About the legend of Henry Ford and the middle class

Andy Kessler has a great op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal explaining why President Obama’s policies regarding government handouts and tax rates on wealthy investors are wrong-headed. It’s worth reading in its entirety. But along the way, he dispenses with a popular myth about Henry Ford, wages and the middle class:

In his acceptance speech at the Democratic convention in Charlotte, N.C., this month, President Obama said, “We believe that when a CEO pays his auto workers enough to buy the cars that they build, the whole company does better.” …

This myth — that you can just give money to the middle class and good things happen — is widely shared and is at the basis of a lot of government policy. And it is why the recovery is stuck between lack and luster.

Let’s go back. Henry Ford is popularly credited with inventing the middle class by doubling his workers’ salaries to $5 per day in 1914. A multiplier for the economy, right? Wrong.

The year before, Ford revolutionized manufacturing with the moving assembly line, slashing automobile build times to just 90 minutes from 14 hours. That’s productivity. It allowed Ford to reduce the price over time of his Model T to $290 from $950. Demand took off because it was far cheaper than the cars made by his 88 competitors.

By 1927, 15 million Model Ts were sold to people (most of whom did not work for Ford) and businesses that retired their horses and used these new automobiles productively to lower their own costs, fueling a boom. Raising wages was a byproduct, not a cause. From Ford Motor’s corporate website about the wage increase: “While Henry’s primary objective was to reduce worker attrition — labor turnover from monotonous assembly line work was high — newspapers from all over the world reported the story as an extraordinary gesture of goodwill.”

As they say, read the whole thing. (Here is the page from Ford’s website to which he refers.)

Btw, one of Kessler’s other points is about the folly that food stamps represent a kind of economic stimulus. You’ll have to read his piece to see his treatment of that notion, but it brought to my mind a statement by state Sen. Charlie Bethel, R-Dalton, during the debate about state unemployment benefits in this year’s legislative session. Taking on the argument that unemployment checks boost economic growth, Bethel noted his town’s extraordinarily high number of people on unemployment and said, “If it were true that unemployment checks stimulated local economies, we’d be doing great in Northwest Georgia. We’ve cashed a lot.”

– By Kyle Wingfield

Find me on Facebook or follow me on Twitter

339 comments Add your comment

Interested Observer

September 19th, 2012
12:35 pm

Of course, food stamps stimulate the economy.

It’s not complicated. If you buy a hamburger off the value menu at McDonald’s, you just grew the economy, specifically Gross Domestic Product, by $1.00. The economy doesn’t care if that dollar came from a private employee or a government employee. It doesn’t care if that dollar came out of an unemployment check or a paycheck. I guarantee you, McDonald’s doesn’t care either.

By the same token, food stamp money is money that is spent. And when it is spent, by definition, the economy is stimulated. There’s no denying that simple fact.

Paps Mear

September 19th, 2012
12:42 pm

Amazing. Will someone please send “Interested Observer” a copy of one of Sowell’s books? No wonder we’re in this mess.

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

September 19th, 2012
12:42 pm

From the “It’s ok when we do it but not when you do it.”

Buzzfeed dug up this clip from a 1962 Romney for Governor informercial, in which Mitt Romney’s mother, Lenore, talks about his father being on “welfare relief” when he was younger.

“We’ve only owned our home for the last four years,” Lenore Romney says. “He was a refugee from Mexico. He was on relief – welfare relief – for the first years of his life. but this great country gave him opportunities.”

Mitt’s family used the welfare to get ahead so hey, I guess Mitt is cool with that. But those 47% of AMericans who use it? everyone of them is a deadbeat loser moocher?

We understand, Mitt, we understand.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/before-ann-and-mitt-lenore-and-george

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

September 19th, 2012
12:49 pm

Observer is correct. A family that has $1 to spend is contributing more to the economy that a family that has $0 to spend. Sure it pales in comparison to what the working class and middle class to for the economy when they spend money but still, it is going to be spent (last time I checked a person with a food stamp isn’t putting those stamps in a a savngs account or int o the stock market – exactly what would happen with a tax break for the wealthy.)

What the family with $0 to spend will contribute to is crime.

Not Blind

September 19th, 2012
12:52 pm

Interested Observer. For the goobermint to put that $1.00 foodstamp or unemployment check into the hands of the consumer the TAXPAYER is hit for far more than $1.00.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:00 pm

Interested: Then why don’t we give everyone $50,000 worth of food stamps to use every year? We’d have the greatest economy in history!

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
1:05 pm

Of course, food stamps stimulate the economy.
———-

Wrong. The food stamp money first has to be taken away from someone else who would have spent it, too, so there’s no net increase in spending.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
1:07 pm

$5 a day?

Too bad the Titans of Industry can’t get away with that now.

But forty years of flat-lined wages for the vast percentage of American workers is illustrative of the sentiment, is it not?

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
1:09 pm

Wages haven’t “flat lined” (well, except for the last three years, in which they’ve gone DOWN.)

JF McNamara

September 19th, 2012
1:11 pm

What do food stamps have to do with the article? No one wants to increase food stamps and an economic boost. Even if it did help, its just bad policy and Democrats, Republicans, and the majority of people on food stamps agree. Is it just an Easter egg to incite your base or something?

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
1:16 pm

No serious economist worth his salt believes that food stamps are an economic multiplier. Food stamps are simply a transfer program. And transferring monies back and forth between different groups in and of itself is not an economic multiplier. If it were we could just transfer monies back and forth between different groups of people, sit on our collective duffs, and watch the economy boom. What an absurdly ridiculous notion. Hard to believe people fall for this kind of utter nonsense.

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...

September 19th, 2012
1:19 pm

It’s pretty obvious the libs have no idea that workers create wealth and non workers do not.

Even the most simple concepts elude them.

geez

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:20 pm

JF: Did you read the article? He mentions them as another example of misguided Obama policies.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
1:20 pm

“For the goobermint to put that $1.00 foodstamp or unemployment check into the hands of the consumer the TAXPAYER is hit for far more than $1.00.”

Exactly. If anything that transfer payment and the bureaucracy needed to administer it is an inefficient allocation of resources. That money would be more efficiently spent investing in plant, equipment, human capital, you know- all the things that actually produce jobs, as opposed to an inefficient transfer payment that produces nothing.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:20 pm

JamVet: Are you including benefits in that figure? Higher employer payroll taxes?

Interested Observer

September 19th, 2012
1:23 pm

Then why don’t we give everyone $50,000 worth of food stamps to use every year?

Do you eat $50,000 worth of food every year, Kyle? If so,…

Food stamps are more stimulative than the Bush tax cuts, for example, because nearly every food stamp dollar is spent. I doubt that woull be true if give everyone $50,000 worth of food stamps every year.

Also, to be able to afford $50,000 of benefits, we’d likely have to tax money that would otherwise be spent anyway. If we’re taxing money that would otherwise be spent, then there’s no stimulus.

While I’m on the subject, the idea behind is progressive income tax is not to punish the rich, but to limit taxation to money that is sitting on the sidelines…that is money that isn’t being spent and, therefore, isn’t growing the economy.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
1:28 pm

Point is anything that contributes to spending increases growth to some extent. Things that keep spending the same tend to forestall decline.

Food Stamps and Unemployment limit GDP decline to some extent while providing some help to those that need it…see that is important as well.

Tax cuts that are then in turn spent…read to the middle class…have a tendency to generate growth that would not have otherwise existed. Government spending does exactly the same thing and has the benefit of allowing you to target where the growth is stimulated.

Tax cuts for the rich that go into investments and savings accounts…waste of money.

As for Henry Ford…raising wages to $5 a day increased spending by those workers leading to growth…and some number of new car sales.

As for Charlie Bethel…if he had any sense he would be wondering what the loss of those checks would mean to his constituents and the businesses they support because on the flip side if tax cuts created jobs Duhbya’s Administration would have been the best in history…not the worst.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:29 pm

Interested: Ah, I see you subscribe to the Scrooge McDuck theory of economics, in which all these rich people have so much money it’s just sitting in a vault for them to swim in.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
1:29 pm

interested@12:35, Did you skip over the first 11 chapters of the book? I’ll try to explain it to you.
The $1 the food stamp recipient received did not magically materialize out of thin air. It was mine.
The govt. took it from me on April 15th. When it arrived in DC, they gave a little of it to the GSA so they could go to a convention in Las Vegas, to Solyndra so they could make solar panels no one wanted, to Egypt so they could stock up on American flags to burn, etc.
Anyway, only 60 cents of my $1 was left. Since DC borrows 40 cents of ever dollar it spends, the food stamp recipient got 60 cents from me & 40 cents from China.
The food stamp recipient’s McDonald’s was stimulated, but my McDonald’s had to lay off an employee. The USA’s credit rating was downgraded again & our unborn grandchildrens’ VISA card was charged another 40 cents

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:31 pm

JDW: Growth comes from more efficient use of resources. Consumption is a byproduct of growth, not a spur of it.

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

September 19th, 2012
1:32 pm

The food stamp money first has to be taken away from someone else who would have spent it, too

Not necessarily. There is a good chance that $1 would have gone into the stock market or a savings account to be unproductive for generations.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
1:34 pm

@Thusla…”That money would be more efficiently spent investing in plant, equipment, human capital, you know- all the things that actually produce jobs,”

That money is producing jobs…15% to 20% of the workforce is employed in government.

cc

September 19th, 2012
1:35 pm

Interested Observer@12:35 pm:
Where does the money come from to buy and distribute the food stamps? It would appear that you’ve done nothing to increase the GDP; you’ve only transferred that money from one pocket to the other . . .

Finn McCool@12:42 pm:
“But those 47% of AMericans who use it? everyone of them is a deadbeat loser moocher”
Could you please furnish me with a link or source that can verify that Romney made that statement using those exact words? Thanks . . .

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

September 19th, 2012
1:36 pm

No serious economist worth his salt believes that food stamps are an economic multiplier.

