An ongoing discussion between Butch and KJ

I just got this on FBook
Marilee - How about this -
When the Govt Subsidizes the poor - 
"food stamps, subsidized rent, and so forth."
We are actually - Subsidizing Business.
We have a MIN Wage - We should have a MAX Wage. 
Send me an Email - LVKen7@Gmail.com
and join in.
=================
These are 2 way emails between Butch and Ken
For Clarification - Butch is Lee Kinder - My Nephew.

Butch's are on the Left Margin
and Ken's are Indented.

Butch considers himself a Conservative - a C
and Ken is an Issues guy.

=======
To keep up on changes go to
go to - More Changes
down to
SUBSCRIBE TO SITE CHANGES.
That way you will get an email when the site is changed
and following the changes is EASY.
Let us know what YOU think.
================
This ALL started when I sent an update to a GDoc I have
Called - Today's HATE from The Heritage Foundation
Butch is on my Update list.
=====




7-24-08 Butch

Marx said that each theory produces in its creation an antithesis.So, when Adam Smith proposed free market economics as opposed to phisiocracy, Smith created the seeds of a new theory, Communism.
 
However, Communism was perfect so the thesis-antithesei conflict was over.  However, Communism blended with Capitalism to produce
Socialism.  What comes next?  State capitalism is Fascism.  Socialism reduces indidivual responsibility and reduces individual motivation.

There are many people with what I call a "slave mentality".  They think
that if the government is going to take care of me, why should I do
anything?  It amazes me how many people are willing to exist on a
subsistance level as long as they have a TV and McDonalds.  How can
a socialistic state produce people who want to advance and contribute
when being lazy is subsidied by the state?
 
Capitalism failed because Adam Smith never met Charles Darwin.  Smith
said that good firms that produce good products at reasonable prices
with reasonable profits will drive bad firms out business.  Bad firms produce
inefficiently, produce bad products, charge high prices.
 
However, Smith overlooked the fact that good/bad are comparative.  I remember
the serachlights at the Nash Rambler, or was it Studebaker showrooms.  I also
remember looking at Hudsons, Packards, and Desotos.  These were all good
firms, but could not stay in business.  There are bad firms worse firms and
the worst firms.  There are also good firms, better firms, and the best firms.
Guess what happens.  The best firms drive everyone else out of business.
 
Gasoline:  Remember Dino Supreme; Flying A; Clark?  Good firms all, but not
good enough.  Darwin was right, the fittest survive, and they there is not enough
competition to keep them in line.  The government ends ALL competition.  Why
was there only one phone company; the government;  why do I have only one
cable TV company?  The government.  Why is Microsoft a monoploy?  Because
the government gave them a patent/copyright and no one else could use their
ideas.    So, we have public and private monopolies.  The trusts before TR and
Taft were private.  Now, Amtrak is a public monopoly.  Many airlines are public
monopolies.  El Al, BOAC, whatever.
 
Maybe, TR's approach was right.  Let companies be privately owned, but don't
let them get close to beinging a monopoly.  Know why GM was so successful?
They bought a closed patent belonging to a man called A. C. Champion.  He
invented the spark plug.  Ford and the others had to use a magneto-coil
system, OR pay GM royalties on the spark plug.  GM had, in effect, a monopoly
on spark plugs.  The monopoly was created by the government.
 
Maybe government should give subsidies to some businesses just so that there
would be competition. 
 
But, what do we do with multinational firms?  Why is GM going under?  Part of
it competition from larger firms like Toyota.  How do we keep competition in the
international market?  We cannot make the Japanese or Chinese insure
a competitive market any more than we can make them forsake slave labor
or open their markets to free trade.
 
Social issues are a whole other ball of wax.
 
What do you think? 
 
Lee

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 10:48 PM, lL. Kinder <lk2@cablemo.net> wrote:
I think that some time ago, you asked me about depressions and
bubbles in American History.
 
