|
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: http://www.suite101.com/content/top-...s-2009-a204269 This seems like a good list to me... # Civilian aircraft including parts . US$74.7 billion, up 1% from 2008 (7.1% of total US exports) # Medicinal, dental and pharmaceutical preparations . $46.1 billion, up 14.1% (4.4%) # Semiconductors . $37.5 billion, down 26% (3.5%) # Other industrial machines . $30.9 billion, down 19.1% (2.9%) # Automotive parts and accessories . $30 billion, down 24.6% (2.8%) # Telecommunications equipment . $28.7 billion, down 12.6% (2.7%) # Passenger cars . $27.5 billion, down 44.5% (2.6%) # Medicinal equipment . $26.9 billion, down 0.5% (2.5%) # Electric apparatus . $26.1 billion, down 15.5% (2.5%) # Plastic materials . $25.5 billion, down 19.3% (2.4%). 8 of the top 10 are going down. Not an encouraging trend. Too bad the ones that employ the most Americans are in decline As I said, economies wax and wane. It's the way the world works. Yes, it's too bad. It's not the end of the world as we know it. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:33:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 03:59:32 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote: The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to produce things we can sell the world. and one of the biggest factors in this was the destruction of unions. a recent series of articles in 'slate' showed that countries with strong unions also have strong manufacturing bases. the right destroyed the unions in this country and, bye bye manufacturing The unions caused it to some degree by making our workers too expensive to compete in a world market and not being willing to budge. The only states that are growing in manufacturing capacity are the non-union states. You really can't blame the unions for screwed up, exploitive management practices that caused the unions to be formed in the first place. The question is what caused them to decline. You can blame it on management but managers answer to stock holders, not unions. Management has a judiciary obligation to stockholders to look at the long-term view, even though stockholders might not appreciate that quarter to quarter. In the late 80s and beyond we rated the economy based on how the stock market was doing, not how the workers were doing. We still rate the economy on how the major stock indexes are doing. Ok. Not sure what that has to do with the Fed, the decline of unions, or anything else, but ok. Bob dances around it but that was particularly true during the Clinton administration. The decline of his middle class went into high gear during that time. That was when major corporations started shedding their senior employees in massive downsizing actions, just to pump up stock prices. That was where his "prosperity" came from. Please define the "middle class." Keep in mind that union workers are only about 8% of the work force. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Kr...ar_MClass.html |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:38:08 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: They are already braced to take that loss. China is smart enough to see our current system is unsustainable. The only question is whether they want to get out while the dollar is still strong or ride it down. They may take the tough love decision to squeeze us, just to force us into fiscal responsibility and insure a longer term market for their goods. Not true. They're in it for the money. They intend to keep playing. They're certainly going to squeeze us (continue to actually) to get our house in order. What's wrong with that? Everyone wins. We are not going to be any happier about it than the Greeks were when the Germans told them they had to cut their entitlements. The question is how that manifests itself. We have a horrible history of electing politicians who will not admit we are in trouble and promise to kick the can down the road. In any case, China isn't going to quit playing, which is the point. No one is particularly happy about getting fewer services for more dollars. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"Califbill" wrote in message m... wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:38:08 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: They are already braced to take that loss. China is smart enough to see our current system is unsustainable. The only question is whether they want to get out while the dollar is still strong or ride it down. They may take the tough love decision to squeeze us, just to force us into fiscal responsibility and insure a longer term market for their goods. Not true. They're in it for the money. They intend to keep playing. They're certainly going to squeeze us (continue to actually) to get our house in order. What's wrong with that? Everyone wins. We are not going to be any happier about it than the Greeks were when the Germans told them they had to cut their entitlements. The question is how that manifests itself. We have a horrible history of electing politicians who will not admit we are in trouble and promise to kick the can down the road. The Chinese can bankrupt us yet not take a Trillion buck loss. The value of the their debt holdings are decreasing with any inflation we get. And they may get 50% of the debt and win a war against evil America and not even have to shoot off a missile. We've spent a Trillion in the middle east on the longest war in US history and still no way to win. They spend $500 Billion and win. The ability to print money does not guarantee we can not go BK. If overspending by government made us richer, the USSR would still be the USSR and be the richest entity of all the nation states. Sure. Go hide. We'll let you know when it's safe to come out. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 10/1/2010 8:28 AM, Harry® wrote: wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 17:55:44 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... So is the US The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt? Perhaps. They are issuing lots of new fiat money to the US and other governments as no one is lending them money any more. Keep crating money until it breaks and then declare bankruptcy on a world wide scale. http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time....dump-u-s-debt/ Which is the real reason behind government rant on currency, they want the Chinese to eat the depreciation of US debt. Suckers play by democrat debtors in denial. Boats are only going to get cheaper. -- Is government working for you, or are you working for the government? Nuckles, nuckles... the Fed can't go bankrupt. Learn to use google. is your friend. Certainly it can. All it would take is for China to stop buying our debt and dump their dollars on the world money markets. As I said, it can't go bankrupt. It would certainly hurt them bad but it would kill us. The Chinese expect tanks in the street to kick them back into the fold but we would not survive as a country if it happens here. No, actually, the reverse is true. It would hurt us and wipe them out. What logic supports your theory? nom=de=plume has logic? Hahaha... she-it doesn't have the money to invest and knows nothing. -- Is government working for you, or are you working for the government? Nuckles has a brain?? Hahaha... Moron Canuck barely functions, is a racist/liar, and is barred from entering the US. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ...
wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Go to any store, pick up just about anything and see where it came from. So, you want us to compete to make plastic toys? Well, actually, what gets produced here doesn't usually have a lead problem. Have you looked at anything other than plastic toys? Look at things like tools, electronics or clothes. How many are US made? We send them scrap iron, they send us socket wrenches. And, I pointed out that we also export lots of stuff. Your point? We used to be afraid of Japan. Now, we're "afraid" of China. I prefer not to be "afraid." Do as you're told you'll be fine. Snicker. -- Harry "The 'C' students run the world." |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ...
wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: http://www.suite101.com/content/top-...s-2009-a204269 This seems like a good list to me... # Civilian aircraft including parts . US$74.7 billion, up 1% from 2008 (7.1% of total US exports) # Medicinal, dental and pharmaceutical preparations . $46.1 billion, up 14.1% (4.4%) # Semiconductors . $37.5 billion, down 26% (3.5%) # Other industrial machines . $30.9 billion, down 19.1% (2.9%) # Automotive parts and accessories . $30 billion, down 24.6% (2.8%) # Telecommunications equipment . $28.7 billion, down 12.6% (2.7%) # Passenger cars . $27.5 billion, down 44.5% (2.6%) # Medicinal equipment . $26.9 billion, down 0.5% (2.5%) # Electric apparatus . $26.1 billion, down 15.5% (2.5%) # Plastic materials . $25.5 billion, down 19.3% (2.4%). 8 of the top 10 are going down. Not an encouraging trend. Too bad the ones that employ the most Americans are in decline As I said, economies wax and wane. It's the way the world works. Yes, it's too bad. It's not the end of the world as we know it. Yes it is, unfortunately. -- Harry "The 'C' students run the world." |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ...
wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:33:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 03:59:32 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote: The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to produce things we can sell the world. and one of the biggest factors in this was the destruction of unions. a recent series of articles in 'slate' showed that countries with strong unions also have strong manufacturing bases. the right destroyed the unions in this country and, bye bye manufacturing The unions caused it to some degree by making our workers too expensive to compete in a world market and not being willing to budge. The only states that are growing in manufacturing capacity are the non-union states. You really can't blame the unions for screwed up, exploitive management practices that caused the unions to be formed in the first place. The question is what caused them to decline. You can blame it on management but managers answer to stock holders, not unions. Management has a judiciary obligation to stockholders to look at the long-term view, even though stockholders might not appreciate that quarter to quarter. In the late 80s and beyond we rated the economy based on how the stock market was doing, not how the workers were doing. We still rate the economy on how the major stock indexes are doing. Ok. Not sure what that has to do with the Fed, the decline of unions, or anything else, but ok. Bob dances around it but that was particularly true during the Clinton administration. The decline of his middle class went into high gear during that time. That was when major corporations started shedding their senior employees in massive downsizing actions, just to pump up stock prices. That was where his "prosperity" came from. plumbers Please define the "middle class." Keep in mind that union workers are only about 8% of the work force. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Kr...ar_MClass.html But an important 8% auto workers, steel workers, garment workers, teachers, postal employees, electricians, plumbers, carpenters ect. When a union employed social worker pulls down almost 130K there's something wrong. The union fat cats are not suffering like the union membership is. You have your head so far up your ass you're looking at your tonsils. Go away little girl. Hey. That's a song title, isn't it? Harry "The 'C' students run the world." |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
YukonBound wrote:
"Secular Humoresque" wrote in message ... On 10/1/10 1:34 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Oct 1, 3:59 am, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote: The issue is not monetary policy, it is a decline in our capacity to produce things we can sell the world. and one of the biggest factors in this was the destruction of unions. a recent series of articles in 'slate' showed that countries with strong unions also have strong manufacturing bases. the right destroyed the unions in this country and, bye bye manufacturing You're using backward logic. Actually, more manufacturing brings more unions. Less manufacturing = less unions. Unions priced themselves out of the market, and people like you killed manufacturing by buying cheap chinese-made battery chargers at walmart. You killed the unions with your purchasing decisions. Sure.. you're right, except for the root cause of union creation... BAD MANAGEMENT. Manufacturers left the USA not because they weren't making profit...they simply did not think they were making enough profit. Greed took over, big time. Prices for most consumer items are far higher than they ever were when they were made in the USA by unionized workforces and labor charges in the Pacific Rim are not much better than slave labor rates. You figure out the rest. Yup.. it's the importers... buying cheap & selling high. Say what? Do you read before you post, dummy? |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 21:00:07 -0400, LG wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:02:17 -0400, wrote: and not being willing to budge. The only states that are growing in manufacturing capacity are the non-union states. also wrong. Their unions aren't corrupt. our corporations are. unions didn't destroy our economy. wall street did |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 14:15:36 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Go to any store, pick up just about anything and see where it came from. So, you want us to compete to make plastic toys? Well, actually, what gets produced here doesn't usually have a lead problem. Have you looked at anything other than plastic toys? Look at things like tools, electronics or clothes. How many are US made? We send them scrap iron, they send us socket wrenches. And, I pointed out that we also export lots of stuff. Your point? We used to be afraid of Japan. Now, we're "afraid" of China. I prefer not to be "afraid." We were afraid of Japan but we could compete with them. Their products were more expensive than ours and their people made a good wage. We don't have that with China. And they were buying up property and companies in the US. Your list of things we export also showed 8 of the 10 were in decline. The trend went from virtually balanced trade between us an china in 1985 to a ratio of 4 times as much of our money going to China than they buy back from us. Yet, they're making money. Why would they want that to end? So they can dominate the world I suppose. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 14:23:35 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:33:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message m... On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 03:59:32 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 02:02:40 -0400, wrote: You really can't blame the unions for screwed up, exploitive management practices that caused the unions to be formed in the first place. The question is what caused them to decline. You can blame it on management but managers answer to stock holders, not unions. Management has a judiciary obligation to stockholders to look at the long-term view, even though stockholders might not appreciate that quarter to quarter. That was the complaint that I started hearing in the late 80s and early 90s. Corporations were losing their long term vision and running ther whole operation on a 90 day window. In the late 80s and beyond we rated the economy based on how the stock market was doing, not how the workers were doing. We still rate the economy on how the major stock indexes are doing. Ok. Not sure what that has to do with the Fed, the decline of unions, or anything else, but ok. It all has to do with the loss of equity in the US and the fed tries to prop that up by printing money. Except that the Fed hasn't been printing money (more than usual). Inflation is not an issue. Bob dances around it but that was particularly true during the Clinton administration. The decline of his middle class went into high gear during that time. That was when major corporations started shedding their senior employees in massive downsizing actions, just to pump up stock prices. That was where his "prosperity" came from. Please define the "middle class." That is an ongoing question here but I will use Bob's definition for this discussion. People with air conditioned jobs. ?? Bectel maybe? They're considered a small business by the Republicans, apparently. Keep in mind that union workers are only about 8% of the work force. Most of them work for the government. Actually, it's about 50/50. Of course, it depends on how you define "public" sector. Does that include police and other essential services? Are you including the Post Office (which is quasi-government)? |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 21:00:07 -0400, wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:02:17 -0400, wrote: and not being willing to budge. The only states that are growing in manufacturing capacity are the non-union states. also wrong. Their unions aren't corrupt. our corporations are. unions didn't destroy our economy. wall street did Wall street is a street in NYC. Can you try to be more specific in your silly rants? |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
In article ,
says... bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 21:00:07 -0400, wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:02:17 -0400, wrote: and not being willing to budge. The only states that are growing in manufacturing capacity are the non-union states. also wrong. Their unions aren't corrupt. our corporations are. unions didn't destroy our economy. wall street did Wall street is a street in NYC. Can you try to be more specific in your silly rants? Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group... The union is bought and paid for by the Company to keep the workers "content" and in the dark, that's why so much violence surrounded the teamsters Business agents during the time when they were selling us to the SureFine Sugar corp;) -- OH, I could do the 105 footer, but I would hate to waste the last few seconds of my life with my eyes closed, screaming like a little girl...;) |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"I am Tosk" wrote in message ... Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the *sweating members of the group*... The union is bought and paid for by the Company to keep the workers "content" and in the dark, that's why so much violence surrounded the teamsters Business agents during the time when they were selling us to the SureFine Sugar corp;) "sweating members of the group"??? I hope you don't include yourself in that designation. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 21:37:17 -0400, LG wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 21:00:07 -0400, wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:02:17 -0400, wrote: and not being willing to budge. The only states that are growing in manufacturing capacity are the non-union states. also wrong. Their unions aren't corrupt. our corporations are. unions didn't destroy our economy. wall street did Wall street is a street in NYC. Can you try to be more specific in your silly rants? you're so uneducated you dont know what 'wall street' is? no wonder you're conservative |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 09:37:02 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Keep in mind that union workers are only about 8% of the work force. Most of them work for the government. Actually, it's about 50/50. Of course, it depends on how you define "public" sector. Does that include police and other essential services? Are you including the Post Office (which is quasi-government)? Certainly USPS is in the public sector, as are teachers, firemen and policemen (along with the huge bureaucracy that they drag around behind them). In any case, it's pretty evenly divided between public and private. Of course, the teacher's unions are evil, right? |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On Oct 3, 2:20*pm, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote in message ...