I just don’t understand why Thulsa isn’t paid the big bucks for his big economics brain.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
1:36 pm

Interested observer,

I just read the article and suggest that you do the same. It has to do with taking money out of the productive economy, the misallocating of resources that I alluded to, and the thing that drives economic growth the most- worker productivity. Since you don’t have an economics background just read it and it will explain things and its an easy read.

George P. Burdell

September 19th, 2012
1:36 pm

Kyle:

You haven’t learned much about how the liberals like to look at payroll taxes. When they want to argue that low income workers pay taxes, they are more than happy to include that cost, including the cost of the employer match, as taxes paid by the worker. However, when they want to argue that wages have been flat, they fight hard to make sure the fact that SS and Medicare percentages have increased greatly since the 1960’s. I know it can be hard to keep up, but you have to make sure you apply the limited logic to a very specific situation and make sure that same argument is not used on a different topic that might weaken your argument.

George P. Burdell

September 19th, 2012
1:37 pm

And don’t dare mention that the $1 hamburger from McDonalds would be even cheaper if labor costs had not risen due to SS and Medicare.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:37 pm

Finn: Right, because there is nooooooooo value in money that’s invested or saved.

Folks, do y’all really believe the economy would be better off if everyone just kept maxing out credit cards? That there’s no value in saving money, which gives banks the wherewithal to make loans to growing businesses? That there’s no value in investing money in the equity markets, which sends signals to entrepreneurs about the incentives of putting money to its most productive uses? That’s the upshot of the theories you’re espousing.

cc

September 19th, 2012
1:39 pm

JDW@1:34 pm:
“15% to 20% of the workforce is employed in government.”
. . . and who pays their salaries?

JDW

September 19th, 2012
1:39 pm

@Kyle…”Growth comes from more efficient use of resources. Consumption is a byproduct of growth, not a spur of it.”

Actually no…more efficient use of resources only produces growth if the resulting savings are redeployed in a manner that creates more growth. If those resources are not redeployed you get decline….take a company of 1000 people and say they come up with a way to produce the same number of widgets with 950 people. Now you have 50 unemployed people which is a contraction. Any resulting growth is dependent on their ability to do something else of value.

Consumption of products and services ALWAYS produces growth for those entities that produce them.

Four more years

September 19th, 2012
1:40 pm

Kyle, you’re just contributing to the shibboleth that someone’s (mainly, Obama’s) goal is simply to give away money to the moochers out there. It’s not, but that’s what Romnuts is running on and, with your help and that of Fox (should be “foxy” – growlllll at those hot blondes) “news” he’s got people helping spread the lie. While claiming Obama is dividing America, they preach that their crowd is the only crowd that wants to work and all others are just out to be freeloaders. What a bunch of bull. Are there freeloaders? Sure, but they sure as heck don’t make up 47% of the population. Why don’t you go preach birth control to some of the folks who can’t afford to have kids? That would be more productive than just stirring up resentment.

Logical Dude

September 19th, 2012
1:42 pm

Finn: There is a good chance that $1 would have gone into the stock market or a savings account to be unproductive for generations.

But that dollar in the stock market goes to a company that uses it.
That dollar in the savings account is used as a loan for someone else.
It doesn’t just sit there doing nothing.

cc

September 19th, 2012
1:43 pm

A nation, just like an individual, can’t borrow its way out of debt and it can’t spend itself to wealth. Am I the only person who sees it that way?

EJ Moosa

September 19th, 2012
1:43 pm

“It’s not complicated. If you buy a hamburger off the value menu at McDonald’s, you just grew the economy, specifically Gross Domestic Product, by $1.00″

Not exactly.

You had to take that dollar from somewhere. You had to collect it, and redistribute it. So you took more than a dollar from others that also would have spent it.

So you likely took $1.30, had $1.00 spent, and the other thirty cents is friction, being paid to government agents.

That is a drag on the economy.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:44 pm

JDW: With your widget example, you are ignoring the resources freed up for the consumers of those widgets.

Also, you are implying that *any* consumption with those savings = growth. That’s not necessarily true.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
1:45 pm

Lil Barry & Jam

Productivity-Wages Disconnect

The income story in America is deeply troubling. Inflation-adjusted average hourly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers (a category that encompasses 80% of the workforce and leaves out higher-paid managers and supervisors) rose by an anemic 0.1% a year from 1979 to 2007, according to the EPI. A potent combination of economic and social forces has conspired to keep wages down for most workers with the exception of a brief period of white-hot economic growth in 1995-2000. Private-sector unions have largely disappeared. Companies have outsourced all kinds of tasks to cheaper places overseas and low-cost contractors at home. The upward spiral in health-care costs has eroded wages. Intense competition unleashed by globalization, deregulation, and technological upheaval has kept a tight lid on compensation.

http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/feb2010/pi2010025_902249.htm

Centrist

September 19th, 2012
1:46 pm

We keep talking about transfer payments, but that is a misnomer when we don’t get close to balancing a budget. We are giving more benefits to the non-productive by adding debt. Adding debt devalues our currency, makes us beholden to the debt holders, lowers our debt rating which in turn increases the cost of debt service and makes other investments more lucrative in comparison, crowds out other private equity, and destabilizes our economy.

The Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke Bernanke gave a speech where he said “The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at no cost.” (He referred to a statement made by Milton Friedman about using a “helicopter drop” of money into the economy to fight deflation.) Bernanke’s critics have since referred to him as “Helicopter Ben” or to his “helicopter printing press.”

This is the Obama’s administration strategy for our future, and it is doomed to eventual failure (after buying short term election votes, of course).

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

September 19th, 2012
1:46 pm

Yeah, Kyle – on the one hand you can either use the $1 for investing or you can use the $1 to help a family in need put food on their table.

You simplify it down so I will do the same: Not all welfare goes to a poor black lazy person like you folks are want to believe. Buying food when you are between jobs helps you get by as you look for work. Being able to feed a kid before he/she goes off to school or at school makes the kid more attentive at school which is conducive to learning.

Kyle, you would have been one of the money changers cast out by that lily- white guy with the long beard who lived in the middle east way back when.

Interested Observer

September 19th, 2012
1:48 pm

RE: “you subscribe to the Scrooge McDuck theory of economics, in which all these rich people have so much money it’s just sitting in a vault for them to swim in.”

Seriously, Kyle, what’s with all the snark? Have my comments been disrespectful to you?

The economy is measured by spending. $1.00 spent on goods and services grows the economy by $1.00. That is not my opinion. That is how Gross Domestic Product is measured.

If you deposit $1.00 into a savings account, you did not grow the economy. If you trade in stocks, you did not grow the economy. Who has the most money that isn’t, at any given moment, directly growing the economy? First the wealthy, then the upper middle class, then the lower middle class (if they’re lucky).

The poor? They’re spending every dollar that they can get their hands on. They have no choice. If you tax a poor person, then that’s $1.00 that you took directly out of the economy. Not so, for those whose savings are taxed.

Again, I’m not expressing my opinion here. If you don’t like it, then I guess that’s the reason for the snark. But the bad jokes don’t change the facts.

“It must always be remembered, however, that it is the luxuries, and not the necessary expense of the inferior ranks of people, that ought ever to be taxed.” — ADAM SMITH

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

September 19th, 2012
1:49 pm

Bethel noted his town’s extraordinarily high number of people on unemployment and said, “If it were true that unemployment checks stimulated local economies, we’d be doing great in Northwest Georgia. We’ve cashed a lot.

Try making those checks a little more substantial?

JDW

September 19th, 2012
1:49 pm

@Kyle…

“That there’s no value in saving money, which gives banks the wherewithal to make loans to growing businesses?”

That does create value. Problem is banks are not using their dollars for that purpose. More and more often they are using those dollars in other investments…say hedge funds or derivatives instead.

That there’s no value in investing money in the equity markets, which sends signals to entrepreneurs about the incentives of putting money to its most productive uses?”

Now that one is a big one. There is value in investing DIRECTLY in a company and giving them capital to use to grow there business. There is NO widespread economic value in buying and selling equities to make a profit. The profits generated by the financial sector in these activities is diverting money that could really be used to drive growth.

“That’s the upshot of the theories you’re espousing.”

The upshot is the money needs to be deployed in productive endeavors…not a Wall Street trading account.

GFY

September 19th, 2012
1:49 pm

Ok…It’s settled science since Finn says (in between studying for classes) Observer is correct. No debating it here…..welfare is the way to go to stimulate our economy. Just look at all those other countries whose economies are growing….I bet the gave away food stamps all the way to prosperity. LOL

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:51 pm

They Both: That article is 2 years old. The buzzword for 2012 is “re-shoring,” i.e. the return of a lot of those jobs to the U.S. because the difference in labor costs has narrowed.

That said, the increasing bite that health costs take out of compensation accounts for much of the wage stagnation. (And, pre-emptively: Handing it off to the government and paying for it via taxes would not help.)

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:52 pm

Finn @ 1:46: If you don’t understand how investing works, and why it’s beneficial to more than the investors, just say so.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
1:54 pm

@Kyle…”With your widget example, you are ignoring the resources freed up for the consumers of those widgets.”

There may not be any resources freed up. Only if prices decline which they may or may not. As a tradeoff to keep it simple I also ignored the impact of the 50 workers not having money to spend and drive growth in other areas.

Many if not most times productivity gains will drive growth but it is not an absolute. Increased consumptions will always drive growth, assuming demand does not outstrip the capacity to produce.

Interested Observer

September 19th, 2012
1:54 pm

RE: “just look at all those other countries whose economies are growing….I bet the gave away food stamps all the way to prosperity.”

More snark. No facts.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
1:56 pm

Kyle

I could careless if it were 5 yrs old. Real wages have been stagnant for almost 30 yrs for the majority in the US. JamVet was correct when he posted that earlier.

Nominal wages have gone up and one must take into account benefits, but real wages are stagnant. In some cases, maybe behind.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
1:56 pm

Wages haven’t “flat lined”

This is the staggeringly level of ignorance and denial in the far right wing.

In 1967 the median income was $33,338. In 2003 it was $43,318.

