Ghost Of 1929 Re-Appears - Pay Attention To The Signals

[15D]

I agree, we don't have a wealth problem or innovation or taxation or regulation problem in America. We only have one problem, unbridled and unregulated greed. When business people are enjoying record profits while the average person's net wealth and earnings are going backwards, it doesn't take a genius to see the obvious.

Large businesses that are somewhat an oligarchy may be enjoying record profits, and if they are it's because they've cut their labor force to bare minimum. Small Businesses haven't done well in a long time, probably 6-7 years, and it's small business that is the new creator of wealth and higher paying jobs. Increased taxation and regulation (which is what Obamacare is) along with shrinking markets is what is keeping the recovery from growing greater than the 2-2.5 percent a year pace. We need to put into place economic policies that gets small businesses growing again.

[Bubstr]

Labor is only one portion of the cost of bringing a product to market. Many of the places that have extremely lower labor costs also have few natural resources to build the products with. Thus it has to be shipped in, manufactured and shipped to market. We have both the resources and market here. If we were to lower the cost of doing business then it may be possible that the least expensive way to bring a product to market is with US labor here at home. Otherwise it will stay overseas.

Yes Bubstr and TNIE and all others, businesses have leaned the labor force back to the bare minimum with Obamacare being the leading reason why. They will not put another person on the payroll until they absolutely have too because they are unsure of what the total compensation package will have to be. So yes they are currently maximizing profit as many do not see their potential market share increasing in the near future. When they think they will need the added capacity is when they will start to hire. My initial contention that a prolonged period of economic expansion is the only way to get there.

So, why is it so hard to get money Bubstr? Dodd/Frank have anything to do with that?

You sound just like these politicians talking out the side of their mouths, One side of their mouth says we need growth, the other side says we need cuts. What they don't say or don't know is, growth depends on spending from the very people you hurt with the cuts.

Say you came up with a miracle bill that helped the upper middle class, a place most of us on this forum would be. I don't know about you, but it would change my spending habits very little. We can afford to save it and will if the future looks as if it will not replenish it. If it was the top of the wealth , the problem would be the same, even easier to save it. The problem is lack of circulation of money, not how much each has. Any cost cutting plan that shorts the lowest earner or non earner is not sustainable. These where the first to get pinched by the wealth redistribution to the top. Money trickles up, not down and any plan that excludes the most down, is doomed to fail or be short lived. If you don't believe that, listen to those that want to cut spending or opportunities to the poor. They say you can give them all of it and it will be in the hands of the elite in no time at all. This proves how money trickles. So What are they out if they include the poor in the economic recovery,if they will get it back anyway. The fact is a steady growth will increase the unemployment and they will lose leverage to keep cheap and abundant labor force. There is a big difference between talking growth out of one side of the mouth and cuts out of the other side of the mouth. One enables the bean counter saving profits by exploiting labor, mentality of the elite and the other does not. The problem is it's not a sustainable way to do business. It's profit today and screw tomorrow.

As far as Dodd Frank, yes it did cut one of the ways that money circulated to the middle class. It changed the banking system that under Glass Stegal kept commercial and financial banks separate. It used to be the job of commercial banks to get reserve money and use it for reserve to loan out for houses or business expansions ect. They can now use this reserve to play the market. It was the number one way, money circulated to the middle class and made money circulate. Now who is stupid enough to ask why wall street is doing well and main street is in the crapper? By the way, you are paying interest on all that money. You pay interest on every dollar made by the FED. On top of that, they are investing money, that they only hold less than 10% of. Makes the market seem safe in 1929 with those facts. Some sit back and say wtf, it's only money. It's not just money, it's your standard of living. And when they go bust, you will bail them out, because the Sherman trust act is no longer in effect. It should make everyone sick to think we had safeguards to protect us from this exploitation and let it slip away. So much for deregulation and trickle down. Now they want tax breaks to cut costs and cuts to the general public. They just want to dodge the bill on this economic fiasco. You know who is going to get stuck with it.

[Bubstr]

Large businesses that are somewhat an oligarchy may be enjoying record profits, and if they are it's because they've cut their labor force to bare minimum. Small Businesses haven't done well in a long time, probably 6-7 years, and it's small business that is the new creator of wealth and higher paying jobs. Increased taxation and regulation (which is what Obamacare is) along with shrinking markets is what is keeping the recovery from growing greater than the 2-2.5 percent a year pace. We need to put into place economic policies that gets small businesses growing again.

