Clusterheadaches.com Message Board


    
      
        Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        Daily Chat >> General Posts >> (Bad) signs of the times
        
(Message started by: DonnaH_again on Mar 18^th, 2008, 5:18am)

Title: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by DonnaH_again on Mar 18^th, 2008, 5:18am

Things aren't looking too good for Englewood, Fl. (and surrounding areas) business. To those of you who have been here, Basketville (a huge tourist attraction)that was here when I moved to the area in 1984, is closing, and a large ABC Liquor store and another very popular restaurant already have. Then there are so many little businesses.

Vinyltech, a large employer, is sinking quickly. They've laid off about 1,500 people already and now there's talk of their closing.

Forclosures are out of sight in this state, as well.

What's happening in your neck of the woods?

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Sean_C on Mar 18^th, 2008, 8:15am

I see inflation outgrowing my paycheck. Its only a matter of time.

He's the worst president in History IMHO, and whoever takes the helm will not be able to get us back on course for years to come.

I voted for him, so I can only blame myself.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by seasonalboomer on Mar 18^th, 2008, 8:45am

on 03/18/08 at 08:15:16, Sean_C wrote:

When's the last time we were all "on course"?
As a society it benefits the politicians of all sides to convince us that we are dangerously off course, and that change is needed, that doom is impending, that the bottom is going to drop out, things are ready to blow up, that the country is on the verge of imploding, that things will never be like they were, that they need to be different than they are, that the good old days were better, that we need to look toward the future, that we need more hope, that we need less complacency, that we need to think about how we solve the problems, that we need to act now to solve the problems.

My labrador retriever has a much better approach to life.

Scott

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 8:47am

I can second Sean's comments 100% with the exception of the voting thing.........

Each week my money goes less and less far and my company lays off more people. Every office I visit has the "last day of school" feeling with 75% of the people who were once there gone and all the empty desks and cubes.

I do feel better that we got those WMD though, I guess that makes it all worth while..........

http://www.devilducky.com/media/64513/

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by seasonalboomer on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:01am

on 03/18/08 at 08:47:43, superhawk2300 wrote:

I wish things were that simple. Fact is, there are good times and not so good times. It's a natural part of the economic cycle. While that doesn't pay the bills it does allow one to understand that "this too will pass" and the future will not be what it is today.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by HappyElaine on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:12am

Its bad here also.
Foreclosures are out of sight in this state, as well.
Construction is down, but with the weather damage that might go back up. Layoffs are bad here to. Its bad every where.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by DonnaH_again on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:24am

I certainly do agree with you that "the future will not be what it is today".

The days of buying tomatoes, oranges, etc. grown and sold in Florida are long gone. A few small produce stands are around, but the rest is imported and our produce is exported.

We are being charged $4.00 for a gallon of milk, $.72 per pound for bananas, almost $3.00 a pound for tomatoes and beef is off of my shopping list.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by brewcrew on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:24am

It never ceases to amaze me that people can truly believe it's one guy's fault. We all have this need to point the finger, don't we?

Maybe it's the nature of the beast. I don't know. I give up.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by DonnaH_again on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:27am

What's the point of having a president?

Edited to clarify:

Doesn't he influence anything?

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Killroy 2.0 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:39am

on 03/18/08 at 09:27:13, DonnaH_again wrote:

What's the point of having a president?

Edited to clarify:

Doesn't he influence anything?

The point is not to fix everything in our lives.

That is part of the problem now days. Everyone wants the govt. (the President) to do something to help them.

It is not the govt. or the Presidents job to do that!!!

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by DonnaH_again on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:48am

:-/

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by BarbaraD on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:58am

Well, maybe it's time we started helping ourselves....

Me, I'm getting a garden spot ready. Plan to plant what I'm gonna eat. Haven't canned in a long time, but plan to get back in the swing of things (well maybe more freezing than canning, but ya get the idea).

Things are gettin' a little tuff in Texas too. But it's about like it was back in 83 when things hit rock bottom. Gas went up - staples went up, jobs went down and the government was gonna fix it all - they didn't. Interest rates got up to 20% and you couldn't give a house away.

But most of you weren't around back then and don't remember what we did back then. Some survived - some didn't. I forget who we were blaming it on then...

It just happens ever so often and we do what we gotta do. But Georgie Porgie is living in a dream world if he thinks things are just "peachy" right now. We're in a damn recession... and it's gonna get worse before it gets better.

And hell, I'm an optimist!

Hugs BD

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Killroy 2.0 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 10:06am

Barb I lived in Tx during that time.

