lack of leadership from the President and nothing's going to get fixed until the President himself steps up and wrangles both parties in Congress....

...And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems -- that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration. And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America. You bet. And until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it's not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President.

And a lot of people don't want to say that. They'll say, "Oh God, don't be attacking Obama." Well, this is Obama's deal, and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America. The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution, and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest or holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody's afraid of the government, and there's no need to soft peddling it, it's the truth. It is the truth. And that's true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I'm telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs."

http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2011/07/20/steve_wynn_anti_obama_rant/index.html

Just curious how many jobs Andrew Leonard (the article's snarky author) has ever created?

Here's where I tell you Steve Wynn's an idiot. 

Steve Wynn's an idiot. 

He can believe what he wants but he's crazy if he thinks the way the entire economy has tanked is solely Obama's fault.  It's really that simple.  There's nothing in that rant that is substantive.  There's no why or wherefore, just a whole bunch of frustration.  I would be more inclined to it if it had an ounce of criticism that didn't mirror the stuff being churned out by the Heritage Foundation, TNR, Hannity, et al, ad infinitum.  He is furious about talking points, not about actual things, and this is why I find it impossible to believe. 

What regulations?  What new taxes? What attitude towards business?  I understand the panicky feeling that he's talking about but simply can't line it up with the extended tax cuts, the toothless financial reform bills, the gentle ramp up of RomneyCare, the truncated and right-leaning stimulus bill, the appointment of insiders and Clinton administration flacks to all the top spots in the land.  Obama's recent arc is of newbie to patsy, and to listen to Steve Wynn spew all of this Hannityesque bullcrap all over Marketwatch is to strain credulity.  I have no idea if Steve Wynn is a good CEO, a bad CEO, or just a drooling ignoramus, but I can tell you he's describing business conditions that don't exist outside of a specific spin apparatus. 

I will say this, though:  if the upper echelon of American business gets its market intelligence from the right wing echo chamber, we're much more screwed than I thought we were. 

I wouldn't call someone who employs 16,400 people an idiot when it comes to a discussion of what is keeping them from investing or hiring.  I'd submit his business acumen is far greater than yours and you are letting your own talking points get in the way of paying attention to what people who actually create jobs have to say about this administration's total lack of understanding of how to create confidence in the economy.

Wynn isn't blaming Obama for the economy tanking.  He's blaming him for the continued malaise.  If you think CEO's are taking talking points from Heritage Foundation and Sean Hannity, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.  Corporate CEO's and small business owners alike are the ones who need to be convinced there is a positive business environment out there.  Steve Wynn didn't become a billionaire by listening to pundits, he became wealthy by investing, hiring, and investing some more. 

When someone like Steve Wynn or Jeffrey Immelt says what would help business grow, government and it's leaders need to listen.  Not the other way around if they really want to see the economy turn around.

If Steve Wynn is an idiot, than I know a lot of very successful idiots that have voiced the exact same concerns.  Many of them Democrats, just like Steve.

There is a whole new industry of consultants and tax attorneys that are hosting seminars across the country to help business owners grasp the impact the legislation will have on their industry.  I have several clients who have attended some of the seminars along with their HR groups. 

The resonating verdict is that they are exploring options to either keeping their workforce under 50 or finding ways to trade labor for technology.

I haven't heard a single person say a single positive thing about how this is going to affect their business, and most still don't have a complete grasp on how the 2,000 pages of regulations will affect them.

I'm sorry.  Steve Wynn is still an idiot.  He could employee half of Vegas and I'd still think he's an idiot.  You're right when you say he's blaming the continuing malaise on Obama rather than the initial plunge, but it still doesn't make the rant any more worthwhile.  I'm in the same industry and follow trends very closely.  The Administration hasn't proposed anything that I'm aware of that would be a threat to the Wynn empire.  Food safety?  New unions and/or Checkcard? (ha!) Tighter OSHA or immigration rules?  More stringent building codes? Higher minimum wage? None of these has come to pass. The Administration hasn't even decided to regulate the investments that Wynn undoubtedly relies on to fund his casinos.  Las Vegas real estate has tanked and so has tourism but that's hardly the President's fault.  He criticized Vegas once when he first came into office but has since been very circumspect about how he talks about industry.  Regardless of who Steve Wynn is or does, the things he's talking about are talking points and do not reflect reality.  Where am I to understand he found these ideas?  Under a rock?  Or listening to Kudlow on CNBC?

Also:  so I'm an English major/actor/gaddabout who hasn't owned his own business and spent a good decade of my 20's in the dissolute pursuit of the arts.  I've got very little business acumen (though I look good in a tie).  But from what I understand you create a job like this:  you judge the market and whether you can make more money with another person (or 10) onboard than with not.  You decide to hire accordingly if you judge the risk to be worth it.  Did I get that right? Isn't that about the extent of the magic?  If so, when can I run for President?

You criticize the President for not understanding this mechanism but what's to understand?  It's straightforward:  you expand if you can afford it and the demand is there.  You don't if it isn't or you can't.  Right now businesses can definitely afford it, but the demand isn't there.  That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Gaspar, it's pretty much futile anyhow.  Confronted with reality, liberals just create a different version or entire new reality to suit them.

Quote from: Conan71 on August 03, 2011, 12:59:37 PM
Gaspar, it's pretty much futile anyhow.  Confronted with reality, liberals just create a different version or entire new reality to suit them.

Cop out.

Quote from: Conan71 on August 03, 2011, 12:59:37 PM
Gaspar, it's pretty much futile anyhow.  Confronted with reality, liberals just create a different version or entire new reality to suit them.

. . .but it never suits them.  It makes them more angry and more liberal. 

It makes them turn from serving their causes, to straight class warfare.

Quote from: we vs us on August 03, 2011, 12:58:30 PM

Also:  so I'm an English major/actor/gaddabout who hasn't owned his own business and spent a good decade of my 20's in the dissolute pursuit of the arts.  I've got very little business acumen (though I look good in a tie).  But from what I understand you create a job like this:  you judge the market and whether you can make more money with another person (or 10) onboard than with not.  You decide to hire accordingly if you judge the risk to be worth it.  Did I get that right? Isn't that about the extent of the magic?  If so, when can I run for President?

You criticize the President for not understanding this mechanism but what's to understand?  It's straightforward:  you expand if you can afford it and the demand is there.  You don't if it isn't or you can't.  Right now businesses can definitely afford it, but the demand isn't there.  That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

You keep missing the most key point in all this and the crux of Wynn's problem:

CONFIDENCE!!!!