On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Specifically union labor. It's a shame we let them do it. -- I'm the real Harry, and I post from a PC or a MAC, as virtually everyone knows. If a post is attributed to me, and it isn't from a PC or a MAC, it's from an ID spoofer who hasn't the balls to post with his current ID Boatless Harry |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 12:45:30 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20*pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... as i've often stated, being a conservative is a learning disability. timothy noah, in 'slate', has a nice series of articles on current economics. countries with the strongest unions have the strongest manufacturing base. guess what that means about the US? i've tried to make this as simple as i can for your level of understanding. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 11:23:26 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 09:37:02 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Keep in mind that union workers are only about 8% of the work force. Most of them work for the government. Actually, it's about 50/50. Of course, it depends on how you define "public" sector. Does that include police and other essential services? Are you including the Post Office (which is quasi-government)? Certainly USPS is in the public sector, as are teachers, firemen and policemen (along with the huge bureaucracy that they drag around behind them). In any case, it's pretty evenly divided between public and private. Of course, the teacher's unions are evil, right? Of course. All I have to point to is our standing in the world (#23 or 26 depending on who you believe) and the amount of money we spend(#2 per student). Education rates worse than health care in that regard and we know how you feel about health care. It is not just the union but the total lack of "management" in US education. They spend about 60% of all the school tax money on administration but they don't have any managers. People who can't do, teach Teachers who can't teach become administrators. So, much of the money spent on administration and infrastructure (esp.) is wasted? Hardly. And, hate to break it to you... the teachers and the administration are TWO different entities. So, administration = no management. Tell that to the principals. Who do you think she be doing the teaching if not the teachers? Then, you claim they should be administrators! This argument makes no sense. The expression is pretty hollow. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote in message ... On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Now, that's funny. Without labor how do you think manufacturing gets done? MORON! |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ...
So, much of the money spent on administration and infrastructure (esp.) is wasted? Hardly. And, hate to break it to you... the teachers and the administration are TWO different entities. So, administration = no management. Tell that to the principals. Who do you think she be doing the teaching if not the teachers? Then, you claim they should be administrators! This argument makes no sense. The expression is pretty hollow. You hit the sauce kind of early today , Pumpkin. You don't make any sense. More than usual, even. -- I'm the real Harry, and I post from a PC or a MAC, as virtually everyone knows. If a post is attributed to me, and it isn't from a PC or a MAC, it's from an ID spoofer who hasn't the balls to post with his current ID Boatless Harry |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 14:24:17 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: In any case, it's pretty evenly divided between public and private. Of course, the teacher's unions are evil, right? Of course. All I have to point to is our standing in the world (#23 or 26 depending on who you believe) and the amount of money we spend(#2 per student). Education rates worse than health care in that regard and we know how you feel about health care. It is not just the union but the total lack of "management" in US education. They spend about 60% of all the school tax money on administration but they don't have any managers. People who can't do, teach Teachers who can't teach become administrators. So, much of the money spent on administration and infrastructure (esp.) is wasted? Hardly. And, hate to break it to you... the teachers and the administration are TWO different entities. So, administration = no management. Tell that to the principals. Principals are not really managers. They generally have no business sense or experience yet they are typically running a $5 million dollar enterprise. (the average "in school" spending per school in our school system) So, you think having an MBA as a manager is going to make for a better education? What do you think this MBA is going to do to promote a better education vs. someone who is an educator by trade? Who do you think she be doing the teaching if not the teachers? Then, you claim they should be administrators! This argument makes no sense. The expression is pretty hollow. The failed teachers should just be sent on their way, not made "managers". The reality is you can't fire a bad teacher so you have to promote them. Huh? Who's the manager now?? The principal? You're saying failed teachers are promoted to ?? The reality is there are no managers in most school systems.School boards have billion dollar budgets and nobody there seems capable of efficiently managing that $1.428 billion budget (what my county spends). We are the #40 school system. 39 spend more than we do. If I was the king, the first thing I would do to cut education spending would be to privatize the food, the busses and maintaining the property. That alone is over a half a billion in our system and all of them are horribly managed. Depends on if there enough safeguards in place. That means regulation and oversight. Who, pray tell, will be doing that? |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