I remember my Dad lost his business.
Both my parents had to go and find jobs.
My dad went from being a business owner to repossessing peoples belongings when they could not pay.

Times were tough, so we ate black label everything and our we shopped at the thrift store.

Then they turned around and things got better. I don't remember once my parents wishing that the govt would help us.

They just did what they had to do and that was that.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by thomas on Mar 18^th, 2008, 10:19am

It is really discouraging to me, that people are so eager to let the government take care of them. I wonder if they still teach history in schools or not. This country rose to greatness because of the independant, self-motivated, hard working spirit of the individual American citizens. We have slowly lost all of the virtues that made us great. Now instead of having the ability to work to better ourselves we are trapped in the middle (slave) class with no way out. Dark days are ahead folks, you've yet to even see the tip of the iceberg.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by brewcrew on Mar 18^th, 2008, 10:25am

Especially when people start worshipping politicians like they were sent from on high. Shades of Nazi Germany.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by DonnaH_again on Mar 18^th, 2008, 10:37am

Hey kids, I think we're talking about two different things here. I wasn't asking the gov't for anything.

Sometimes I wonder if I don't make myself clear enough to be understood because I always get answers to questions that I didn't even think of asking.

I lived in Cleveland, Ohio during the recession in 1982, raising 3 kids by myself. I never once asked for help from anyone including my family. The Ford and Chevy assembly plants closed as well as bunches of other business, big and small. Republic Steel shut down all but one boiler, etc.

I was a purchasing agent for a sheel metal fab shop, and the company I worked for was folding. I lost my job and after 11 months and a whole savings account later, sold my home at a $20,000.00 loss and was forced to move to Florida where there were a few jobs that I could fill. My mom lived down here and that is how I knew that.

Things have never really been the same BECAUSE bananas (and just about everything else) took a +200% increase while my wages are about the same as they were then.

I doubt that our kids and grandkids will ever have the opportunities that our parents had.

Some of us had garden spots back then. I did and filled a freezer every fall. Our grandkids probably won't have that chance.

We need to get more involved in our government by writing our State Reps and Congressmen...right?

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by John Michael Smith on Mar 18^th, 2008, 10:45am

on 03/18/08 at 10:37:54, DonnaH_again wrote:

Hey kids, I think we're talking about two different things here. I wasn't asking the gov't for anything.
Didn't say you were, but the perception of the press/media and general public is that the government has to do something, just watch televison or read a paper, or some of the posts on this thread. You'll see what I'm referring too.
Sometimes I wonder if I don't make myself clear enough to be understood because I always get answers to questions that I didn't even think of asking.
Me too, happens around here a lot.

I lived in Cleveland, Ohio during the recession in 1982, raising 3 kids by myself. I never once asked for help from anyone including my family. The Ford and Chevy assembly plants closed as well as bunches of other business, big and small. Republic Steel shut down all but one boiler, etc.

I was a purchasing agent for a sheel metal fab shop, and the company I worked for was folding. I lost my job and after 11 months and a whole savings account later, sold my home at a $20,000.00 loss and was forced to move to Florida where there were a few jobs that I could fill. My mom lived down here and that is how I knew that.

Things have never really been the same BECAUSE bananas (and just about everything else) took a +200% increase while my wages are about the same as they were then.

I doubt that our kids and grandkids will ever have the opportunities that our parents had.

Some of us had garden spots back then. I did and filled a freezer every fall. Our grandkids probably won't have that chance.

We need to get more involved in our government by writing our State Reps and Congressmen...right?

No, we need to get more involved in pressuring the "two" major parties into actually nominating real candidates, get rid of the corruption in all levels of government and hold people accountable for the crimes they've commited against the American people and the Constitution.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by DonnaH_again on Mar 18^th, 2008, 10:51am

BINGO!! Mr. Smith.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by brewcrew on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:05am

on 03/18/08 at 10:37:54, DonnaH_again wrote:

My comments were directed elsewhere, Donna.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Peppermint on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:06am

on 03/18/08 at 05:18:38, DonnaH_again wrote:

Things aren't looking too good for Englewood, Fl. (and surrounding areas) business. What's happening in your neck of the woods?

To answer your original question...
it's looking scary. I was born and raised in New York, which, by all accounts I've ever heard, is more expensive than many places.
Everywhere I look houses are for sale yet there was a huge rash of gentrification period in the "slummiest" parts of town. I wonder who's going to buy those lofts now...
Monday, yesterday I come in to work - a financial investment corp- to hear that Bear Stearns, a major financial institution was sold to JP Morgan for $2 a pop. It had been rollercoasting on Fri. and we saw some funny volume trading - strange, but not quite indicative of the catastrophe to come.
To say scary is an understatement. Many people went in to work early, not knowing whether they still had a job - and I'm not talking about the hotshots who make the big bucks and the McMansions and summer homes.