You can find lots of "Bubbles" in recent history, some just funny, but
not to the people that lost hundreds or thousands of dollars on them
Remember the "Avon Bottle Bubble"?  How about the "Baseball card
and Comic Book Bubble"?  Laura got zapped in the "Beanie Baby
Bubble".  I know that these seem trivial, but they are examples, on
a small scale of what happened in the housing market.  People are
convinced that something has value, the buy it, force the prices up by
buying it, then find out that at some point, there is on one to sell to.
 
This happened in the housing market, and as a result about ten million
Americans now owe more on their home than it is worth.  This is an
unside down mortgage.  The problem is that people lose real wealth
when the bubble breaks.  There have been many serious bubbles
in U.S. History involving railroads, land in Florida, Texas, and California.

Henny Youngman
got a call from his broker -
B - Henny you should buy this stock it is 25 cents and will go to $10.00

H - OK buy 1000 shares

Next day -
B - Henny the stock is up to $2.00

H = Buy another 1000 shares.

Next day -
B - Henny the stock is up to $5.00

H = Buy another 1000 shares.

Next day -
B - Henny the stock is up to $20.00

H = SELL IT ALL.

B - To WHO?
====
 
 
There also have been serious depressions.  In 1837 Andrew Jackson caused
a panic by issuing a speci circular and closing the bank of the U.S.  Starting
about 1830 banks let lots of credit,using foriegn money and the fact that
they could issue paper money.  In 1837 Jackson required that all business
with the government and all land purchases must be in gold or silver.  This
caused a run on the banks.  Of the 850 or so banks in the U.S. almost
350 closed and another 60 or so had to reduce activity.  The following
depression lasted  5 years.
 
There was another depression from 1807 to about 1814.  Again, the government
was responsible.  Thomas Jefferson declared an embargo against Great Britain
and its allies.  This crippled American industry and killed our major export
market.  It ended with the end of the War of 1812 when we resumed normal
trading with Britain.
 
In 1873 there was another depression in the U.S.  It lasted about 6 years.
There were two problems here, one was the Government, and the other
was railroading.  The government stuck to a hard money, or speci, format.
The economy was expanding because of the railroad bubble.  However,
because of the hard money line the value of money increased drastically,
and there was not enough money for credit.  If the interest rate had been zero,
it would have been positive because money was increasing in value.  However,
when the railroad bubble burst because of overexpansion and lack of capital,
stock prices fell, steel mills closed, makers of rails and locomotives closed,.
unemployment soared.  The key event was the failure of a company called
Jay Cook and Company.
 
Of course the Great Depression from 1929 to 1941 was caused by the failure
of the Federal Reserve to control credit in the U.S.  It was helped by a bubble
in the stock marked, and equity bank loans used to buy stock.  In addition, the
Agricultural markets had been in a depression before 1929. 
 
In the U.S. between 1929 and the end of 1933, GDP dropped about 27%.
Investment had dropped by over 80%.  Consumer buying had only dropped
by about 82%.  So the real problem was in investment.  The drop in consumer
spending was probably the result, not cause of the depression.  The failure
of the banks, because of bad loans didn't help.  Banks making bad loans
. . . sounds sort of modern.

As you and I have talked
HOW WOULD THE WORLD HAVE GOTTEN
OUT OF THE DEPRESSION
IF THERE HAD NOT BEEN WORLD WAR 2?

KJ



6-18- 08

Morning Bell: The Silence Is Deafening

The year 2008 is not just an election year. It is also the year that marks the beginning of a demographic transformation that threatens the fiscal stability of this country.


Already, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid eat up 42% of the federal budget.



But this year, the first of the nearly 80 million baby boomers begin to

draw out,

instead of contribute to, our entitlement programs.








The consequences of this shift will come quickly and will be staggering.



Already Medicare spends more each year than it takes in. In just six years, Medicare will draw more than 45% of its budget from general revenues. Already Social Security and Medicare consume 7.5% of our GDP. Unless changes are made, that figure will jump to 13% by 2030. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the increased deficits or taxation required to cover this explosion in spending would cripple the U.S. economy.