President Obama doesn't realize that when he panders to more liberal interests and the lower income brackets Democrats depend heavily on for votes that he's going to soak the rich or re-distribute wealth, that shows a hostility toward business and the wealthy.

When you create a very, very complex piece of legislation that hardly anyone can explain all the details ("Let's pass this bill so we can see what's in it!") but it will have an effect on every single person you presently employ or plan to hire, it's seen as hostility and a disincentive.

Business owner's perceptions trump economic theory every single day of the week, that's what makes the economy work.

Lower demand has little to do with the jobs picture right now.  There are larger mitigating factors like exporting of jobs to countries where there are fewer barriers or penalties.  Anecdotally, I've been told Cisco opened an office in Ireland which employs 10,000 workers because the corporate tax rate is much lower.  Companies have also learned to improve productivity with fewer people.  Overall, GDP doesn't seem to be struggling all that bad.  A true lack of demand in the economy would be indicated by a consistently shrinking GDP.

Here's another explanation from Cisco on taxes and global competitiveness.  Of course these are all just Tea Ba**ing talking points so ignore at your own risk.

Quote"As the world leader in networking technology that transforms how people connect, communicate and collaborate, Cisco is proud of the role we have played in creating opportunity and economic growth throughout the world.

However, here in the U.S. we are facing unique and daunting challenges that jeopardize our position as an economic leader.  We need to get Americans back to work, boost investment in the United States, increase our global competitiveness and inject certainty into our economy.

While there are many contributing factors to the challenges we face as a Nation, one area we need to address is modernizing the U.S. corporate tax system.  The last time the corporate tax code was modernized was in 1986, the same year a little start-up called Microsoft went public.  Think about how much the world has changed since then.  Our antiquated and overly complicated tax system is broken.  And it is putting American workers and businesses at a severe competitive disadvantage.  Our policies must reflect the new realities of the global marketplace

First, the U.S. has the one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world.  Our global competitors are subject to significantly lower tax rates, which give them more flexibility to invest and operate their businesses.  This comes at time when we are seeing global competition like never before.  On one side, emerging new competitors are aggressive and driving change with a low-cost and highly-skilled labor force.  On the other side, developed nations have a huge focus on exports and job creation, and a competitive tax system that supports their goals. Several of these countries – such as Germany, Japan and Canada – are lowering their corporate tax to address exactly these issues.

Second, it's no surprise that many companies such as Cisco are growing outside of the United States. That is where the world is seeing the fastest growth. In fact, 50% of Cisco's sales are outside the U.S.  This is the reality of doing business in a global economy – we sell in Mexico, we sell in Germany, we sell in China – and we pay taxes locally on those earnings. However if we decide to bring the foreign earnings back to the United States, we are taxed again by our government at a remarkably high rate.  Many of our global competitors do not face this same double taxation.  And the demand for technology overseas will keep growing substantially beyond our borders – in fact, IDC estimates that 71% of total information and communications technology spending will be outside the United States by 2014. That is only three years from now.

Together, these tax policies hinder investment in the U.S. and prevent American companies from growing stronger at home.  Ultimately, they negatively impact our economic growth and our competitiveness as a nation.  Unfortunately, despite political support from both sides of the aisle, long-term, comprehensive reform could take years to enact.  The U.S. economy and our workers cannot afford to wait.  We need action now to promote investment in the economy and create jobs."

http://blogs.cisco.com/news/the-corporate-tax-reform-imperative/

Quote from: Conan71 on August 03, 2011, 01:17:16 PM


President Obama doesn't realize that when he panders to more liberal interests and the lower income brackets Democrats depend heavily on for votes that he's going to soak the rich or re-distribute wealth, that shows a hostility toward business and the wealthy.

And this is exactly what I'm talking about.  Obama hasn't pandered to anyone even vaguely left of the spectrum since he was elected.  His legislation -- even RomneyCare -- has been very solidly center-right, stuff that Bush I would be proud to call his own.  Which is why I look at Steve Wynn's vomitorium + conference call as nothing but unrealistic talking points.  Steve-o has been steeping so long in the Fox Business Channel spin that he believes the same lie that's been pushed from the git-go, which is a variant of Obama = Socialist = baaaaaad for business. 

If business confidence is shaky based on how left Obama's been -- when in reality and by any historical measure he's been center-right -- there's a major disconnect between what business thinks now and what it used to think.  Then business itself has been pushed through the ole' Overton Window. 

Addendum to Steve Wynn's rant:  a friend of mine who plays semi-pro poker just told me that Wynn's casinos had forged an exclusive marketing deal with PokerStars.com and that the conference call coincides almost perfectly with the total shutdown of internet pokerplaying on all US servers.  So if by "overregulation" we mean "shutting down illegal gambling sites" that would dovetail very nicely.

Quote from: we vs us on August 03, 2011, 02:43:18 PM
Addendum to Steve Wynn's rant:  a friend of mine who plays semi-pro poker just told me that Wynn's casinos had forged an exclusive marketing deal with PokerStars.com and that the conference call coincides almost perfectly with the total shutdown of internet pokerplaying on all US servers.  So if by "overregulation" we mean "shutting down illegal gambling sites" that would dovetail very nicely.

3 months after.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 03, 2011, 03:18:37 PM
3 months after.

Funny.  RomneyCare passed in 2010.  What's the statute of limitations on sour grapes over a business loss?

Quote from: we vs us on August 03, 2011, 02:30:01 PM
And this is exactly what I'm talking about.  Obama hasn't pandered to anyone even vaguely left of the spectrum since he was elected.  His legislation -- even RomneyCare -- has been very solidly center-right, stuff that Bush I would be proud to call his own.  Which is why I look at Steve Wynn's vomitorium + conference call as nothing but unrealistic talking points.  Steve-o has been steeping so long in the Fox Business Channel spin that he believes the same lie that's been pushed from the git-go, which is a variant of Obama = Socialist = baaaaaad for business. 

If business confidence is shaky based on how left Obama's been -- when in reality and by any historical measure he's been center-right -- there's a major disconnect between what business thinks now and what it used to think.  Then business itself has been pushed through the ole' Overton Window. 

Is Madcow referring to Obamacare as Romneycare now?  Sounds like Dims think he's the front-runner.

