On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 16:29:42 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 14-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:


the fact is, the wealthy, protected by the right, has had their way
for the last 30 years. they ran the financial sector from 20% to 40%
of GDP in the last 10 years.

and what happened? did all this 'investment' make america more
competitive?

Investment wasn't in the U.S., ignorantly aided and abbeted by the U.S.
voter and consumer. (people like you)

really? if you can prove i voted for reagan, i'll give you my 401K.



nope. the middle class got nothing. the income spread between the
mddle class and the rich SKYROCKETED as the weatlhy transferred more
and more money from the middle class to themselves

Transferred? By doing something extra-productive? No, by continuing to
produce while "Americans" sent their diminishing wages overseas. There is no
fixed amount of money anywhere - it is dynamic, but you have to believe it
is a fixed quantity for your moronic "theory" to work.

what did wall street ever produce?

nothing except debt and fairy tales that people like you believe.

and no, there isn't a fixed amount of money. monetary policy can
increase or decrease it at will.

and, yes, productivity in america increased by 28% from 1997 to 2007.
the middle class got none of that.

oh. you dont know any of these facts. you just let rush fill your head
with right wing crap.



and how's that work out? economy doing OK? unemployment down?

Wages will not increase until North American wages can compete with the 3rd
world ********s you send your diminishing wages to -

and we can do that by increasing productivity OR by inventing products
with differentiable IP. we used to be good at that until wall street
starting sucking up moe resources to pay themselves billion dollar
bonuses

they will bottom out
within 4 to 5 years. Eventually, productive output in the United States will
regenerate, allowing once again companies (those evil entities) to employ
the fat happy and stupid.

really? got proof of this fairy tale?

the rich will continue to get rich. the middle class will
disappear...this has been going on for 30 years. bush just increased
the pace


i sent my money overseas because the only option left to me was
walmart. otherwise i'd STILL be sending my money overseas but the
wealthy would take an even BIGGER cut.

So you admit you're part of the problem............I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU
THAT.

fine. you give me a pay increase and i'll stop. unless and until the
right realizes the middle class is not the enemy, our economy will
continue to tank


The fat happy and stupid could revrse the trend in 90-120 days, but being
fat happy and stupid prevents them (you) from doing so. You created the
mess by your voting and purchasing habits - are you so inept that you have
no option but to blame someone you don't know, never met, and can't
identify???

ROFLMAO!! tell you what. when you find the hidden stack of CDO's that
i have, you let me know, OK

it was wall street with their buying and selling of non productive
financial instruments...

NOT THE MIDDLE CLASS

that destroyed this economy

but you? you're a right wing idiot who thinks the middle class has an
obligation to support the rich

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 16:33:57 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 14-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

ROFLMAO!! free trade is the mantra of the far right reaganites, milton
friedman, etc.

How can someone even as feeble as you "think" free trade is one way
trade.
Try to explain your "thinking." If you wnat to keep squealing like a
stuck
pig, stop sending your money overseas.

then give me a pay raise instead of sucking the dicks of the rich

You shouldn't be paid whatever you get right now, the fact that you have
income is temporary. The U.S. will literally collapse, you will be a farmer,

i've been saying this all along. the rich are continuing to socialize
the risk and privatize the rewards...and you help them

and in a couple hundred years the better times MIGHT happen all over again,
once your lifestyle has reached equilibrium with India and red Chinese

courtesy of the right wing which refused to implement treaties that
guaranteed basic standards of living for all workers

funny how highly unionized countries like australia and germany are
doing fine.


peasants. No one stole **** from you; your opportunities were lost due to
the scum you elect allowing ONE WAY trade,

since george bush and ronald reagan pushed free trade, your brain has
liquified if you think i voted for them

you? you're right wing. you believe the fairy tales rush and reagan
told you about how free trade would starve the US worker to support
the rich

and you support that

and you supporting the trend with
your spending habits. Why do you pay U.S. retail prices for shoddy 3rd world
merchandise? Because you're stupid.

fine. you get me a pay raise and i'll stop.

On 15-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Investment wasn't in the U.S., ignorantly aided and abbeted by the U.S.
voter and consumer. (people like you)

really? if you can prove i voted for reagan, i'll give you my 401K.