Good Idea. Why did Republicans sink the jobs bill, and not offer a substitute or amend the original? Their only excuse was it was a poor bill and didn't go far enough. Where is the far enough bill?

[15D]

You sound just like these politicians talking out the side of their mouths, One side of their mouth says we need growth, the other side says we need cuts. What they don't say or don't know is, growth depends on spending from the very people you hurt with the cuts.

Say you came up with a miracle bill that helped the upper middle class, a place most of us on this forum would be. I don't know about you, but it would change my spending habits very little. We can afford to save it and will if the future looks as if it will not replenish it. If it was the top of the wealth , the problem would be the same, even easier to save it. The problem is lack of circulation of money, not how much each has. Any cost cutting plan that shorts the lowest earner or non earner is not sustainable. These where the first to get pinched by the wealth redistribution to the top. Money trickles up, not down and any plan that excludes the most down, is doomed to fail or be short lived. If you don't believe that, listen to those that want to cut spending or opportunities to the poor. They say you can give them all of it and it will be in the hands of the elite in no time at all. This proves how money trickles. So What are they out if they include the poor in the economic recovery,if they will get it back anyway. The fact is a steady growth will increase the unemployment and they will lose leverage to keep cheap and abundant labor force. There is a big difference between talking growth out of one side of the mouth and cuts out of the other side of the mouth. One enables the bean counter saving profits by exploiting labor, mentality of the elite and the other does not. The problem is it's not a sustainable way to do business. It's profit today and screw tomorrow.

As far as Dodd Frank, yes it did cut one of the ways that money circulated to the middle class. It changed the banking system that under Glass Stegal kept commercial and financial banks separate. It used to be the job of commercial banks to get reserve money and use it for reserve to loan out for houses or business expansions ect. They can now use this reserve to play the market. It was the number one way, money circulated to the middle class and made money circulate. Now who is stupid enough to ask why wall street is doing well and main street is in the crapper? By the way, you are paying interest on all that money. You pay interest on every dollar made by the FED. On top of that, they are investing money, that they only hold less than 10% of. Makes the market seem safe in 1929 with those facts. Some sit back and say wtf, it's only money. It's not just money, it's your standard of living. And when they go bust, you will bail them out, because the Sherman trust act is no longer in effect. It should make everyone sick to think we had safeguards to protect us from this exploitation and let it slip away. So much for deregulation and trickle down. Now they want tax breaks to cut costs and cuts to the general public. They just want to dodge the bill on this economic fiasco. You know who is going to get stuck with it.

You are hopeless if you cannot connect the dots between a business becoming more competitive because of the lowering of their cost of doing business by reducing regulation. There exists no argument or example I can offer.

The only hope for our country and our way of life is to get our economy churning again. To do that will take programs designed to promote business and growth, not penalize them for competing here rather than abroad with arbitrary regulations with no other aim then to punish businesses.

Dodd/Frank no matter how you look at it makes it more difficult to obtain credit thus stifling economic growth. The worst part about it is that it does little to protect us against the last financial calamity, it simply insures us when it happens again. Glass-Stengel was way-laid in the late '90's under some very misguided, possibly corrupt Republican controlled Congressmen and a very corrupt president. Pretty amazing that the hick from Arkansas came to Washington with little more than his name and now he is worth hundreds of millions.

[Clayton_Wetter]

Good Idea. Why did Republicans sink the jobs bill, and not offer a substitute or amend the original? Their only excuse was it was a poor bill and didn't go far enough. Where is the far enough bill?

Would you like a "Connect The Dots" game for Christmas or is that Bah Humbug too???

[Bubstr]

You are hopeless if you cannot connect the dots between a business becoming more competitive because of the lowering of their cost of doing business by reducing regulation. There exists no argument or example I can offer.

Your saying deregulate in one paragraph and regulate in the next, with reinstate Glass Stegal. Until you realize that there is no trickle down. That every economy is consumer driven and no matter how many baseball fields you build in a cornfield, unless someone has the price of a ticket, no one will come. What we need is a more competitive consumer and there will be the business that comes. We can not expect to get that consumer if we keep passing cuts to taxes that fund him. If we keep allowing outsourcing and repatriation of the profits un taxed. If we keep allowing illegal immigration and raised quotas on legal immigration, weakening out labor forces bargaining power for higher wages. Somehow deregulation and making a lower tiered consumer works against each other. But still people say it like it's a well known fact. The fact is, it's just not so. It's a boogie man, a often repeated lie. It's something that can be seen right threw for anyone that looks.