Brief synopsis on the difference between the two:

Quote"But let's subdue our reflexes for a moment. Without wading into the weeds of health care reform, there are also significant differences between Romneycare and Obamacare.
Chief among those differences: One is a massive federal program without cost controls that requires a vast bureaucracy to operate; the other is a more modest plan that constitutes less than 1 percent of the state budget.
More to the point, one was decided by the people of a single state, by and for themselves. The other presumes to dictate what individual states must do.
Romney's central point was that what's good for one state may not suit another and that states should have the freedom to choose what works best for them rather than have to conform to a federal one-size-fits-all plan, the ultimate costs of which are not really knowable. People who tell you they know what it would cost are fibbing. Off the record, every honest person in Washington will tell you: Nobody knows."


Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Romneycare-vs-Obamacare-1380042.php#ixzz1U00Xj5v7

Just because you perceive Obama to be to the right of your political leanings, doesn't make him center-right at all.  Ever since the election, he has repeatedly recited the meme of "those people make enough" "we need to redistribute the wealth", "we are going after corporate jet owners".  Do I need to cut and paste the videos?

At what time did Presidents Clinton or Reagan, two Presidents who knew how to inspire confidence in business, ever talk about wealth redistribution as a favored policy, or wind up enacting an expensive overhaul of healthcare which necessarily involves the business community?  Hillarycare vanished like a fart in the wind and business didn't fear Clinton.  He also didn't cite tax increases as being a penalty on the rich or social justice.

Extending the Bush tax cuts hasn't made Obama suddenly center-right.  He had no real choice but to extend the cuts given the current state of the economy.  

Quote from: Conan71 on August 03, 2011, 03:27:59 PM
Just because you perceive Obama to be to the right of your political leanings, doesn't make him center-right at all.  Ever since the election, he has repeatedly recited the meme of "those people make enough" "we need to redistribute the wealth", "we are going after corporate jet owners".  Do I need to cut and paste the videos?

Talk is meaningless. If you look at his policies, it's mostly center-right. And the RomneyCare thing isn't new, it's been said since the bill passed, precisely because it is almost identical to Romney's Massachusetts plan. When given a choice between the typically liberal way to handle something and the typically Reaganite way to handle something, he always goes for the latter.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 03, 2011, 10:26:18 AM
So greed is the liberal term for when a businesses strives to be more profitable, more efficient, and less expensive.

Got it!

. . .and you can mitigate greed by giving away money?  You can pay people to be less greedy? 

Does anyone else find this to be about the most hilarious thing they have ever read?

It was Nixon's agriculture secretary who put that framework into place, bud.

Quote from: nathanm on August 03, 2011, 04:24:53 PM
It was Nixon's agriculture secretary who put that framework into place, bud.

Nixon was no conservative.

Your right. He was more mainstream America at the time. A true throwback to the 1950's and that generation's last true hope against the emerging more progressive boomer movement. His problems were more personality and integrity related. He was able to keep the extremists of his own party (Reagan, Goldwater et al) at bay so he could administer the government. Pretty F'd up country at the time. Communism, Viet Nam, recession, crime, demonstrations and riots. I remember feeling bad for him at the time even though we all laughed at his foibles.

He was way out of synch with my generation until we became wealthy and mainstream appealed to us. Then Reagan looked harmless.  :D

Well isn't this just great news. A little more Bush bashing/blaming, then this gem I emphasized:

Quote"It's been a long, tough journey. But we have made some incredible strides together. Yes, we have. But the thing that we all ought to remember is that as much as good as we have done, precisely because the challenges were so daunting, precisely because we we were inheriting so many challenges, that we're not even halfway there yet. When I said 'change we can believe in' I didn't say 'change we can believe in tomorrow.' Not change we can believe in next week. We knew this was going to take time because we've got this big, messy, tough democracy," President Obama said at a campaign fundraiser in Chicago on Wednesday night.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/08/03/obama_were_not_even_halfway_there_yet.html

Hear that American? Obama is "not even halfway" through frakking us. Better stock up on...

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQq_xqPIWdY7r3hTWC1OJS0vGdb7QZrHfW3CArVb1hPeFETMwEX3g)

Unemployment has risen (unexpectedly) again, and with our dear leader's most recent comments re-affirming his desire to raise taxes, the market is freeking out.  Down almost 300 pts this morning.

Confidence, a little pat on the back, a "you can do it," rather than a "yes we can" take it from you.  

Anything but threats Mr. President, please.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 04, 2011, 10:37:29 AM
Unemployment has risen (unexpectedly) again, and with our dear leader's most recent comments re-affirming his desire to raise taxes, the market is freeking out.  Down almost 300 pts this morning.

Confidence, a little pat on the back, a "you can do it," rather than a "yes we can" take it from you.  

Anything but threats Mr. President, please.

You know that confidence thingy doesn't work Gassy, just look at how badly it backfired on Reagan.  Only esoteric economic theories written by dead people who never created a job in their life works.  8)

Press conferences of the last two days:

Barack Obama just after Congress signed the debt deal: 'Everybody is going to have to chip in. It's only fair.'
Barack Obama again: 'It means reforming our tax code so that the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations pay their fair share."

Harry Reid speaking about the committee established by the debt deal: 'The only way we can arrive at a fair arrangement for the American people with this joint committee is to have equal sharing.

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz:  "Hopefully now with this compromise on the debt ceiling behind us, with the opportunity, with the economic to sit down and focus on longer-term deficit reduction that will have some balance and ask some sacrifice for our most fortunate."

Immediately back on the raise taxes on businesses train.

This is a scary take today from the American Thinker

Cloward-Piven Paradise Now?
By Jeannie DeAngelis


Combine class warfare, demonizing the rich, getting as many people onto the welfare rolls as possible, and pushing the economic system to collapse and you have a flawless formula for Cloward-Piven 2.0 -- and a vehicle that ensures Obama remains in power.

Cloward-Piven is a much talked-about strategy proposed in the mid-1960's by two Columbia University sociology professors named Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven.  The Cloward-Piven approach was sometimes referred to as the "crisis strategy," which they believed were a means to "end poverty."

The premise of the Cloward-Piven collective/anti-capitalist gospel decried "individual mobility and achievement," celebrated organized labor, fostered the principle that "if each finally found himself in the same relative economic relationship to his fellows ... all were infinitely better off."

The duo taught that if you flooded the welfare rolls and bankrupted the cities and ultimately the nation, it would foster economic collapse, which would lead to political turmoil so severe that socialism would be accepted as a fix to an out-of-control set of circumstances.