It was enough to make you throw up after having $1. roach coach coffee from the guy on the street corner. Starbucks, say goodbye to your regulars, its only a matter of time.

To me- - this remark summed it up in a nutshell -

on 03/18/08 at 10:19:03, thomas wrote:

Dark days are ahead folks, you've yet to even see the tip of the iceberg.

Tell me about it.

Pepp

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Killroy 2.0 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 12:36pm

Yes back to the original question.

According to the news things are as bad as they could possibly be. I believe the phrase used on the news this morning was “as bad as the great depression”.

My job is going well we had a record breaking year last year in revenue and we are blowing away last year’s monthly goals this year.

I imagine my husband work place will just get more popular as more people will be keeping there cars longer and will need someone to fix things that are no longer under warranty, or just buying scooter to help with the cost of gas prices.

Gas prices are high, and so is everything else. So some things get cut out of the budget others are replacing with cheaper alternatives. Such as, I will not be spending the money to travel to Dallas for the convention. I will how ever try to see more of the great state of WI and do some camping, canoeing and hiking.

The only thing we do not own out right is our home. Car are old but paid for and we do not owe on any credit cards.

So I don’t know IS IT JUST ME? I don’t see the whole “great depression” thing.
I don’t know if it is all that bad !!!

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by John Michael Smith on Mar 18^th, 2008, 1:07pm

on 03/18/08 at 12:36:18, Killroy 2.0 wrote:

I don’t know if it is all that bad !!!

Foreclosures are at a record level, the dollar is weaker than it ever has been on the global level, gas prices are incredibly high, food prices are through the roof, I haven't had a raise in three years......... It won't be long until everyone is feeling this.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by sandie99 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 1:11pm

Back in here, I live in a city in which getting a job is harder than hard and unemployment rate is high. And most employees are hiring just telemarketers, that's it.

Sanna

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by JeffB on Mar 18^th, 2008, 6:53pm

As a recruiter and a personnel manager I can tell all of you for certain, the economy sucks.

I have delt with peaks and valleys but this is the deepest valley I have ever been in.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Redd on Mar 18^th, 2008, 7:05pm

Jeff,

I may ask you to peek at my resume and tell me how to fix it up and what holes to close some time in the very near future. ;)

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 7:14pm

I for one, am not asking for a handout from my government.

Just because I am holding my elected leaders accountable doesn't mean I want a hand out.

What would help me is if I got to keep more of the money I make (make working very hard that is - "helping myself" so-to speak) So far my elected officals have lied to me about the "war" in Iraq to the tune of a record amount in TRILLIONS in defict and in the process they pissed away a record surplus. Mostly paid for on the backs of middle-class hard working people.

Now if this was WWII I'd be in the lines dontating my pots and pans for scrap metal to make bullets, but this "war" is only in existance to make a few people more money and more powerful and I have been lied to to get it this way. And the war is actually doing the opposite of what the LATEST reason for being there is - securing America. America has never had so many enemies and never was so vunerable.

And never in our history has POTUS had more power and MORE influence. POTUS could drive to your house with media in tow, get out of the motorcade and shoot you in the head, on tape, for no reason what-so-ever and there is nothing that could be done about. Your family wouldn't even get a "sorry". Thanks Patriot Act. You were a threat to American security, why, because the President said so, that's why.

The only difference between our goverrnment and the governemnt in Iraq is that we get to elect our dictaor from a choice of 2 possible candidates as opposed to the US just putting who they want in power. Not much of a difference considering what the democrats are talking about doing by over-riding the elections with the super-delegates. Democracy my ass.

For the first time in decades it would be nice to have the country run by the person that most American's wanted to have run it. They way it has been since Clinton the winner of the election had more individual votes go to other candidates than to the winner.

The two-party system, even played fairly, is a broke system. The way it is now it is a rigged and broke game we are forced to play and middle-class America is funding it all.

Soon it will be a few BILLION-aires and the rest will be poverty level people.......

