A lot of irony crammed in one little sentence

My favorite sentence of the day comes from a New York Times article reporting that Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street firms may move up their bonus payments from early in 2011 to late in 2010. You see, they don’t want to risk that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy somehow won’t be renewed.

Here’s the sentence in question:

“If Congress does not extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the highest income levels, a typical worker who earns a $1 million bonus would pay $40,000 to $50,000 more in taxes next year than this year, depending on base salary.”

“… a typical worker who earns a $1 million bonus…”

Those additional taxes saved by that “typical worker” would cover unemployment benefits for a year for three Americans left jobless in the wake of the fiscal crisis, a crisis created in large part because of Wall Street greed and carelessness, a crisis eased considerably because the U.S. taxpayer and the Federal Reserve lent Wall Street firms hundreds of billions of dollars at considerable risk.

601 comments Add your comment

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
10:45 am

Yeah, reminds me of a squabble a few years ago between 2 airlines that merged(can’t remember which ones) about pilot pay, because one airlines pilots were making $180 an hour and the other’s were making $140. As someone said, there are millions of Americans who would love to be making “just” the DIFFERENCE between them.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
10:47 am

I’ve been called a “typical” lots of things to my displeasure…but, hey, if there’s a million buck bonus for a “typical worker,” then thass me…

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
10:49 am

Josef – doesn’t your heart just bleed for those poor, downtrodden “typical” workers?

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
10:54 am

Doggone…

“Josef – doesn’t your heart just bleed for those poor, downtrodden “typical” workers?”

Of course it does. I’m a “typical bleeding heart liberal!” Or so I’ve been told…

Paulo977

December 6th, 2010
10:57 am

A “typical worker” EARNS a bonus of a million bucks?

We the people have facilitated this gross inequality and injustice in the society , so we deserve to drown, ALL of us!!

Soothsayer

December 6th, 2010
10:58 am

The current Crisis appears to be in a lull similar to the 1930s. Government actions can mask deeper problems for awhile, but pressure continues to build. The problems did not go away. The bad debts did not disappear. The Wall Street criminals are still free to loot the American middle class. No one has been prosecuted for the greatest financial fraud in history. The National Debt continues to balloon by $4 billion per day. The USD is slowly being replaced as the worldwide reserve currency. Political ideologues have taken control of both parties. Worldwide trade tensions and social contract broken promises are leading to riots and chaos across the Europe. The onset of peak cheap oil is raising prices for fuel and food and setting the stage for coming resource wars. Fundamentalist religious leaders are pushing for a religious war between Christianity and Islam. The extremists are gaining control of the agenda.

The sudden shift in mood has occurred. The hard working middle class of this country are frustrated, angry and feel betrayed by their leaders. The American people are fed up with all politicians. The liberal ideologues and conservative ideologues have staked out immovable positions on social, financial, and foreign trade issues. Compromise is as likely as it was in 1860. The Tea Party will not compromise. Their agenda is to change politics in Washington DC. They will be a thorn in both party’s side. The possibility of the Tea Party becoming a 3rd party is quite possible. This brings us to the 2012 Presidential election. The current configuration of Congress guarantees that absolutely nothing will get done in the next two years. Both parties will ignore the looming disaster of debt, devaluation, and depression as they position themselves for the 2012 election. The Crisis has not yet entered the regeneracy stage. This is the stage where the country unifies behind a leader and deals with the sudden threats that previously have been ignored or deferred, but which are now perceived as dire. The likely threats are the National Debt, a currency collapse, the Christian/Muslim conflict, Peak Oil, the rise of China, or more likely a combination of some of these issues.

OK, OK, I know this is stretch that some of you will actually read this article. But for the ambitious, save it to your favorites and read it later. Or read it now.

jewcowboy

December 6th, 2010
10:59 am

Doggone/GA,

“because one airlines pilots were making $180 an hour and the other’s were making $140.”

Perhaps if the average American put in the time and training, they might be able to. I don’t believe that everyone is entitled to the same pay (as I think you don’t either), but at the same time I do think it is the obligation of those who make more to pay more (within limits).