The idea was that if people were starving and the only way to eat was to accept government cheese, rather than starve, the masses would agree to what they would otherwise reject.  In essence, for the socialist-minded, the Cloward-Piven strategy is a simple formula that makes perfect sense; the radical husband-and-wife team had Saul Alinsky as their muse, and they went on to teach his social action principles to a cadre of socialist-leaning community organizers, one of whom was Barack Obama.

As the debt crisis continues to worsen, President Obama stands idly by an inferno with his arms crossed, shaking his head, and doing nothing other than kinking the fire hose and closing the spigot.  Spectator Obama is complaining that the structure of the American economy is engulfed in flames while accusing the Congress, which is trying desperately to douse the fire, of doing nothing about the problem.

Although speculative, if the Cloward-Piven strategy is the basis of the left's game plan, spearheaded by Alinsky devotee Barack Obama, it certainly explains the President's inaction and detached attitude.

The greatest nation in the history of the world is teetering on the brink of a catastrophic economic crisis. America was pushed to this point by a rapidly-expanding national debt and a stressed-out entitlement system; in the center of this crisis is the President, who insists on expanding it even further, all in the name "fairness" and "social justice."

As a default date nears and the President threatens seniors that there's a chance they may not receive their Social Security checks, it has been revealed that the federal government disperses a stunning 80 million checks a month, which means that about a third of the US adult population could be receiving some sort of entitlement.
Since the 1960's when Cloward-Piven presented a socialistic guideline to usher in the type of evenhandedness Obama lauds, America's entitlement rolls have swelled from eight million to 80 million.  If the nation's ability to disperse handouts were ever disrupted, it's not hard to see how chaos would erupt should an angry army of millions demand what Cloward-Piven called "the right to income."

Couple the threat of dried-up funds for food stamps, Social Security, unemployment benefits and the like with the Obama administration's vigorous campaign to turn a tiny upper class of big earners into the enemy, and you have the Cloward-Piven recipe for anarchy and complete collapse.

If the worst happened, Saul Alinsky's biggest fan, whose poll numbers continue to plummet, could use mayhem in the streets to remain firmly ensconced in the White House.  Alinsky taught his students a basic principle that community organizer Barack Obama learned well: "Never let a good crisis go to waste." Fiscal disintegration coupled with lawlessness would deliver the type of Cloward-Piven/Saul Alinsky trifecta that progressives have worked toward and waited decades for.

Barack Obama has spent the last 1,000+ days defying reason and choosing policy directions that seem nonsensical to the rational mind: a failed stimulus package; ObamaCare; growing the deficit to astronomical proportions; and cynically portraying wealth as immoral. Now, when cuts are the only fix to a budgetary balloon about to burst, a seemingly illogical President digs in and demands additional phantom dollars to spend on a system that is collapsing under the weight of unmanageable debt.

It's hard to figure out the method to the President's obvious madness, because based on Obama's approval rating, if the election were held today even Pee Wee Herman could replace Obama behind the Resolute Desk.  Maybe the "method" isn't "mad" in the least!

Could it be that Barack Obama is purposely pressuring the system in a premeditated effort to foster a major crisis?   One that would demand extraordinary measures to control by a President who could then mete out basic sustenance to Americans who would agree to anything to regain some sense of normalcy.  And in the process successfully usher in the "socially just" system Barack Obama has dreamed of all his life.

While radical Alinsky/Cloward-Piven disciple Obama appears to be clueless and detached, it may be a ploy; he may actually be focused and engaged as he purposely pursues an Alinsky-inspired course of action to force the system to "live up" to its own rules.  Obama's ultimate goal of once-and-for-all discrediting the capitalist system and replacing America's foundational economic and social tenets with a broad-based socialist one headed by progressive Marxists like himself, is actually within reach.

As Obama pushes and prods the US economy and instigates social unrest, it could be that he believes a Cloward-Piven-style utopia resides just beyond the horizon -- a progressive panacea where an election-free, classless society, thankful for a simple crust of bread, looks to Barack Obama to keep the peace by remaining in power indefinitely.

Therefore, unless all of America, regardless of class or political persuasion, pays attention to the potential for a bleak future that lies ahead and realizes the President's non-plan could be itself an actual calculated plan, the resulting consequences will affect everyone, as Barack Obama transforms a once great nation into Cloward and Piven's idea of paradise.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 04, 2011, 10:37:29 AM
Unemployment has risen (unexpectedly) again, and with our dear leader's most recent comments re-affirming his desire to raise taxes, the market is freeking out.  Down almost 300 pts this morning.

Yet private payrolls were up over 100k this month.

Using the non-seasonally adjusted numbers, initial claims are down almost 131k in the last two weeks. The adjusted numbers put the change at a 22k decrease.

I think it's funny that you grumble and whine about a problem that you and your ilk are causing with your focus on cutting government jobs. The private sector is adding jobs, just very slowly. Government, on the other hand (especially state and local governments) are bleeding jobs like mad.

QuoteDNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz:  "Hopefully now with this compromise on the debt ceiling behind us, with the opportunity, with the economic to sit down and focus on longer-term deficit reduction that will have some balance and ask some sacrifice for our most fortunate."

She is perfect Vice President material.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 04, 2011, 08:05:17 AM
Nixon was no conservative.

Not by today's standards, however remember the competition: McCarthy and McGovern.

I guess I should quantify "bleeding jobs like mad." There were 552,000 fewer government workers in June than there were in April. The private sector was up 1,559,000 in the same time period, although a lot of that is seasonal work. Seasonally adjusted, the private sector added 130,000 jobs in that time frame.

Quote from: nathanm on August 04, 2011, 08:04:50 PM
I guess I should quantify "bleeding jobs like mad." There were 552,000 fewer government workers in June than there were in April. The private sector was up 1,559,000 in the same time period, although a lot of that is seasonal work. Seasonally adjusted, the private sector added 130,000 jobs in that time frame.

Those are positive trends, let's hope it continues, most specifically the growth in private sector jobs.  And let's hope that some of those jobs being lost in the government sector are ones which can be absorbed by the private sector for services the government needs to contract for.

Quote from: Conan71 on August 04, 2011, 08:31:49 PM
And let's hope that some of those jobs being lost in the government sector are ones which can be absorbed by the private sector for services the government needs to contract for.

Realistically, I doubt much of the work is going to be shifted to the private sector, since state and local governments are laying off people because they don't have the money to pay them. I think the "recovery" is so weak it's not terribly likely to see the private sector quickly absorb the workers in non-government-related work. There's just not much in the way of excess demand right now.