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Maffumatt on Mar 18^th, 2008, 7:19pm

Rail utilization is down, way down. Part of our business is storing rail cars for the owners. Every facility we have is full. I have had reps from GE, Union Tank, TTX, GATX, and even businesses that are not currently customers begging for car space for storage. Good for us, bad for the economy. If the cars aren't moving with commodity, people aren't buying it, and people aren't making it, from base chemicals, plastics, and box cars......I see hard times ahead.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by PollyPocket on Mar 18^th, 2008, 7:33pm

I work in a "luxury" business- swimming pools, tanning beds, saunas, jacuzzis, etc. You'd think we'd be taking a hard hit...

guess what? the rich are getting richer cuz we are slammed with business. These aren't cheap either, most of the inground pools start around $45k, and the way things are looking we're going to have one helluva year.

(hoping for a raise - I work HARD for it)

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by KJ on Mar 18^th, 2008, 7:40pm

on 03/18/08 at 19:14:49, superhawk2300 wrote:

I POTUS could drive to your house with media in tow, get out of the motorcade and shoot you in the head, on tape, for no reason what-so-ever and there is nothing that could be done about. Your family wouldn't even get a "sorry". Thanks Patriot Act. You were a threat to American security, why, because the President said so, that's why.

This is the kind of comment that pisses me off. Agree or disagree with the Patriot Act, but don't tell me the President of the United States could shoot me in the head, with the media watching, and nothing would be done. It's just fucking rediculous! >:(

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 7:50pm

Like it or not it is true. The Patriot act boils down to the President gets to decide who can break the law and who cannot.

Telecom companies who were spying on American citizens were breaking the law - there is no debate about that. Now they are being given immunity for the past crimes.

American citizens are being detained without representation. Clearly a violation of the most basic Constitutional rights. American citizens have been executed without a fair trial as well. Once the President declares you a "urban combatant" you will be shipped from your home town to foriegn soil where you will get a military tribunal. When they decide you are guilty (this is a discussion amongst the leaders, not a trial) you can be shot with no questions asked.

The bottom line is this: As it sits right now the President gets to decide who can break the law and go unpunished and who can be executed regarless of if they have broken any laws or not. That is it period. You may not think so, but it is the way it is.

After thinking about it, it is debatable if anything could be done if the President himself pulled the trigger.

However it is not debatable that he could easily order someone else to do it and then pardon them.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by KJ on Mar 18^th, 2008, 8:04pm

on 03/18/08 at 19:50:01, superhawk2300 wrote:

After thinking about it, it is debatable if anything could be done if the President himself pulled the trigger.

However it is not debatable that he could easily order someone else to do it and then pardon them.

OK, then. I'll watch out for the pardonable hit man to take me out for speaking my mind. Damn, this country sucks! ;)

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Racer1_NC on Mar 18^th, 2008, 8:08pm

I hardly ever post to these type of threads...but this statement is incorrect.

on 03/18/08 at 19:14:49, superhawk2300 wrote:

And never in our history has POTUS had more power and MORE influence.

I suggest you research FDR's powers during WWII, you'll find he had more power than is commonly believed.

Quote:

The bottom line is this: As it sits right now the President gets to decide who can break the law and go unpunished ...

Always been that way. The President can pardon any law breaker at anytime he or she desires.

Quote:

For the first time in decades it would be nice to have the country run by the person that most American's wanted to have run it. They way it has been since Clinton the winner of the election had more individual votes go to other candidates than to the winner.

The Electoral College is in place to give less populated states a voice in who leads the country. Without it, only the large, urban population centers would be courted for votes. Middle America would be a write off.

Quote:

Soon it will be a few BILLION-aires and the rest will be poverty level people.......

What redistribution of wealth plan would you favor?

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 8:23pm

FDR did do whatever he wanted, is true. Same holds true today however. FDR "saved" the economy the same way Regan did - FDR build public buildings, roads and courthouses and Reagan built aircraft carriers and the army. My point isn't for or against any side per say, rather against the bad behavior. I don't care who is doing it, dem or repub, so bringing up so-and-so did it too doesn't really do anything for me. I'm anti-big government which includes both major parties.

Yes the Pres and even govs can pardon, but the Pres has never been able to execute "judge and jury" rights before.

Or declare war w/o congress approval.

I understand how the elector college works and it's purpose. However it doesn't fullfill its purpose. States with low numbers where the battle is too hard for a candidate are ignored anyways. The fact remains that the system is broke if more people DIDN't want the guy in office than who did, which is the way it has been for some time now. People mostly vote against who they don't want as opposed to who they want. My comment really wasn't against the electoral college directly anyways. Not that it matters anyways. The current regime leader turned around just a month or two after being elected and publicly said "yeah, that stuff I said i would do if elected, yeah, um , I decided I am not going to do that stuff". Nothing new there - so what's the point. It isn't like there is a recourse available to the people that actaully could work to hold our elected officals accountable.

