|
Youse guys must be rich
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:45:39 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:42:21 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 28, 11:13*pm, wrote: On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 19:30:05 -0400, "Paul@BYC" wrote: On 10/28/2010 5:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:20:54 -0400, "Paul@BYC" *wrote: I read that the Peoples Republic of China now lays claim to the world's fastest supercomputer. I don't know if any of the scientists involved in that project were trained in the United States, but it would not surprise me to learn some were. I think the sun is setting on the United States for many reasons. You may be right but that's a political statement anyway you slice it. This is supposed to be (mostly) a boating group and past history here is that nothing will get a food fight going faster than political or religious pronouncements. Don't start undoing your good work ! Political? A non-partisan observation about this country is political? So, if I posted that "Democracy in the United States has worked well," that would be political? How about, "The sun is setting on new boat sales in the United States because of the price of fuel, the economy, and the closure of many boat manufacturers and dealerships." Better? Is it political to discuss the lack of dredging in the ICW? I thought the idea was to avoid partisan political posting. It doesn't matter what you say here. There are some who'll find political fault with it. Mostly, they're mean-spirited little men. -- Nom=de=Plume - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Apparently is doesn't matter what we say here, you are still stuck on name calling... So, you're claiming I called you a mean-spirited little man? Wow. I was thinking of someone else, but if the shoe fits.... Can you knock it off? If me and ***** can do it, you should be able to. When you came here a year or so ago, you said it was for boats but were immediately consumed in the fire. Now you have a chance to join the group you tried to join a year or so ago. Maybe you are not so motivated as some of us, but then you don't remember how fun this boat group was a decade ago, I do. I'm not sure what you're talking about. What does consumed by fire mean? Some people were obnoxious, and I occasionally responded to that. You guys have been at this "war" for a while. Don't put it on me. If you don't like what I have to say, feel free to plonk me. FYI, I don't respond to spoofers like Harry(r) if that's not obvious. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Youse guys must be rich
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:00:54 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:45:39 -0400, I am Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:42:21 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Oct 28, 11:13*pm, wrote: On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 19:30:05 -0400, "Paul@BYC" wrote: On 10/28/2010 5:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:20:54 -0400, "Paul@BYC" *wrote: I read that the Peoples Republic of China now lays claim to the world's fastest supercomputer. I don't know if any of the scientists involved in that project were trained in the United States, but it would not surprise me to learn some were. I think the sun is setting on the United States for many reasons. You may be right but that's a political statement anyway you slice it. This is supposed to be (mostly) a boating group and past history here is that nothing will get a food fight going faster than political or religious pronouncements. Don't start undoing your good work ! Political? A non-partisan observation about this country is political? So, if I posted that "Democracy in the United States has worked well," that would be political? How about, "The sun is setting on new boat sales in the United States because of the price of fuel, the economy, and the closure of many boat manufacturers and dealerships." Better? Is it political to discuss the lack of dredging in the ICW? I thought the idea was to avoid partisan political posting. It doesn't matter what you say here. There are some who'll find political fault with it. Mostly, they're mean-spirited little men. -- Nom=de=Plume - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Apparently is doesn't matter what we say here, you are still stuck on name calling... So, you're claiming I called you a mean-spirited little man? Wow. I was thinking of someone else, but if the shoe fits.... Can you knock it off? If me and ***** can do it, you should be able to. When you came here a year or so ago, you said it was for boats but were immediately consumed in the fire. Now you have a chance to join the group you tried to join a year or so ago. Maybe you are not so motivated as some of us, but then you don't remember how fun this boat group was a decade ago, I do. I'm not sure what you're talking about. What does consumed by fire mean? Some people were obnoxious, and I occasionally responded to that. You guys have been at this "war" for a while. Don't put it on me. What I meant by "consumed by fire" is.. I seriously doubt you came here with the goal of becoming one of the most prolific one line, name callers in the group, but you did. You probably came in to try to talk boats, or meet some nice folks on line and once you jumped in, you found out quickly rec.boats was an inferno already. Instead of jumping out of the fire, you became just more fuel like so many others.. If you don't like what I have to say, feel free to plonk me. Well as you know, I have had you plonked for months already pretty much since you came here, but opened my filters last week to see how everyone was gonna' act and I have had (and probably given) some pleasant surprises. You have surprised me too, as although I don't feel you have life experiences or point of view that would produce much