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:00 am

“We the people have facilitated this gross inequality and injustice in the society”

I wouldn’t necessarily agree with this. The “bonus” *I* earn at the end of the year is part of my compensation package with the company I work for and is based on company performance. So YES, I *earned* it.

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:00 am

Jay, sort of off the topic, but it does have to do with wages…specifically the minimum wage. Did you read Walter Williams column about the minimum wage in American Samoa? Apparently the government there convinced President Barack HUSSEIN Obama to sign a waiver allowing American Samoan companies to NOT PAY the new higher minimum wage. It seems that last time the minimum wage was increased, they lost thousands of jobs. Wondering what you think about that. BTW, many of those jobs came back to Georgia.

Southern Comfort

December 6th, 2010
11:00 am

***Warning: Troll Chow Alert***

First, McCain bashing… Now wealth envy…

jewcowboy

December 6th, 2010
11:01 am

Soothsayer,

“But for the ambitious, save it to your favorites and read it later. Or read it now.”

Looks interesting…but it will have to wait for the train ride home this evening. ;)

T

December 6th, 2010
11:01 am

Just when I thought I was a “typical worker” reality sets in.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:02 am

Private businesses plan ahead. That is the core truth that leftists cannot face.

When leftists threaten to regulate businesses to death, businesses don’t add employees.

When leftists threaten to add higher energy costs through a scheme like cap and tax, whether implemented legally by Congress or illegally through the EPA, businesses do not add employees.

When leftists impose new higher healthcare costs for employers, businesses do not add employees.

Just as surely as night follows day, whenever leftists command the tides to remain at sea, the sea finds another way to send them in. It called “the law of unanticipated consequences.”

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:03 am

“I don’t believe that everyone is entitled to the same pay (as I think you don’t either), but at the same time I do think it is the obligation of those who make more to pay more (within limits).”

I agree. Heck *I* would like to earn $40 an hour too, but I’m paid what my skills and time are worth. If I wanted more, I’d go out to get it. And I could, I’ve been offered jobs that pay that much, but they are supervisory positions and I am not a “people person” and doing such a job would eventually land me in a psychiatrists office!

Granny Godzilla

December 6th, 2010
11:03 am

Was that quote from Jacob Marley?

RAMBLE ON!!!

December 6th, 2010
11:03 am

Goldman Sachs, didn’t they donate more to King Obama than any other Presidential candidate?

Hmmm, just saying.

jewcowboy

December 6th, 2010
11:05 am

Ragnar Danneskjöld,

“When leftists threaten to regulate businesses to death, businesses don’t add employees.

Yes…the 1890’s were a great time to own a business…and quality of life was surely better for everyone.

Paul

December 6th, 2010
11:06 am

Bonuses based on what? Earnings? Performance?

If a ‘typical’ worker generates earnings or has performance that merits a bonus of a million bucks, I’d love to see what the exceptional workers are doing.

Moderate Line

December 6th, 2010
11:07 am

Those additional taxes saved by that “typical worker” would cover unemployment benefits for a year for three Americans left jobless in the wake of the fiscal crisis, a crisis created in large part because of Wall Street greed and carelessness, a crisis eased considerably because the U.S. taxpayer and the Federal Reserve lent Wall Street firms hundreds of billions of dollars at considerable risk.
+++++++
I do not doubt these people do not deserve a bonus but what percentage of taxes which fund unemployment insurance is paid by people who were not involved in the finance industry. It great to use the rich as a boogeyman but 42% of the taxes come from people making below $110,000. Many of the people paying taxes are people whose net worth has decreased do to the recession and they are upside down on their house. What is your self-righteous argument for those people?

When you use the power of the government (force) to make peope do want you want I don believe you should be so self-righteous.

At what point are you not in favor of extending unemployment. It is obvious at this time unemployment is not coming down until 2011 or 2012.

Is it right to use the power of the government (force) to take money from someone and give it to someone else for 3 to 4 years?

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:08 am

BTW, you people need to check out some reading comprehension classes. It DOESN’T SAY THAT THE TYPICAL WORKER EARNS A MILLION DOLLAR BONUS.