That's not to say I don't hope for better, I just don't see it as the most likely scenario.

So the jobs report shows 139,296,000 people working in July, compared to 139,334,000 in June.  That's a drop of 38,000 jobs.

The number of discouraged workers (those who have given up looking for a job) went from 982,000 to 1.119 million, a difference of 137,000 or a 14 percent increase.

CNN headline "Finally Some Good News" & "Hiring picks up"

MSNBC headline "U.S. economy created 117,000 jobs in July; jobless rate slips
Sigh of relief for Wall Street after worst stock-market sell-off since 2008 financial crisis"

Dipsmiles in the administration thought the market and the people would buy this if disseminated through the state run media.  Throw out the numbers for the folks that have given up and WOW!  Things look better, unemployment drops to 9.1%.  Well, the market did not buy it, and even some of the state news sources like CNBC broke from the pack and started reporting the real numbers.  http://www.cnbc.com/id/44033486

If you continue to read the jobs report you also learn that the duration for people staying on unemployment rose too.  That is probably the most disturbing metric.  It indicates that those who do have marketable skills in this economy are having a harder time finding employment.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 05, 2011, 10:20:55 AM
So the jobs report shows 139,296,000 people working in July, compared to 139,334,000 in June.  That's a drop of 38,000 jobs.

The number of discouraged workers (those who have given up looking for a job) went from 982,000 to 1.119 million, a difference of 137,000 or a 14 percent increase.

CNN headline "Finally Some Good News" & "Hiring picks up"

MSNBC headline "U.S. economy created 117,000 jobs in July; jobless rate slips
Sigh of relief for Wall Street after worst stock-market sell-off since 2008 financial crisis"

Dipsmiles in the administration thought the market and the people would buy this if disseminated through the state run media.  Throw out the numbers for the folks that have given up and WOW!  Things look better, unemployment drops to 9.1%.  Well, the market did not buy it, and even some of the state news sources like CNBC broke from the pack and started reporting the real numbers.  http://www.cnbc.com/id/44033486

If you continue to read the jobs report you also learn that the duration for people staying on unemployment rose too.  That is probably the most disturbing metric.  It indicates that those who do have marketable skills in this economy are having a harder time finding employment.

If this had been in 2008, you can bet they would have reported the net loss of 38,000 jobs first then buried the creation of 117,000 jobs in the last paragraph.

Quote from: Gaspar on August 05, 2011, 10:20:55 AM
If you continue to read the jobs report you also learn that the duration for people staying on unemployment rose too.  That is probably the most disturbing metric.  It indicates that those who do have marketable skills in this economy are having a harder time finding employment.

If you go back a bit further, the numbers paint a picture of many of the folks in the initial round of layoffs after the crisis began still not being able to find jobs, while those who were laid off after the credit freeze have had a much easier time finding work. With the first round, nobody was hiring, so that group got largely stuck in long term unemployment. More recently, companies seem to have been much more interested in hiring people who haven't been out of work long.

yep

Consumer Confidence at 30 Year Low

Confidence among U.S. consumers plunged in August to the lowest level since May 1980, adding to concern that weak employment gains and volatility in the stock market will prompt households to retrench.
The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan preliminary index of consumer sentiment slumped to 54.9 from 63.7 the prior month.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-12/u-s-consumer-sentiment-falls-more-than-expected-to-54-9-in-michigan-index.html

Finally another chance for me to buy stocks at rock bottom prices! Sold the last batch after their record highs!

WOW!

Again I ask, why did S and P wait until they did for this rating game?

This is food for thought...
Titanic Battle or Insider Trading? The S&P Downgrade and the Bilderbergers: All Part of the Plan?
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26054

"Whatever can be said about the first two weeks of August, their market action was unprecedented, unnatural, and bears close observation."

(Ricky Perry attends the Bilderberger meetings...Presidential candidate? Hmmmmmmmm)

Quote from: Teatownclown on August 21, 2011, 08:51:32 PM
WOW!

Again I ask, why did S and P wait until they did for this rating game?

This is food for thought...
Titanic Battle or Insider Trading? The S&P Downgrade and the Bilderbergers: All Part of the Plan?
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26054

"Whatever can be said about the first two weeks of August, their market action was unprecedented, unnatural, and bears close observation."

(Ricky Perry attends the Bilderberger meetings...Presidential candidate? Hmmmmmmmm)

Supposedly President Obama's cabinet is/was loaded with Bilderbergers including : Geithner, Summers, Emmanuel.  Supposedly Bernanke, Rubin, and Greenspan are also members.

Hell, I thought Bilderberger was that fancy new burger joint out in SW Tulsa.

In actuality, thought it was another one of Savage's paranoid conspiracy theories.

Savage Nation....he makes some great comments every once in a while. But he's too over the top with anti American rhetoric for me.

How come when the stock market takes a hit of 2 1/2% it is all doom and gloom but when like today the markets end up with a gain of 490 points there is hardly any talk. 

Just curious.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-futures-signal-losses-focus-094410132.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-futures-signal-losses-focus-094410132.html)

Quote from: joiei on November 30, 2011, 05:28:46 PM
How come when the stock market takes a hit of 2 1/2% it is all doom and gloom but when like today the markets end up with a gain of 490 points there is hardly any talk. 

Just curious.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-futures-signal-losses-focus-094410132.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-futures-signal-losses-focus-094410132.html)

Average Joe, when the market goes down, thinks "I'm losing money" whether he's got much in or not.  Same Average Joe, when the market goes up, thinks "Only the rich folk are making money off this.".

Plus, 24/7 leads with what bleeds.

Quote from: joiei on November 30, 2011, 05:28:46 PM
How come when the stock market takes a hit of 2 1/2% it is all doom and gloom but when like today the markets end up with a gain of 490 points there is hardly any talk.  

Just curious.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-futures-signal-losses-focus-094410132.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-futures-signal-losses-focus-094410132.html)

People will b!tch when they lose money, just a thought. Kinda like my broker calls me when the market is up, crickets when it falls. Also, it's the front page story on Drudge and CNN.com

Thanks G, I like your to the point answer.

Quote from: joiei on November 30, 2011, 05:28:46 PM
How come when the stock market takes a hit of 2 1/2% it is all doom and gloom but when like today the markets end up with a gain of 490 points there is hardly any talk.  