of interest to me, I never doubted you were an intelligent person and actually thought you of all the folks here (involved in the flame fest) would pick up on this "thing" a lot quicker than you have... FYI, I don't respond to spoofers like Harry(r) if that's not obvious. Yeah, well as long as he is being harry, and not trying to be Karen or Harry Krause... I will let it ride for now... I certainly disagree that I was anywhere near as prolific or vociferous as others. Calling someone a moron is a bit different that some of the more extreme terms I've seen used here. Certainly, I did want to and still want to converse about boats. Your plonking me or not is your concern not mine. My recollection is that you were unwilling to listen to contrary points of view, it upset you that I might have a different opinion and was willing to support it forcefully. And, then your next comment... "don't feel you have the life experiences" .. well, many could say the same about your support of the bickering and devisiveness of others of similar political views. Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Youse guys must be rich
"I am Tosk" wrote in message
... In article , says... Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly. Cool.... -- Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever! Let me know how that works out. ;-) |
Youse guys must be rich
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:12:04 -0400, "Harry®" wrote:
"I am Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly. Cool.... -- Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever! Let me know how that works out. ;-) I'm happy to report that there has been a great deal of progress here in the early stages, more so than I might have expected. Now for the next step, why don't you give up that "Harry®" handle that you have adopted and go back to your old likable self, who ever that might be. :-) |
Youse guys must be rich
|
Youse guys must be rich
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
... On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:12:04 -0400, "Harry®" wrote: "I am Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly. Cool.... -- Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever! Let me know how that works out. ;-) I'm happy to report that there has been a great deal of progress here in the early stages, more so than I might have expected. Now for the next step, why don't you give up that "Harry®" handle that you have adopted and go back to your old likable self, who ever that might be. :-) I've worked hard to make Harry® a household name around here...........and you want me to abandon him. Whatever for? |
Youse guys must be rich
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:45:28 -0700, wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:15:31 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:39:48 -0700, wrote: Actually I saw a Chinese lady on Charley Rose a few weeks ago explaining why she and a lot of other Chinese students chose to go back home when they graduate from an American school ... growth and opportunity. They are growing exponentially and the US is not. We scoff at a business where you may only be making a few cents a unit but when your customer base is a billion, that is a lot of pennies. As long as you don't mind being oppressed and censored, not to mention practically no environmental regulations, sure lot's of "opportunity." -- You are basically describing the US back when we were great. Come on.. Love Canal? McCarthy's era? Jim Crow? I think I'll pass. The fact remains the US was the engine of democracy and the growth leader of the world in these times The fact remains that we still are. Our economy is improving, big corporations are making record profits, but it's going to take a while to recover from all the years of bs. Much like the Chinese, we didn't know we were oppressed. So, I guess the active and vocal right and left media don't identify any problems. Who knew? I guess you never heard of Edward R. Murrow calling out McCarthyism? I also remember one of the most quoted supreme court decisions was Schenck where OW Holmes told is about fire in a crowded theater and that was a decision that upheld the government's power to quash an anti-war demonstration and throw Mr Schenck in jail for speaking out about the draft. And your point? Things are a bit better these days. In the 40s the press was not allowed to talk about the president's health, in the 60s we couldn't talk about the president's girlfriends, in the 50s, 60s and 70s we had the "equal time" law that restricted political commentary on TV. There was plenty of censorship about things that were "immoral" or just in bad taste on TV with the government largely making that decision. And this was when we were "great"??? It was when we had an expanding middle class and when we were the fastest growing economy in the world. The middle class in this country is not extinct. It's been battered, but not deep fried just yet. Having the "fastest growing economy in the world" isn't the most important thing nor is it necessarily a good thing. As for environmental laws. under our current law, there would have been no Hoover Dam, the LA water system and hence the development of most of Southern and central California. There would also not have been a TVA, and that probably meant no atom bomb. So, we should go back and keep on polluting? That's going to make us great again? We only have to look at the super fund sites to see what industries would not exist with current laws. That may have been horrible environmentally but it was the opportunity that let us dominate in technology. And, again... you want us to dominate what exactly? How about we actually get our collective sh*t together, which means getting our sh*t cleaned up, and actually competing through intellect . I don't think we ever really competed on intellect. We were just very good at bringing products to market