A diverse coalition of 16 budget experts from seven think tanks (including American Enterprise Institute, Brookings Institution, Concord Coalition, The Heritage Foundation, New America Foundation, Progressive Policy Institute and Urban Institute) met for more than a year before producing a paper calling for honest political leadership on the issue. Now at least one congressman has come forward with an honest proposal.

Today, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) discuss his plan “A Roadmap for America’s Future” at an event hosted by the Brookings Institution. Ryan’s road map includes changes for each of the big three entitlement programs.


For Social Security, Ryan would:

1) raise the eligibility age to 67 by 2026;

2) index benefits for those now under 54 to prices;

3) create a personal account option starting in 2011.






For Medicare, Ryan would:

1) reform the entire health care system with a $2,500 per person refundable tax credit;

2) create new program by 2019 that gives each beneficiary $9,500 to enroll in a private health plan;

3) index that payment to health care inflation and gradually lower the payment to higher income beneficiaries;

4) provide low-income beneficiaries with additional payments for a medical savings account set equal to the average deductible for high-deductible health plans.


The Ryan proposals are an honest effort to solve our nation’s looming fiscal catastrophe. The nation now awaits and deserves to hear from the congressional majority party about its ideas. Talk of problems is not enough. Promising proposals is not enough. It’s time for all sides to join with Ryan and get serious about entitlement reform.

Quick Hits:

  • Thanks to a loophole in congressional disclosure requirements, senators who sponsor $300 billion bailouts for irresponsible banks that include Countrywide Financial, like Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), don’t have to disclose the discount loans they knowingly received from bank “VIP” programs, like Dodd did.
  • According to Rasmussen Reports, 67% of voters believe that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other states and 64% believe it is at least somewhat likely that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is allowed.
  • Liberals do not want to drill off America’s coastline, but China and Japan put aside their rivalry and just inked a deal for Chinese companies to drill for oil, with Japanese financing, in waters near Okinawa and Shanghai.












But we Pay into Soc Sec & Medicare





But we pay into Soc Sec on every $ we earn
THAT is more proof that we NEED a National Sales Tax.
With 1% added for Soc Sec
and .05% Going to Medicare




































What about removing the CAP on earnings and make everyone pay on ALL They earn.
Wonder WHY they didn't suggest that?
Think Maybe THE Make a LOT of $$$$?
Probably







WHY make it complicated?

Just give everybody Medicare at Birth.


One thing they didn't mention is the PROFIT the Insurance Companies make that would be eliminated.











































More - UNION Hate




===
Ken - Got this from Butch

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:05 AM, lL. Kinder <lk2@cablemo.net> wrote:
Ken; please bear with me for a minute.  I suspect that your are
really a NEW DEAL DEMOCRAT.  You subscribe to the idea that
the Federal Government can deal with most of the problems
in the country.  I am a Goldwater Conservative, and I KNOW
better!
 
So, go with me though a trip to NEVERLAND, or Euphoria, as
Liberals call it.
 
First,  NO RETIREMENT PLAN can work in the U.S. economy.
It is not possible for any normal person to put enough aside to
pay for a retirement that lasts more than four of five years.
Public retirement programs are all Pyramid schemes, including
Social Security.  Current benefits must be paid from current
revenue because YOU and I DID NOT PAY IN ENOUGH FOR
anything else to happen.  The first year I taught, I made
$5,800, the second year, $6,200.  When I finished, I was
making just over $41,000 a year.  SO, IF I averaged $30,000
a year, I would have kicked in an average of $1,500 a year,
matched by my boss.  So, in 30 years, that would $90,000 a
year.  Linda would match that.  That's $180,000.  We draw
out over $6000 a month.  That cancels our contributions
in less than 3 years!. 
 
Even if our money had been well invested, and it has been, and
it increased by 5 fold, that would give us about $900,000, or
about 12 years worth of income.  Linda has been retired 10
years and I have been retired 8.  There is NO WAY that we could have contributed enough to pay for what we get.  We
could not put enough aside to maintain a minimun standard of
living.  The reason;  INFLATION.  Who causes inflation?  THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT~!
 
