Brexit

[84HuskerLaw]

84, your post is rife with factually wrong information, but let's hone in on one that may be provable or disprovable: over all cost of living has significantly exceeded wage growth.

 

What's your evidence?

 

You seem to be mixing non-inflation numbers with inflation adjusted numbers. Generally, consumer products are incredibly cheaper and more widely available today than in the history of the world.

I am sorry CM but your problem in many posts is you don't have any facts correct. You think quite logically most of the time but don't get the critical facts correct. Stop listening to any liberal 'news' sources as they make up facts to support their positions out of thin air and ignore the truth most of the time. You asked for a fact. I pointed out a huge one on 'inflation' vs. wages in my long post. Wages have been half the increase in the price of cars. I also didn't mention that in many ways the cars that we pay such highly inflated prices for today are not as much 'car' as the ones back in the day. They are now filled with 'electronics' and computers and so on but frankly the gas mileage has certainly not increased significantly considering the decline in size and strength and relative safety. We pay more, after inflation adjustments, today for less car in many ways. They have lots of fancy features and 'comforts' and luxury accessories (arguably unnecessary and wasteful in environmental terms in my view) but gas mileage has not even doubled with all the excess crap. A new car today is hardly affordable to most unskilled workers and many are now driving cars that are 10 or 15 years old. Those were literally a few hundred dollars in the 1960s and 1970s and even into the 1980s. Today, thousands. People used to pay for a car with cash or financing upto 36 or 48 months (new) and 18 or 24 for used.

Housing is incredibly expensive and but for the government's incredibly stupid manipulation of interest rates to near zero with long term mortgages at 4% or so, people could not afford to buy a home. Interest rates cannot economically remain at this artificially low levels indefinitely. Once they return to a more historically normal level, we will see a housing collapse (bubble burst) of staggering proportions, worse than 2008 certainly. None of the 'recovery' of housing prices since then has been real and is nearly all the direct consequence of government driving down mortgage rates. An 7.5% to 9% mortgage rate area will lower the purchase price of the typical home by about 40% or more.

[HuskerShark]

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

 

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

[Moiraine]

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

 

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

Honestly... we let companies have their stuff made by 6 year olds in other countries. Is having illegal immigrant adults as employees really worse than that? IMO it's a lot less bad, but neither happening would be ideal.

 

Here's a good article on non-citizen workers:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/

[ZRod]

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

It is. Answer it. A pretty logical question at that.

[cm husker]

 

84, your post is rife with factually wrong information, but let's hone in on one that may be provable or disprovable: over all cost of living has significantly exceeded wage growth.

 

What's your evidence?

 

You seem to be mixing non-inflation numbers with inflation adjusted numbers. Generally, consumer products are incredibly cheaper and more widely available today than in the history of the world.

I am sorry CM but your problem in many posts is you don't have any facts correct. You think quite logically most of the time but don't get the critical facts correct. Stop listening to any liberal 'news' sources as they make up facts to support their positions out of thin air and ignore the truth most of the time. You asked for a fact. I pointed out a huge one on 'inflation' vs. wages in my long post. Wages have been half the increase in the price of cars. I also didn't mention that in many ways the cars that we pay such highly inflated prices for today are not as much 'car' as the ones back in the day. They are now filled with 'electronics' and computers and so on but frankly the gas mileage has certainly not increased significantly considering the decline in size and strength and relative safety. We pay more, after inflation adjustments, today for less car in many ways. They have lots of fancy features and 'comforts' and luxury accessories (arguably unnecessary and wasteful in environmental terms in my view) but gas mileage has not even doubled with all the excess crap. A new car today is hardly affordable to most unskilled workers and many are now driving cars that are 10 or 15 years old. Those were literally a few hundred dollars in the 1960s and 1970s and even into the 1980s. Today, thousands. People used to pay for a car with cash or financing upto 36 or 48 months (new) and 18 or 24 for used.

Housing is incredibly expensive and but for the government's incredibly stupid manipulation of interest rates to near zero with long term mortgages at 4% or so, people could not afford to buy a home. Interest rates cannot economically remain at this artificially low levels indefinitely. Once they return to a more historically normal level, we will see a housing collapse (bubble burst) of staggering proportions, worse than 2008 certainly. None of the 'recovery' of housing prices since then has been real and is nearly all the direct consequence of government driving down mortgage rates. An 7.5% to 9% mortgage rate area will lower the purchase price of the typical home by about 40% or more.

 

 

 

Cars are so much safer today than before it's not even funny. They are also more fuel efficient, more comfortable, more reliable, etc.

I nearly had to stop reading at the bolded, because it's simply wrong and I don't see you and I agree on any "facts" related to this discussion.