I favor no redistribution of weath system. The sytem I favor is the "I make it - I keep it" system. Any tax should be incured upon spending money only thus representing the services the citizens actaully want. For example all roads would be paid for by taxes levied when related items like cars and gas are purchased - no lobbied for subsidies. Dream on I know, so I'd settle for someone stopping all my money going to Iraq becasue one person decided that he wanted to go to war.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Maffumatt on Mar 18^th, 2008, 8:54pm

Wow I have never seen so many words say so little since SuperIrish.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Charlie on Mar 18^th, 2008, 8:56pm

The thing is that the federal government usually does us good when dealing with bad times. Way back when....long before Theodore Roosevelt and other progressives.. there were "panics" and serious ones at that, every decade...sometimes more. Since then, there have been few.

The depression, in large part was due to the goverment's refusal to get involved and it backfired. The banks raised interest rates rather than lower them at the time to "discourge" runs on them. Welcome to 1929. Since further involvement by the feds and the New Deal, we don't fear itself...at least where economics is concerned. In 75 years, most of us haven't missed a meal.

Even though George Bush stands alone as the worst President in history, even he probably can't totally wreck the place. Afterall, his only friends are those that wouldn't like it. He's done his best though.

Charlie

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by brewcrew on Mar 18^th, 2008, 9:47pm

Everybody forgets about President Jimmuh.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Kevin_M on Mar 18^th, 2008, 10:50pm

on 03/18/08 at 20:23:22, superhawk2300 wrote:

FDR "saved" the economy the same way Regan did - FDR build public buildings, roads and courthouses...

Ike would get the nod for roads with the Federal Highway Act of 1956, and the PUBLIC BUILDINGS ACT OF 1959 did a lot, too.

Quote:

I'm anti-big government which includes both major parties.

While giving credit to FDR for saving the economy, he was big government.

Quote:

In the long run, New Deal programs set a precedent for the federal government to play a key role in the economic and social affairs of the nation.

During Roosevelt's 12 years in office, there was a dramatic increase in the power of the federal government as a whole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:05pm

Hey Kev,

I am sorry but I don't really follow your reply. It seems to be you misunderstand my post and are pointing out my incongruency.

Quote:

Ike would get the nod for roads with the Federal Highway Act of 1956, and the PUBLIC BUILDINGS ACT OF 1959 did a lot, too.

While this is true FDR did plenty building too. I am not saying it is a good thing or a bad thing, just that it is what he did. Hell, he had people dig holes in the AM only to have people in the PM fill those holes back in.......

Quote:

While giving credit to FDR for saving the economy, he was big government.

The "credit" I gave was for saving was, "saving", as in, in quotes, meaning "not so much".

I never meant to lead-on that I somehow was endorsing FDR. I was just drawing a parallel between him and some others on the opposite end of the political spectrum who are being discussed here as well, all of which I guess I would generalize as me being opposed to, thus the point I was making.........

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Charlie on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:16pm

on 03/18/08 at 21:47:09, brewcrew wrote:

Everybody forgets about President Jimmuh.

Sure. A jerk but:

Remember when a President was part of the three branches of government rather that behaving like a despot thinking it was all his? Jimmy at least knew better and that none of them is supposed to be more important than the other.

Bush had such a good chance in 1991 after 9-11 but he blew the best chance in our liftetimes to make things better, not worse by pretty much telling the rest of the world to go to hell and beginning a period of animosity toward us...even by traditional allies.. that I've not seen in my 61 years. A tragedy and the same with Iraq. He asked us to sacrifice nothing. The People don't liked being ignored and lied to when a country goes to war. LIke 1991, his recommendation was to go shopping.

Charlie

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Kevin_M on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:19pm

Quote:

The "credit" I gave was for saving was, "saving", as in, in quotes, meaning "not so much".

on 03/18/08 at 20:23:22, superhawk2300 wrote:

FDR "saved" the economy the same way Regan did -

So you're saying Reagan "saved" the economy in the same way, which would be "not so much"?

on 03/18/08 at 23:05:01, superhawk2300 wrote:

While this is true FDR did plenty building too. I am not saying it is a good thing or a bad thing, just that it is what he did.

I just commented on your mention of roads, which FDR discussed a lot but eventually was little action. Ike followed through on New Deal public building again after FDR. Building in general happened though during FDR.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:27pm

Kev,

Just to be clear, I am not "coming at you" or anything like that. It can be hard to read the tone of the written word.