Yes, you pay into Social Security.  You used up all of your money,
AND its interest within the first 6 or 7 years.  The rest has to be
made up with General Revenue, or contributions for people who
work NOW.  So, retirement funds do not work because of
inflation.
 
They also do not work because they are pyramid schemes.  At
the beginning, Social Security worked because most workers
did not live long enough to collect.  Those that did, died within
4 or 5 years.  Also, it was a SUPPLEMENT, not their total income.  The base of the pyramid was lots of workers, about 12l
for each retired worker.   Today, the base is decreasing, and
the top is increasing.  It is not half what is was.  That's why
SS is failing.  Better medical care, more spending, is letting
us live longer, fewer children born, fewer good jobs.  Social
Security has turned into a major fiscal failure, just as foretold
by the 1932 conservatives.
 
]Lee
 =========

From Ken - I operate better with SHORT - You can ask Joye.
So I put it in a form I could work with -

FDR

Labels - Ken HATES Lables
I Have NO idea what they mean.

Today on my IRadio Show - 8:30 to 9 AM PDT
I talked about the FCC considering a law
about Cell Phone Contracts
and the penalties for Stopping the Service Early.

To ME - A contract is a Contract and should be enforced.
If people choose to get out
get out, BUT PAY THE AGREED TO PENALTY.

I ONLY list to Rush when I am in the car.
About 11:15AM PDT
Rush said - THE EXACT SAME THING
that I had said, almost word for word.

So, HERE is my Question -
Because I agree with Rush on this
DOES THAT MAKE ME A CONSERVATIVE?


Ken; please bear with me for a minute.  I suspect that your are
really a NEW DEAL DEMOCRAT. 

You subscribe to the idea that
the Federal Government can deal with most of the problems
in the country. 




I am a Goldwater Conservative, and
I KNOW
better!







So, go with me though a trip to NEVERLAND, or Euphoria, as
Liberals call it.



*** THEM are fighting words.



How about this -
YOU let me TELL YOU
WHAT I BELIEVE
and I will ask YOU what YOU believe.





**** What is with you.
Arrogant!!!!!
I have Never known you to be like this before.

I respect YOUR Opinion,
but  =
KNOW better?????
Maybe NOT!!!


*** I have NO idea what a liberal is,
or what they call anything.
NEW DEAL DEMOCRAT -


I am a Goldwater Conservative, and I KNOW better!

Liberal



First,  NO RETIREMENT PLAN can work in the U.S. economy.
It is not possible for any normal person to put enough aside to
pay for a retirement that lasts more than four of five years.
Public retirement programs are all Pyramid schemes, including
Social Security.  Current benefits must be paid from current
revenue because YOU and I DID NOT PAY IN ENOUGH FOR
anything else to happen.  The first year I taught, I made
$5,800, the second year, $6,200.  When I finished, I was
making just over $41,000 a year.  SO, IF I averaged $30,000
a year, I would have kicked in an average of $1,500 a year,
matched by my boss.  So, in 30 years, that would $90,000 a
year.  Linda would match that.  That's $180,000.  We draw
out over $6000 a month.  That cancels our contributions
in less than 3 years!. 
Doris paid in ALL of those years
but never drew one red cent.

Are Enron ex-employees GLAD for Soc Sec?
Bet they are.

Was their private retirement better?

Don't think so.





Even if our money had been well invested, and it has been, and
it increased by 5 fold, that would give us about $900,000, or
about 12 years worth of income.  Linda has been retired 10
years and I have been retired 8. 
There is NO WAY that we could have contributed enough to pay for what we get.  We could
not put enough aside to maintain a minimum standard of
living.  The reason;  INFLATION.  Who causes inflation?  THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT~!



INFLATION. 
Who causes inflation?  THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT~!
Now see, I thought it was BIG Gasoline - Exxon Mobil merger that caused the Gas Price to go up.