In English, this is called a PHRASE. The whole thing should be read together:

a typical worker who earns a $1 million bonus

In other words, it is only talking about the GROUP of people who earn the bonus and NOT ALL of the workers. “typical” refers to thenormal or average person IN THAT GROUP.

Southern Comfort

December 6th, 2010
11:08 am

Damn Ragnar, next you’ll say that when Obama breaks wind, businesses will not add jobs. Typical blame the government mentality if I’ve ever seen it.

Question for you… If businesses plan ahead, how do they plan to keep their current customer base or expand that base if they don’t give people jobs to earn money? Are they just waiting on Obama to leave office and then they’ll start hiring?

Goobers

December 6th, 2010
11:09 am

Goobers, thanks to Drudge and others,Goober Ground Zero is getting lots of bad international press, what with the crime and the East Point section 8 fiasco and now the Cobb Cold Aid (hundreds line up freezing). Sounds like Sonny and the Lesterlature have left things in good shape LOL. Much more to come… as the middle class is decimated.

As my friend Gerald Celente says, ” When people lose everything… they lose it.”

Many are about to ‘lose it’. Exciting times indeed.

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:09 am

To be honest, I have no problem with pushing payment of the compensation forward to before the end of this year. These are, after all, finance experts and it would be pretty STUPID of them NOT to take advantage of any loopholes they can find. That’s what loopholes are for, right?

It’s actually not THAT that is so despicable…it’s that they willfully refuse to see the damage they’ve already done to our economy AND their inability to take responsibility for that damage.

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:09 am

AMEN, RAGNAR

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:10 am

The four causes of the great depression:

(1) A republican congress passed the anti-trade Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. Concerned about jobs leaving America, the Congress did what it could to shut down foreign trade, to compel Americans to buy American. Every country in the world did the same thing, and before long the collapse of international trade crushed the economies of the entire free world.

(2) First a republican congress, and then a democrat congress serially, passed new higher taxes to reduce the budget deficit. The withdrawal of capital from the private economy effectively prohibited formation of new businesses and/or expansion of old businesses.

(3) A democrat congress determined the cause of the economic collapse was the stock market crash (even though the market had mostly recovered six months after the “crash” and unemployment six months after the crash was still only 6%. To prevent freedom from killing the world again, the democrats determined to regulate the economy closely, to prevent people from just starting up businesses willy-nilly.

(4) A democrat congress, to ensure there was no whelming incentive for individuals to start up businesses, determined to create welfare programs, to make it still profitable to do nothing.

Still works the same way.

Bud Wiser

December 6th, 2010
11:10 am

Poor little weak-minded wealth envy fools…..doesn’t it just give you a headache to think that someone else is making more money than you, and:

1. Isn’t sharing it with you?
2. Undoubtedly doesn’t deserve it;
3. Already has ‘enough’ (as in the words of your Messiah to Joe the Plumber);
4. Isn’t paying ‘their fair share’( ie., theirs, and about 95% of the rest of American taxpayers as well)
5. Is probably a Republican;
6. Doubtless is better educated, and, well, just plain smarter than you;
7. Doesn’t deserve it (did I say that already?);
8. Will be buying better gifts for their loved ones and friends at Christmas?
9. And finally, that because you didn’t see them at Hosea’s Feed the Hungry, that they are off to some fine restaurant eating high on the hog, while you are just out standing in the mud, looking at a hog?

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:11 am

“BTW, you people need to check out some reading comprehension classes. It DOESN’T SAY THAT THE TYPICAL WORKER EARNS A MILLION DOLLAR BONUS”

Calm down…we ACTUALLY DO know that.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:11 am

Dear Jewcowboy @ 11:05, good observation, the US economy grew more and faster from 1875 to 1905 than any other 30 year period in American history, dwarfing even the Reaganomics era.

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:12 am

JCB, you also need to learn what a PHRASE is. Ragnar said:

“regulate businesses to death”

NOT just Regulate Businesses. There is a difference.