 

I will just add that I do think interest rate manipulation is a problem, but I don't foresee the collapse you're describing, unless an insane number of people are still stuck in ARMs.

[ZRod]

 

84, your post is rife with factually wrong information, but let's hone in on one that may be provable or disprovable: over all cost of living has significantly exceeded wage growth.

What's your evidence?

You seem to be mixing non-inflation numbers with inflation adjusted numbers. Generally, consumer products are incredibly cheaper and more widely available today than in the history of the world.

 

I am sorry CM but your problem in many posts is you don't have any facts correct. You think quite logically most of the time but don't get the critical facts correct. Stop listening to any liberal 'news' sources as they make up facts to support their positions out of thin air and ignore the truth most of the time. You asked for a fact. I pointed out a huge one on 'inflation' vs. wages in my long post. Wages have been half the increase in the price of cars. I also didn't mention that in many ways the cars that we pay such highly inflated prices for today are not as much 'car' as the ones back in the day. They are now filled with 'electronics' and computers and so on but frankly the gas mileage has certainly not increased significantly considering the decline in size and strength and relative safety. We pay more, after inflation adjustments, today for less car in many ways. They have lots of fancy features and 'comforts' and luxury accessories (arguably unnecessary and wasteful in environmental terms in my view) but gas mileage has not even doubled with all the excess crap. A new car today is hardly affordable to most unskilled workers and many are now driving cars that are 10 or 15 years old. Those were literally a few hundred dollars in the 1960s and 1970s and even into the 1980s. Today, thousands. People used to pay for a car with cash or financing upto 36 or 48 months (new) and 18 or 24 for used.

Housing is incredibly expensive and but for the government's incredibly stupid manipulation of interest rates to near zero with long term mortgages at 4% or so, people could not afford to buy a home. Interest rates cannot economically remain at this artificially low levels indefinitely. Once they return to a more historically normal level, we will see a housing collapse (bubble burst) of staggering proportions, worse than 2008 certainly. None of the 'recovery' of housing prices since then has been real and is nearly all the direct consequence of government driving down mortgage rates. An 7.5% to 9% mortgage rate area will lower the purchase price of the typical home by about 40% or more.

You're entire post is quite literally contradicting itself!!! This is insane!!!!!!!!

 

You say we are getting less car, and yet you rattle off all the features and improvements you get that didn't even exist 10 years ago. Automobiles are the safest they have ever been. Fact. They also have more standard features than ever before. Fact.

 

Gas mileage has improved quite a bit. The reason you don't see huge improvements in fuel mileage are:

 

1. The consumer doesn't care enough to demand the change. They don't show it with their wallet unless gas is close to $4 a gallon.

2. Cars are a little heavier these days for many reasons. They are not smaller, they are not less safe, and they are stronger where it counts.

3. The internal combustion engine has been around over 100 years and we've pretty much figured out how to make it as efficient as it can be in all regards (manufacturing, cost, fuel efficiency, etc.)

 

4. You can't cheat physics.

[HuskerShark]

 

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

It is. Answer it. A pretty logical question at that.

Ok. Here's my answer.

 

Why would we allow pre-citizenship immigrants to be employed in the US, unless they have a green card?

[HuskerShark]

 

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

 

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

Honestly... we let companies have their stuff made by 6 year olds in other countries. Is having illegal immigrant adults as employees really worse than that? IMO it's a lot less bad, but neither happening would be ideal.

 

Here's a good article on non-citizen workers:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/

Correct, which is why we are able to impose tariffs so our industries don't get dominated.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

 

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

Honestly... we let companies have their stuff made by 6 year olds in other countries. Is having illegal immigrant adults as employees really worse than that? IMO it's a lot less bad, but neither happening would be ideal.

 

Here's a good article on non-citizen workers:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/

Correct, which is why we are able to impose tariffs so our industries don't get dominated.

Our tariff rate was 1.3% in 2010. The lowest it had ever been in the U.S. since they started keeping track (1792). There is no serious attempt to keep companies from outsourcing to labor that would be illegal if it was located here.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

 

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

Honestly... we let companies have their stuff made by 6 year olds in other countries. Is having illegal immigrant adults as employees really worse than that? IMO it's a lot less bad, but neither happening would be ideal.

 

Here's a good article on non-citizen workers:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/

Correct, which is why we are able to impose tariffs so our industries don't get dominated.

Our tariff rate was 1.3% in 2010. The lowest it had ever been in the U.S. since they started keeping track (1792). There is no serious attempt to keep companies from outsourcing to labor that would be illegal if it was located here.

Moraine, what products are being produced outside the US by kids younger than 14? How about you get than 10, let alone 6?

 

That's a pretty wild accusation that's not actually substantiated by fact, at least in terms of meaningful amounts of US consumer goods.