Yeah, pretty much on the Reagan thing. I view them pretty much the same. Both took tax money and "paid" it back to the private sector to stimulate the economy, in essence forcing citizens to buy items for the government be it public buildings or weapons of war. So much for capitolism "letting the market dictate............".

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by seasonalboomer on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:27pm

This all reminds me of a good old Led Zep song:

"Good Times, bad times, you know I've had my share
Well, my woman left home for a brown-eyed man
but I still don't seem to care"

And that's what I've got to say about that.

Scott

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Kevin_M on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:43pm

So you're saying, the ends, like being taken to some form of prosperity, from depression and from the dismal recession of the late 70's early 80's, was not justified by the means?

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 18^th, 2008, 11:58pm

I am generally not a believer in any ends justifying the means. That being said I am sure if one were to take me to task they could punch many holes in me personally on this - sigh, no one is perfect but the intention is there - maybe with some more practice!

So it is not my place to judge the situation under those terms.

What I can say about it is that what happned was not representative of conservative values, capitolistic values, nor was it an example of "small government", nor was it fundementally different than what FDR did, even though FDR and Reagan are often considered "anti's" of each other by each Pres's respective party.

I guess my point would be, as the great Dave Coverdale once sung, "Here we go again".

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Kevin_M on Mar 19^th, 2008, 12:26am

A bit of good pro and con.

Quote:

And so Reagan was able to ask Americans twice, are you better off today than you were four years ago? And both times Americans resoundingly said, yes, we're a lot better off.

I think the important thing to remember is that Reagan really had two higher priorities than balancing the budget. One was to put America back to work again. I mean people forget that in the late 1970s and early 1980s we were in a mini-depression. The unemployment rate was 8 percent. I mentioned the high inflation. Most Americans really felt that there was something fundamentally wrong with America. Jimmy Carter had given a speech in August of 1980 where he said that America was in a decline and that we couldn't get out of this problem of joblessness and high inflation.

Reagan really restored the faith in the private sector economy to grow. So I think that the price we paid for those high deficits was to win the Cold War and to rebuild our economy with 15 million new jobs that were created in the 1980s and certainly Robert Reich as labor secretary under Clinton respects that kind of job growth.

But we also have noted that trickle-down economics -- that's what we called supply- side economics in those days -- trickle down economics didn't work very well.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/economy/jan-june04/reagan_6-10-04.html

Ronnie's an overall plus in my book because I remember well the economy before his presidency. :)

Modern trickle down I don't care for though.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 19^th, 2008, 8:21am

I must admit I am baised. Under Regan-noimics a law was passed or some act was taken so banks, who had written ARMs could ignore the caps on the loans and set the rates as high as possible. Normally the cap by law is something like it the loan can never go higher than a total of 5 or 7 % above the starting rate, or something like that. Well, thanks to Reagan-nomics my parents mortgage went up to 22%!!!!! They should have used a credit card to buy the house!

Needless to say we had to move from my beloved childhood home as my parents couldn't swing the payments on a cruddy 30 grand second mortgage.

I'm wouldn't be complaining if my dad was irrespionsible for something but his credit was perfect (he was they type to where he never had a parking ticket in his life) and he had planned so he would have been able to make the payments even if rates reached the highest level there were supposed to reach.

So while blue colloar Americans are being thrown out of their homes Banks got a buy-out from those same people who are now homeless. Minumum wage was frozen while the biggest companies in America got record tax breaks. In it's simplest form, money was taken from the middle class and given to the richest people in the world so they could "stimulate the economy".

If the government shifted the same exact amount of money from the middle class to poor people, the right would have complained that the USA was turning socialist, and they would be correct. But apply the same plan but shift the money to corporations and rich investes who make money by using money given to them instead of going to a job and somehow it isn't socialism? To make it worse for every dollar I make "not working" by investing I get taxed half as much as the money I make going to work, so from the get go the game is rigged. The workers will continue to work to support those that do not.

How is corporate welfare better than plain old welfare? To the middle-class worker looking at his paycheck it isn't, and giving the money to anyone besides people who already make money with money is a better plan. Every tax break for the rich just gives them more money to save - they don't need those checks to get by - they go right in the bank only weaking the dollar. Every tax break for poor people puts the money immediatly back in the grocery store and other business. Compound that with the fact for every penny a working class person gets in tax relief corporations and rich people typicaly get hundreds of dollars.

I think I am pertty fair in judging the situation. I make enough money o the point where I won't be getting any money from the latest round on economic "stimulus" - first time ever! I am still up thousands from the rest of the tax cuts in my life compared to my friends of same age in lower tax brakets. That being said I am sure that the people in the tax brackets above me are 10's of thousands ahead of me in money redistributed from hard working americans.