Moderate Line

December 6th, 2010
11:12 am

Obama’s top contributors:

University of California $1,591,395
Goldman Sachs $994,795
Harvard University $854,747
Microsoft Corp $833,617
Google Inc $803,436
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:14 am

Dear Southern @ 11:08, fair question: “If businesses plan ahead, how do they plan to keep their current customer base or expand that base if they don’t give people jobs to earn money? Are they just waiting on Obama to leave office and then they’ll start hiring?”

Short answer, every business is different. Some can wait for a change in economic policies – those with comparatively inelastic markets. Others however will go wherever the opportunities exist, and if that does not mean the US it may mean other more hospitable economic climates.

Goobers

December 6th, 2010
11:15 am

Hey Goobs!!! Say “Thanks Sonny!!! Thanks W!!! Thanks Obama!!!”

And remember a trend in motion tends to stay in motion!

Jawja is the BIGGEST LOSER (Family Median Income) :
“But Georgia’s whopping 13.1% loss of $6,710 to $44,696, made it the biggest loser.”
SOURCE: http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/16/news/economy/Americas_wealthiest_states/index.htm?section=money_latest

Dusty

December 6th, 2010
11:15 am

Oh Ragnar, you are sooo good! For real! Your accurate approach is vastly appreciated by me ( and many others I am sure).

And JewCowBoy, you did not do too bad yourself. You got a little itchy there about the smarter and more diligent making more money, but you did not backtrack too much. Hey!! You gonna be a brave liberal yet?? Nawwww.

Goobers

December 6th, 2010
11:17 am

Beautiful Words from James Howard Kunstler:

“Behind the incoherent cargo of conflicting complaints that makes up Tea Party doctrine — like “keeping the government’s hands off our medicare!” — stands the more basic dissolution of the Sunbelt’s miracle economy, along with the pain and bewilderment of the southern peckerwood political nexus that rose out of the dust after World War Two to build the suburban nirvana of universal air-conditioning, happy motoring, Jesus tub-thumping, over-eating, and Friday night football that defined Sunbelt culture. They sense now that history is about to thrust them back into the okra patch, with the hookworms and the chiggers, as the economy whirls down the drain, and the car dealerships close up, and the idle production homebuilders succumb to methedrine addiction, and the price of Reba McEntire tickets exceeds their dwindling resources, and they are none too happy about any of that.
Of course this Sunbelt political culture has tentacles and outposts all over the USA, wherever a few generations of laboring folk enjoyed debt-fueled parabolic rises in living standards during the cheap oil decades, and now find themselves in foreclosure hell, indentured to the very WalMarts that they welcomed with open arms (and allowed to destroy their local businesses) — and, of course, it’s yet another paradox that these are the same folk who will still defend the big box masters to their deaths. The America they stand for is a weird contradictory mish-mash of Confederate nostalgia, hyper-individualism that really owes allegiance to nothing, racial enmity, religious paranoia, and potemkin patriotism — especially involving anything in the constitution that allows them to wriggle out of obligations to the public interest at the same time that they get to push other groups of people around.”

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:17 am

YOU MAY KNOW if doggone, but most of the people commenting apparently don’t.

jm

December 6th, 2010
11:17 am

Jay

“a crisis created in large part because of Wall Street greed and carelessness”

I would revise this to say “a crisis created in significant part because of Wall Street greed and carelessness”. You’ve left out a lot of other factors though.

Frankly, but for the housing bubble, unemployment would’ve probably just gone up to 10% gradually over the last 10 years…. so you thank finance and housing for keeping people employed for a decade that they would’ve otherwise been out of a job.

Wall St needs reregulation. But the core of the problem is a bad US tax system and uncompetitive businesses. And federal deficits that allow the chinese to manipulate our FX rate.

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:18 am

“YOU MAY KNOW if doggone, but most of the people commenting apparently don’t.”

Actually, they do…it is YOU who is misreading what they are saying. I’m not having any trouble with it at all.

BlahBlahBlah

December 6th, 2010
11:19 am

Slam them all you want, but this is an example of prudent tax planning. It’s stuff like this that has traditionally kept taxes around 18-19% of GDP no matter what the highest tax rates are.