wrote in message ... On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 20:58:06 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 14:24:17 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: In any case, it's pretty evenly divided between public and private. Of course, the teacher's unions are evil, right? Of course. All I have to point to is our standing in the world (#23 or 26 depending on who you believe) and the amount of money we spend(#2 per student). Education rates worse than health care in that regard and we know how you feel about health care. It is not just the union but the total lack of "management" in US education. They spend about 60% of all the school tax money on administration but they don't have any managers. People who can't do, teach Teachers who can't teach become administrators. So, much of the money spent on administration and infrastructure (esp.) is wasted? Hardly. And, hate to break it to you... the teachers and the administration are TWO different entities. So, administration = no management. Tell that to the principals. Principals are not really managers. They generally have no business sense or experience yet they are typically running a $5 million dollar enterprise. (the average "in school" spending per school in our school system) So, you think having an MBA as a manager is going to make for a better education? What do you think this MBA is going to do to promote a better education vs. someone who is an educator by trade? No but I think a real manager would help. Someone who has actually been successful running a business Well, who are you going to call? Ghostbusters? FYI, education isn't a business. It doesn't need to show a financial profit. It's a societal imperative. It was MBAs who ran the economy into the ground. So, it's people who are trained to run a business who are at fault for running the economy into the ground. I guess that would include Bush. "Real educators" are not the people I want running the largest food outlet in my county or running the largest bus system. I don't want them running a $100,000,000 maintenance department and I don't want them making real estate decisions about the two billion dollars worth of property they own. Real educators don't "run" any of those things directly. They administer a system, and most have years of experience doing it. But, you'd rather have who do it exactly. So far, you've said "real managers." Who would they be? How are they trained? Unfortunately the vertical integration caused by the fact that you can't go very far in the education department without being a teacher assures we have people running it with absolutely zero management experience. ? So, how would you structure a $multi-billion system? You have to use someone? Who do you think she be doing the teaching if not the teachers? Then, you claim they should be administrators! This argument makes no sense. The expression is pretty hollow. The failed teachers should just be sent on their way, not made "managers". The reality is you can't fire a bad teacher so you have to promote them. Huh? Who's the manager now?? The principal? You're saying failed teachers are promoted to ?? You can't do much of anything in the education establishment if you are not a former teacher. And, your point? The reality is there are no managers in most school systems.School boards have billion dollar budgets and nobody there seems capable of efficiently managing that $1.428 billion budget (what my county spends). We are the #40 school system. 39 spend more than we do. If I was the king, the first thing I would do to cut education spending would be to privatize the food, the busses and maintaining the property. That alone is over a half a billion in our system and all of them are horribly managed. Depends on if there enough safeguards in place. That means regulation and oversight. Who, pray tell, will be doing that? Busses are regulated by the department of transportation and the public services administration. Food is regulated by the health department. EXCEPT IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM. Busses are beholden to the same regulations that any other vehicle on the road follows. Food is regulated (not all that well) by the FDA. Not sure what you're getting at. Are you trying to claim that a school administrator can feed children uninspected (regulation-wise) chicken???? Is that really oversight? There are as many if not more stories about tainted food being served in schools and dangerous busses in school systems as there are in the private sector. So, what you're really talking about is the decision of WHAT food is given/sold to kids. That should be up to nutritionists in concert with budget issues. The maintenance department is simply a government boondoggle and a private company could do a better job for half the money, still returning money to stock holders. That is simple to evaluate. Either the roof leaks or it doesn't, the light bulbs get replaced or they don't. Tracking trouble calls, response times, cycle times, cost and customer satisfaction are very easy to document. That is a very well developed business model in the private sector that just seems to baffle government maintenance operations. So, schools that are underfunded are out of luck I suppose. You're going to take the budget responsibilities away from the local officials and give it to who? This very much sounds like a rant. Who exactly are you angry with and why? What did they do to you? Do you have any solutions or is it just privatize everything? |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On Oct 3, 3:45*pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20*pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Snotty the " non-working leach " thinks that everyone should work for nothing. This from a poor, uneducated, unemployable leach of a man who lives off the back of his poor Wife. Panty Liner also gambles with her hard-earned cash, instead of doing ANYTHING to help her in life. You really do need a bitch-slap, you ****ing slug. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ...