cheaply and quickly. They were seldom the best product, nor were they particularly innovative, we just made a lot of them. Huh? We have more Nobels than any other country and we're ranked 11th out of 40 per capita. What would you rather have, a 58 Chevy or a 58 Mercedes Benz? Depends on it's condition of course. I imagine that there would be some 58 Chevys that are worth quite a bit. As for personal freedom, we did not have the woman's right to chose, civil rights, the EPA, OSHA, CPSC and other things the chinese lack. Yet we do now. So, you're saying that a woman's right to VOTE or Choose or be a full citizen was required to be competitive? You're claiming we should scrap OSHA and the EPA for the sake of competing with the Chinese?? I agree we do not want to go back to the bad old days but that also means we will lose significant market share. China is not going to dominate the solar PV market because they make the best solar collector. They will dominate because they make the cheapest one. You can have a 100% market share of the buggy whip industry and still lose. Cheaper isn't always better. Example: McDs. And, it's not even clear that cheaper is actually cheaper in the long run. Yet Bob says those were the last days that the middle class actually got a raise. (pre 1973) I don't know what Bob said. He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here. Take it up with Bob. I am not his savior. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Youse guys must be rich
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:32:26 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:18:04 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote: He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here. Maybe Bob's middle class didn't but certainly a lot of other middle class folks did better by any reasonable measure. I'd agree that a lot of that was the result of two income families and better job opportunities for women. Of course the unfortunate result of better opportunities for women meant fewer for guys with marginal skils or work ethic. I believe that too. I just did not want to start that fight ;-) It is a case of supply and demand. When you double the number of workers, wages will fall. That implies a steady-state economy, which doesn't exist. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Youse guys must be rich
On Oct 25, 11:13*am, "Paul@BYC" wrote:
I get a lunch break, but you guys get to post here all day. Rich? Retired? Or, maybe both! |
Youse guys must be rich
On Oct 25, 11:13*am, "Paul@BYC" wrote:
Not me. Me either. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Oct 29, 10:24*pm, "Harry " wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:12:04 -0400, "Harry " wrote: "I am Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly. Cool.... -- Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever! Let me know how that works out. ;-) I'm happy to report that there has been a great deal of progress here in the early stages, more so than I might have expected. Now for the next step, why don't you give up that "Harry " handle that you have adopted and go back to your old likable self, who ever that might be. * :-) I've worked hard to make Harry a household name around here...........and you want me to abandon him. Whatever for?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Cause like rat poison you were here for a good reason so we held our noses and let it go.. But now the mission is over, time to move along now unless you enjoy being the poster you came here to slay... |
Youse guys must be rich
|
Youse guys must be rich
On Oct 29, 10:24*pm, "Harry " wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:12:04 -0400, "Harry " wrote: "I am Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly. Cool.... -- Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever! Let me know how that works out. ;-) I'm happy to report that there has been a great deal of progress here in the early stages, more so than I might have expected. Now for the next step, why don't you give up that "Harry " handle that you have adopted and go back to your old likable self, who ever that might be. * :-) I've worked hard to make Harry a household name around here...........and you want me to abandon him. Whatever for? Not quite as hard as you've worked to be a total asshole/fluffer in here. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Oct 30, 5:33*am, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote: On Oct 29, 10:24*pm, "Harry " wrote: "Wayne.B" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:12:04 -0400, "Harry " wrote: "I am Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly. Cool.... -- Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever! Let me know how that works out. ;-) I'm happy to report that there has been a great deal of progress here in the early stages, more so than I might have expected. Now for the next step, why don't you give up that "Harry " handle that you have adopted and go back to your old likable self, who ever that might be. * :-) I've worked hard to make Harry a household name around here...........and you want me to abandon him. Whatever for?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Cause like rat poison you were here for a good reason so we held our noses and let it go.. But now the mission is over, time to move along now unless you enjoy being the poster you came here to slay... Too bad he slew no one. But you're still being a little cocksucker/ loser. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Oct 30, 7:43*am, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:55:26 -0400, wrote: Most of the profit is in marking up chinese goods and selling them. We still do not make much here anymore. There are some notable exceptions however including your old employer, IBM. * One of the things that stood out on our recent European trip is the large amount of new looking John Deere and Caterpillar equipment that is being used over there. *Both of them are obviously doing something right. Better than using the ****ty equipment they manufacture in Belarus. |