The only true answer is to get rid of nearly every deduction, lower rates across the board, and treat all income the same (no more capital rates).

Fred

December 6th, 2010
11:20 am

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:10 am
+++++++++++++++

Nice job on the CAUSES of the great depression. Unfortunately cowboy THAT horse has already left the barn. How we got OUT of the depression is the topic of interest. Care to regale us with tales of that? What did that “communist” FDR do that got us out of the Depression?

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:21 am

Dear Dusty @ 11:15, thanks.

TaxPayer

December 6th, 2010
11:21 am

Republicans and their true constituency. Don’t they just put you in the holiday spirit. Ho Ho Ho!

Southern Comfort

December 6th, 2010
11:21 am

Ragnar

Decent answer, but it still doesn’t explain how the companies will keep their current consumer base. If jobs continue to be harder to come by, who will consume the stuff that companies manufacture in foreign lands and import here to the US? There has to be job creation here for people to earn money. Otherwise, we’re setting ourselves up to be dependent on welfare to make ends meet.

Matti

December 6th, 2010
11:22 am

I have to agree with chuck’s analysis of the phrase. However, if there were only a half a dozen employees who typically receive a $1Mil bonus, then (I’m thinking) they would have moved the bonuses up quietly (Shhhh!) instead of sending a memo explaining it.

Mr. Bookman, do we have a ballpark number on how many Wall Street crimi.. I mean, fine, hard-working financial GENIUSES merit this type of “compensation?”

(Not that it makes any difference to me. I work for a living, bought a house I could afford, and am headed toward the under-the-bridge-eating-cat-food retirement plan, thanks to the geniuses on Wall Street and my Congressman who only cares about big donors.)

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:22 am

I am referring to Josef, Paulo, and T. If you read their statements, they CLEARLY believe that it is referring to typical as applying to the entire group of employees at Goldman. Of course, even though you are rarely right, I have never seen you admit to being WRONG, which of course , YOU ARE.

TaxPayer

December 6th, 2010
11:23 am

Others however will go wherever the opportunities exist, and if that does not mean the US it may mean other more hospitable economic climates.

I hear Venezuela is nice this time of year.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:23 am

Dear Fred @ 11:20, another good question: “How we got OUT of the depression is the topic of interest. Care to regale us with tales of that? What did that “communist” FDR do that got us out of the Depression?”

The short answer is a positive one, “absolutely nothing.” After screwing with macro-economic levers for 10 years, with no improvement and with even Henry Morgantheau noticing the poor response, FDR got out of the economy business and let it recover on its own. Works every time. The economic principle is called, “if you don’t quit picking at it, it will never heal.”

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:24 am

Chuck

“a typical worker who earns a $1 million bonus” would pay

In English this is a noun clause used as the subject of the conditional verb of the sentence. The use of the indefinite article “a” instead of the definite article “the” carries the implication that we are taking an example from a wider class, in this case “worker,” now the nominal subject of the sentence. The modification of that noun by the adjective “typical” and the adjectival declarative “who earns” clearly states that the writer considers it “typical” that said “worker” earns a million dollar bonus.

Miss Lura Barnette late of the Mississippi Public Schools just rolled over in her grave…

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:24 am

“If you read their statements, they CLEARLY believe that it is referring to typical as applying to the entire group of employees at Goldman”

Actually, no…they CLEARLY do NOT believe that, but they are clever enough to word it in such a way as to deceive those – like you – who would want to put that spin on it. And it worked…you did.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:25 am

Dear Southern @ 11:21, the real problem is that government policy today may be so intrusive that it is cheaper for companies to abandon their domestic markets than do anything to keep them. That is the real horror of Washington economic policy.

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:25 am

Nice turn of a phrase as always Matti.

carlosgvv

December 6th, 2010
11:26 am

“A typical worker who earns a 1 million bonus”

We have the best congress money can buy and the above mentioned “typical worker” represents the buyers. Money talks. Always has and always will.

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:26 am

Ragnar at 11:23, Great answer.