A 29.9% increase over a span 36 years.

You do the math. denier.

There are countless facts, figures, pieces of data and evidence, studies and irrefutable proof that all say the same thing.

America’s middle class has gotten clobbered for 40 plus years.

That you are not interested in knowing about any of that is in and of itself, interesting, but useless

Centrist

September 19th, 2012
1:57 pm

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
1:59 pm

Interested: First, consumption is *one* way GDP is measured. Output is another.

Second, what do you think happens when money is deposited in a savings account? What do you think happens when it’s invested in a stock? Don’t just think about the individual — you have to understand the broader picture here. Banks do things with the money deposited with them. Companies and entrepreneurs make decisions based on what the equity markets tell them about the potential return on their investment of time, money, expertise, etc.

Third, I didn’t mean to offend you, just to provide an illustration of what your line of thinking sounds like to me. It was, admittedly, a caricature. But that’s essentially what you’re saying: a) that rich people just keep their money lying around unproductively, and b) that $1 spent on a hamburger at McDonald’s has the same economic value as $1 invested in an effort to find more productive uses of resources.

If you’re right, why don’t we shut down the equity markets, outlaw savings accounts, and mandate that everyone spend every dollar they earn? Wouldn’t that lead us to the most prosperity, according to you?

EJ Moosa

September 19th, 2012
1:59 pm

“There may not be any resources freed up.”

There does not necessarily need to be any resources freed up for a transaction to be beneficial.

Prices, in theory, work as follows. You buy something because it offers more value, or is worth more to you than the price you pay for it. Otherwise you would keep your cash.

The difference is the benefit you receive from the transaction. If there was no benefit, you would not spend the cash.

We already understand the motives for the seller.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
1:59 pm

Kyle

Please note, I am not saying that it is a Republican problem. If anything it could be blamed do a degree on both parties, but even that blame only goes so far.

The world has shrunk with the increase in competition and that drives cost and pricing pressures.

Del

September 19th, 2012
2:00 pm

The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other peoples money.

Interested Observer

September 19th, 2012
2:01 pm

“The U.S. Department of Agriculture calculates that for every $5 of food-stamp spending, there is $9.20 of total economic activity, as grocers and farmers pay their employees and suppliers, who in turn shop and pay their bills.

While other stimulus money has been slow to circulate, the food-stamp boost is almost immediate, with 80% of the benefits being redeemed within two weeks of receipt and 97% within a month, the USDA says.”

Boost in Food-Stamp Funding Percolates Through Economy: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124691958931402479.html

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
2:02 pm

JDW: So why not outlaw stock trading? Just a one-time sale, to people who will do…what exactly with it, I don’t know. But I’m sure they’ll spend a lot of money to get it!

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
2:02 pm

The problem with slogans is pretty soon you run out of bumper stickers.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
2:02 pm

“take a company of 1000 people and say they come up with a way to produce the same number of widgets with 950 people. Now you have 50 unemployed people which is a contraction.”

If that were true then any advancement in technology or productivity gains at the micro level such as your example would lead to more unemployment and contraction. That may be true in a very short term example such as your micro example but in the long term and on the macroeconomic level the consumer is much better off and his resources are freed up to make other purchases. And the employer’s resources are also freed up to expand or invest elsewhere.

For example when refrigeration came about tens of thousands of ice and milk delivery men were put out of business. Did the economy suffer? No. The productivity gains that refrigeration brought about allowed for other economic advances and expansion- an expansion that quickly swallowed up the unemployed ice and milk delivery men.

Same with with the example of Ford’s Model T. A lot of horse carriage and buggy whip makers went under and their employees were out of a job. But they found jobs in other sectors of the economy as overall productivity gains advanced us collectively.

3 other fallacies in your example that are common with liberal thinkers. In your example you’re looking at it from a static viewpoint and thinking only of the 50 people who lost jobs. You have to look at it in the overall macro sense and from the dynamic perspective of what happens to the economy- it expands.

Annother fallacy is that you are ignoring with your example the fact that overall productivity gains is what helps drive economic growth even if the 50 people lost jobs in the very short run.

And last you are only looking at what is seen- the 50 people losing their jobs. You did not look at the unseen events such as the increased worker productivity and the freeing up up more resources both on the consumer end and on the employer end where they now can invest in more projects or expansion.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
2:03 pm

They Both: My point with the 2-year comment was that the conditions which led in large part to that stagnation have been changing.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
2:04 pm

JamVet: And how has purchasing power changed over that time? Does the median household today have only more or less what it had 40 years ago?

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

September 19th, 2012
2:04 pm

We’re not saying welfare is the only way to stimulate the economy. What we are saying is that , like investing, it has several benefits – it helps those who need it and it does get spent which puts the spend back into circulation.

the folly that food stamps represent a kind of economic stimulus.

This is like saying investing in machinery is only going to provide one benefit: to the seller of the equipment. That’s it, end of story.

You folks are short sighted when it suits your prejudices.

EJ Moosa

September 19th, 2012
2:04 pm

“The U.S. Department of Agriculture calculates that for every $5 of food-stamp spending, there is $9.20 of total economic activity, as grocers and farmers pay their employees and suppliers, who in turn shop and pay their bills.”

Yet they have not accounted for where those funds come from, if money has been borrowed to be able to distribute those funds, or what the cost of administration is, and assume the money would have not been invested or spent otherwise.

How convenient.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
2:05 pm

TD

Great points, but you have to take into account off shoring of jobs. It is a huge variable when you consider not just the manufacturing, but also the IT / programming, engineering, customer service, etc that have done bye bye. Some of come back, but no where at the rate they have left…….

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
2:07 pm

Kyle

Got you. We will see and I hope you are correct. There has been companies who have brought operations back to the US.

Would be great to see more it, but of course that must be balanced with cost and pricing pressures.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
2:07 pm

Finn: Food stamps have a purpose — keeping people from starving. There is a benefit from that, for them and for society, economic and otherwise.

But let’s not kid ourselves that *on net*, accounting for where that money came from and all of its possible alternative uses, food stamps are the most efficient and productive use of that money. If that were true, then, as I said earlier, we should make sure as many people as possible get as many food stamps as possible.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
2:08 pm

Kyle, more. But not where it counts.

Americans in larger percentages than ever can no longer afford their medical insurance, their children’s college tuition or their utility bills. They certainly can’t afford a vacation to anywhere other than the closes national park. (Run by the hated Uncle Sam!)

But they sure can afford more neat little, cheaply made electronics from China and Korea.

Look around at your communities.

We have gotten trickle down decimated…

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
2:10 pm

JamVet @ 2:08: Isn’t that more a reflection of their priorities than their purchasing power?

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
2:15 pm

No, it is a factor of skyrocketing costs for certain necessities and decreasing costs for others.

From the Rand Institute:

Fast-rising health care costs have eaten nearly all the income gains made by a median-income American family of four over the past decade, leaving them with just $95 per month in extra income.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
2:18 pm

they both suck,

I understand that it sucks to see jobs offshored. But keep in mind that this isn’t anything new. This has been going on for a long time to a lesser degree and has been going on to a more marked degree over the last few decades as the world becomes smaller.

A basic principle of economics is that we are all better off in the long term with free trade. There will be short term losers in the way of people who lose jobs but the overall benefit to consumers offsets these losses.

Now I have a lot of friends in IT who I would hate to see lose their jobs and it actually went on for awhile. Their co. would bring over 5 to 7 Indians to the corporate campus and train them for 3 months and then send them home. Then 5-7 American programmers would get laid off. Made em mad as hell. I can see both sides of that equation. It sucks to see those Americans lose good paying jobs but on the other hand according to common economics principles overall we will all be better off in the long term. Its just hard to stomach in the short term.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
2:18 pm

Kyle, I’m not going to read the comments to see if you addressed this already, but here goes. You are aware that Henry Ford was a Nazi sympathizer who contributed tons of money to promote Nazism in Europe and The United States? Were you aware that his buddy Hitler even gave him an Iron Cross? Do you wing nuts ever consider the sources of which you site?

Also, if you are so interested in promoting the conservative ideology and so forth, wouldn’t it be in your best interest to boot the plutocrats out of your “movement?” I’m still waiting for you to champion the middle class that you are trying to persuade every day. When will you get real about the plutocrats that are ruining the GOP? Perhaps you are like me and eager to see the GOP explode?

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
2:20 pm

Gravy Train: What in the world do Henry Ford’s sympathies 80 years ago have to do with the question of whether economic growth comes from increased productivity or spending financed by government handouts?

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
2:24 pm

JamVet: You keep focusing on one side of the equation: income. The question I’m asking has to do with whether people are materially richer or poorer in spite of stagnant wages. For example, for most of the past 20 years inflation has been at historically tame levels; that’s had a positive effect on people’s purchasing power.

jd

September 19th, 2012
2:25 pm

Kyle,

The Ford site says this:

“Henry Ford had reasoned that since it was now possible to build inexpensive cars in volume, more of them could be sold if employees could afford to buy them. The $5 day helped better the lot of all American workers and contributed to the emergence of the American middle class. In the process, Henry Ford had changed manufacturing forever.”

Ford’s logic went further than the retention issue.

By the way, tax credits to the poor expanded under Republican presidents following Friedman’s advice…

Del

September 19th, 2012
2:26 pm

Obama has increased food stamps 100%, since he took office. This building from the bottom up sure has been successful.

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
2:27 pm

Sure, but they sure as heck don’t make up 47% of the population

Thats dang right. Where are these freeloaders ?

Where are the moochers ? I dont see them.

Most poor people I know work their tails off sometimes at 2 or 3 jobs

Interested Observer

September 19th, 2012
2:29 pm

RE: “why don’t we shut down the equity markets, outlaw savings accounts, and mandate that everyone spend every dollar they earn? Wouldn’t that lead us to the most prosperity, according to you?”

Kyle,

The answer to your question is no, and the question itself is a misunderstanding of what I’m saying. Nor am I saying that rich people keep their money lying around unproductively. I’m am saying, however, that savings aren’t included in the measure of economic growth, spending is. Again, not an opinion.