Youse guys must be rich
|
Youse guys must be rich
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:57:25 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:09:01 -0700, wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:32:26 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:18:04 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote: He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here. Maybe Bob's middle class didn't but certainly a lot of other middle class folks did better by any reasonable measure. I'd agree that a lot of that was the result of two income families and better job opportunities for women. Of course the unfortunate result of better opportunities for women meant fewer for guys with marginal skils or work ethic. I believe that too. I just did not want to start that fight ;-) It is a case of supply and demand. When you double the number of workers, wages will fall. That implies a steady-state economy, which doesn't exist. The economy is barely keeping pace with the population. That is why we are creating lots of jobs and the unemployment rate is static. We're creating jobs and those who've given up looking are starting to do so again. That's what's going on, mostly. It's a big hill to climb. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:55:26 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:07:36 -0700, wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote: The fact remains the US was the engine of democracy and the growth leader of the world in these times The fact remains that we still are. Our economy is improving, big corporations are making record profits, but it's going to take a while to recover from all the years of bs. The "record profits" do not seem to be trickling down to the workers (Bob help me out here) Most of the profit is in marking up chinese goods and selling them. We still do not make much here anymore. So, the gov't is to blame because corps are hoarding cash and trying to influence the election, so that more Republicans can get elected, who will gut the regulations. Please cite the profit numbers. Exxon/Mobile is making huge profits right now. I don't think they're marking up Chinese goods. Much like the Chinese, we didn't know we were oppressed. So, I guess the active and vocal right and left media don't identify any problems. Who knew? I guess you never heard of Edward R. Murrow calling out McCarthyism? I also remember one of the most quoted supreme court decisions was Schenck where OW Holmes told is about fire in a crowded theater and that was a decision that upheld the government's power to quash an anti-war demonstration and throw Mr Schenck in jail for speaking out about the draft. And your point? Things are a bit better these days. Are they? I suppose it is great that people can picket the white house with signs calling obama a muslim communist from Kenya but does that really make is stronger? Actually, it does. Free speech is mostly a good thing. I might not agree with what someone says, but as long as they're not advocating violence, I'm willing to defend their right to say it. How about the idea that money has free speech rights? Money? You mean the Citizen's United decision? That was a horrible example of judicial activism. In the 40s the press was not allowed to talk about the president's health, in the 60s we couldn't talk about the president's girlfriends, in the 50s, 60s and 70s we had the "equal time" law that restricted political commentary on TV. There was plenty of censorship about things that were "immoral" or just in bad taste on TV with the government largely making that decision. And this was when we were "great"??? It was when we had an expanding middle class and when we were the fastest growing economy in the world. The middle class in this country is not extinct. It's been battered, but not deep fried just yet. Having the "fastest growing economy in the world" isn't the most important thing nor is it necessarily a good thing. You will have to fight this out with Bob. He certainly thinks you are wrong ... but you are likely also in the top 5% Yes, admittedly I'm in the top few percent... certainly not mega rich, but I can't complain. I don't mind paying a bit more in taxes either. As for environmental laws. under our current law, there would have been no Hoover Dam, the LA water system and hence the development of most of Southern and central California. There would also not have been a TVA, and that probably meant no atom bomb. So, we should go back and keep on polluting? That's going to make us great again? We only have to look at the super fund sites to see what industries would not exist with current laws. That may have been horrible environmentally but it was the opportunity that let us dominate in technology. And, again... you want us to dominate what exactly? How about we actually get our collective sh*t together, which means getting our sh*t cleaned up, and actually competing through intellect . I don't think we ever really competed on intellect. We were just very good at bringing products to market cheaply and quickly. They were seldom the best product, nor were they particularly innovative, we just made a lot of them. Huh? We have more Nobels than any other country and we're ranked 11th out of 40 per capita. So what? That is just intellectuals patting each other on the back. It has very little to do with the average working person. There is no Nobel Prize for creating jobs. You claimed we don't compete nor have competed on intellect. When I cited actual numbers, you claimed it has nothing to do with the "average person" or for "creating jobs." That's a total non-sequitur. What would you rather have, a 58 Chevy or a 58 Mercedes Benz? Depends on it's condition of course. I imagine that