wrote in message ... On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 20:58:06 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 14:24:17 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: In any case, it's pretty evenly divided between public and private. Of course, the teacher's unions are evil, right? Of course. All I have to point to is our standing in the world (#23 or 26 depending on who you believe) and the amount of money we spend(#2 per student). Education rates worse than health care in that regard and we know how you feel about health care. It is not just the union but the total lack of "management" in US education. They spend about 60% of all the school tax money on administration but they don't have any managers. People who can't do, teach Teachers who can't teach become administrators. So, much of the money spent on administration and infrastructure (esp.) is wasted? Hardly. And, hate to break it to you... the teachers and the administration are TWO different entities. So, administration = no management. Tell that to the principals. Principals are not really managers. They generally have no business sense or experience yet they are typically running a $5 million dollar enterprise. (the average "in school" spending per school in our school system) So, you think having an MBA as a manager is going to make for a better education? What do you think this MBA is going to do to promote a better education vs. someone who is an educator by trade? No but I think a real manager would help. Someone who has actually been successful running a business Well, who are you going to call? Ghostbusters? FYI, education isn't a business. It doesn't need to show a financial profit. It's a societal imperative. It was MBAs who ran the economy into the ground. So, it's people who are trained to run a business who are at fault for running the economy into the ground. I guess that would include Bush. "Real educators" are not the people I want running the largest food outlet in my county or running the largest bus system. I don't want them running a $100,000,000 maintenance department and I don't want them making real estate decisions about the two billion dollars worth of property they own. Real educators don't "run" any of those things directly. They administer a system, and most have years of experience doing it. But, you'd rather have who do it exactly. So far, you've said "real managers." Who would they be? How are they trained? Unfortunately the vertical integration caused by the fact that you can't go very far in the education department without being a teacher assures we have people running it with absolutely zero management experience. ? So, how would you structure a $multi-billion system? You have to use someone? Who do you think she be doing the teaching if not the teachers? Then, you claim they should be administrators! This argument makes no sense. The expression is pretty hollow. The failed teachers should just be sent on their way, not made "managers". The reality is you can't fire a bad teacher so you have to promote them. Huh? Who's the manager now?? The principal? You're saying failed teachers are promoted to ?? You can't do much of anything in the education establishment if you are not a former teacher. And, your point? The reality is there are no managers in most school systems.School boards have billion dollar budgets and nobody there seems capable of efficiently managing that $1.428 billion budget (what my county spends). We are the #40 school system. 39 spend more than we do. If I was the king, the first thing I would do to cut education spending would be to privatize the food, the busses and maintaining the property. That alone is over a half a billion in our system and all of them are horribly managed. Depends on if there enough safeguards in place. That means regulation and oversight. Who, pray tell, will be doing that? Busses are regulated by the department of transportation and the public services administration. Food is regulated by the health department. EXCEPT IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM. Busses are beholden to the same regulations that any other vehicle on the road follows. Food is regulated (not all that well) by the FDA. Not sure what you're getting at. Are you trying to claim that a school administrator can feed children uninspected (regulation-wise) chicken???? Is that really oversight? There are as many if not more stories about tainted food being served in schools and dangerous busses in school systems as there are in the private sector. So, what you're really talking about is the decision of WHAT food is given/sold to kids. That should be up to nutritionists in concert with budget issues. The maintenance department is simply a government boondoggle and a private company could do a better job for half the money, still returning money to stock holders. That is simple to evaluate. Either the roof leaks or it doesn't, the light bulbs get replaced or they don't. Tracking trouble calls, response times, cycle times, cost and customer satisfaction are very easy to document. That is a very well developed business model in the private sector that just seems to baffle government maintenance operations. So, schools that are underfunded are out of luck I suppose. You're going to take the budget responsibilities away from the local officials and give it to who? This very much sounds like a rant. Who exactly are you angry with and why? What did they do to you? Do you have any solutions or is it just privatize everything? Bottom line Pumpkin, is that you think public school systems are doing fine just the way they are. Watch out fer Obama. He