Republicans aren’t anarchists, so we all agree that we do need a government of some form and that the goods and services provided need to be paid for. We also agree, whether you know it or not, that we should limit taxes to those needed to pay for those good or services (and, at this point, pay off the debt). The question is, how do we tax?

Yes, savings and investments contribute to the economy. But the contribution is indirect and limited. The entire dollar that I put in a savings account doesn’t get loaned out. And the fraction that does get loaned out doesn’t always get spent. And if it does get spent, it might not get spent for quite a while. On the other hand, a dollar spent for goods and services today has, by definition, a definite and immediate effect on the economy.

So, all I’m saying, is that to the extent that we must tax (and we both agree that we must), we should avoid taxing money that is being spent–hence progressive income taxes.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
2:30 pm

TD

I’m with you, but my point about using “older examples” is that there wasn’t much off shoring during those times so the majority if not all of the “newer jobs” stayed here in the US.

Bottom line is that all of this off shoring has caught up. Sorry dude, but it has. It is a double edged sword.

I’m fully aware that technology has driven job creation. Not arguing those facts. but when you take into account all the jobs off shored, technology and efficiency improvements, it takes a toll. Again not saying, we should stay stuck in the 50s, but everything whether it is free market or government is not a “win win” over time.

I do not have the answers, but I can say that we can neither spend and tax our way to prosperity nor will just another tax cut get us there either

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
2:31 pm

Gravy Train,

Henry Ford was anti-Semitic from what I understand. So was the patriarch of the Kennedy clan. His stated business goal everyday was to screw a Jew in a business dealing. A lot of people back in that day were anti-Semitic. Did you know that most of the elite Eastern universities had quotas on how many Jews that they would accept into their universities back then? That is a serious personal failing on the part of Henry Ford as well as many other men of his era. But it doesn’t have much to do with the fact that he revolutionized mfging with the assembly line process or that he built a great car for millions of Americans.

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
2:32 pm

Plus the 47 percent number is waaay overblown.

On an average year nowhere near 47 percent of people dont pay income taxes.

You see the Republicans just cherry picked one year and repeat it like its that way every year.

Of course their lemmings just repeat it and repeat it.

And EVERYONE pays taxes. Sales Tax. FICA.

Heck the sales tax where I live is 10 percent. That means poor people are taxed 10 cents on every dollar they spend.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
2:33 pm

Oh, I don’t know Kyle. There is this little thing about association that you’re failing to see. I would think it would be far better not to associate yourself with treasonous plutocrats. I guess this goes back to the GOP’s modern definition of success: profit by any means necessary. Like Willard for example, you consider him successful because he has lots of money and you gloss over how he got it. So then, Henry Ford’s promotion of Nazism doesn’t matter because he had lots of money? What about the millions he spent promoting antisemitism also?

cc

September 19th, 2012
2:33 pm

Del@2:26 pm:
“This building from the bottom up sure has been successful.”
Yes, it has been extremely successful . . . for Obama . . . if you understand his plan.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
2:36 pm

Also, you keep avoiding my question. What about the plutocrats who control the GOP? They have turned the old conservative ideology into a myth. Conservative is nothing more than a catch phrase to convince middle class folks to vote for them. Are you pretending like this isn’t happening?

GFY

September 19th, 2012
2:36 pm

Facts don’t interest you…….you have an agenda and will argue with a fence post. I say good luck to the fence post.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
2:36 pm

they both suck,

Well you also have to take into account that after WW2 all of the major mfging nations in the world were devastated- Japan, Europe, the industrial heartland of China- Manchuria. We pretty much enjoyed standing as the world’s foremost economic and mfging power for at least a decade or 2 as the other powers rebuilt. That is a one time event that we greatly prospered from until they caught back up with us which was inevitable. We got fat and happy right through the 60s and in the last few decades now that we’ve had to compete head to head with rebuilt industrial powers we don’t like it very much. And that’s not a partisan point either. Just sayin that things are different nowadays than from the late 40s, 50s, and even into the 60s.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
2:36 pm

Gravy Train: Who is associating himself — or anyone else — with Henry Ford today? Me, because I mentioned an article that mentioned him? OK, does that mean Obama “associated” with Ford by alluding to him in his speech to the DNC two weeks ago?

You are making one of the most bizarre, out-of-the-blue arguments anyone has ever made on this blog. And that’s saying a lot.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
2:37 pm

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
2:36 pm
Also, you keep avoiding my question. What about the plutocrats who control the GOP?

Gravy Train,

Are you naive enough to think that plutocrats don’t control the Democratic party?

GFY

September 19th, 2012
2:39 pm

Everyone is taxed on the $ they spend, correct Cheesy? Or are there only “poor” people paying this exorbiant sales tax? BTW…..where do you reside to pay such a large sales tax? Toronto? Paris?

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
2:42 pm

Everyone is taxed on the $ they spend, correct Cheesy? Or are there only “poor” people paying this exorbiant sales tax?

Yes they are. It just hurts poor people more.

Montgomery Alabama ( A hotbed of liberalism I assure you )

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
2:43 pm

“The question I’m asking has to do with whether people are materially richer or poorer in spite of stagnant wages.”- Kyle

In terms of material wealth there is no question that the average American is vastly better off than he was forty years ago. Every modern convenience that the average American owns makes his life far more comfortable than it was back in 1970. I don’t think anyone would disagree with that.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
2:44 pm

Answer the question Kyle. You can do it. Are you willing to fight the plutocrats to rejuvenate the GOP?

Thulsa, how can the Democratic Party be controlled by both plutocrats and the Socialist Marxists that the nimrods are always spouting off about?

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
2:44 pm

TD

Great point. I have been saying for sometime that regardless of D or R, we have been averting today’s economic situation by the skin of our teeth for some years now.

In the early to mid 80s, we saw a tremendous push with technology in terms of the use of computers. That rode us for the most part into the dot.com bubble. Then it was off to the housing and construction bubble.

The whole time jobs were leaving the US and technology along efficiency improvements kept on increasing.

It creates jobs, but it has caught up to us when looking at the “big job picture”

Seems that the government as well as the private sector didn’t do a good job working and pushing education and training to meet the challenges that were right in our faces.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
2:46 pm

Cheesy grits,

That 10% might explain why so many people are fleeing Montgomery to Wetumpka, Prattville, Millbrook, and elsewhere thus eroding the tax base further. That and the gang infested schools and the rampant crime in the city. You looked at the murder rate in Montgomery the last few years?

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
2:48 pm

“Seems that the government as well as the private sector didn’t do a good job working and pushing education and training to meet the challenges that were right in our faces.”

they both suck,

No doubt and our education system shows it. Too many kids pursuing sociology and poly science degrees and not enough pursuing the hard math and science degrees or IT degrees.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
2:51 pm

TD @ 2:43

That is true, but they are much more in debt as well.

The lowering of credit standards, while increasing the amount that could be borrowed was done to of course increase bottom line of the individual company but also to keep the economy running along. It worked for awhile, but now there is too much debt. People don’t have that ability to buy, so companies are not hiring in many sectors because of the lack of demand. I do understand that people make the choice to take the credit. Banks as well, but Uncle Sam bailed out their stupidity or a good part of it.

Consumer spending makes up 70% of our economy.

Obama or Romney come November, I hope no one is looking for miracles. When we see consumer debt start to go down, you will see the economy pick get out of its malaise.

I could be wrong, but remember I just gave you the Paul Harvey right here (the rest of the story).

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
2:51 pm

Kyle, inflation has gone up a cumulative 48% since 1993. (Actually more than that with compounding.)

Wage increases since 1993 for80% of Americans? Nowhere near that. I’ll have to do some research to get the exact numbers.

We can have a democratic society or we can have the concentration of great wealth in the hands of the few. We cannot have both.” ~Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, 1941

Welcome to the American plutocracy…

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
2:52 pm

That 10% might explain why so many people are fleeing Montgomery to Wetumpka, Prattville, Millbrook, and elsewhere thus eroding the tax base further.

Nope. They are fleeing Montgomery to get away from the black people. Just ask them. They will tell you the same.

White Flight in action. Montgomery is still partly stuck in the 60’s and a very segregated city.

I went to public schools here. They are not gang infested.

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
2:53 pm

That 10% might explain why so many people are fleeing Montgomery to Wetumpka, Prattville, Millbrook, and elsewhere thus eroding the tax base further.

Nope. They are fleeing Montgomery to get away from the black people. Just ask them. They will tell you the same.

White Flight in action. Montgomery is still partly stuck in the 60’s and a very segregated city.

I went to public schools here. They are not gang infested.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
2:57 pm

Thulsa, also, if the plutocrats control the Democratic Party, why would they allow a tax hike on themselves to be a major plank of the party’s platform? FYI: Basic economic theories only work in a vacuum. Human greed and corruption tend to taint the results in the real world. Controlled capitalism is the only real world economic theory that accounts for all of the members of the economy in question.
If it weren’t for unions and regulations, there would’ve never been a middle class. See the living conditions of the average worker prior to unions.

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
3:02 pm

There are countless facts, figures, pieces of data and evidence, studies and irrefutable proof that all say the same thing.

America’s middle class has gotten clobbered for 40 plus years.

That you are not interested in knowing about any of that is in and of itself, interesting, but useless

JamVet–You’ve made a blog career out of championing the “fact” that the middle class has been getting screwed for the past 40 years. Yet somehow, some way, the standard of living for ALL Americans, including those at the bottom and in the middle, has risen dramatically in the same time period by any realistic measure you can think of such as average square feet of residential space, access to medical care, access to transportation, access to travel, access to communication, etc. etc.

Just my opinion, of course, but I don’t see how comparing raw income data really means anything, because that’s not how people measure their satisfaction in life. What is important is how well people are living. But, because that particular measure takes all the wind out of your argument, you seem to ignore it time and again.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
3:12 pm

B, ask Hillbilly D, he is one of a tiny few besides me with the honesty to readily acknowledge that he was better off in the 1970s than he is now.