there would be some 58 Chevys that are worth quite a bit. In the same condition, the Benz is worth a lot more What if I don't like the look of the Benz? What if I like the look of the Chevy? As for personal freedom, we did not have the woman's right to chose, civil rights, the EPA, OSHA, CPSC and other things the chinese lack. Yet we do now. So, you're saying that a woman's right to VOTE or Choose or be a full citizen was required to be competitive? You're claiming we should scrap OSHA and the EPA for the sake of competing with the Chinese?? I agree we do not want to go back to the bad old days but that also means we will lose significant market share. China is not going to dominate the solar PV market because they make the best solar collector. They will dominate because they make the cheapest one. You can have a 100% market share of the buggy whip industry and still lose. Are you saying solar technology is a buggy whip business? What I said, poorly, is that cheapest isn't always best... nor is market share the end all and be all of business success. Maybe you want to rephrase. The fact is, the first company to actually produce that mythical dollar a watt solar collector is going to rule the world. That is about where solar actually starts to make sense. http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...r-wind/4306443 I guess we're the ruling country. Cheaper isn't always better. Example: McDs. And, it's not even clear that cheaper is actually cheaper in the long run. Humm, lets see. Ruth's Chris Steak house stock was $20 in 2007 it is $5 now McDonalds was $40 in 2007 it is $70 now. Maybe cheaper is better. As long as you don't factor in health... Yet Bob says those were the last days that the middle class actually got a raise. (pre 1973) I don't know what Bob said. He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here. Take it up with Bob. I am not his savior. It is a statistic that is all over liberal TV, I know you have heard it. A statistic? There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. :) |
Youse guys must be rich
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:43:04 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:55:26 -0400, wrote: Most of the profit is in marking up chinese goods and selling them. We still do not make much here anymore. There are some notable exceptions however including your old employer, IBM. One of the things that stood out on our recent European trip is the large amount of new looking John Deere and Caterpillar equipment that is being used over there. Both of them are obviously doing something right. We've got exports up quite a bit, since the dollar has fallen. That's the reason why it's not so Obama or white (sorry, couldn't help it) that a falling (or rising dollar) is good or bad. It's a mixed bag. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 11:52:03 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:43:04 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:55:26 -0400, wrote: Most of the profit is in marking up chinese goods and selling them. We still do not make much here anymore. There are some notable exceptions however including your old employer, IBM. One of the things that stood out on our recent European trip is the large amount of new looking John Deere and Caterpillar equipment that is being used over there. Both of them are obviously doing something right. IBM doesn't make much here. They are very profitable because they sell offshore equipment at premium prices and broker offshore technical assistance. They make heavy use of contractors and business partners here in the US. They are hiring because they have laid off or retired all of the higher paid employees. My only warning to kids taking those jobs, is watch your back. When would that not be the case? Hardly anyone stays at a company to retirement any more, but that's been the case for a while now. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Oct 27, 3:12*pm, John H wrote:
Hope you're having a great day! John H Hope you're having an excellent weekend, John! |
Youse guys must be rich
On 10/30/10 7:16 PM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 27, 3:12 pm, John wrote: Hope you're having a great day! John H Hope you're having an excellent weekend, John! You need something faster than that 300-bps modem, Tim...that post from herring is three days old. :) Perhaps 1200-bps? |
Youse guys must be rich
On Oct 30, 6:20*pm, Secular Humouresque wrote:
On 10/30/10 7:16 PM, Tim wrote: On Oct 27, 3:12 pm, John *wrote: Hope you're having a great day! John H Hope you're having an excellent weekend, John! You need something faster than that 300-bps modem, Tim...that post from herring is three days old. *:) Perhaps 1200-bps? LOL! Oh, I know, but still it's a good thought. ?;^ ) |
Youse guys must be rich
|
Youse guys must be rich
On 10/31/2010 9:19 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... My bozo bin includes: Tosk Justwait Herring BAR Harry? Canuck Jack Three pontoons Larry and his every-three-week ID change for the past 2 years GC Boater jp christian insurance salesman ...among others Most of these bozos post under several ID's, so I plonk 'em as they come up. Unfortunately, I see their drivel if someone responds to them. You are a liar. Hmmm. And you would be? |
Youse guys must be rich
"Paul@BYC" wrote in message
... On 10/31/2010 9:19 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... My bozo bin includes: Tosk Justwait Herring BAR Harry? Canuck Jack Three pontoons Larry and his every-three-week ID change for the past 2 years GC Boater jp christian insurance salesman ...among others Most of these bozos post under several ID's, so I plonk 'em as they come up. Unfortunately, I see their drivel if someone responds to them. You are a liar. Hmmm. And you would be? All the above would fit nicely in your bozo bin. Don'tcha think? |
Youse guys must be rich