Don't go spend your 600 bucks all in one place now! And I don't listen to those who hold exponentially more pieces of the pie than I hold when it comes to how much I should be able to have.....

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by seasonalboomer on Mar 19^th, 2008, 8:38am

on 03/18/08 at 23:58:41, superhawk2300 wrote:

I am generally not a believer......

How does one generally not believe? Does that mean that you specifically believe? Or that in a general sense, you're inclined to believe, but can't specifically point to times when you did believe. Or that you can't determine why you don't believe but when looking at the specifics some of it seems to make sense....

;)

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by John Michael Smith on Mar 19^th, 2008, 8:48am

on 03/18/08 at 19:50:01, superhawk2300 wrote:

That was happening long before W. got into office.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by brewcrew on Mar 19^th, 2008, 9:49am

on 03/19/08 at 08:48:22, John Michael Smith wrote:

That was happening long before W. got into office.

I think it actually DID happen with LBJ. ;)

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 19^th, 2008, 10:08am

One thing I am confused on. (And remember I am not a democrat or a republican)

I have heard the "the president is just one man - the current mess isn't his fault" arguement from the far right.

But the same far right also gives one man, Reagan, credit for saving the nation inthe 80's.

So if GWB has not that much influence and does not deserve critisim for where we are, then why does reagan get the credit for "saving" the ecomomy?

So let me get this stright, if the nation falls to crap under a repub then the office of pres really doesn't have much influence but if the nation does well or overcomes something than the sole position gets all the credit? All at tax payer's expense?

Where can I get a job like that?

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 19^th, 2008, 10:11am

I read this a few years back and thought it funny.

InTAXication: The feeling of euphoria one gets when they receive any form of tax rebate, which quickly goes away once the person realizes it was their money to begin with.

Love it.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Kevin_M on Mar 19^th, 2008, 10:31am

on 03/19/08 at 10:08:27, superhawk2300 wrote:

but if the nation does well or overcomes something than the sole position gets all the credit?

Being just a shmuck standing in an unemployment line before Reagan, and having good steady work and owning a house before he left, the politics didn't matter much.
But in the interview link I posted, it also said:

Quote:

Inflation was out of control. Ronald Reagan should get some credit, but Paul Volcker heading the Federal Reserve Board actually gets most of the credit.

Things working right in tandem.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Kevin_M on Mar 19^th, 2008, 10:36am

on 03/19/08 at 10:11:25, superhawk2300 wrote:

InTAXication: The feeling of euphoria one gets when they receive any form of tax rebate, which quickly goes away once the person realizes it was their money to begin with.

From same link, Reagan mentioned something, too.

Quote:

One of my favorite Reagan quotes was when he said that a government that's big enough to give you everything you want is also a government big enough to take everything you've got.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Groov on Mar 19^th, 2008, 4:34pm

Donna, around here, in the last 10 years, there have been MANY plant closings. Firestone, Borg Warner and a few others I cant remember. We seem to rebound ok, but those good jobs are replaced with crappy jobs.

I put a large portion of the blame on our INCREDIBLY inactive/lazy city officials.

Decatur NEVER seems to do a damn thing to entice new business in. I'm not the only one who thinks this way.
In fact, most people here have that as our only real complaint.

When I lived in San Antonio Texas, Henry Cisneros was the mayor. He was a helluva Mayor !! He constantly pressed the city administration to do better & bring in more local business. San Antonio has grown leaps & bounds since the early 80's.

I would run for city council here if I had more money & time. I know I could get in...or at least think people here are really ready for someone who wants to progress !!!!
I have very positive thoughts as to what we could do here to improve things. All it would take is for the city administration to get off their lazy butts and beat the pavement.....I am an optimist.

My job is still here and likely will be for a long time to come. As many of you know, I build custom fabrications for industrial applications. Kinda like Jonny does, but not as many polished pieces or pieces for indoor commercial applications.

Regardless, ADM and Staley are huge food producing companies here who constantly need machinery and tanks & etc. built , modified & repaired.

Even though the outlook here is negative in many peoples minds, I believe we can really do something good here. But it will take local Govt. to get the ball rolling. Another Wal Mart is not the answer. The reason I charge local Govt. with the task is that it takes a local Govt. to offer new companies incentives to come & set up shop. New business always looks to a place where they can find reasonable tax rates and labor costs. Look what some of the Southern states have done to entice big Japanese companies to come !!! Their people now have better jobs and the communities have improved...it's simple economics. Had they done nothing...they would have got what they put in...nothing !!!