THAT story can be told by millions and millions and millions of Americans.

Who cannot afford health insurance like they used to take for granted.

Who cannot afford to put their kids in college like they used to take for granted.

Who cannot afford to go to Europe/NYC/wherever like they used to take for granted.

More cheap gizmos and sh*tty furniture is not living better…

wallbanger

September 19th, 2012
3:14 pm

Well, the comments above on this post demonstrate clearly why we are in the current ditch. There is so much ignorance of simple economics in this country. I guess people with government educations can’t be blamed for being ignorant, but it sickens me to know they vote. Maybe they would understand it if you said that when the payments to people from government exceed the capacity of the taxpayers to fund them we collapse. (Well, that is about where we are now but for the $16 Trillion we owe a few other countries who are stupid enough to continue to lend to us).

JDW

September 19th, 2012
3:19 pm

@Kyle…”"So why not outlaw stock trading? Just a one-time sale, to people who will do…what exactly with it, I don’t know. But I’m sure they’ll spend a lot of money to get it!”"

I don’t think we should outlaw it, simply stop subsidizing it. Profits from trading existing equities should be taxed at least as much as income from labor.

Investments made directly into companies should be tax advantaged if not tax free.

Now if your next arugment is going to be that you need a market to sell those direct invesments into why yes but you need a rational market…not one where Facebook IPO’s at $42 and quickly plunges to $22.

Wouldn’t everyone have been better off if Facebook investors had gotten say $15 to $18 a share tax free and the price increased to $22? Guess who the only group that loses is….Wall Street bankers who specialize in IPO’s…their fees just took a hit.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
3:20 pm

“Nope. They are fleeing Montgomery to get away from the black people. Just ask them. They will tell you the same.”

Yep. That is true. They are fleeing the crime and the crime in the city is overwhelmingly perpetrated by the blacks. Its a very uncomfortable truth to talk about but it is a truth nonetheless. Is it any wonder the whites are fleeing this kind of environment?

“I went to public schools here. They are not gang infested.”

I did too. JD in fact and before that Georgia Washington and Dozier elementary. My sister happens to be a teacher there and mom and Dad live down the street from Lee high school. Lee was so gang infested and the inability of the principal and teachers to control the problem was so bad that Lee ended up firing about half the staff last year. Its out of control and for you to deny that is kinda breathtaking.Ignoring the problem doesn’t make it go away.

Where my sister teaches the 5th graders there come from an environment so dysfunctional that many of them know all about anal, oral, and just about any other kind of sex. Lot of social problems and pathologies with those kids due to their dysfunctional environment.

We are sending my 2 nieces to private school. If you think we are going to subject our kids to that sort of environment and the sort of anti-social behavior and violence that goes on in Montgomery public schools every day than you are off your rocker.

Del

September 19th, 2012
3:25 pm

“Yes, it has been extremely successful . . . for Obama . . . if you understand his plan.”

cc, I become more and more convinced that Obama’s plan, which is the identical plan that the hard-left inside and outside of government have is to push the majority of Americans into total dependence on the federal government. The evidence is obvious even in Obama’s own statements out in public. When he says, “People at the top need to pay their fair share” and when “we have to make certain that everyone has a fair shot”, he’s boldly revealing his otherwise hidden agenda.

@@

September 19th, 2012
3:26 pm

Pssst, Kyle…let me see if I’ve got this right

When demand is up, production is up. The more one can produce, the more workers they can employ long term resulting in disposable income to buy those things in demand.

(ISH)

JDW

September 19th, 2012
3:28 pm

@Thulsa…I don’t have time to completely educate you so I will focus on these bits….

“If that were true then any advancement in technology or productivity gains at the micro level such as your example would lead to more unemployment and contraction.”

It does, unless the economy creates opportunity for those displaced, which has often happened in past but does not seem to keeping pace for the last 10+ years.

“That may be true in a very short term example such as your micro example but in the long term and on the macroeconomic level the consumer is much better off and his resources are freed up to make other purchases. And the employer’s resources are also freed up to expand or invest elsewhere. ”

Really…then explain to me how the long term macro result of driving productivity and cost decreases by shifting manufacturing has benefited the US. Sure the consumer has benefited via cost decreases but what has happened for the last 30 years is their jobs have been cannibalized. One of the key problems we have now is that our economy is not mutating fast enough to replace the jobs lost by increased productivity and offshoring.

Fact is we are living the real life contradiction to your theory.

Rightwing Troll

September 19th, 2012
3:29 pm

“Interested: Then why don’t we give everyone $50,000 worth of food stamps to use every year?”

Apparently we do just that very thing… we give $50,0000.00/yr worth of food stamps to 47% of everyone. (according to wingnuts anyway…)

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
3:32 pm

@ Thulsa

Like I said. Montgomery is still very segregated and stuck in the 60’s

Yep. That is true. They are fleeing the crime and the crime in the city is overwhelmingly perpetrated by the blacks. Its a very uncomfortable truth to talk about but it is a truth nonetheless. Is it any wonder the whites are fleeing this kind of environment?

And no that isn’t it. Thats just the perverted way you see the world.

Is there alot of crime in the black community. Yes. But most of that is black on black crime.
Ive lived here most of my life and have never not felt safe.

I understand though that for people like you black people are “scary”

I see where your politics come from now too.

I’m actually ashamed. I went to Georgia Washington too. ( There weren’t gangs there either )

I’m ashamed to have gone to the same school as you. You are the problem.

Don't Tread

September 19th, 2012
3:32 pm

And we wonder why 47% don’t pay income tax…

:roll:

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
3:33 pm

B, ask Hillbilly D, he is one of a tiny few besides me with the honesty to readily acknowledge that he was better off in the 1970s than he is now.

In what way?? Houses, cars, consumer products, travel, etc, are all far more affordable to the average American now than in the 1970s.

Who cannot afford health insurance like they used to take for granted.

Yet, according to this graph, the percentage of uninsured Americans has remained essentially the same from 1987 through 2008.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Uninsured_and_Uninsured_Rate_%281987_to_2008%29.JPG

Linda

September 19th, 2012
3:34 pm

Has anyone else noticed that all the Democrats/liberals have no clue about economics & that all the Republicans/conservatives have a clear understanding of economics? Does that mean that everyone who passes Econ 101 becomes Republicans/conservatives? Does that mean that if Econ 101 was a required course to graduate from college, we could get rid of almost all Democrats/liberals & never have to worry about the economy ever again?

BTW, is there a particular sitcom on TV from which Democrats/liberals get their economic talking points?

JDW

September 19th, 2012
3:36 pm

@Thulsa…”A basic principle of economics is that we are all better off in the long term with free trade. There will be short term losers in the way of people who lose jobs but the overall benefit to consumers offsets these losses.”

LOL…problem is that the “all” in your Theory are citizens of the world. There is no doubt that the people of India and China have benefited greatly of late…problem we have is the US is currently and could very likely long term be one of your “short term losers”

What you need to understand is that in free trade like business the winners are those that produce and sell. That’s what we need to subsidize.

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
3:39 pm

We are sending my 2 nieces to private school.

Good for you but you cant shelter them forever.

Its better for kids to mingle and not separate.

They become more well rounded.

Heck they might even learn about a culture other than their own.

Imagine that.

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
3:39 pm

Who cannot afford to put their kids in college like they used to take for granted.

Again, Jam, the stats don’t support your assertions. According to this table, the percentage of college graduates in the US in 1970 was 11%. In 2000, that number rose to 25.8%.

As to the affordability of college, I agree with you that college costs have outpaced inflation in a shameful way. Too many Lib profs getting rich at the expense of the students.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/92404.html

adniL

September 19th, 2012
3:40 pm

Has anyone else noticed that all the Republicans/Conservatives have no clue about economics & that all the Democrats/Liberals have a clear understanding of economics? Does that mean that everyone who passes Econ 101 becomes Republicans/Conservatives? Does that mean that if Econ 101 was a required course to graduate from college, we could get rid of almost all Republicans/Conservatives & never have to worry about the economy ever again?

BTW, is there a particular sitcom on TV from which Republicans/Conservatives get their economic talking points?

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
3:40 pm

Has anyone else noticed that all the Democrats/liberals have no clue about economics & that all the Republicans/conservatives have a clear understanding of economics?

I dont see that at all. In fact if you look at the blue states they have a much higher percentage of college graduates.

Look at the red states. Education level is much lower and % of college grads is much lower.

Hardly a coincidence.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
3:42 pm

“I don’t think we should outlaw it, simply stop subsidizing it. Profits from trading existing equities should be taxed at least as much as income from labor.”

Clearly you haven’t looked at historical IRS tax tables and noted the correlation between high capital gains taxes and lower govt revenue receipts. You can see this going all the way back to the 1920s. If you taxes investments capital gains investments at 39% then monied investors will simply park their funds in tax free munis and govt securities. The after tax return is simply not enough to compensate them in terms of risk/reward. We know this from history and we know this cause its just common sense.

“Investments made directly into companies should be tax advantaged if not tax free.”

If you buy stock in Walmart or you buy corporate bonds aren’t you making an investment directly into the company outside of a small transaction cost?

“Now if your next arugment is going to be that you need a market to sell those direct invesments into why yes but you need a rational market…not one where Facebook IPO’s at $42 and quickly plunges to $22.”

How do you define a “rational market” and who defines and decides what constitutes a “rational market”? And you advocate this why??? Because of one inappropriately priced IPO? Seriously?

“Wouldn’t everyone have been better off if Facebook investors had gotten say $15 to $18 a share tax free and the price increased to $22? Guess who the only group that loses is….Wall Street bankers who specialize in IPO’s…their fees just took a hit.”

Its a free market. If you didn’t buy Facebook stock then what the hell do you care or why does anyone who didn’t invest in it care? And how is “everyone” better off if Facebook’s IPO was priced better? Is Kyle or myself or you personally going to be richer or poorer if we didn’t invest in facebook if it was priced more “appropriately” in your opinion?