On 10/31/10 12:56 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 15:20:25 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 11:52:03 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:43:04 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:55:26 -0400, wrote: Most of the profit is in marking up chinese goods and selling them. We still do not make much here anymore. There are some notable exceptions however including your old employer, IBM. One of the things that stood out on our recent European trip is the large amount of new looking John Deere and Caterpillar equipment that is being used over there. Both of them are obviously doing something right. IBM doesn't make much here. They are very profitable because they sell offshore equipment at premium prices and broker offshore technical assistance. They make heavy use of contractors and business partners here in the US. They are hiring because they have laid off or retired all of the higher paid employees. My only warning to kids taking those jobs, is watch your back. When would that not be the case? Hardly anyone stays at a company to retirement any more, but that's been the case for a while now. That is usually not by choice. We need to separate non-disability retirement from employment by making the former portable. Your employer contributes to a fund, and so do you, and when you move on, all the funds stay with you. Get rid of the concept of "vesting" with a particular employer. 401-k's don't actually do this, and neither do IRA's. Another discussion would be what happens to those retirement funds. We need options other than what the Wall Street casinos offer. Many unionized construction workers have portable, controllable pensions. It's entirely their money and when they move from one signatory employer to another, the "retirement" portion of their earnings can be credited to the retirement account at their home local or to their international's retirement plan, if it has one. It's a good model for health care, too, until we really have universal health care coverage. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:55:19 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 15:19:29 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:43:04 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:55:26 -0400, wrote: Most of the profit is in marking up chinese goods and selling them. We still do not make much here anymore. There are some notable exceptions however including your old employer, IBM. One of the things that stood out on our recent European trip is the large amount of new looking John Deere and Caterpillar equipment that is being used over there. Both of them are obviously doing something right. We've got exports up quite a bit, since the dollar has fallen. That's the reason why it's not so Obama or white (sorry, couldn't help it) that a falling (or rising dollar) is good or bad. It's a mixed bag. Cat is actually building plants in China so this is not as cut and dried as you would think. There is also a deal in the works for GM to build cars in China. Chinese love Buicks evidently. It is the highest selling car there. Please show me where I said it was "cut and dried." I said, "it's a mixed bag." I stand by that statement. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:52:32 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 15:17:52 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:55:26 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:07:36 -0700, wrote: On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote: The fact remains the US was the engine of democracy and the growth leader of the world in these times The fact remains that we still are. Our economy is improving, big corporations are making record profits, but it's going to take a while to recover from all the years of bs. The "record profits" do not seem to be trickling down to the workers (Bob help me out here) Most of the profit is in marking up chinese goods and selling them. We still do not make much here anymore. So, the gov't is to blame because corps are hoarding cash and trying to influence the election, so that more Republicans can get elected, who will gut the regulations. Please cite the profit numbers. Exxon/Mobile is making huge profits right now. I don't think they're marking up Chinese goods. Exxon is making money because world energy profits are up. China is the #2 user of energy (maybe even #1) So, we shouldn't sell to China? Exxon is a US-based company I believe. You will have to fight this out with Bob. He certainly thinks you are wrong ... but you are likely also in the top 5% Yes, admittedly I'm in the top few percent... certainly not mega rich, but I can't complain. I don't mind paying a bit more in taxes either. By your standards I am poor but I also think taxes are too low right now. Certainly I don't want to send any more money to Washington but they will spend the money anyway. It is better not to foist it on our kids. Huh? This nonsense about the deficit is out of control. Sure, it's a problem, but certainly not a fatal one. As for environmental laws. under our current law, there would have been no Hoover Dam, the LA water system and hence the development of most of Southern and central California. There would also not have been a TVA, and that probably meant no atom bomb. So, we should go back and keep on polluting? That's going to make us great again? We only have to look at the super fund sites to see what industries would not exist with current laws. That may have been horrible environmentally but it was the opportunity that let us dominate in technology. And, again... you want us to dominate what exactly? How about we actually get our collective sh*t together, which means getting our sh*t cleaned up, and actually competing through intellect . I don't think we ever really competed on intellect. We were just very good at bringing products to market cheaply and quickly. They were seldom the best product, nor