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:27 am

“that it is cheaper for companies to abandon their domestic markets than do anything to keep them.”

Yes, some of them might see it that way…but if they do, all they will really have done is open a hole to be filled by a more savvy entrepeneur.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:28 am

“The worker who might typically earn a million dollar bonus…”

Paulo977

December 6th, 2010
11:28 am

Ragnar
Danneskjold

“When leftists impose new higher healthcare costs for employers, businessesdo not add employees “!!!

They wont be able to as so many would have died out anyway!

StJ

December 6th, 2010
11:29 am

“What did that “communist” FDR do that got us out of the Depression?”

Well…..nothing. The Japanese accomplished that goal for him in about 3 hours.

jm

December 6th, 2010
11:29 am

Timing Irony. Everyone that cares about this issue should read this column by Bill Gross….

http://www.pimco.com/Pages/AllentownDecember2010.aspx

came out today also.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:30 am

Dear Chuck @ 11:26, thanks.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:31 am

Dear Paulo @ 11:28, ha. I yield to good humor.

Lezzie

December 6th, 2010
11:31 am

It’s comical how the liberally favored “evil” Wall Street firms are exempt from paying back their loans and allowed to give out bonuses. I seem to remember the kook media having a conniption fit over AIG wishing to do the same thing.

jconservative

December 6th, 2010
11:31 am

“The four causes of the great depression:…”

Actually it was just one, a credit crunch stiffled both domestic and international trade. Without credit the entire world comes to a complete halt.

Matti

December 6th, 2010
11:31 am

The problem with the statement isn’t how many people to whom it refers. The flaw in the logic is with the obviously loose definition of the word WORK. People who actually work are not rewarded thusly. People who figure out how to cheat and steal without getting caught usually are.

@@

December 6th, 2010
11:31 am

Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street firms may move up their bonus payments from early in 2011 to late in 2010.

That’s what happens when government rewards failure. Freedom to fail is essential to a healthy economy.

The current Crisis appears to be in a lull similar to the 1930s. Government actions can mask deeper problems for awhile, but pressures continues to build.

I was willing to let the gasket blow so the pain could be dealt with early on. Band-aids only cover the wound. Let the air in…only then will it begin to heal.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:32 am

carlos

That was just a grammatical clarification of the Engrish of the article cited… :-)

Southern Comfort

December 6th, 2010
11:32 am

Ragnar

Is it government policy or corporate greed? Personally, I think we’ve gone beyond the tipping point for jobs and recovery. IF we recover from this latest recession, it’s going to be a long, long time before we see unemployment levels down to 5% again. It doesn’t matter what or how well the companies plan, there is no real job market in the US anymore. The turning point was back in the 70’s and 80’s when we turned from a manufacturing-based economy into a paperless, financial transaction-based economy.

We are now consumers of the world where we were once the manufacturers to the world. We can not compete with foreign workers on labor costs. If we tried to lower labor costs here to compete on the global market, you’re looking at a 3rd world US for sure. We should have never allowed companies to abdicate our throne as manufacturing kings. We’re now reaping what we’ve sown. The sad part is that, generations from now, our descendents will still be paying the price for our dumbass decisions now.

Fred

December 6th, 2010
11:33 am

Are you a Mississippi boy Jonix? Me too lol. Gulf Coast. Sister even went to The W.

Rag: Not exactly true. But I guess one could look at it like that in a very oblique way. Of course a huge war in Europe causing an influx of gold into this Country didn’t exactly hurt anything…………

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:33 am

my 11:32

Oops..my mistake…ignore the comment Carlos….

jm

December 6th, 2010
11:34 am

2.5 Billion Chinese and Indians willing to work for 1/10th US pay and produce a better product. I think this is a smaaaaaaaaall problem for the US worker unless the move up the education ladder. Better go get a college degree in engineering…

Dusty

December 6th, 2010
11:34 am

Well, in the spirit of Christmas I am going to write the brand new Editor-in-chief at AJC and tell him to give Bookman a REAL bonus this year. ONE can of three flavored popcorn was NOT enough last year.