Hope everyone here is doing well in their job.

Cheers, Dave

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by echo on Mar 19^th, 2008, 4:50pm

I've often told my wife that if I ever concider running for office to put a gun to my head and ventilate.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by monty on Mar 19^th, 2008, 5:16pm

on 03/18/08 at 20:08:24, Racer1_NC wrote:

What redistribution of wealth plan would you favor?

Maybe taxes on wages should be less than taxes on dividends, instead of more? As it is, people that work for a living pay more taxes than people that live off a trust fund. When they decided to cut dividend taxes to such low levels, that was to redistribute wealth to the wealthy. I think it is time to reverse that.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Killroy 2.0 on Mar 19^th, 2008, 6:13pm

on 03/18/08 at 20:08:24, Racer1_NC wrote:

What redistribution of wealth plan would you favor?

I do not think that there should be an income tax.

I think there should just be sales tax.

Then the wealthy that can afford to make all those purchases would pay the most tax.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 19^th, 2008, 6:14pm

on 03/19/08 at 08:38:44, seasonalboomer wrote:

Love it, btw laughed my ass off :)

Yeah leave it to me to draw a hard fast line on something.......lol

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 19^th, 2008, 6:19pm

on 03/19/08 at 18:13:49, Killroy 2.0 wrote:

I do not think that there should be an income tax.

Here here! Did you know that the income tax was supposed to be a temporary fix when first introduced?

yes, the money I make to live on is taxed when I make it. Then I buy food to live, and it is taxed again. Then that same money gets taxed buy the grocery store owner as his income - it is total BS. The half life of a dollar is miserably short these days.

BUT the money I make investing, which is money I don't need to live on, does not get taxed as much or in the same way (Go VISA and MC!!!!). Seems dumb to me. I'm not complaining per say, but it seems to be a fundemental problem in our econommic structure.

I have issue with my money being redistributed to non-working types, regardless if they are non-working poor lazy MF'ers OR non-working rich MF'ers. Neither one deserves my money!

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by brewcrew on Mar 19^th, 2008, 6:22pm

Gimme back my money, dammit!

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by superhawk2300 on Mar 19^th, 2008, 6:42pm

Right on BC!

How come every time the economy sucks everyone is worried about losing their job or having to get a crappy paying job except government officals? If working America has to cut back, why should not the government?

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Linda_Howell on Mar 19^th, 2008, 6:52pm

To answer your oringinal question Donna:

Until a year ago I did housecleaning. I'd been doing it for 16 years. One by one my customers told me that they could no longer afford such a luxury as having a clean house and would have to try to make do, by doing it themselves. I certainly understood that it had nothing to do with How I did my work but I no longer have a business.

There are houses for sale in No. Calif. here that have been on the market for almost 2 years. They keep lowering the prices but still no takers. I want to sell my house so bad and get out of Dodge....but a for sale sign on my front lawn means nothing except something to mow around.

Gas is almost 4.00 a gallon here. Food is almost a luxury anymore and I too shop at thrift stores for clothes.

Southern Calif. is worse.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by stevegeebe on Mar 19^th, 2008, 9:06pm

Things are not too bad down here. Sure we have some foreclosures here and there but housing stock is not plentiful on the Southshore. Plus, people in large numbers, are heading North of the Lake for obvious reasons.

Contrary to previous down turns, Architecture, like freight and rail are some of the first to feel the onset of an econimic slump. However, we keep getting new projects every other week.

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by Charlie on Mar 19^th, 2008, 11:41pm

Reagan had a couple of good things to his credit but saving the economy isn't one that I'll give him. I got trickled on a lot.

When Reagan and Co. was so startled by Gorbachev's offers in Iceland, began what I think was his best accomplishment. Unlike Bush, he knew how to take advantage of a good thing and didn't get in the way. He also tended to hire a few competent people in the cabinet.

Charlie

Title: Re: (Bad) signs of the times
Post by john_d on Mar 20^th, 2008, 6:00am

I kinda do blame Bush on some points. He should have acted to stop the lending practices that led to the unstable real estate market- I saw that freight train rumbling down the track years ago and I am just an observer; he led us into Iraq and the price of that war and then rebuilding Iraq is astronomical; and finally my observation is that his cabinet has a deeply vested interest in oil- so I partly blame him for the price of oil. And it has nothing to do with R vs D- I'm still voting for Mccain this time around. I just think the dude lacks wisdom and he simply bungled things.