were they particularly innovative, we just made a lot of them. Huh? We have more Nobels than any other country and we're ranked 11th out of 40 per capita. So what? That is just intellectuals patting each other on the back. It has very little to do with the average working person. There is no Nobel Prize for creating jobs. You claimed we don't compete nor have competed on intellect. When I cited actual numbers, you claimed it has nothing to do with the "average person" or for "creating jobs." That's a total non-sequitur. The Nobel Prize has very little to do with the average worker. I bet 99% of them can't even name more than one current prize winner in any category. Again, this has nothing to do with your original claim. Sounds anti-intellectual to me. What would you rather have, a 58 Chevy or a 58 Mercedes Benz? Depends on it's condition of course. I imagine that there would be some 58 Chevys that are worth quite a bit. In the same condition, the Benz is worth a lot more What if I don't like the look of the Benz? What if I like the look of the Chevy? It was a trick question, nobody liked the look of a 58 chevy ;-) LOL As for personal freedom, we did not have the woman's right to chose, civil rights, the EPA, OSHA, CPSC and other things the chinese lack. Yet we do now. So, you're saying that a woman's right to VOTE or Choose or be a full citizen was required to be competitive? You're claiming we should scrap OSHA and the EPA for the sake of competing with the Chinese?? I agree we do not want to go back to the bad old days but that also means we will lose significant market share. China is not going to dominate the solar PV market because they make the best solar collector. They will dominate because they make the cheapest one. You can have a 100% market share of the buggy whip industry and still lose. Are you saying solar technology is a buggy whip business? What I said, poorly, is that cheapest isn't always best... nor is market share the end all and be all of business success. It has been the best business model for the last 2 decades. Walmart is the nations most successful retailer, McDonalds is the most successful restaurant and most of our electronics come from China. Ummm... 2 decades is a pretty short time frame. Maybe you want to rephrase. The fact is, the first company to actually produce that mythical dollar a watt solar collector is going to rule the world. That is about where solar actually starts to make sense. http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...r-wind/4306443 I guess we're the ruling country. Let's see if they can deliver that panel for a buck, It's your claim that producing a panel for that cost is a ruling event. Cheaper isn't always better. Example: McDs. And, it's not even clear that cheaper is actually cheaper in the long run. Humm, lets see. Ruth's Chris Steak house stock was $20 in 2007 it is $5 now McDonalds was $40 in 2007 it is $70 now. Maybe cheaper is better. As long as you don't factor in health... I doubt there is much difference between a steak and a burger, health wise. It's all about fat content. Pick the right steak and the wrong burger (e.g., McDs) and there's a big difference. Yet Bob says those were the last days that the middle class actually got a raise. (pre 1973) I don't know what Bob said. He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here. Take it up with Bob. I am not his savior. It is a statistic that is all over liberal TV, I know you have heard it. A statistic? There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. :) I know you liberals are fast and loose with statistics. Bob was quoting Andrew Sullivan. I'm not a liberal except socially. Andrew Sullivan isn't a liberal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Sullivan |
Youse guys must be rich
On 10/31/10 5:08 PM, Jim wrote:
wrote in message ... A young woman was Is there some reason why you are posting/reposting political horse****, "Jim"? Tell us about your boat. |
Youse guys must be rich
"HarryK" wrote in message
m... On 10/31/10 5:08 PM, Jim wrote: wrote in message ... A young woman was Is there some reason why you are posting/reposting political horse****, "Jim"? Tell us about your boat. My boat has a pointy end and a flat end. I hope that gives you a good visual. Liberal and conservative bent isn't horse****. And it isn't necessarily associated with politics. |
Youse guys must be rich
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 18:26:11 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:18:49 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:55:19 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 15:19:29 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:43:04 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 00:55:26 -0400, wrote: Most of the profit is in marking up chinese goods and selling them. We still do not make much here anymore. There are some notable exceptions however including your old employer, IBM. One of the things that stood out on our recent European trip is the large amount of new looking John Deere and Caterpillar equipment that is being used over there. Both of them are obviously doing something right. We've got exports up quite a bit, since the dollar has fallen. That's the reason why it's not so Obama or white (sorry, couldn't help it) that a falling (or rising dollar) is good or bad. It's a mixed bag. Cat is actually building plants in China so this is not as cut and dried as you would think. There is also a deal in the works for GM to build cars in China. Chinese love Buicks evidently. It is the highest selling car there. Please show me where I said it was "cut and dried." I said, "it's a mixed bag." I stand by that statement. I was just referring to the idea that just because you see John Deere or Caterpillar on a machine does not indicate it was actually built in America. Got it. I was referring to the fact that a weak or strong dollar doesn't make any absolute statements of health about the economy. |