Please, sir, go wild and let him have TWO cans of popcorn so we can have a non-rant blog subject.. .. Is that asking too much???

chuck

December 6th, 2010
11:34 am

Sorry Josef. Took it to the English teacher next door. She says that it is referring only to the group of people who actually earn the bonus.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:36 am

FRED

Yep…a Yoknapatawpha boy myself…Dad was a Louisiana Swamp Rat and Mama a Tennessee Hillbilly…Unmentionable is from the Coast, Pass Christian…love the place…I’ve lived lots of other places, but it’s Frenchman’s Bend I go back to…

Soothsayer

December 6th, 2010
11:36 am

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:37 am

“That was just a grammatical clarification of the Engrish of the article cited”

Josef…it may be time to educate some of our new members on the genesis of “Engrish” – they clearly aren’t getting the joke.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:37 am

Dear Southern @ 11:32, I respectfully reject the idea that greed first occurred in 2007.

Southern Comfort

December 6th, 2010
11:37 am

jm

Interesting article. I see it as an economic death spiral. Shrinking demand leads to shrinking production and layoffs. That further decreases demand which further decreases production and causes more layoffs. Until someone breaks that spiral somewhere, it’s a neverending collapse. Someone has to interject capital somewhere so that the decrease in demand becomes an increase. You can’t produce more to increase that demand. That demand comes from consumer confidence and consumers having $$ to spend.

Fred

December 6th, 2010
11:37 am

The english teacher next door where? 8 minutes to get up, go next door, bring it up a computer and then get back to post?

Sorry Chuck, I don’t believe you.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:38 am

Carlos

Ask her then why the use of the indefinite instead of the definite article…also see my own correction thereof…

Paulo977

December 6th, 2010
11:39 am

Josef
Please instruct Chuck about nuance!!!

Mary Elizabeth

December 6th, 2010
11:39 am

Ragnar @ 11:10

Just a point of grammar: The word “democrat” is a noun.
The word “democratic” is an adjective.

When you combine that word with the noun “congress,” you need an adjective to describe the type of “congress” to which you are referring.
Therefore, the grammatically correct phrase is “democratic congress.”

Moreover, since you are referring to a particular political party, the Democratic Party, not the generalized adjective “democratic,” you should capitalize the word “Democratic” to read thus in the phrase, “Democratic congress,” just as the word “republican” should be capitalized for
same reason, i.e. “Republican congress.

A noun cannot modify another noun, as in “democrat congress.”

So many people are misusing this word, “democrat,” in this manner that I wanted to clarify its proper usage, at the risk of seeming picayune.

My remarks not meant to be a personal criticism of your grammar. They are simply meant to clarify for readers what is the grammatically correct usage. If no one ever takes the time to explain the error, poor usage continues. I have simply taken the time to explain.

Lil' Barry Bailout

December 6th, 2010
11:39 am

“Those additional taxes saved by that “typical worker” would cover unemployment benefits for a year for three Americans”
———————————-

Right, except that the money belongs to the person who earned it, not the greedy folks who voted Democrat in hopes that would mean more freebies for themselves.

Southern Comfort

December 6th, 2010
11:40 am

Dear Southern @ 11:32, I respectfully reject the idea that greed first occurred in 2007.

I didn’t say it was a recent event. Hence, my referral to the 70’s and 80’s. This problem has been festering for a long time. It’s just now coming to the surface for all to see. People should have seen that a long time ago when there were references made to “jobless recovery”. How can a country prosper long term on a jobless recovery? It’s all a sham, and we, the American people, have been hoodwinked.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:40 am

Dear Dusty @ 11:34, I admire your generous spirit. More generous than mine.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:41 am

Doggone

Engrish is t he lingua franca of the blog! `When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ …

Lil' Barry Bailout

December 6th, 2010
11:42 am

Mary Elizabeth: “My remarks not meant”
———————

You should have an apostrophe before the “s” in “remarks”. I’m only pointing that out since you’re so obsessed with correct language, capitalization, et cetera.