[Bubstr]

Would you like a "Connect The Dots" game for Christmas or is that Bah Humbug too???

Just what do you see as a game with a jobs bill??? Are you saying Bah Humbug to all the people out of work?

[15D]

Your saying deregulate in one paragraph and regulate in the next, with reinstate Glass Stegal. Until you realize that there is no trickle down. That every economy is consumer driven and no matter how many baseball fields you build in a cornfield, unless someone has the price of a ticket, no one will come. What we need is a more competitive consumer and there will be the business that comes. We can not expect to get that consumer if we keep passing cuts to taxes that fund him. If we keep allowing outsourcing and repatriation of the profits un taxed. If we keep allowing illegal immigration and raised quotas on legal immigration, weakening out labor forces bargaining power for higher wages. Somehow deregulation and making a lower tiered consumer works against each other. But still people say it like it's a well known fact. The fact is, it's just not so. It's a boogie man, a often repeated lie. It's something that can be seen right threw for anyone that looks.

I never advocated for complete deregulation. Many protections need to stay in place; the Clean Water Act being one that comes to mind. What I advocate is the reduction of regulations that only punish our business people and allow foreign companies and unfair advantage in our economy.

Allowing Brokerage Houses and Commercial Banks to merge is a mistake in my opinion, and I would have left those provisions of Glass-Stengal in place.

I do not believe that Union Laborers can effectively compete in most businesses. Regulated monopolies such as utility companies is a good place for union labor because of the apprenticeship programs and much needed safety policies. Most every other place I think that they will not be able to compete with maybe the exception of when a business operates as an oligarchy, in these cases the price of the products or services is not really driven completely by consumer demand. I really do not believe they should be allowed in the public sector, at some point they become self-feeding at the expense of the taxpayer.

When we have the lowest percentage of adults working in our economy since the Great Depression, the gates of immigration should be closed for all but the political refugees.

[Bubstr]

I never advocated for complete deregulation. Many protections need to stay in place; the Clean Water Act being one that comes to mind. What I advocate is the reduction of regulations that only punish our business people and allow foreign companies and unfair advantage in our economy.

What would they be? Clean air? Safe working conditions? Pure food and drugs? Building codes where written with the blood of mistakes? I would concede carbon tax, but coal fired energy should have to maintain clean air standards. I would also concede that the EPA is used as a political tool at times. Personal experience, if a piece of land is condemned for ground contamination from wrecked cars leaking oil and antifreeze, a foot of fill on top shouldn't make it safe as a playground for kids, especially when that fix was denied the owner.

Just what regulations are you talking about?

[Bubstr]

I do not believe that Union Laborers can effectively compete in most businesses. Regulated monopolies such as utility companies is a good place for union labor because of the apprenticeship programs and much needed safety policies. Most every other place I think that they will not be able to compete with maybe the exception of when a business operates as an oligarchy, in these cases the price of the products or services is not really driven completely by consumer demand. I really do not believe they should be allowed in the public sector, at some point they become self-feeding at the expense of the taxpayer.

Are you saying that organized labor should not be allowed to use it's power to achieve good wages and working conditions, while the employer can use it's power to do the exact opposite? If anywhere a union was needed, it would be when working for a unscrupulous. lying employer. THE GOVERNMENT. When you look at it logically there is no real need for most of this deregulation, with a few exceptions and they are mostly unfair implementation.

Let's see, If GM would be fined for using a dirty Coke fired steel plant here in the States, why shouldn't they be fined for using one in China? That air will hit the west coast in a few days. Seems there is a double standard for domestic companies and multinational companies. Think not? You could do prison time for violating child labor laws, yet you can go into Wallmart and buy shoes and clothes made by kids. Want to deregulate that too. Some say, well it's a global market now days. I say enforce our regulations on eberyone that sells here and we wouldn't have to cut the pay on hard working Americans. We would also put a lot of them back to work.

[15D]

Are you saying that organized labor should not be allowed to use it's power to achieve good wages and working conditions, while the employer can use it's power to do the exact opposite? If anywhere a union was needed, it would be when working for a unscrupulous. lying employer. THE GOVERNMENT. When you look at it logically there is no real need for most of this deregulation, with a few exceptions and they are mostly unfair implementation.