 

Also, what would be a better thing for the 8 year old in India? Starvation?

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

It is. Answer it. A pretty logical question at that.

Ok. Here's my answer.

 

Why would we allow pre-citizenship immigrants to be employed in the US, unless they have a green card?

So, you acknowledge that we shouldn't be limited to employing citizens.

 

Personally, I don't think we should be limited to Florida oranges and Pennsylvania steel if I can get better (quality or cost) oranges from Mexico or steel from Europe. In the same vein, I should be able to get my labor from anywhere, too.

[cm husker]

Wow. We have so many examples from over the centuries of companies not self-regulating because they don't care and don't have to.

 

It was only in my lifetime that companies were told they could not poison the rivers used by people and wildlife downstream, or render the air we all share dangerous to breathe. They argued that it would be too costly to fix and make it hard for them to compete, and their fellow industrialists had zero motivation to self-regulate. Citizen consumers hardly had the resources to fight them. If you don't remember how grim and unhealthy major American cities were in the 1960s and '70s, it's been a stunning reversal, led by activists, driven by government regulation and now accepted as the status quo by people who conveniently forget how we got here.

 

Inviting in outside and competitive companies has hardly stopped collusion, and again, the industry generally comes running to the government to arbitrate. The pharmaceutical companies, for one, hate being regulated but rely heavily on the government to step in when both domestic and international competitors threaten their patents. Pretty much every industry with intellectual property issues isn't keen on self-regulation because --- surprise! -- you can't trust your competitors. And consumers are too busy and uninformed to initiate action, though they are an incredibly powerful force when the stakes are explained to them.

 

I'm almost certain you're cherry-picking on the OSHA issue and missing the larger point, but I'll have to look into that.

 

Honestly not sure what planet you guys have been living on.

As I said, I'm all for the protection of people in the event a company or person harms them. That's the value of litigation in this country. It actually goes after harm causers in a more direct (and less corruptable) way than general regulations.

 

I'm happy to discuss patent law, as it is a prime example of true government sponsored monopolies. In fact, your paragraph is arguing exactly what I'm saying: companies use the governments and regulations to advance their own positions, so in my opinion, the worst course (of no perfect course) is to grant them more power by expanding the tools they are already using to advance their agendas.

 

I think you misunderstand what I mean by self regulation though. Clearly governments need to arbitrate over property disputes, IP or otherwise. I'm not an anarchist. The provision of predictable, fair courts is a key component of government's role in commerce.

 

Let me know what you find on OSHA. There's tons of evidence that work place safety was improving exponentially before OSHA and OSHA didn't accelerate it (even though it heaped on costs and therefore erected barriers of entry to new competitors).

[ZRod]

 

 

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

It is. Answer it. A pretty logical question at that.

Ok. Here's my answer.

Why would we allow pre-citizenship immigrants to be employed in the US, unless they have a green card?

Nobody said otherwise. You just moved the goal post...

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

 

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

Honestly... we let companies have their stuff made by 6 year olds in other countries. Is having illegal immigrant adults as employees really worse than that? IMO it's a lot less bad, but neither happening would be ideal.

 

Here's a good article on non-citizen workers:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/

Correct, which is why we are able to impose tariffs so our industries don't get dominated.

Our tariff rate was 1.3% in 2010. The lowest it had ever been in the U.S. since they started keeping track (1792). There is no serious attempt to keep companies from outsourcing to labor that would be illegal if it was located here.

Moraine, what products are being produced outside the US by kids younger than 14? How about you get than 10, let alone 6?

 

That's a pretty wild accusation that's not actually substantiated by fact, at least in terms of meaningful amounts of US consumer goods.

 

Also, what would be a better thing for the 8 year old in India? Starvation?

I don't think it happens widely in the past but it has in the past 35 years and we did nothing to stop it from happening or U.S. companies from profiting from it.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

 

When i think regulation, i think very minimal. For example, make sure all workers are citizens.

I'm sure various industries have a need for some regulation so they don't end up corrupted but that's what I'm thinking about.

Why do workers need to be citizens.

Is this a serious question? Or are you being sarcastic?

It is. Answer it. A pretty logical question at that.

Ok. Here's my answer.

 

Why would we allow pre-citizenship immigrants to be employed in the US, unless they have a green card?

So, you acknowledge that we shouldn't be limited to employing citizens.

 

Personally, I don't think we should be limited to Florida oranges and Pennsylvania steel if I can get better (quality or cost) oranges from Mexico or steel from Europe. In the same vein, I should be able to get my labor from anywhere, too.

So you're in support of reduced safety and minimum ages for workers. Because that's what you're saying when you think we should be able to get labor from anywhere.

 

Also, for the most part, products aren't made in other countries because they're higher quality than ours.