Your 401k is a paper wager, and worthless.




nope. the middle class got nothing. the income spread between the
mddle class and the rich SKYROCKETED as the weatlhy transferred more
and more money from the middle class to themselves

Transferred? By doing something extra-productive? No, by continuing to
produce while "Americans" sent their diminishing wages overseas. There is
no
fixed amount of money anywhere - it is dynamic, but you have to believe
it
is a fixed quantity for your moronic "theory" to work.

what did wall street ever produce?

nothing except debt and fairy tales that people like you believe.

You are confused - THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING - THE HOUSE OF CARDS YOU DEPEND
ON IS A SCAM.

and no, there isn't a fixed amount of money. monetary policy can
increase or decrease it at will.

Productive output increases wealth - not wagers like 401K, which when based
upon productive entities, were good investments - they are now (with your
concurrence) based on wagers of "what it will be worth some day" with no
sound foundation.


and, yes, productivity in america increased by 28% from 1997 to 2007.
the middle class got none of that.

NO one "gets" anything - productivity increased because of imported
materials and equipment (lowering costs - same output with less cost =
greater productivity). Automotion (a good thing) was the other half of
productivity. Your labors are no longer needed.

oh. you dont know any of these facts. you just let rush fill your head
with right wing crap.



and how's that work out? economy doing OK? unemployment down?

Wages will not increase until North American wages can compete with the
3rd
world ********s you send your diminishing wages to -

and we can do that by increasing productivity OR by inventing products
with differentiable IP. we used to be good at that until wall street
starting sucking up moe resources to pay themselves billion dollar
bonuses

Like "green jobs?" Check the solar panel output from red China - nothing's
going to generate engineering, design, raw material output or production in
the United States, reinforced by your propensity to buy foreign (while
bitching about "the economy!")


they will bottom out
within 4 to 5 years. Eventually, productive output in the United States
will
regenerate, allowing once again companies (those evil entities) to employ
the fat happy and stupid.

really? got proof of this fairy tale?

Logic - nothing else would stimulate employment of the fat happy and stupid.


the rich will continue to get rich. the middle class will
disappear...this has been going on for 30 years. bush just increased
the pace


i sent my money overseas because the only option left to me was
walmart. otherwise i'd STILL be sending my money overseas but the
wealthy would take an even BIGGER cut.

So you admit you're part of the problem............I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU
THAT.

fine. you give me a pay increase and i'll stop. unless and until the
right realizes the middle class is not the enemy, our economy will
continue to tank

You won't have a job for a pay increase - you're not needed as long as the
scum you elect open the U.S. to unrestricted importation of overpriced
shoddy junk (that you are satisfied with)



The fat happy and stupid could revrse the trend in 90-120 days, but being
fat happy and stupid prevents them (you) from doing so. You created the
mess by your voting and purchasing habits - are you so inept that you
have
no option but to blame someone you don't know, never met, and can't
identify???

ROFLMAO!! tell you what. when you find the hidden stack of CDO's that
i have, you let me know, OK

gee whizzers


it was wall street with their buying and selling of non productive
financial instruments...

NOT THE MIDDLE CLASS

that destroyed this economy

but you? you're a right wing idiot who thinks the middle class has an
obligation to support the rich

You are distressed with economic penis envy. If someone else achieves an
income, they're taking it from you. That's stupid, but that's the TV
generation. Create your own job - that's your only choice, "the rich"
producers don't need you any more.

On 15-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

and in a couple hundred years the better times MIGHT happen all over
again,
once your lifestyle has reached equilibrium with India and red Chinese

courtesy of the right wing which refused to implement treaties that
guaranteed basic standards of living for all workers

That worked for Marx, right? Guarantee you living standard. That's around
the corner - get ready from you cement block apartment.


funny how highly unionized countries like australia and germany are
doing fine.

Australia is doing fine because they produce - spend a few months in Western
Europe - you'll like the American ghetto even better than you do now.

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:40:59 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 15-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Investment wasn't in the U.S., ignorantly aided and abbeted by the U.S.
voter and consumer. (people like you)

really? if you can prove i voted for reagan, i'll give you my 401K.