I thought it was the "free enterprise" system that caused Food Prices to go up.

How did the Gov't make it FLOOD in Iowa?

Reagan was the one that said -
"the Gov't is the problem."

How does BuSh's war figure in?



 Yes, you pay into Social Security.  You used up all of your money,
AND its interest within the first 6 or 7 years.  The rest has to be
made up with General Revenue, or contributions for people who
work NOW.  So, retirement funds do not work because of
inflation.



They also do not work because they are pyramid schemes.  At
the beginning, Social Security worked because most workers
did not live long enough to collect.  Those that did, died within
4 or 5 years.  Also, it was a SUPPLEMENT, not their total income. 
The base of the pyramid was lots of workers, about 12l
for each retired worker.   Today, the base is decreasing, and
the top is increasing.  It is not half what is was.  That's why
SS is failing.  Better medical care, more spending, is letting
us live longer, fewer children born, fewer good jobs. 

Social Security
has turned into a major fiscal failure, just as foretolded
by the 1932 conservatives.
But NOBODY LISTENED TO THE 1932 Cs
because of the
1929
1930
1931
Cs

Got us into a WORLD WIDE DEPRESSION.

What would Pa & Ma have done without Soc Sec?

 
 Ken Got THIS Back from Butch and the discussion REAlLY started.
So, Here goes -

 


On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 2:35 PM, lL. Kinder <lk2@cablemo.net> wrote:
Ken, you missed the point, and I did not make the point clearly.
Social Secutity is two things people will not admit.  First,
it is a pyramid scheme, and these do not work.
 
Second, it is a welfare system, not an insurance system.
 
If we admit these two things, we can see why it is not working,
and what we must do to make it work. 

What got you started on this?

People HAVE TALKED ABOUT SS
for a Long time
but nobody has BETTER system.
 
 
Social Security can NEVER be an insurance scheme because
you, and most others CANNOT EVER put aside enough money
for a decent retirement.  We must depend on the current
generation to pay our retirement.  We paid for others retirement.
The problem is, (a) there are too many retired people.  (b) too many
people draw SS when they do not NEED it, (c)  there are fewer
workers supporting more retirees (d) there are fewer good jobs
with good wages to pay higher SS taxes.
 
Yes, people need SS, but the word is NEED, not deserve.  


Hold on.
They promised us
if we pay into SS while we are working
they we will be able to draw out of it
at 62.

When the Govt PROMISED don't we DESERVE to get it?
 
As
I pointed out, if people only got what they deserved from these
programs, they would only get a handful of years, not nearly
enough to cover a full retirement.  Payment based on NEED is
welfare, not insurance.
 
SO, here is the solution.  First, tax all earned income in the U.S.
for SS. 

You and I have talked about this
NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THEY EARN
But they DO KNOW WHAT THEY SPEND.

 
Second, NO general revenue funds are paid to SS
people. 


Go back to the beginning
and calculate how much
has been paid into it
and figure interest on the money taken for the General fund.

Add that to it,
and how much will we have?


Third, a "NEEDS TEST" is applied to all SS applicants,
and people that don't need it don't get it, even if they paid in.

Who decides "needs"?
 
 
Inflation is caused by government.  Inflation is the result of
increases in the money supply.   Only the government can do
that.  Look at Mexico. When we first visited Mexico, a Coke
cost 900 pesos.  The last time it cost 8 pesos.  The reason,
the Mexican Government has re-valued the peso, and has
instituted strict limits on the amount of money in circulation.
Our government tries to increase inflation by making sure that
we have enough money to buy things we should not purchase.
Bush gives people $ to buy things we don't need.  He cuts taxes
so we can spend more.  The government borrows money to
spend also increasing the money supply.  Gas costs $4.00 per
gal.  The free market says that when this happens, several
things happen.  (1) people use less gas.  (2) producers put
more gas in the marked.  (3) people develop substitutes for
gas.  What do we do?  We try to force the market into an
artificial position, trying to force prices down, or we just give
people money so they can buy more gasoline.  Why not just
ration gas?  Why not improve public transportation?  Why not
research alternative energy? 