Youse guys must be rich
"HarryK" wrote in message
m... On 10/31/10 5:08 PM, Jim wrote: wrote in message ... A young woman was Is there some reason why you are posting/reposting political horse****, "Jim"? Tell us about your boat. Well well well. You deleted it didn't you? |
Youse guys must be rich
|
Youse guys must be rich
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 19:43:43 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:25:00 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:52:32 -0400, wrote: By your standards I am poor but I also think taxes are too low right now. Certainly I don't want to send any more money to Washington but they will spend the money anyway. It is better not to foist it on our kids. Huh? This nonsense about the deficit is out of control. Sure, it's a problem, but certainly not a fatal one. The government is borrowing 40 cents of every dollar it spends with nothing but higher deficits in sight and you don't think it is a problem? For the short-term. No. It's a necessary evil. For the long-term. Yes. The Nobel Prize has very little to do with the average worker. I bet 99% of them can't even name more than one current prize winner in any category. Again, this has nothing to do with your original claim. Sounds anti-intellectual to me. You are the one who seemed to be saying nobel prizes translate to jobs., Where? I never said that nor implied it. It has been the best business model for the last 2 decades. Walmart is the nations most successful retailer, McDonalds is the most successful restaurant and most of our electronics come from China. Ummm... 2 decades is a pretty short time frame. Do you see the trend changing? For next year? No. For another two decades, it's too early to tell. Maybe you want to rephrase. The fact is, the first company to actually produce that mythical dollar a watt solar collector is going to rule the world. That is about where solar actually starts to make sense. http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...r-wind/4306443 I guess we're the ruling country. Let's see if they can deliver that panel for a buck, It's your claim that producing a panel for that cost is a ruling event. If they can actually bring this to market for a buck a watt with a reasonable life expectancy, it will be a game changer. Mechanix Illustrated is famous for writing stories about things that din't actually happen. Well, I'm just point out that your bar has been reached... at least according to what you said. Cheaper isn't always better. Example: McDs. And, it's not even clear that cheaper is actually cheaper in the long run. Humm, lets see. Ruth's Chris Steak house stock was $20 in 2007 it is $5 now McDonalds was $40 in 2007 it is $70 now. Maybe cheaper is better. As long as you don't factor in health... I doubt there is much difference between a steak and a burger, health wise. It's all about fat content. Pick the right steak and the wrong burger (e.g., McDs) and there's a big difference. The steak at Ruth's will have a lot higher fat content than a McD hamburger. That is what USDA prime means, more fat. (AKA "marbling") http://www.weightlossforall.com/mcdo...ories-list.htm http://www.weightlossforall.com/fat-content-beef.htm Yet Bob says those were the last days that the middle class actually got a raise. (pre 1973) I don't know what Bob said. He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here. Take it up with Bob. I am not his savior. It is a statistic that is all over liberal TV, I know you have heard it. A statistic? There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. :) I know you liberals are fast and loose with statistics. Bob was quoting Andrew Sullivan. I'm not a liberal except socially. Andrew Sullivan isn't a liberal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Sullivan Who wrote that Wiki? Sullivan is a gay writer for Atlantic Monthly, formerly from the New Republic. How conservative can he be? Libertarian may be a better description. You claimed he's a liberal. He and others claim he isn't. To answer you question, many people, and it's been vetted by many people. I don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of references. Feel free to discount all that. |
Youse guys must be rich
|
Youse guys must be rich
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 23:54:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote: On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 16:04:16 -0700, wrote: Sure... whatever. laissez faire capitalism doesn't work. Please don't re-post (quote) the political and religious stuff. Everyone is working hard to clean up the group and get it back to boating. Huh? After all his bs, you complain about my post???? I don't see you going after Jim. He's certainly not "working hard to clean up the group." |
Youse guys must be rich
On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:55:11 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote: On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote: I don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of references. Feel free to discount all that. Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an EMAIL exchange than in a boating group. Allow me to suggest that you're not the group monitor. Greg and I were having a conversation. If you don't like it, stay out of it. Oh, and get off my back. I haven't done anything approaching what others have done. |
Youse guys must be rich
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ...
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:03:56 -0700, wrote: I don't see any dispute in the article header and there are lots of references. Feel free to discount all that. Allow me to suggest that his might be a topic better discussed in an EMAIL exchange than in a boating group. What! And miss the courtship of em and greg? -- H |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com