Just curious.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-futures-signal-losses-focus-094410132.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-futures-signal-losses-focus-094410132.html)

The media has figured out bad news sells far better than good news.  Just ask George Bush. ;)

Aside from that, optimism is out of vogue.

I hear that President Obama emerged from the oval office this morning and saw his shadow.

SIX MORE WEEKS OF RECESSION!

The big danger to the economy now is Europe.  Without that external headwind, we'd be growing slowly but steadily.  It will be interesting to me to see who will take the blame for a recession (if it happens) caused entirely by something outside of our control. 

Quote from: we vs us on December 01, 2011, 09:11:15 AM
The big danger to the economy now is Europe.  Without that external headwind, we'd be growing slowly but steadily.  It will be interesting to me to see who will take the blame for a recession (if it happens) caused entirely by something outside of our control. 

The ridiculous part is that the Fed is providing more liquidity to Eurozone banks than the ECB is. The root of the problem, however, is that Germany is in denial. They seem to think that they can force their neighbors to undergo 15-20% wage reductions and still keep their export economy intact. They don't want inflation because they're, well, German, and they don't want to share in the pain. They have to pick one or the other or the Euro is done for. Thus far, they have refused to act and the fire is beginning to eat away at the hull of the ship.

In some ways, this is a huge advantage for us here in the US (a rump Euro makes a piss poor reserve currency), but if events continue the way they have been, it's going to get worse before it gets better.

Quote from: we vs us on December 01, 2011, 09:11:15 AM
It will be interesting to me to see who will take the blame for a recession (if it happens) caused entirely by something outside of our control. 

Bush

;D

Quote from: nathanm on December 01, 2011, 09:20:39 AM
The ridiculous part is that the Fed is providing more liquidity to Eurozone banks than the ECB is. The root of the problem, however, is that Germany is in denial. They seem to think that they can force their neighbors to undergo 15-20% wage reductions and still keep their export economy intact. They don't want inflation because they're, well, German, and they don't want to share in the pain. They have to pick one or the other or the Euro is done for. Thus far, they have refused to act and the fire is beginning to eat away at the hull of the ship.

In some ways, this is a huge advantage for us here in the US (a rump Euro makes a piss poor reserve currency), but if events continue the way they have been, it's going to get worse before it gets better.

I vote for the "it's going to get worse" part.  Not necessarily because I'm a pessimist but because we're all so interconnected now.  For all of our sturm und drang about them taking over the world, China's economy is also in an increasing pickle (their own credit/housing bubbles, an economy and growth curve almost entirely based around the dollar-pegged yuan and exports-exports-exports); if Europe goes, and we go, I'd be afraid that China might follow suit.

Quote from: we vs us on December 01, 2011, 09:28:42 AM
I vote for the "it's going to get worse" part.  Not necessarily because I'm a pessimist but because we're all so interconnected now.  For all of our sturm und drang about them taking over the world, China's economy is also in an increasing pickle (their own credit/housing bubbles, an economy and growth curve almost entirely based around the dollar-pegged yuan and exports-exports-exports); if Europe goes, and we go, I'd be afraid that China might follow suit.

China has already followed suit. They did pretty much the opposite of what we did, mainlining a bunch of fiscal stimulus and letting their municipalities run up enormous debts for largely useless projects and ended up driving RMB inflation sky high. That you don't see more support of the Euro by China is a fairly strong indication of where they are right now. Why is this happening? Because the domestic consumption the nattering nabobs of negativism were on about over the past couple of years was almost entirely debt funded. It had to be, most Chinese don't get paid jack smile. You can't run a modern economy in the style of some 19th century early industrial revolution economy and expect it to work well.

You'll note we have something of the same problem here, just without the inflation because our debt bubble quit growing, unlike China's.

Going slightly o/t here: Speaking of China and trying to help our economy, I'm currently in the market for a higher end slide in range and dishwasher for a kitchen renovation project.  Thus far, I keep finding appliances which are made in Canada or China, seems to be hard to even find high end GE or Frigidaire built in the U.S.  I suspected lower end units would be made in China or Mexico but really surprised we don't even make the high end stuff here any more.  If anyone knows of a manufacturer who is standing pat on American production and assembly, I'd love to go that route.  At the very least I will buy from a locally-owned store if I can't find American-made.

Quote from: Conan71 on December 01, 2011, 10:10:04 AM
Going slightly o/t here: Speaking of China and trying to help our economy, I'm currently in the market for a higher end slide in range and dishwasher for a kitchen renovation project.  Thus far, I keep finding appliances which are made in Canada or China, seems to be hard to even find high end GE or Frigidaire built in the U.S.  I suspected lower end units would be made in China or Mexico but really surprised we don't even make the high end stuff here any more.  If anyone knows of a manufacturer who is standing pat on American production and assembly, I'd love to go that route.  At the very least I will buy from a locally-owned store if I can't find American-made.

The FB link Gaspar provided has both those things on sale at Sage.  GO take a gander.  Seems like a pretty good deal if they're in as good a shape as they look.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/162124153883903/#!/media/set/?set=a.10150394457391519.351420.189680196518&type=1 (http://www.facebook.com/groups/162124153883903/#!/media/set/?set=a.10150394457391519.351420.189680196518&type=1)

Quote from: Townsend on December 01, 2011, 10:12:55 AM
The FB link Gaspar provided has both those things on sale at Sage.  GO take a gander.  Seems like a pretty good deal if they're in as good a shape as they look.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/162124153883903/#!/media/set/?set=a.10150394457391519.351420.189680196518&type=1 (http://www.facebook.com/groups/162124153883903/#!/media/set/?set=a.10150394457391519.351420.189680196518&type=1)

Good looking stuff, unfortunately the range wouldn't work for me, I need one without the back piece as the range will be going on the island in my kitchen and I'm going to level the entire island down to where the bar-top is, roughly 40" or so.  Dishwasher wouldn't work either as I'm going all stainless to match FMC's fridge.  Much appreciated on the link though.  I might have use for some of the racks they said they still have.

Quote from: Conan71 on December 01, 2011, 10:21:42 AM
Good looking stuff, unfortunately the range wouldn't work for me, I need one without the back piece as the range will be going on the island in my kitchen and I'm going to level the entire island down to where the bar-top is, roughly 40" or so.  Dishwasher wouldn't work either as I'm going all stainless to match FMC's fridge.  Much appreciated on the link though.  I might have use for some of the racks they said they still have.

I forgot about the island thing.

Looking forward to seeing the changes.