Big Gaso
doesn't operate to benefit the Public
I think they should nationalize the Gaso companies.

 
 
But no, our position is that we should punish the oil companies
for making too much money.  We know what happens when that
happens.  They move.  They find places where there are not
taxes, environmental regulations, and unions.  The result in the
U.S.;  empty buildings, unemployment, and more welfare. 

Like WHERE?
- Show quoted text -
 
Welfare is necessary.  We must take care of the poor, the old,
and the disabled, but we should not look at the programs as
insurance or entitlements.  They are welfare.  WE are better off
now than we ever when we were working.  We are actually making
more money as retirees than we did as workers.  BUT, I KNOW
that my retirement is actually being paid by  teachers that are
teaching NOW.  I paid for teachers that were retired from 1970
to 1999.  I paid 8% of my income to a retirement fund, this was
matched by the school district.  That money went into a trust
fund, but most of it was paid out to the retired teachers.  Now,
people in our district START at $30,000.  I started here at $6,200.  They pay into the same fund and I get part of it   IF we get too many retired teachers,
and not enough beginning or practicing teachers, the fund
will not be able to pay retirement benefits.  The same thing is
true of Social Security.
 
What the Heritage Foundation said is true.  We cannot keep
the program as it is.  The ideas I have will just band-aid the
program for 15 or 20 years.  In truth, no one knows how to deal
with the increasing problem of OLD AMERICANS LIKE US.  We
use more medical resources, are basically non-productive, and
live longer and longer.  When we took our our first insurance, the
actuarial(sic) tables said I would live until 69.  Now they say I will
live until 75, maybe longer.  My whole retirement plan was based
on mis-information.  (I would say a lie, but at the time it was true.)
What will life expect. be by 2020? 
 
One more thing.  FDR DID NOT GET US OUT OF THE GREAT
DEPRESSION. 


You and I have talked on this too.

Without the War HOW would we have ever gotten out of the Depression?


 
I just taught a unit on FDR and the derpession
for Luge when she missed a class at Drury College.  Unemployment rates, GNP, Yd, tax income, consumption rates,
 were just as bad in 1939 as they were in
1934. 

But, the Banks were open
they had the CCC
WPA
Soc Sec started


KJ

 
Our economey was pulled out of the depression because
the British Empire, the French Empire and other allies purchased
war supplies from us.  Then we went into a war-time economey
which required full employment.  The real hero of the time was
Truman, who kept us our of another major recession/depression
when WWII ended.  Maybe Korea helped him?  
 
I tried to post some of this on the blog, but, when I logged in, I could not get back to the original posting.
 
Lee
 =====================

Ken, it is possible to visit the SS website and find out what your TOTAL
contributions are.  We all know that we made minimun contributions at
the start and then, as our income increased, so do our contributions.  Could
you look at your account, plug the numbers into a spreadsheet and figure
how much you actually paid in, the interest on it, and the amount you
actually drew out?  I did this with our retirement system, and the money
I paid in for my retirement is all ready gone..  I paid in 8% of my total
income, plus 8% from the district.  Figured at 8% compound quarterly,
the amound I paid in, plus interest, is used up.  And, according to the
tables, I can expect to live for another 13 years!
 
Lee

================



- Show quoted text -
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 8:51 AM, lL. Kinder <lk2@cablemo.net> wrote:
Yes, I have Social Security Coverage.  I paid in 5 years worth when I went to
College.  I got more quarters doing summer work while teaching.  I also got
more quarters teaching for colleges.  I have enough coverage to draw it,
it cannot.  My teacher retirement will be adjusted against my benefit, but
Linda and I will be eligible for Medicare.
 
No, I do not believe in Contracts, I believe in the people who make them.
I trust, the people, not the contract.  The U.S. government has not kept
many of the Contracts they made, including the Bill of Rights.  Look at
what Lincold did to that!  So did Wilson and FDR.  They shredded it and
used it as cat litter!.  Bush does not have a good record here either, nor
does this Democratic Congress.
 