Your 401k is a paper wager, and worthless.

and the only retirement plan the rich let the middle class have.

guess you forgot that


what did wall street ever produce?

nothing except debt and fairy tales that people like you believe.

You are confused - THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING - THE HOUSE OF CARDS YOU DEPEND
ON IS A SCAM.

me? defend wall street?

uh...let me know when your drugs wear off


and no, there isn't a fixed amount of money. monetary policy can
increase or decrease it at will.

Productive output increases wealth - not wagers like 401K, which when based
upon productive entities, were good investments - they are now (with your
concurrence) based on wagers of "what it will be worth some day" with no
sound foundation.

and THAT is correct. finally you said something that's right

and in the last 10 years, productivity went up 28%. the middle class
got NONE of this. not a dime



and, yes, productivity in america increased by 28% from 1997 to 2007.
the middle class got none of that.

NO one "gets" anything - productivity increased because of imported
materials and equipment (lowering costs - same output with less cost =
greater productivity). Automotion (a good thing) was the other half of
productivity. Your labors are no longer needed.

IOW you think people don't get wages. interesting view of the economy
you have

and if labor is no longer needed...

why was there full employment for the 10 years before bush's
depression?

oh. your head just exploded...



and we can do that by increasing productivity OR by inventing products
with differentiable IP. we used to be good at that until wall street
starting sucking up moe resources to pay themselves billion dollar
bonuses

Like "green jobs?" Check the solar panel output from red China - nothing's
going to generate engineering, design, raw material output or production in
the United States, reinforced by your propensity to buy foreign (while
bitching about "the economy!")

so your recipe is:

1. no wage increases for the middle class

2. buy only expensive domestic products so RICH AMERICANS get the
money instead of rich CHINESE.

interesting.



they will bottom out
within 4 to 5 years. Eventually, productive output in the United States
will
regenerate, allowing once again companies (those evil entities) to employ
the fat happy and stupid.

really? got proof of this fairy tale?

Logic - nothing else would stimulate employment of the fat happy and stupid.

uh wrong. when we had full employment with no wage increases, the only
way the middle class could maintain the economy was to spend money we
didnt have.

now we're tapped out. the rich sucked all the money possible out of
the middle class.


fine. you give me a pay increase and i'll stop. unless and until the
right realizes the middle class is not the enemy, our economy will
continue to tank

You won't have a job for a pay increase - you're not needed as long as the
scum you elect open the U.S. to unrestricted importation of overpriced
shoddy junk (that you are satisfied with)

sorry. i never voted GOP in my life.



it was wall street with their buying and selling of non productive
financial instruments...

NOT THE MIDDLE CLASS

that destroyed this economy

but you? you're a right wing idiot who thinks the middle class has an
obligation to support the rich

You are distressed with economic penis envy. If someone else achieves an
income, they're taking it from you.

really? guess you're kinda stupid and dont know that the middle class
hasnt had a raise in 37 years

but the wealthy have had their incomes go up by 500%

not in other countries. only in america.

you? you're willing to be a dung beetle. you eat the **** the rich
feed you.

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:43:15 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 15-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

and in a couple hundred years the better times MIGHT happen all over
again,
once your lifestyle has reached equilibrium with India and red Chinese

courtesy of the right wing which refused to implement treaties that
guaranteed basic standards of living for all workers

That worked for Marx, right? Guarantee you living standard. That's around
the corner - get ready from you cement block apartment.

so your recipe is to make sure that ALL working people are poor and
only the wealthy stay wealthy.



funny how highly unionized countries like australia and germany are
doing fine.

Australia is doing fine because they produce - spend a few months in Western
Europe - you'll like the American ghetto even better than you do now.

ah. they produce. the rich have sucked the marrow out of the american
economy but to you that's fine because we have n o unions.

On 16-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

That worked for Marx, right? Guarantee you living standard. That's around
the corner - get ready from you cement block apartment.

so your recipe is to make sure that ALL working people are poor and
only the wealthy stay wealthy.