Quote from: Red Arrow on December 01, 2011, 09:28:00 AM
Bush

;D

At this point, no one really cares who he blames.  No one expects him to take a leadership role, not even his own party.

He's so consumed prancing around the country on his class warfare tour that people have basically stopped listening. 

All speech, no substance, expecting others to take the reigns and the blame.

Quote from: Gaspar on December 01, 2011, 10:42:32 AM
At this point, no one really cares who he blames.  No one expects him to take a leadership role, not even his own party.

He's so consumed prancing around the country on his class warfare tour that people have basically stopped listening. 

All speech, no substance, expecting others to take the reigns and the blame.

Got Fox running in the background there do ya?

Quote from: Townsend on December 01, 2011, 10:46:29 AM
Got Fox running in the background there do ya?

Provide any example to the contrary.

Quote from: Gaspar on December 01, 2011, 10:42:32 AM
At this point, no one really cares who he blames.  No one expects him to take a leadership role, not even his own party.

He's so consumed prancing around the country on his class warfare tour that people have basically stopped listening. 

All speech, no substance, expecting others to take the reigns and the blame.

I wasn't talking about who Obama blames . . . I was talking about who we the people will blame.  Who will take the fall for a negative event that's out of our control?  

Quote from: Townsend on December 01, 2011, 10:46:29 AM
Got Fox running in the background there do ya?

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AlaZTgDZ_Rc/TZsMXn6WxGI/AAAAAAAAAA8/rkBkO13RaMM/s1600/head-in-sand.jpg)

Quote from: Breadburner on December 01, 2011, 10:53:01 AM
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AlaZTgDZ_Rc/TZsMXn6WxGI/AAAAAAAAAA8/rkBkO13RaMM/s1600/head-in-sand.jpg)

Exactly Bread, exactly.

Quote from: Conan71 on December 01, 2011, 10:10:04 AM
Going slightly o/t here: Speaking of China and trying to help our economy, I'm currently in the market for a higher end slide in range and dishwasher for a kitchen renovation project.  Thus far, I keep finding appliances which are made in Canada or China, seems to be hard to even find high end GE or Frigidaire built in the U.S.  I suspected lower end units would be made in China or Mexico but really surprised we don't even make the high end stuff here any more.  If anyone knows of a manufacturer who is standing pat on American production and assembly, I'd love to go that route.  At the very least I will buy from a locally-owned store if I can't find American-made.

Acura? Be optimistic despite it being out of favor, Conan.

Nate, you are correct, as usual.

RA, I prefer to blame SCOTUS....

ST, quit trolling.

Burner, you need new material....

Quote from: Gaspar on December 01, 2011, 10:48:15 AM
Provide any example to the contrary.

Regurging "class warfare" in your post provides an argument against what you write.

Quote from: we vs us on December 01, 2011, 10:51:32 AM
I wasn't talking about who Obama blames . . . I was talking about who we the people will blame.  

Same answer as before, Bush.  Everything wrong with this country is Bush's fault except what is Bush the elder's or Reagan's.

 ;D

Quote from: Red Arrow on December 01, 2011, 12:34:13 PM
Same answer as before, Bush.  Everything wrong with this country is Bush's fault except what is Bush the elder's or Reagan's.

This just popped up on Twitter feed.  Has AI become a bit more militant?

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1211/no_amnesty_315049e9-9bcf-4353-9e15-87195a3c0df5.html (http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1211/no_amnesty_315049e9-9bcf-4353-9e15-87195a3c0df5.html)

QuoteAmnesty International is calling for the arrest of former President George W. Bush while he is travelling overseas in Africa.

The human rights group issued a statement Thursday calling for the governments of Ethiopia, Tanzania or Zambia to take the former president into custody. According to Amnesty, the 43rd president is complicit in torture conducted by the United States during his administration and should be held pending an international investigation.

"International law requires that there be no safe haven for those responsible for torture; Ethiopia, Tanzania and Zambia must seize this opportunity to fulfill their obligations and end the impunity George W. Bush has so far enjoyed," said Amnesty senior legal adviser Matt Pollard in a statement.

Quote from: we vs us on December 01, 2011, 10:51:32 AM
I wasn't talking about who Obama blames . . . I was talking about who we the people will blame.  Who will take the fall for a negative event that's out of our control?  

That's the problem, and to some extent the widening rift between political philosophies. Yes there are some things out of our control, at least at this point, but the vast majority of "things" are, and, for the last three years, were completely under our control. It just depends on the people that a leader chooses to listen to.

On one side the free-market capitalists, business owners, innovators and employers were demanding a pull back of all things government and stimulus that fed the private sector.

On the other side the Keynesians, social engineers, and congress members with desks full of failed proposals were demanding full frontal government advance, and stimulus to the public sector.

In the middle were the advisors who said "Mr. President, you can't let this crisis go to waste."  This is our chance to shift money from free market endeavors with public support and demand, to liberal initiatives that we can develop support and demand for!

At the top was a leader willing to take the gamble, knowing he could play the blame card for any chips that were lost in the gamble.

On the sidelines you had businesses, watching the drama, quietly biding their time until the insanity is over.

Now all of those who supported these grand and foolish initiatives are throwing their hands in the air saying, "well, theres nothing we could do anyway. This is all out of our control.  It all depends on Europe.  It goes back to Reagan. It was Bush's fault, so it's not our responsibility to address. It's congress's fault.  It's the oil companies' fault.  It's big businesses who keep hoarding money.  It's the rich.  It's the hurricanes, tsunamis, global warming, climate change, climate catastrophe, BP environmental disaster,  Wall Street investors, banks, and the media. He's just the president, he doesn't make the laws, he has no control over what congress does. Don't blame the president, he's a very busy man.  He has more important things to worry about than a do-nothing congress. Hey, look over there, he got Osama."

No one gives a flip who the Obamites want to blame things on.  Stop with the speeches, and do something.  You want to spur business growth?  Talk to the business owners.  Your "jobs bill" is crap, we don't need to spend another million dollars on a sidewalk in Hulbert, or a solar ribbon manufacturer using 20yr old technology, or millions to research radioactive rabbit droppings, or a new bicycle bridge in Stigler.

Fixing this ox cart is not hard, in fact, simply making energy less expensive, probably would have been all the fix we needed to avoid prolonged and secondary recession.  Keep the banks going long enough for cheap energy to produce increased production and ease prices for goods and services, then slowly pull the reins back to a reasonable tension.

Well, at least half of your first paragraph was grounded in reality, Gaspar. It's an improvement, anyway.

