BengalsCat Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 good post rick. and it does show how numbers can be manipulated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Mar 10 2005, 12:16 PM']homer... for some odd reason, that article sounds a tad bit biased... link please? [right][post="59926"][/post][/right][/quote] You're right, Roberts is biased (as is everyone.) I read this at Counterpunch, a fairly radical site. The article will make it's way around the "left" web, as these tend to do. That being the case, it's up to you to evaluate his argument. Note the economic argument, note his resume, and note in particular that many of the old-line conservatives are genuinely concerned with the direction of the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Mar 10 2005, 12:45 PM']i'm tired of hearing good news, and the listening to the democratic spin, telling us all how bad they really are... <snip> the facts are that employment was better ACROSSED THE BOARD, and the most jobs were created in the professional and business services, which increased by 81,000 in February... the last i checked, professional and business jobs are very very good jobs... manufacturing jobs were big about 20 years ago... technology is the wave of the future, NOT manufacturing... that was the wave of the past... [right][post="59957"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] I want to be polite here, but I have to state that you are simply mistaken about economics here. Technology has always been "the wave of the future" since about the 15th century. You are right about one thing, interpretation is a big part of measuring a healthy economy. It's the pursuit of truth that matters, not Demicans or Republicrats, etc... But, that begs a question: how do you know when you've got a truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='Homer_Rice' date='Mar 10 2005, 09:21 PM']I want to be polite here, but I have to state that you are simply mistaken about economics here. Technology has always been "the wave of the future" since about the 15th century. You are right about one thing, interpretation is a big part of measuring a healthy economy. It's the pursuit of truth that matters, not Demicans or Republicrats, etc... But, that begs a question: how do you know when you've got a truth? [right][post="60252"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] i don't see how i'm confussed... the future is computers, not manufacturing... i'm not saying that there is no room for it, but computers are what we need to train our kids to be able to get jobs it... and we did make jobs all acrossed the board... it's not like we only had jobs in one industry, but lost jobs in other places... we just didn't have as much... but we only need 175,000/mth jobs created to keep up w/ population growth so anything over that is great... and i agree that our economy isn't it great shape, but it's also not in terrible shape... the dollar dropped again today and i was sure that was what this post was about... economics is far from black and white, but i feel the economy is going to explode IF more good news happens in the middle east... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bengal_Smoov Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 So now that we have the 2nd highest trade deficit in American history and the value of the dollar is falling daily, does anyone still think that is not a problem. [quote]The struggling U.S. textile industry fears that the lifting of these restraints will result in the loss of thousands more U.S. jobs and result in China dominating the global textile trade. U.S. manufacturers are asking the administration for increased protection against a surge in Chinese imports. [b]Critics point to the huge trade deficits as evidence that President Bush trade policies are not working and have cost America millions of lost jobs as U.S. manufacturing companies have moved production abroad to low-wage countries such as China.[/b] The administration argues that the deficits reflect stronger growth in the United States, which has pushed up demand while economic growth has lagged in Europe and Japan. The soaring trade deficit must be financed by foreigners willing to hold U.S. dollars in exchange for the products they sell to the United States. The concern has been that the trade deficit at some point could rise so far that foreigners become reluctant to hold dollar-denominated assets such as stocks and bonds. Such a development could send stock prices plunging and U.S. interest rates soaring. The mere prospect of such a change has been enough to send the dollar tumbling in recent weeks, following remarks by officials in South Korea (news - web sites) and Japan that at some point they might consider holding less in dollar reserves.[/quote] [url="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=&e=6&u=/ap/20050311/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/economy"]Click Here[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalsCat Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 Smoov unless u work in manufactionering this woldnt affect u. american has been making the switch to a service economy for a long time. As for the national debt its because some bleeding heart decided that it was a good idea to give foriegn fucking aid to every country that pretty much asks for it from us which sets us up to be put into debt.. think about that man if we didnt give out billions of dollars in aid we wouldnt be in debt... THIHK ABOUT THAT????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='BengalsCat' date='Mar 11 2005, 01:13 PM']Smoov unless u work in manufactionering this woldnt affect u. american has been making the switch to a service economy for a long time. As for the national debt its because some bleeding heart decided that it was a good idea to give foriegn fucking aid to every country that pretty much asks for it from us which sets us up to be put into debt.. think about that man if we didnt give out billions of dollars in aid we wouldnt be in debt... THIHK ABOUT THAT????? [right][post="60554"][/post][/right][/quote] While I agree that we are moving to a service economy and have been for some time, (And one could argue that that is a product ) I take issue with the idea that we shouldnt supply forigen aid. In having allies on your side during war and peace time it must be a several pronged approach. Both policy and aid. If we didnt help other nations in need when we would set ourselves up for not getting the help we need when we need it. But I do have a question for the people who understand economics better than I, how is it that during Clintons years we used buzzwords like "global economy" and "new economy" and yet Nafta and looser trade restrictions is a bad thing? Some would argue (and ive seen them argue it) that cheaper labor drives down prices and in turn allows for people to spend their money thereby creating Jobs in other areas. Im not an econominist and I can hear some screaming Reganomics before I even finish this post, but it makes some sence. I also agree with Rick that computers will drive the economy of the future, as things become more streamlined and companys are easier able to comunicate with one and other (and there is ALOT of work being done in the industry to this end right now) better, faster products and services will drive the economy. Inovation has always been a huge part of our economy, and will continue to be. Personally I think it was a bad decisison and hurtfull to the economy when the Justice Department made their decision against Microsoft. I also think the Tech Sector will be in for a boon once people get over their fear of losing money in it again and realize they lost the money not because that industry was a fad, but because they invested in things like Pets.com. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalsCat Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 Yeah but my response was not that we shouldnt give the aid but it is one of the reason we have such a large national debt. personaly i have no problem with the deficit.. aparently where still better off then every other nation on the planet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='Jamie_B' date='Mar 11 2005, 12:29 PM']While I agree that we are moving to a service economy and have been for some time, (And one could argue that that is a product ) I take issue with the idea that we shouldnt supply forigen aid. In having allies on your side during war and peace time it must be a several pronged approach. Both policy and aid. If we didnt help other nations in need when we would set ourselves up for not getting the help we need when we need it. But I do have a question for the people who understand economics better than I, how is it that during Clintons years we used buzzwords like "global economy" and "new economy" and yet Nafta and looser trade restrictions is a bad thing? Some would argue (and ive seen them argue it) that cheaper labor drives down prices and in turn allows for people to spend their money thereby creating Jobs in other areas. Im not an econominist and I can hear some screaming Reganomics before I even finish this post, but it makes some sence. I also agree with Rick that computers will drive the economy of the future, as things become more streamlined and companys are easier able to comunicate with one and other (and there is ALOT of work being done in the industry to this end right now) better, faster products and services will drive the economy. Inovation has always been a huge part of our economy, and will continue to be. Personally I think it was a bad decisison and hurtfull to the economy when the [b]Justice Department made their decision against Microsoft[/b]. I also think the Tech Sector will be in for a boon once people get over their fear of losing money in it again and realize they lost the money not because that industry was a fad, but because they invested in things like Pets.com. [right][post="60564"][/post][/right][/quote] i don't agree w/ the justice dept thing... great post besides that... i think that microsoft was and to an extent, still is a monopoly of sorts... yes there are other options, like mac and linux, but microsoft keeps making deals to more monopolize the computer industry... theres a reason that bill gates is the richest man in the world... my hope is that google can continue to grow,and create their own desktop, b/c that is the computer industries only hope of continueing to progress like we should be... google is the only technology company that can halfway compete w/ microsoft and that is only b/c of the search engine... btw, great point about the boom that is coming... i started a 401k last year, and after seeing the return of investment, i am ready to start a roth ira whenever i get some more money... imagine if we start personal accounts, what that will do for the market Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Mar 11 2005, 02:00 PM']i don't agree w/ the justice dept thing... great post besides that... i think that microsoft was and to an extent, still is a monopoly of sorts... yes there are other options, like mac and linux, but microsoft keeps making deals to more monopolize the computer industry... theres a reason that bill gates is the richest man in the world... my hope is that google can continue to grow,and create their own desktop, b/c that is the computer industries only hope of continueing to progress like we should be... google is the only technology company that can halfway compete w/ microsoft and that is only b/c of the search engine... btw, great point about the boom that is coming... i started a 401k last year, and after seeing the return of investment, i am ready to start a roth ira whenever i get some more money... imagine if we start personal accounts, what that will do for the market [right][post="60590"][/post][/right][/quote] I have a bit of a bias as I'm a Microsoft Certified Developer, but they make products that are better and have a overall less cost than running their compaition when ease of use is a factor. The whole Linux thing I liken to the MPAA... as a programmer I want to be paid for my work, so I could never support freeware on the level of a OS. Plus it takes away from the economy if we gave it all away for free. Id also argue that MS's only "manopoly" is in two areas Desktop OS's and Office software. But I think that when we not allow for a company to innovate based on good software design rather than restrictive because of goverment interference then we do a disjustice to the consumer. I say let MS and their compatiton face off based on best products, their compation just doesn't put out better products on a whole IMHO. If they want to win against MS win with better products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='Jamie_B' date='Mar 11 2005, 01:13 PM']I have a bit of a bias as I'm a Microsoft Certified Developer, but they make products that are better and have a overall less cost than running their compaition when ease of use is a factor. The whole Linux thing I liken to the MPAA... as a programmer I want to be paid for my work, so I could never support freeware on the level of a OS. Plus it takes away from the economy if we gave it all away for free. Id also argue that MS's only "manopoly" is in two areas Desktop OS's and Office software. But I think that when we not allow for a company to innovate based on good software design rather than restrictive because of goverment interference then we do a disjustice to the consumer. I say let MS and their compatiton face off based on best products, their compation just doesn't put out better products on a whole IMHO. If they want to win against MS win with better products. [right][post="60597"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] i absolutely agree that 1. MS is the best company there is and 2. to beat them, a company needs to outperform them... the problem though is that MS had such a hold on the industry, there wasn't a way to really out compete them... thats like the reds playing the yankees, redsox, and diamondbacks team (and salary) at once... MS was a thousand times bigger than all other competetors... plus it would help the OS to have geniune competition, b/c then all the hackers will start working on hacking their operating system, instead of everyone focusing on only windows... imo, windows is by far, the most secure OS, but since they also control about 75% of every computer, why waste time hacking firefox, when you get 100x's the results w/ windows?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Mar 11 2005, 02:24 PM']i absolutely agree that 1. MS is the best company there is and 2. to beat them, a company needs to outperform them... the problem though is that MS had such a hold on the industry, there wasn't a way to really out compete them... thats like the reds playing the yankees, redsox, and diamondbacks team (and salary) at once... MS was a thousand times bigger than all other competetors... plus it would help the OS to have geniune competition, b/c then all the hackers will start working on hacking their operating system, instead of everyone focusing on only windows... imo, windows is by far, the most secure OS, but since they also control about 75% of every computer, why waste time hacking firefox, when you get 100x's the results w/ windows?!? [right][post="60607"][/post][/right][/quote] Yankees lost to the Marlins just two years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 [quote name='Jamie_B' date='Mar 11 2005, 01:28 PM']Yankees lost to the Marlins just two years ago. [right][post="60609"][/post][/right][/quote] can't argue there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.