Entitlement programs include all public programs that provide services to people.
Parks, Education, Food Stamps, SSI, Medicade, Medicare, roads, anything the
governmend does, except defense is an entitlement.  When we pay for them,
its just like any business, except that the government has unlimited credit and
can print money.  That is how the government really funds its debt.  It borrows
hard money and pays back soft money.  We spent $500 on a bond for Laura.
At the time it would have purchased a good used car.  It is now worth about
$1,400.  Think you can buy a good used car for that.  The bad entitlement
programs are the ones that let people use products without paying for them
Medicade, Food Stamps, Special Education, SSI, Rent and Utility subsidies.
People who use these do not pay for them.  Why are people entitled to medical
care they don't pay for?
 
Banks.  By your definition, there is no such thing as a sound bank.  No bank can
carry enough money to cover its deposits. 

The FDIC Made ALL member Banks SOUND.

 
They loan the money out to people
who pay it back with interest.  About 2/3rds of the banks in 1930 had enough in
assets to cover their demand deposits.  The assets were in the form of government
bonds, secure stocks, foreign currency, business and real-estate loans that
would be paid back.  But, no bank can survive a run, even today. 

Sure they can,
because of the FDIC.

One more thing.
In THOSE Days
1930's
You had to have CASH to buy anything.
NO Cash, you couldn't buy a loaf of bread

NOW we have Plastic
and I can buy on it till
the Bank gets itself straigntened out.


 
Only the
government can stop a run, but why should they?  If people are so stupid that
they don't know about runs, let them feel the sting a a bank faillure. 

The FBI just arrested 2 Managers
at Bears Sterms

They were NOT a bank
therefore were NOT covered by FDIC.

 
The people
who own the bank will be O.K. because they still have the secure investments,
and they will be able to pay back the depositers, over the time of a normal
loan.  The government should not protect the stupid, but ours does.  The result,
more stupid people.   Why should the government bail out Bear-Sterns?  Why
should they bail out ANY business?  Only reason.  The business is necessary
to the national defense.  The government should not prop up a business that
is not able to take care of itself.  I'm not sure they shuould take care of people
than cannot take care of themselves.  Arab nations DO NOT have welfare.  It
is the job of each individual to take care of the incompetent, and they do.  I
guess we are to greedy?


Come on, Butch.
YOU and I BOTH
come from a place on the Economic ladder
that was closer to the bottom than the middle.

I believe we should help people that NEED help.

From time to time
members of my family have needed help.
Should they be abandoned?

 
Remember, History provides the pattern.  The are few new things that ever happen.
There were massive economic disasters before and people survived, and eventually
prospered.  The laws of Economics don't change. 

Of course it does.
When they talk about Gaso Prices
They talk about supply and demand
but the S&D they are talking about is OIL, as in Barrels of...

Is there a shortage of gaso
where you live?
There is NONE in LV.

BuSh BEGGED OPEC to drill more,
but what good will that do?

Iran had 9 Tankers FULL of oil setting in the Gulf
but the sanctions have made it hard to find a place to deliver it to.

There is a shortae of Oil Tankers
We own Oil Tanker Stock.
The Breakeven point on Oil Tanker Rental is about
$30,000 a day
NOW THE DAILY RENTAL IS UP TO ABOUT $250,000.

They stock is paying a dividend yield over 15%.

Exxon Controls the Supply
therefore, they control the price.



 
We may bend them with government interfearance in the market, but the laws are still there.  They just
extract their vengenance in a different way.  If you meddle with the laws in the
medical market, you get long waits for service, over crowded facilities, and poor
quality.  The depression would have ended, on its own, just as the others in
our history did. 

What was the date of the other "depression"?

KJ

 
 =======================












KJ



On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:13 PM, L. Kinder <lk2@cablemo.net> wrote:

If pro and con mean opposite things, is

Congress the opposite of progress?