Quote from: Gaspar on December 01, 2011, 01:52:18 PM
That's the problem, and to some extent the widening rift between political philosophies. Yes there are some things out of our control, at least at this point, but the vast majority of "things" are, and, for the last three years, were completely under our control. It just depends on the people that a leader chooses to listen to.

I was asking about Europe, about which we -- as individuals and as a nation -- have very little control over.  It has the largest economy in the world, valued in 2010 at $13.6T.  What happens when that splits apart into multiple currencies, multiple rump economic units, all of whom are cratering to one degree or another?  The economy is global, obviously; what are our next steps to protect ourselves from the failures of other parts? 

But if you want to answer the question you wish I'd asked, feel free. 

Quote from: Conan71 on December 01, 2011, 10:10:04 AM
Going slightly o/t here: Speaking of China and trying to help our economy, I'm currently in the market for a higher end slide in range and dishwasher for a kitchen renovation project.  Thus far, I keep finding appliances which are made in Canada or China, seems to be hard to even find high end GE or Frigidaire built in the U.S.  I suspected lower end units would be made in China or Mexico but really surprised we don't even make the high end stuff here any more.  If anyone knows of a manufacturer who is standing pat on American production and assembly, I'd love to go that route.  At the very least I will buy from a locally-owned store if I can't find American-made.

Whirlpool is making ranges just north of here in Owasso.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on December 01, 2011, 02:34:16 PM
Whirlpool is making ranges just north of here in Owasso.

Full line?

Quote from: Conan71 on December 01, 2011, 03:00:19 PM
Full line?

Haven't looked lately.  Check with Metro Builders Supply - or their current name, can't remember.
They only go up to about $2,000 in price, so if you want to spend more, you will have to go somewhere else most likely.

Do you want a Viking type?

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on December 01, 2011, 03:07:03 PM
Haven't looked lately.  Check with Metro Builders Supply - or their current name, can't remember.
They only go up to about $2,000 in price, so if you want to spend more, you will have to go somewhere else most likely.

Do you want a Viking type?

No, I'm looking GE Profile or whatever Frigidaire's upscale lines are.  Range I'm looking at is smooth top with expandable elements and a warmer, oven is regular function or convection and theres a warming/storage drawer as well.  $1200 to $1500 range.  Anything more capability than that would be wasted on me.  I'd love to have a full gas chef's range, but it would involve running a gas line under the floor and I'd rather not get into that.  It's been done once before to run a capillary water line and wiring to the island in a renovation during the mid 1990's.

Quote from: Conan71 on December 01, 2011, 05:28:10 PM
No, I'm looking GE Profile or whatever Frigidaire's upscale lines are.  Range I'm looking at is smooth top with expandable elements and a warmer, oven is regular function or convection and theres a warming/storage drawer as well.  $1200 to $1500 range.  Anything more capability than that would be wasted on me.  I'd love to have a full gas chef's range, but it would involve running a gas line under the floor and I'd rather not get into that.  It's been done once before to run a capillary water line and wiring to the island in a renovation during the mid 1990's.

I've been looking too, but every time I just get irked by the whole thing.  I have gas stove, so may just go over to Tulsa Stove Hospital in Redfork and buy an antique.  Cost less and very much more cool.  Work as well if not better.  My current old Magic Chef has failing valves, and Whirlpool, who bought the company, wants to encourage people NOT to repair, so they rape and pillage on the parts.  (They are doing that to Maytag washer/dryer parts now, too.)

I'm not impressed by the electronic controls that they are using in this type of appliance.  They "value engineer" it to the point where it is gonna fail on you in 3 to 6 years.  And the replacement cost is $400 for the control panel.  Yuck.  (Relative is going through that now with a Thermador brand.)  And the only real problem is they put some cheesy electrolytic caps on the control boards, instead of a good cap, so it dries out in a few years and the power supply fails.  

Have done some cooking on the smooth top at the relative's, and I just can't get the hang of it.  Too much conditioned to natural gas, I think.  Keep over or under doing it.  Electric oven is good - that seems to be pretty easy.

Yeah, if gas line not already there, it can be a pain.  Strongly recommend finding a good plumber to install if go that route.

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on December 01, 2011, 09:23:20 PM
I've been looking too, but every time I just get irked by the whole thing.  I have gas stove, so may just go over to Tulsa Stove Hospital in Redfork and buy an antique.  Cost less and very much more cool.  Work as well if not better.  My current old Magic Chef has failing valves, and Whirlpool, who bought the company, wants to encourage people NOT to repair, so they rape and pillage on the parts.  (They are doing that to Maytag washer/dryer parts now, too.)

I'm not impressed by the electronic controls that they are using in this type of appliance.  They "value engineer" it to the point where it is gonna fail on you in 3 to 6 years.  And the replacement cost is $400 for the control panel.  Yuck.  (Relative is going through that now with a Thermador brand.)  And the only real problem is they put some cheesy electrolytic caps on the control boards, instead of a good cap, so it dries out in a few years and the power supply fails.  

Have done some cooking on the smooth top at the relative's, and I just can't get the hang of it.  Too much conditioned to natural gas, I think.  Keep over or under doing it.  Electric oven is good - that seems to be pretty easy.

Yeah, if gas line not already there, it can be a pain.  Strongly recommend finding a good plumber to install if go that route.

If I go to gas I'm fortunate in that I happen to work for someone with an unlimited mechanical contractors license.  I simply don't want to jack hammer up the floor in the kitchen.  Besides I kind of like the look of the smooth top.  The future Mrs. Conan and I have both been cooking on electric long enough that we are used to the settings.  It took awhile when I first used electric as I grew up with gas and liked how adjustments are much more instantaneous with gas.

Quote from: Conan71 on December 01, 2011, 11:50:32 PM
If I go to gas I'm fortunate in that I happen to work for someone with an unlimited mechanical contractors license.  I simply don't want to jack hammer up the floor in the kitchen.  Besides I kind of like the look of the smooth top.  The future Mrs. Conan and I have both been cooking on electric long enough that we are used to the settings.  It took awhile when I first used electric as I grew up with gas and liked how adjustments are much more instantaneous with gas.

Do all the smooth tops change color or something whenever the heating element is on?  I think some of the early (long time ago) smooth tops didn't indicate they were on until they got really hot.  I vaguely remember someone who had one complaining about it being really too warm to touch but not blistering without an obvious indication it was on.

One I have used a little bit glows dark cherry from fairly low heat, up to bright red.