Fred

December 6th, 2010
11:42 am

No Sh…….. oot? My sister was Miss Pass Christian. Ask unmentionable if he ever knew any Rowes. They lived in Pass Christian, (although I think ya’ll may be about 10 years behind me so even the youngest would have been gone by then). Although we lived in Long Beach, we were off Beatline Road so my sister was eligible for the Pass Christian contest………

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:43 am

“Engrish is t he lingua franca of the blog!”

I know that, but I’d be willing to bet I might be the only who remembers how it came to BE that!

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:43 am

Dear Southern @ 11:40, I would proffer that capitalism is successful because it is a self-correcting mechanism that uses greed as its great engine. By unleashing the powerful forces that we call the free market, with no constraints to entry and exit, all society gains. It is only when politicians game the system, to select winners and losers (through tax and regulatory policies) that the machine fails.

Matti

December 6th, 2010
11:43 am

Mary Elizabeth,

If I may… I enjoyed your lesson to Mr. Ragnar! However, his misuse of grammer is entirely intentional. You see, in his mind, proper grammar must be EARNED and DESERVED. Those whom he deems undeserving get substandard English, and should be grateful for the Christian generosity with which he offers even that.

@@

December 6th, 2010
11:43 am

“democratic” congress most aptly describes who we’re dealing with today.

Southern Comfort

December 6th, 2010
11:46 am

Ragner

And I would counter-proffer that capitalism is not always self correcting, and relying on one of the seven deadly sins to propel our economy is not the most Christian-like way to live. Even the Great Greenspan has recanted on the self-correcting market theories. Unchecked greed is a detriment to us all, and as recent events have shown, not all society gains by unbridled greed.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:47 am

Mary Elizabeth…

And if we do combine two or more nouns to create a compound noun, the nouns now used adjectivally to modify the meaning of the final noun are joined together in as a single lexical entry in a process that is Germanic in origin and may only use Germanic elements. In situations where the idea is to be expressed using non Germanic elements, the two or more modifying nouns should be separated by hyphens… :-)

Thanks for the sweet thoughts of earlier…

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:48 am

Dear Mary Elizabeth, with all due respect there is nothing “democratic” about a party that imposes constraints on individual freedom. You err.

Mary Elizabeth

December 6th, 2010
11:48 am

DUSTY-

I just noticed that you had checked in this a.m. I want to thank you for your kind remarks Sunday evening about my posts on the blog. I did notice your remarks and I want to express my appreciation to you for them. I have been wanting to say “hello” to you for awhile, and this gives me a chance. :-) Have a great afternoon, Dusty.

Lil' Barry Bailout

December 6th, 2010
11:50 am

Capitalism isn’t self-correcting? Of course it isn’t, when politicians refuse to allow the corrections to happen!

Duh.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:50 am

Barry

Nope. Remarks as used by ME is the nominative plural subject of the sentence, not the singular possessive….

Since we are going for the picayune..

Doggone/GA

December 6th, 2010
11:51 am

“with all due respect there is nothing “democratic” about a party that imposes constraints on individual freedom”

And you err. There are NO parties of any persuasion you care to name who do NOT impose constraints on individual freedoms. THEY ALL do that.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

December 6th, 2010
11:51 am

Dear Southern @ 11:46, we would agree that greed is incompatible with individual Christian ethics. Similarly leftists affirm that deficit spending is good for the economy, even though it has horrific results for the individual.

Matti

December 6th, 2010
11:51 am

…relying on one of the seven deadly sins to propel our economy is not the most Christian-like way to live…

IT IS NOW!!! Why do you think the GOP has been regularly and soundly kicking the Dems’s behinds for the last few decades? “Your greed is healthy. Your prejudice is valid. Your hatred is justified. You are RIGHT to judge others. The best way to help your neighbor is to do nothing.” Those who convince members of our “Christian nation” that sins are actually virutues win their loyalty for life!

TaxPayer

December 6th, 2010
11:52 am

All I knows is that the common belief that Republican’s spewing of hot air causes global warming has now been thoroughly debunked.

josef nix

December 6th, 2010
11:52 am

FRED
The name didn’t ring a bell…they left there after Camille…

Doggone
@ 11:43

Fill us in…