All working people (whatever the hell those are) ARE poor, and getting
poorer. The largest company and highest average wage payer used to be
General Motors. Now the largest company is Walmart, selling you overpriced
junk at high prices. Nitwit clerks don't (and shouldn't) make more than
minimum wage. Congress, and you made it all possible. Not "the rich"
(whoever they are.) By the wealthy, are you referring to designers,
engineers, toolmakers, owners of stamping companies, molding companies,
forging companies, casting companies and those nasty *******s that employed
you? If so, rest assured, they are out of business due to unabated foreign
crap you joyously drag to your foreclosed home in your foreign auto.





funny how highly unionized countries like australia and germany are
doing fine.

Australia is doing fine because they produce - spend a few months in
Western
Europe - you'll like the American ghetto even better than you do now.

ah. they produce. the rich have sucked the marrow out of the american
economy but to you that's fine because we have n o unions.

Unions have 2 functions - to protect the incompetent, and to enrich their
hierarchy. In fact, I used to be the president of a union, albeit only for
the purpose of screwing over the Teamsters.

On 16-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

NO one "gets" anything - productivity increased because of imported
materials and equipment (lowering costs - same output with less cost =
greater productivity). Automotion (a good thing) was the other half of
productivity. Your labors are no longer needed.

IOW you think people don't get wages. interesting view of the economy
you have

You don't "get" your pay, you earn your pay, or hopefully earned it (unless
your'e incompetent and protected by the mob) Once you're paid, veryone's
even, no one owes you anything. What you "get" from that point forward
depends on your viability as a useful laborer wage-earner.


and if labor is no longer needed...

why was there full employment for the 10 years before bush's
depression?

No depression, no recession -

1) a flood of money that bloated the financial marketplace as a result of
IRAs and 401k's etc., such accounts only becoming available to the average
schlub in the early 80's, That money supply made the cost of investment (and
borrowing) low so investments were made. and 2) the personal computer
industry, which employed millions and spawned complementary
industries/services. That's all that gave jobs to the otherwise
unemployable.

During the same period (1992 or 1993 and beyond) began the greatest escape
of productive output ever seen, and will never be seen again (too little to
leave). Automobiles, steel, machinery, tools and dies, refined alloys,
electronics, televisions, consumer goods - all off to Mexico and China due
to trade agreements promoted and put into place by Bush 1, Clinton and Bush
2.

When the paper investment market burst (I predicted it for 10 years; the
real estate orgy was obvious to anyone), the PC market reached maturity and
finally left the U.S. in combination with the simultaneous escape of firms
having to leave the U.S., unemployment skyrocketed. (fear by the consumer
kills retail - but so what? It's al foreign anyway - who gain's - Walmart
jerkimo's?) Where will future employment come from? Prisons, minimum wage
retail sales and scams like the financial markets, insurance and
medical/legal fraud. Prisons and retail will employ many but not
reestablish a middle class; the remainder is too small of a group. The
current condition is the new "service economy" you've heard discussed but
not described, hundreds of millions of poor people and a hundred thousand
high income people. There is no recession, "it" won't "get better." (Unless
you get to another country where opportunities exist, to simulate the former
U.S.)

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 00:17:33 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 16-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

NO one "gets" anything - productivity increased because of imported
materials and equipment (lowering costs - same output with less cost =
greater productivity). Automotion (a good thing) was the other half of
productivity. Your labors are no longer needed.

IOW you think people don't get wages. interesting view of the economy
you have

You don't "get" your pay, you earn your pay, or hopefully earned it (unless
your'e incompetent and protected by the mob) Once you're paid, veryone's
even, no one owes you anything. What you "get" from that point forward
depends on your viability as a useful laborer wage-earner.

uh, who made up this rule? you're surprised that the middle class has
no money with your view of wages?

and, no, it doesn't depend on ability. middle class wages have not
grown in 37 years.


how is that accounted for in your 'utlity' view given that OTHER
countries havent seen a run up in the GINI coefficient like the US
has?

oh. you don't know what the GINI coefficient is...


and if labor is no longer needed...

why was there full employment for the 10 years before bush's
depression?