Let's see, If GM would be fined for using a dirty Coke fired steel plant here in the States, why shouldn't they be fined for using one in China? That air will hit the west coast in a few days. Seems there is a double standard for domestic companies and multinational companies. Think not? You could do prison time for violating child labor laws, yet you can go into Wallmart and buy shoes and clothes made by kids. Want to deregulate that too. Some say, well it's a global market now days. I say enforce our regulations on eberyone that sells here and we wouldn't have to cut the pay on hard working Americans. We would also put a lot of them back to work.

In the private sector I see no reason to impede a union as I see no reason to force a business to use union labor. If the company that hires union employee's doesn't have the strength of character to effectively manage their business, they simply go insolvent and all parties suffer from their own actions.

I've advocated for decades that the companies/countries that import goods and services into the USA should have to ramp up to meet our EPA and OSHA Standards. That would level the playing field for all.

[dirtisforracin]

If just putting money into the economy was the answer, the almost 1 trillion stimulus bill Obama forced on us, would have done that. What did we get for that 1 trillion? and most important where did that 1 trillion come from to start with? MY point is you had to take 1 trillion away from someone, to give away 1 trillion. That never works. The goverment does not produce anything? Before income taxes, the USA had roads, schools, hospitals, College's. Who built them?

[dirtisforracin]

When companies have to pay money to meet those standards here in America. The company moves out of country that does not have those standards. Who wins? I know of a Coal energy plant in southwestern PA. It spent 900 million dollars to comply with EPA. Once done, the EPA changed standards again, and it was going to cost another 600 million dollars to meet the new standards. Guess what happened. The energy plant is being shut down. Boy that leveled the playing field for those workers! I'm not against clean water and air, but our country is so much cleaner, then it was say 30 yrs ago, but to handcuff our companies and business while other countries could care less, only hurt americans.

[t.nie]

You were doing good until you said...
Yes Bubstr and TNIE and all others, businesses have leaned the labor force back to the bare minimum with Obamacare being the leading reason why.

Seriously? Obamacare is the main reason no one is hiring? I beg to differ. If there was money to be made, Obamacare, Medicare Part D, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, gas prices at $10 a gallon or not, businesses would be hiring. It has NOTHING to do with Obamacare, and EVERYTHING to do with the bleeding dry of the spare cash of the middle class that DID NOT start under Obama, and it won't end under him either.

Now the right just drove another nail in the coffin of small business owners by voting to discontinue food stamps for many of the poor. Thanks, right wingers! Right wingers are so Pro Small business, they do everything they can to ensure the customers of small business have no money to buy anything with!

Leading cause of reduction in work force Obama care... Right..... I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you too...

[t.nie]

When companies have to pay money to meet those standards here in America. The company moves out of country that does not have those standards. Who wins? I know of a Coal energy plant in southwestern PA. It spent 900 million dollars to comply with EPA. Once done, the EPA changed standards again, and it was going to cost another 600 million dollars to meet the new standards. Guess what happened. The energy plant is being shut down. Boy that leveled the playing field for those workers! I'm not against clean water and air, but our country is so much cleaner, then it was say 30 yrs ago, but to handcuff our companies and business while other countries could care less, only hurt americans.

So, did that $900 million not go to companies that employ people? Or was it just a big fat check written to some CEO somewhere, and no one else was in that cash flow chain?

What you guys never realize is regulations, like them or hate them, agree with them or not, create JOBS, because SOMEBODY has to install the new filters, revamp the plant or enforce the regulation.

If regulations did not create some work for someone, somewhere, then regulation would not cost $900 million. Simple economics.

Now not all regulations are good for working class folks in America, because some nations will court jobs away from the USA by not having the same standards. But you have to ask yourself, do you want to work in an unsafe environment, threats to your health, for low wages just to have a job? Because that is what China and Mexico offer companies, they have little to no regulation, the cost of labor is low because the people will accept it.

Personally, I think the race to be the cheapest nation on earth, with the highest profit margins for business can be won by China or Mexico. I really don't want to live in a crappy sweat shop nation, thank you. And like 15D said, I would be for laws stating that goods sold in America have to be manufactured to the same standards required of American companies, regardless of where they are made.