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
3:42 pm

BTW, is there a particular sitcom on TV from which Republicans/Conservatives get their economic talking points?

I thinks its called Sean Hannity.

It goes like this. Give all the money to the rich. They are the only ones to be trusted with means.

Then all these jobs and money will “trickle down” over us commoners.

Ive been hearing that crap my whole life. Still haven’t felt the first trickle.

I

getalife

September 19th, 2012
3:42 pm

Wow, the cons are talking about the middle class instead of carrying water for the wealthy that disdain you people.

Change.

Yes, lets focus on the middle class and cut welfare for the wealthy that does not need it.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
3:45 pm

“Look at the red states. Education level is much lower and % of college grads is much lower.”

Cheesy grits,

Red states such as the Southern states also have higher minority populations which drags down education levels and percentages of college grads.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
3:45 pm

…are all far more affordable to the average American now than in the 1970s.

B, the very first brand new car I bought in 1979 was a Chevrolet sedan off of the showroom floor at a dealership in Niagara Falls, NY. It cost me $4500. Gas was about fifty cents a gallon, if I recall correctly.

Now a brand new Chevrolet sedan costs….? Five times that much? Or more? And gas has gone up by a factor of 8.

Have most Americans seen a wage increase of 500% – 800% since 1979?

Has anyone else noticed that all the Democrats/liberals have no clue about economics & that all the Republicans/conservatives have a clear understanding of economics?

All Democrats? All Republicans?

You write like a petulant sixth grader, Linda.

Seriously…

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
3:48 pm

cheesy grits,

I want my nieces to be exposed to other races and cultures and to be in mixed environments for the same reasons- it makes them more well rounded and it exposes them to people that they are going to have to work with and associate with the rest of their lives. Every school I went to was racially mixed and I wish it were that way across America. But what I am saying is that now several of those Montgomery schools are dangerous due to the gang and violence problem and of course whites are going to flee school systems like that.

Jefferson

September 19th, 2012
3:49 pm

$1.00 spent from a paycheck probably only costs maybe $1.01 inclusively to distribute to the employee on average, if that, much. I don’t have the data for either one (but would be curious to see) I would bet that $1.00 in food stamps costs about $1.15 inclusively to distribute. So the net cost to produce $1.00 in GDP would likely be much higher through government programs. I realize that I am just guessing, but it would be interesting to see if there is any data on this.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
3:50 pm

Right, because gawd knows that books, insurance, equipment, operating expenses across a wide variety of costs have not gone up at American universities, B. Just the salaries of liberal professors!

Michael H. Smith

September 19th, 2012
3:51 pm

Kyle let’s just cut through the chase here and recite what these leftwing OBAMA REDISTRIBUTION socialists truly believe, as Karl Marx said it in his simple mantra; which is the cornerstone and foundation of Marxism that none of these liberals socialist can disavow:

“From each according to their ability to each according to their need”

getalife

September 19th, 2012
3:51 pm

mitt speaking with his people proved their disdain for you people.

Stand up and stop bowing down for them.

What is wrong with you Linda?

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

September 19th, 2012
3:51 pm

But let’s not kid ourselves that *on net*, accounting for where that money came from and all of its possible alternative uses, food stamps are the most efficient and productive use of that money

Kyle, who is arguing this? I don’t think anyone is kidding themselves on this point. Your original post refutes that there is ANY economic benefits from welfare/food stamps. We are pointing out that that isn’t true. We aren’t saying “it’s the only form of economic benefit.”

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
3:53 pm

Red states such as the Southern states also have higher minority populations which drags down education levels and percentages of college grads.

True colors revealed.

LOL. Yeah. Those minorities sure are dumb aren’t they.

And they only have them in the South !!!!

Lord knows they have had the same opportunities as whites in the South from the beginning.

Lets just say we see the world in VERY VERY VERY different ways.

At the end of the day you have to be you.

Thats punishment enough i guess.

George P. Burdell

September 19th, 2012
3:53 pm

Jamvet,

the data I have only shows up to 2010 for wages and inflation but since 1993 wages have gone up 80.15% while inflation has gone up 51.9%. A similar result is found going back to 1967 when you add SS taxes and Medicare taxes as part of compensation. I’m sure there have been recent periods where you would find the relationship has gotten worse, but over any measure of time, it has improved for all workers, at least the ones that are able to find jobs.

I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please

September 19th, 2012
3:56 pm

Kyle let’s just cut through the chase here and recite what these leftwing OBAMA REDISTRIBUTION socialists truly believe

Ive been hearing that Socialist crap since Clinton was elected.

It just a buzzword they know will get you lemmings all hot and bothered.

Nothing else.

Michael H. Smith

September 19th, 2012
3:58 pm

What is wrong with you getalife? You and your ilk have been stooping and bowing down to government dependence for years, when is your bunch going to stand up and take on responsibility for your own destiny rather than have government assign you a fate in life?

getalife

September 19th, 2012
3:58 pm

We should cut the redistribution to wealthy and corporations that don’t need any help.

This mindless waste of taxpayer money must end now if you care about the debt..

Linda

September 19th, 2012
3:58 pm

adnil@3:40, Democrats/liberals could have passed Econ 101 if they weren’t plagerists.

Can’t come up with your own thoughts/material?

Karl Marx

September 19th, 2012
3:59 pm

Interesting that Henry Ford’s wage policies seem to be creeping into the politico blog scene. It will be fun watching what this get spun and twisted into. Mr. Ford didn’t just significantly raise salaries once he did it a few times and he didn’t do it for just one reason. He knew that his workers would not necessarily spend money on his cars. The might but a new appliance, go on vacation, or go out to a movie and then those people might by a Ford. He also wanted to attract the best and create a stable work force which fed his bottom line. Even Toyota owes a great deal to Henry Ford because without Henry Ford’s writing Taiichi Ohno might have not have designed the Toyota Manufacturing System. Anyway here is the rule if you really want to fix the problem. It is really simple.

The Private sector provides the revenue for the Public sector.

If you don’t have a vibrant, growing private sector then you can’t have a well funded public sector for very long.

Michael H. Smith

September 19th, 2012
3:59 pm

Ive been hearing that Socialist crap since Clinton was elected.

It just a buzzword they know will get you lemmings all hot and bothered.

Nothing else.

And you cannot deny a word of that crap without LYING.

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
4:00 pm

Who cannot afford to go to Europe/NYC/wherever like they used to take for granted.

I can’t find a simple chart to demonstrate the affordability of travel, but from personal experience, I know that travel is much more frequent now than 40 years ago. Heck, we couldn’t even afford a long distance call back then let alone a trip to Florida or Europe.

No matter how you slice it or dice it, the average schmo lives far better today than 40 years ago.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
4:01 pm

George P

Are those nominal or real wages? Since one can’t run from inflation when purchasing something, you also must take into account wages adjusted for inflation, which are “real wages”.

Thanks for the clarification.

getalife

September 19th, 2012
4:01 pm

Michael H. Smith,

We recovered half of the jobs you lost and we will recover them all in his second term.

It takes jobs so Americans can get back to work.

Focus on the middle class not the wealthy con.

Michael H. Smith

September 19th, 2012
4:02 pm

If you don’t have a vibrant, growing private sector then you can’t have a well funded public sector for very long.

Somehow between the socialist democrats and big spending republicans they have managed to keep it going for far too long on debt and a weak private sector economy. Soon we will become another Greece.

getalife

September 19th, 2012
4:05 pm

noonan is freaking out.

gop are turning on mitt.

President 52% in mitt’s home State off Michigan.

You cons are going down.

Michael H. Smith

September 19th, 2012
4:06 pm

getalife

No we have not recovered the jobs we’ve have lost since obama took office. Unemployment was below 8% when obama took over, after his stimulus that he said would keep unemployment below 8% it hasn’t gone back down below that number

obama has produced a NET JOB LOSS.

adniL

September 19th, 2012
4:06 pm

Linda@3:58, Republicans/Conservatives could have passed Econ 101 if they could think.

See the problem with Republicans/Conservatives is that they can’t come up with their own thoughts/material? Instead they resort to spouting utter nonsense most likely heard from Rush or Sean and attempt to claim intellectual superiority with such drivel.

getalife

September 19th, 2012
4:07 pm

Stop lying con.

getalife

September 19th, 2012
4:08 pm

gop blocked Veterans Jobs Program.

Support our troops cons.

Gimme Gimme Gimme

September 19th, 2012
4:09 pm

Finn – “Kyle, who is arguing this? I don’t think anyone is kidding themselves on this point. Your original post refutes that there is ANY economic benefits from welfare/food stamps. We are pointing out that that isn’t true. We aren’t saying “it’s the only form of economic benefit.”

Lift with your legs so you don’t hurt your back moving those goal posts. LOL

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
4:09 pm

Finn said,

Not necessarily. There is a good chance that $1 would have gone into the stock market or a savings account to be unproductive for generations.

Right, so we let the government have it because THEY know how to spend it better than you do! They always spend our money so efficiently!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
4:11 pm

B, the very first brand new car I bought in 1979 was a Chevrolet sedan off of the showroom floor at a dealership in Niagara Falls, NY. It cost me $4500. Gas was about fifty cents a gallon, if I recall correctly.

Now a brand new Chevrolet sedan costs….? Five times that much? Or more? And gas has gone up by a factor of 8.

When comparing car costs, the front end purchase price is only part of the equation. Back in the day, it was an accomplishment to limp a car past 100,000 miles. I took my last 3 cars past 240,000 miles. In addition, cars require far less maintenance than in the 1960s or 1970s. Now it is normal to go 4000-5000 miles between oil changes, and nearly 100,000 miles before needing a tuneup.

As for the price of gas, that seems to only have been a problem since Obama took office…… ;-)

Gimme Gimme Gimme

September 19th, 2012
4:11 pm

adnil – “Instead they resort to spouting utter nonsense most likely heard from Rush or Sean and attempt to claim intellectual superiority with such drivel.”