No depression, no recession -

1) a flood of money that bloated the financial marketplace as a result of
IRAs and 401k's etc., such accounts only becoming available to the average
schlub in the early 80's, That money supply made the cost of investment (and
borrowing) low so investments were made. and 2) the personal computer
industry, which employed millions and spawned complementary
industries/services. That's all that gave jobs to the otherwise
unemployable.

nope. the money from 401k's is deferred spending FROM the middle
class. money that wall street coveted and thought, like you, the
middle class didnt deserve.

again, if labor is no longer needed, why did this happen only in the
last 3 years?

and jobs to the otherwise unemployable? what the hell does THAT mean?

During the same period (1992 or 1993 and beyond) began the greatest escape
of productive output ever seen, and will never be seen again (too little to
leave). Automobiles, steel, machinery, tools and dies, refined alloys,
electronics, televisions, consumer goods - all off to Mexico and China due
to trade agreements promoted and put into place by Bush 1, Clinton and Bush
2.

When the paper investment market burst (I predicted it for 10 years; the
real estate orgy was obvious to anyone), the PC market reached maturity and
finally left the U.S. in combination with the simultaneous escape of firms
having to leave the U.S., unemployment skyrocketed. (fear by the consumer
kills retail - but so what? It's al foreign anyway - who gain's - Walmart
jerkimo's?) Where will future employment come from? Prisons, minimum wage
retail sales and scams like the financial markets, insurance and
medical/legal fraud. Prisons and retail will employ many but not
reestablish a middle class; the remainder is too small of a group. The
current condition is the new "service economy" you've heard discussed but
not described, hundreds of millions of poor people and a hundred thousand
high income people. There is no recession, "it" won't "get better." (Unless
you get to another country where opportunities exist, to simulate the former
U.S.)

uh no. there IS a recession caused by the artificial creation of
financial instruments, primarily CDO's

CDO's went from ONE trillion in 1997 to SIXTY TWO TRILLION in 2007.

why? because wall street got greedy.

home ownership stayed constant at about 64% of the population. what
changed was wall street created a bubble in housing prices, in LIEU OF
wage increases. rather than PAYING people good wages, investors
impoverished the middle class and ran up the price of our houses so we
could use them as piggy banks.

we then borrowed against these to cover expenses since our WAGES WERE
DECREASING vs inflation

the CDO market collapsed when people couldnt afford to borrow and
spend

if the elites had PAID DECENT WAGES NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED

but wall street greed destroyed america

and the right wing continues to tell us how the unregulated free
market creates wealth

WHERE IS IT?

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 22:27:47 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 16-Aug-2010, bpuharic wrote:

That worked for Marx, right? Guarantee you living standard. That's around
the corner - get ready from you cement block apartment.

so your recipe is to make sure that ALL working people are poor and
only the wealthy stay wealthy.

All working people (whatever the hell those are) ARE poor, and getting
poorer.

courtesy of wall street

The largest company and highest average wage payer used to be
General Motors. Now the largest company is Walmart, selling you overpriced
junk at high prices. Nitwit clerks don't (and shouldn't) make more than
minimum wage. Congress, and you made it all possible. Not "the rich"
(whoever they are.

really?

uh...then why were there SIXTY TWO TRILLION DOLLARS in CDO's in 2007?
do you KNOW WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT??

so, yes, the RICH got greedy. you have some bull**** idea that cant
explain ANYTHING.

tell me how wal mart created this meltdown, OK? otherwise you're just
another rush pimp.

By the wealthy, are you referring to designers,
engineers, toolmakers, owners of stamping companies, molding companies,

i'm an engineer. i'm not wealthy

forging companies, casting companies and those nasty *******s that employed
you? If so, rest assured, they are out of business due to unabated foreign
crap you joyously drag to your foreclosed home in your foreign auto.

gee. the financial sector of our economy went from 20% of GDP in 1997
to 40% in 2007

and to the right wing...there's nothing wrong with that....

proof of that is the shape our economy is in today.






funny how highly unionized countries like australia and germany are
doing fine.

Australia is doing fine because they produce - spend a few months in
Western
Europe - you'll like the American ghetto even better than you do now.

ah. they produce. the rich have sucked the marrow out of the american
economy but to you that's fine because we have n o unions.

Unions have 2 functions - to protect the incompetent, and to enrich their
hierarchy. In fact, I used to be the president of a union, albeit only for
the purpose of screwing over the Teamsters.

tell it to the germans and australians. their economies are doing fine
with their large unions

ours isnt