----- Original Message -----

From: Ken Jarvis

To: undisclosed-recipients:

Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 9:20 AM
Subject: Decline


America is in Decline

because of the 2 party system.
And because of WHO Is in Control.
I mean Murdoch,
not Obama.

Ken, I once read a book, I intend to reat another sometime.
The premise of the
author is that
nations do not decline,
other nations progress faster.

England is
still as powerful as it was in 1918,
more so in fact, its just that we are more

powerful.

The U.S.A. is just as strong as it was in 1950,
Japan and China
have just gotten stronges.

Can't remember the name of the book, but the

author made a good case.

If Murdoch was in control does that mean that

Hurst was in control in the 1900's?

*** Murdoch is THE MOST POWERFUL OF ALL.
Ever since he bought the WSJ.

The Problem is NOT that he owns them,
it is HOW he uses them.

For example -
Yesterday Chrysler reported a Quartely profit
their biggest in 7 Months.
WSJ reported -
Chrysler has lost BILLIONS,
and later in the article mentioned the PROFIT.
 
WHAT GAUGE DO YOU USE
TO DETERMINE HOW THE ECONOMY IS DOING?

I USE THE DOW.
====


What happened to Majority Rule?
NOW we need 60 Votes.
WHY not 51?


Majority rule is the worst tyranny in the world.
No one can protect minority
rights.

*** I agree
but what is better?
===

No one can insure any sort of consistency. No one can keep the public

treasury closed. That is what I have told you before.

We have discovered that
we can vote ourselves "public money". So, people on Social Security, welfare, Medicare, and people with public contracts will elect people who will spend more money on them.

*** If that were true
why did the GOP win the Last 4 elections?
Murdoch won.
====

Notice what Obama promises. More pie in the sky for

the Middle Class.

*** Not the Middle Class
the NEEDY.
====


The poor already have their pie in the sky.

*** I thought the POOR had
Hunger
Debt
Homelessness
Fear
Disease
etc.

If they have "pie in the sky"
Why wouldnt everyone want to BE POOR?
===

I now think that

a 2% or 3% national sales is a good idea, but IN ADDITION to the income
tax. Its one way to make the poor pay for their government.

*** No.
NO income tax.
Just ONE Tax
a NSTx

YOU want to POOR to pay

I want the RICH to pay.

The RICH have the $$$.
===

A good government is a set of laws that requires a super majority to change.

This is called a REPUBLIC. It is what we were before 1932. The rule in the
Senate is because of Senate rules. The house has 435 members, and it limits
debate through the rules committee(?). In the Senate, with only 100 members,
Senate rules let each member speak for as long as they want on any subject.
Senators do not want to change the rule, as it is their untimate "Nuke". So,
they all know that at some time they may need to threaten a filibuster because
they oppose something that they think would really hurt their people. So, no
one is willing to give up the nuke.

*** Currently, the Filibuster is being used
to HURT Obama.

Didn't work on HCare

And I doubt it will work on
Financial Regulation
or
Cap Pollution.

====


China is the Leader.
How do we KNOW?
The USA owes them a ton $$.

Yes, but remember the debt can always be monitorized. We just print money
and pay them. They have to take it because it is legal tender.

*** Yes, but they
keep talking about changing the Chinese Currency.
If they do.
And quit lending
what does the USA do then?
===


Now the question is -
HOW do we Fix it?
What do YOU think?

Why fix it? It is a natural process. Nations rise and fall, it is a normal process.

*** But we were on the verge of
another DEPRESSION.

Still NOT out of the woods.

====

Our standrd of living does not have to decline, it just means that
other nations will have a higher standard of living. We built our standard
of living throug explotation of natural resources and pollution. We are running out of resources and trying to control pollution.

Think of all of the "powerful nations" that don't even exist now. Charlamange, Rome, Greece, the Aztecs, Mayans, Toltecs, Phonecians,

Babylonians, . . . whoever. I am also send another e-mail about another
problem.

KJ


Comments