I would listen to them before I took my economic advice from Rev. Al

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
4:12 pm

If you think money being saved in a bank or invested isn’t benefiting the economy, then you’re probably a victim of public schooling and never learned even basic economics. It’s likely that such capital is doing more economic good than some parasite buying the #3 Value Meal.

Investment > Consumption.

Michael H. Smith

September 19th, 2012
4:13 pm

Oh and getalife, I don’t do “CLASS WARFARE”. And I don’t look for equal results, equal rights will do.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
4:13 pm

JamVet@3:34, I’m very proud of my Bachelor of Science degree in Economics from one of the largest universities in the SE USA.
Even sixth graders know that food stamps is a goofy means to stimulate the economy. They also know that paying for advertising with taxpayer dollars to promote the use of food stamps in SPANISH is kinda suspect.

Mary Elizabeth

September 19th, 2012
4:14 pm

“America’s middle class has gotten clobbered for 40 plus years.”
—————————————————————-

I agree, and here is why that has happened to the middle and lower classes, in my opinion:

For the past four decades, many of the super rich have begun to believe that practically all of their money belongs to them, alone, and they resent “the government” taking their money for the purpose of “redistributing” it to the less fortunate. Those are the thoughts of people with limited imaginations and limited compassion, imo, even though they may know how to accrue wealth. Moreover, they have used propaganda to sway others of less wealth to hold that same attitude, imo. They do not see, or care to see, that the entire financial framework, within which our society operates, has been skewed to their benefit to begin with (perhaps going back as far as the days of Henry Ford). Is is right for some to make hundreds of millions of dollars running a corporation, and others who work for them to make only $12.70 an hour? One expects that the CEO will make more than the laborer, but is that proportion of difference right, balanced fairly, and equitable to all? I do not think that it is. And, then, these CEOs, and many others of the super rich, want to tax even more these laborers, deny them medical insurance if they are laid off (through having Obamacare to fall back upon), privatize their Social Security and Medicare, so that the money of the super rich does not end up being “redistributed” to serve the common good. All of these policies would be simply inhumane to inflict upon anyone making that little of an income to begin with, while trying to raise a family in today’s world, in proportion to what the very wealthy give themselves. Those who possess imagination enough to see beyond their own particular situations, and who can see what others may face, and who do not try to depict others in caricatured negative images (the poor) can see what has been happening. At least, that is what I believe has been happening in our nation for the past 40 plus years to the detriment of the middle and working classes.

Gimme Gimme Gimme

September 19th, 2012
4:14 pm

Please be kind to the Lib’s. When you watch MSNBC and listen to Keith Olbermann you can’t help but be confused.

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
4:15 pm

Has anyone else noticed that all the Democrats/liberals have no clue about economics & that all the Republicans/conservatives have a clear understanding of economics?

Linda, I will agree that some of the economic ideas advanced by the Libs today are beyond laughable. Looks like Kyle and Doom have been doing a good job shooting darts into their hyperinflated arguments. Particularly laughable today is the idea that invested money is somehow “sitting on the sidelines”. That along with the assertion that the best way to stimulate the economy is to give everyone food stamps. The way that food stamp money multiplies is simply astonishing.

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
4:16 pm

I agree, and here is why that has happened to the middle and lower classes, in my opinion:

You may agree, ME, but unfortunately the facts and stats don’t. We’re all better off now than 40 years ago, from the richest to the poorest.

Michael H. Smith

September 19th, 2012
4:17 pm

Hey getalife what party is responsible for passing the earned income tax credit that gives poor people( you know the 47% you whine about) who don’t earn enough money to pay federal income tax a government check? :lol:

Gimme Gimme Gimme

September 19th, 2012
4:17 pm

Mary Elizabeth-

What a blinkered view of things. Once again someone ignores the fact the middle class tried to live like millionaires through Credit Cards and Equity Loans.

There are many causes for the demise but you choose to look at one slice of the pie and the smallest piece at that.

Michael H. Smith

September 19th, 2012
4:18 pm

Good evening to all.

Gimme Gimme Gimme

September 19th, 2012
4:19 pm

Michael H. Smith-

Welcome to the jungle. :)

Linda

September 19th, 2012
4:20 pm

adnil@4:06, YOU were the one who copied MY original thoughts & material.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
4:23 pm

Linda

If you do not mind me asking, how many degrees do you have?

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
4:27 pm

“LOL. Yeah. Those minorities sure are dumb aren’t they.”

Nope. I never said that. You did. Educational attainment is lower amongst minorities. That’s just a fact of life that we all know. And the red states- particularly the ones in the south have a higher % of minorities.

“And they only have them in the South !!!!”

The southern states have a higher % of blacks then say Wisconsin or Connecticut. Surely you know that.

“Lord knows they have had the same opportunities as whites in the South from the beginning.”

Nope. For centuries blacks had practically no opportunities in America. No one denies that. But nowadays if you have a black kid and a white kid from the same economic status the black kid has more doors open to him via affirmative action.

“Lets just say we see the world in VERY VERY VERY different ways.

At the end of the day you have to be you.

Thats punishment enough i guess.”

Resorting to insults doesn’t bolster your argument cheesy.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
4:31 pm

Bruno@4:15, It’s also quiet clear that many of the Democrats/liberals on this blog today did not read the Kessler article. I don’t think they’re even interested in economics, except the propaganda they hear on the likes of MSNBC.
I thought Kessler’s idea of I-Economics vs G-Economics was brilliant. I hope Romney/Ryan use it on the trail.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
4:31 pm

Bruno and JamVet,

From what I’ve seen the rising cost of education is due primarily to govt subsidizing education so much. The more you subsidize something the more you drive up the cost. Over 600 colleges and universities now have rock climbing walls amongst other amenities. Tuition is rising not because education is any more expensive but because colleges knowing that tuition is being subsidized are putting money into more and more amenities to compete for and attract those students.

adniL

September 19th, 2012
4:32 pm

@Linda 4:20 YOU were the one that used NO orginal thoughts or material. But then you never do. Just sweeping unfounded and unsupportable BS. If you want to make an argument make it but don’t insult anyones intelligence with CRAPPY hyperbole that a first grader can pick apart.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
4:37 pm

adniL: Why the new name?

JDW

September 19th, 2012
4:40 pm

@Thulsa…”If you buy stock in Walmart or you buy corporate bonds aren’t you making an investment directly into the company outside of a small transaction cost?”

My God you really don’t have a clue do you?

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

If you buy stock in Walmart you are purchasing an asset from another third party. Whomever sells you the stock gets the money and the broker gets the transaction fee Walmart gets NOTHING. Same deal on a bond purchased in the open market.

The ONLY time the company gets the money is in an IPO, Secondary Stock Issue or initial Bond Issue.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
4:41 pm

They@4:23, Nth. That’s what I have. Nth degrees. What I have more of than degrees is unlimited common sense.
What I don’t have is food in my new refrigerator. Got to go.
Have a nice evening!

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
4:42 pm

…socialists truly believe, as Karl Marx said…

Will some tell MHS that McCarthyism died a horrific and shameful death sixty years ago?

Thank you.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
4:44 pm

We’re all better off now than 40 years ago, from the richest to the poorest.

In terms of inflation adjusted incomes, no, not much. If at all.

The minimum wage is worth LESS now than it was in 1968…

cc

September 19th, 2012
4:44 pm

Del@3:25 pm:
“push the majority of Americans into total dependence on the federal government”
I believe that is only a small part of a much bigger picture!

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
4:45 pm

It was science the other day, so I guess you meant a BS in Economics…………

Or literal BS?

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
4:46 pm

cc

Tell us the entire picture. I am sure you have the unbiased and inside scoop

Do tell.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
4:46 pm

“In what way?? Houses, cars, consumer products, travel, etc, are all far more affordable to the average American now than in the 1970s.”

I know that in 3 measures life is much better. Flying is substantially cheaper than it was in the 70s. After deregulation the cost of flying dropped like a rock. My bro is flying in from Indy for $78 a ticket one way. That’s unreal. Consumer goods are substantially cheaper. And then the cost of phone service. Please. Everyone knows that phone rates are unbelievably cheap relative to back in the 70s or even the 80s. I remember in college in 86 or so before the telecomm dereg act passed that my buddy in Montgomery would call his girlfriend 88 miles away in B’ham. An instate long distance phone call costed 33 cents a minute which back in 85 was a good chunk of change. People forget how good we got it today compared to 30 years ago. Costs of things such as air travel, phone service, consumer goods have plummeted with correspondingly high increases in quality and technology improvements like the internet, cell phone service, etc.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
4:47 pm

Linda

Maybe it is both…………… Never know.

;-)

These Lying Eyes!!!

September 19th, 2012
4:49 pm

Wait a minute…. I keep seeing Kyle and the Crew refer to Obama as having increased Food stamps…..I am sorry but the increase in food stamps was caused by the pulling back of the economy. By all accounts ( even Kyle’s) this began in late 2007…. How about we stop trying to hang this one on the PUTUS and make it what it is…The result of a shrinking economy and a growing poplulation. The problem of cost and the reality of the need is legit, but for once stop trying to pin this one on Obama……..

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
4:53 pm

Tuition is rising not because education is any more expensive but because colleges knowing that tuition is being subsidized are putting money into more and more amenities to compete for and attract those students.

I’ve read the same, Doom, primarily among private colleges. As a result, many students have become spoiled and demand numerous amenities. But, having said that, college profs as a group are making a pretty penny. Especially considering their generous vacation schedules.

Which doesn’t take away from my original point to JamVet–We’re all living far better than 40 years ago, poor and rich alike.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
4:57 pm

“If you buy stock in Walmart you are purchasing an asset from another third party. Whomever sells you the stock gets the money and the broker gets the transaction fee Walmart gets NOTHING. Same deal on a bond purchased in the open market.”

What is your point sir? You are purchasing part of the company itself. The broker makes a small transaction fee. So what.

“The ONLY time the company gets the money is in an IPO, Secondary Stock Issue or initial Bond Issue.”