be going to go in and CHANGE everything to suit himself. You be watching out fer it. Ya Heah. -- I'm the real Harry, and I post from a PC or a MAC, as virtually everyone knows. If a post is attributed to me, and it isn't from a PC or a MAC, it's from an ID spoofer who hasn't the balls to post with his current ID Boatless Harry |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"*e#c" wrote in message ... On Oct 3, 3:45 pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Snotty the " non-working leach " thinks that everyone should work for nothing. This from a poor, uneducated, unemployable leach of a man who lives off the back of his poor Wife. Panty Liner also gambles with her hard-earned cash, instead of doing ANYTHING to help her in life. You really do need a bitch-slap, you ****ing slug. He's just jealous that most people actually go out and work for a living. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On 10/4/10 7:47 AM, YukonBound wrote:
"*e#c" wrote in message ... On Oct 3, 3:45 pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Snotty the " non-working leach " thinks that everyone should work for nothing. This from a poor, uneducated, unemployable leach of a man who lives off the back of his poor Wife. Panty Liner also gambles with her hard-earned cash, instead of doing ANYTHING to help her in life. You really do need a bitch-slap, you ****ing slug. He's just jealous that most people actually go out and work for a living. Here's a non sequitur for you: I just sold my Parker for more than Little Man Tosk has earned in the last three or more years, and it wasn't that expensive of a boat. How is that possible? Little Man Tosk has no earnings. -- Republicans are the Party of No: No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"Secular Humoresque" wrote in message m... On 10/4/10 7:47 AM, YukonBound wrote: "*e#c" wrote in message ... On Oct 3, 3:45 pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Snotty the " non-working leach " thinks that everyone should work for nothing. This from a poor, uneducated, unemployable leach of a man who lives off the back of his poor Wife. Panty Liner also gambles with her hard-earned cash, instead of doing ANYTHING to help her in life. You really do need a bitch-slap, you ****ing slug. He's just jealous that most people actually go out and work for a living. Here's a non sequitur for you: I just sold my Parker for more than Little Man Tosk has earned in the last three or more years, and it wasn't that expensive of a boat. How is that possible? Little Man Tosk has no earnings. Oh boy! I could probably say the same thing if I sold my Princecraft Yukon. That Freak has one sweat deal... he runs around acting like an overage Peter Pan while Terri brings home the bacon. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"YukonBound" wrote in message ... "Secular Humoresque" wrote in message m... On 10/4/10 7:47 AM, YukonBound wrote: "*e#c" wrote in message ... On Oct 3, 3:45 pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Snotty the " non-working leach " thinks that everyone should work for nothing. This from a poor, uneducated, unemployable leach of a man who lives off the back of his poor Wife. Panty Liner also gambles with her hard-earned cash, instead of doing ANYTHING to help her in life. You really do need a bitch-slap, you ****ing slug. He's just jealous that most people actually go out and work for a living. Here's a non sequitur for you: I just sold my Parker for more than Little Man Tosk has earned in the last three or more years, and it wasn't that expensive of a boat. How is that possible? Little Man Tosk has no earnings. Oh boy! I could probably say the same thing if I sold my Princecraft Yukon. That Freak has one *sweat deal*... he runs around acting like an overage Peter Pan while Terri brings home the bacon. ooops.. better make that *sweet deal*. I doubt The Freak raises much of a sweat these days... unless he's sitting in the sun guzzling someone else's beer at the track. |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On Oct 4, 9:02*am, "YukonBound" wrote:
"YukonBound" wrote in message ... "Secular Humoresque" wrote in message om... On 10/4/10 7:47 AM, YukonBound wrote: "*e#c" wrote in message .... On Oct 3, 3:45 pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Snotty the " non-working leach " thinks that everyone should work for nothing. This from a poor, uneducated, unemployable leach of a man who lives off the back of his poor Wife. Panty Liner also gambles with her hard-earned cash, instead of doing ANYTHING to help her in life. You really do need a bitch-slap, you ****ing slug. He's just jealous that most people actually go out and work for a living. Here's a non sequitur for you: I just sold my Parker for more than Little Man Tosk has earned in the last three or more years, and it wasn't that expensive of a boat. How is that possible? Little Man Tosk has no earnings. Oh boy! *I could probably say the same thing if I sold my Princecraft Yukon. That Freak has one *sweat deal*... he runs around acting like an overage Peter Pan while Terri brings home the bacon. ooops.. better make that *sweet deal*. I doubt The Freak raises much of a sweat these days... unless he's sitting in the sun guzzling someone else's beer at the track.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - No, you can leave it sweat deal, it doesn't matter. You are a fat, bald, useless old man who sucked the tit of the government all his life and failed to raise his kids properly.. No matter, you are loser and a pussy. Now get back under your desk before someone shoves your Yukon up your ass... |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
"JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote in message ... On Oct 4, 9:02 am, "YukonBound" wrote: "YukonBound" wrote in message ... "Secular Humoresque" wrote in message om... On 10/4/10 7:47 AM, YukonBound wrote: "*e#c" wrote in message ... On Oct 3, 3:45 pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Snotty the " non-working leach " thinks that everyone should work for nothing. This from a poor, uneducated, unemployable leach of a man who lives off the back of his poor Wife. Panty Liner also gambles with her hard-earned cash, instead of doing ANYTHING to help her in life. You really do need a bitch-slap, you ****ing slug. He's just jealous that most people actually go out and work for a living. Here's a non sequitur for you: I just sold my Parker for more than Little Man Tosk has earned in the last three or more years, and it wasn't that expensive of a boat. How is that possible? Little Man Tosk has no earnings. Oh boy! I could probably say the same thing if I sold my Princecraft Yukon. That Freak has one *sweat deal*... he runs around acting like an overage Peter Pan while Terri brings home the bacon. ooops.. better make that *sweet deal*. I doubt The Freak raises much of a sweat these days... unless he's sitting in the sun guzzling someone else's beer at the track.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - No, you can leave it sweat deal, it doesn't matter. You are a fat, bald, useless old man who sucked the tit of the government all his life and failed to raise his kids properly.. No matter, you are loser and a pussy. Now get back under your desk before someone shoves your Yukon up your ass... Oh my! Would that be you trying to shove something up my ass? The smart money says you don't have the balls! |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On 10/4/10 9:30 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
No, you can leave it sweat deal, it doesn't matter. You are a fat, bald, useless old man who sucked the tit of the government all his life and failed to raise his kids properly.. No matter, you are loser and a pussy. Now get back under your desk before someone shoves your Yukon up your ass... Awwww. Little Boy Toskie is... *upset* Hey, Tosk: Your buddies herring and flajim "sucked the tit of the government" all their working lives...and what are you raising your daughter to be, a future quadriplegic? Speaking of losers...when is the last time you held an adult's paying job? -- Republicans are the Party of No: No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On Oct 4, 9:35*am, "YukonBound" wrote:
"JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote in message ... On Oct 4, 9:02 am, "YukonBound" wrote: "YukonBound" wrote in message .. . "Secular Humoresque" wrote in message om... On 10/4/10 7:47 AM, YukonBound wrote: "*e#c" wrote in message ... On Oct 3, 3:45 pm, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 3, 2:20 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 23:03:42 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: Really, this has been going on for months.. Both of you need to understand that there is no difference between "wall st" and "labor". They are and have always been in bed together to take from the sweating members of the group. if this were true, wall street wouldnt have destroyed labor. labor unions would be flourishing. they're not Exactly, Labor destroyed manufacturing... Snotty the " non-working leach " thinks that everyone should work for nothing. This from a poor, uneducated, unemployable leach of a man who lives off the back of his poor Wife. Panty Liner also gambles with her hard-earned cash, instead of doing ANYTHING to help her in life. You really do need a bitch-slap, you ****ing slug. He's just jealous that most people actually go out and work for a living. Here's a non sequitur for you: I just sold my Parker for more than Little Man Tosk has earned in the last three or more years, and it wasn't that expensive of a boat. How is that possible? Little Man Tosk has no earnings. Oh boy! *I could probably say the same thing if I sold my Princecraft Yukon. That Freak has one *sweat deal*... he runs around acting like an overage Peter Pan while Terri brings home the bacon. ooops.. better make that *sweet deal*. I doubt The Freak raises much of a sweat these days... unless he's sitting in the sun guzzling someone else's beer at the track.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - No, you can leave it sweat deal, it doesn't matter. You are a fat, bald, useless old man who sucked the tit of the government all his life and failed to raise his kids properly.. No matter, you are loser and a pussy. Now get back under your desk before someone shoves your Yukon up your ass... Oh my! *Would that be you trying to shove something up my ass? The smart money says you don't have the balls!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The smart money shows you are still yapping from under your desk... |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
On 10/4/10 9:38 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
The smart money shows you are still yapping from under your desk... Yapping from under your desk? What does that mean? Just because Little Man Tosk doesn't have the $$$ to finance driving to nova scotia doesn't mean don is hiding under anything. -- Republicans are the Party of No: No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals |
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
|
The Federal Reserve Bank bankrupt?
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:44 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com