We all know that JDW. You’re not enlightening anybody-especially somebody who had a series 7 license and sold securities for 7 years. Again. What is your point? If your only point is that my purchase of Walmart stock doesn’t mean Walmart gets any more investment funds then so what. I don’t care about that. I care about the appreciation I will hopefully get off their shares and the wealth it will create for me which I will then hopefully put into an IPO of another company, a small business, or a secondary offering.

Bruno

September 19th, 2012
4:59 pm

In terms of inflation adjusted incomes, no, not much. If at all.

Again, Jam, raw income data is a relatively meaningless stat. If everyone is living better in terms of housing, travel. consumer products, etc., then I view that as a plus, not a negative as you seem to do. Obviously the gap between the top and bottom is greater, but as long as those at the bottom are living fairly well, then I’m not that concerned.

Li'l Aynie

September 19th, 2012
5:01 pm

Don’t ya’ll forget: the top tax rate was 91% when Ford was working his magic.

High taxes spur creativity. If Ford had been able to collect biliions from his efforts he probably would have stashed his trove in overseas tax havens and retired to the South of France. Since he netted only a few hundred thousand a year, he kept working to perfect assembly-line methods.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
5:02 pm

Kyle, quit hiding. Tell us the solution to the problems of plutocrats and “brain drain” within your ranks. Are you going to sit by and watch the base of your party die off without fresh recruits? You’re only going to be able to fool people for so long and with Willard alienating more portions of our population each week now, that time is growing shorter. How many defeats will it take?

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
5:05 pm

Bruno,

I was a little kid in the 70s. But I know that in terms of material wealth, food and restaurant choices, clothing, travel, consumer goods, phone service, etc that we have vastly more in the way of choices and goods at an affordable price that we did in the 70s. Now our purchasing power has greatly been diminished recently with QE1, 2, and 3. Did you see the latest report a week or 2 ago that real incomes have diminished almost 10% just since O took office? Its all that money being printed which is devaluing our currency and nothing more than a hidden tax on the economy- a tax that hurts the poor more than anyone. That is the irony of what the liberals do not understand about what is happening under O.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
5:06 pm

adnil@4:32, Take an Advil.
It is a fact that economics is in no way the forte of Democrats/liberals. The bizarre comments on this blog today prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is also a fact that math is not included in their forte. Borrowing & spending our way into prosperity has not worked & has caused our credit rating to be downgraded TWICE.
If my comments insult you, then don’t read them. At least MY comments are not peppered with personal insults & cuss words as are yours.
Go pick on someone else.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
5:09 pm

Yeah TD, I just don’t understand

I need smart folks like you to get me by.

How I made it this far is beyond me, but I will keep seeking our your wisdom

:-)

JDW

September 19th, 2012
5:10 pm

@Thulsa…

The point is that the aftermarket does not drive corporate or job growth but mainly Financial sector and personal profits. There is no reason for it to receive preferential l tax treatment.

Now as the Series 7…pssssstttt I have one too….you ought to know better than this…

“If you buy stock in Walmart or you buy corporate bonds aren’t you making an investment directly into the company outside of a small transaction cost?”

Because again, no you aren’t. You are investing in a security purchased from a third party that you hope will go up. That security does have some rights conveyed by the issuing company but you have not invested directly in the company.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
5:11 pm

seeking out………

excuse me

I’m not worthy………….

:-)

Linda

September 19th, 2012
5:12 pm

They@4:45, A degree in Economics might be in arts at one university or in science at another. Mine is a Bachelor of Science.

Darwin

September 19th, 2012
5:14 pm

But the Keynesian approach to Lockheed Martin is ok, right?

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
5:16 pm

Linda

Got you. I thought I read a post the other night where you were referencing your degree and knowledge in relation to climate change. Not sure how an economics degree, unless you minored in something else would give you that sort of scientific knowledge on the topic in question.

Apparently it wasn’t you. ;-) Allow me to extend an apology for my mistake

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
5:17 pm

I find it more alarming that some people are still stuck in Vietnam era politics and economic theory. Key word there is THEORY. That means it has never been proven as fact. Facts often elude the ditto-heads. They have no use for facts or fact checks. They only want their egos stroked and their fears and hatreds fanned. I have yet to meet a ditto-head that could mask their bigotry or xenophobia. People like Willard sell them down the river and they come back for more. They are too busy living in some fairy tale to notice what’s really going on. The super rich are getting richer while the middle class keeps sliding towards poverty. It’s too bad we all don’t have millionaire parents to bankroll our lives. That is somehow our fault too, according to the ditto-heads and their handlers.

cc

September 19th, 2012
5:19 pm

I was shocked (shocked, I tell you!) to hear Hussein say that he favored a “redistribution of wealth”. Was that ever a surprise to me! I’m sure no one else suspected that, either. In other news, the AG (Withholder) has cleared himself of any wrongdoing and announced his findings to the world . . .

Richard Nixon had a squeaky clean administration by comparison to the current regime . . .

They BOTH suck@4:46 pm:
You’re a bright fellow. I’m sure you can figure it out for yourself!

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
5:21 pm

cc

Figured as much. Thanks for the expected reply

Darwin

September 19th, 2012
5:22 pm

“Romney vows to help the poor” Well, he’s not getting my vote now.

Darwin

September 19th, 2012
5:23 pm

Redistribution of wealth? OK, you pay your property taxes. Where does it go? Does some of it go the pay teachers? If you answered yes. Guess what, wealth was just redistributed.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
5:24 pm

It is a fact, in my own made up sixth grade reality, that economics is in no way the forte of Democrats/liberals.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
5:24 pm

According to Willard we have to cater to people like him because he is a “creator.” Still waiting for proof of something he “created” that benefits the American worker. In Willard’s version of America, the people like him are oppressed and the poor folks are living high on the hog. Willard obviously never tried to raise a family on the kind of wages he wants to pay. He actually has ditto-heads convinced that he built some great billion dollar enterprise all on his own. Too bad he leaves out the part where his daddy bank rolled his start ups. The fairy tale continues…

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
5:29 pm

“The point is that the aftermarket does not drive corporate or job growth but mainly Financial sector and personal profits. There is no reason for it to receive preferential l tax treatment.”

You have a point about the aftermarket. But what you are not recognizing is that stock or capital gains represent wealth creation. And creating wealth then allows us to invest and create more wealth, more jobs, companies, and opportunity. When you start taxing wealth at exorbitant rates you are then disencentivizing innovation, entrepreneurial risk, etc.

“Now as the Series 7…pssssstttt I have one too….you ought to know better than this…”

Doesn’t look like you’re using it if you’re blogging all day.

“Because again, no you aren’t. You are investing in a security purchased from a third party that you hope will go up. That security does have some rights conveyed by the issuing company but you have not invested directly in the company.’

So if a guy owns 51% of the shares of a company are you telling me that that man does not directly own the majority of that company and that he only has some rights conveyed to him by the issuing company? I’m sorry sir but that is downright laughable. You’re going to have a hard time convincing the CEO and the board that this man who owns 51% of the shares doesn’t really directly own a good part of the company and thus has no influence. You have completely lost it with that one.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
5:32 pm

Yes, America, you too can be like Willard. That is if you can just “borrow money from your parents.” Then start your own corporation because “corporations are people.” If you don’t have millionaire parents to give you millions, too bad. Good luck trying to get a start up loan in this economy, the banks are sitting tight on their money that we bailed them out with. Of course there is a third option, just wait for your trickle to come down from the plutocrats. You know because that trickle has been flowing for 30 plus years now. Real talk folks.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
5:33 pm

they both suck,

You being a smarty pants? You know I’m not that wise. Quite foolish in fact on many things. I just know and understand economics is all. All that tuition money spent on econ and finance degrees I better know something.

JamVet

September 19th, 2012
5:34 pm

Richard Nixon had a squeaky clean administration by comparison to the current regime . . .

Completely fallacious.

I surmise that you were still in diapers when all of the following went down:

VP Spiro Agnew resigned from office and was convicted in federal court on felony charges of income tax evasion.

Nixon’s infamous “hit lists”.

He fired special Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox, and forced his Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General to resign when neither would do it for him.

He release edited transcripts of taped White House conversations.

Colson went to prison, as did Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Mitchell. I believe several others did as well.

Nixon resigned in utter disgrace and humiliation.

The Bush administration was dam near as bad.

But none of them hold a candle to the most criminally riddled administration in all of modern American history – Ronald Reagan’s.

And you can look it up!

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
5:34 pm

No, Li’l Aynie, it wasn’t: In 1914, the year he increased wages, the top federal income tax rate was 7% — starting at (adjusted for inflation) $11.2 million. You didn’t owe any income tax unless you made more than $448,000 (again, adjusted for inflation).

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
5:36 pm

TD

Again, “liberals do not understand”…….

I’m not that worthy and will seek out your wisdom

:-)

WWonka

September 19th, 2012
5:36 pm

Kyle, you asked: Interested: Then why don’t we give everyone $50,000 worth of food stamps to use every year? We’d have the greatest economy in history!

What a ridiculous question to ask !

Do you eat $ 4,166.66 worth of groceries a month Kyle ?

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
5:37 pm

Gravy Train,

By trickle down do you mean all that extra money being printed that has stocks surging because of all the money flowing into them? And consequently all the fatcats on wall st. making all that coin because of this money printing and the ensuing rise in stock prices? I’m glad to see you and I agree on Obama’s trickle down economics.

Kyle Wingfield

September 19th, 2012
5:38 pm

WWonka: I think you missed the point.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
5:39 pm

they both suck,

I don’t consider you a full blown liberal. Therefore I arbitrarily removed you from the “liberals don’t understand” grouping. Doomy can do that ya know.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
5:41 pm

TD

just messing with you

Have a good one. Out for a jog.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
5:42 pm

Do you eat $ 4,166.66 worth of groceries a month Kyle ? wwonka

wwonka,

Then we’ll just give them 10k in food stamps for the year and then give them 40k in newly created housing voucher stamps and money spending stamps that work just similar to a food stamp card and from there we will watch the economy just take off. The principle is the same.

WWonka

September 19th, 2012
5:56 pm

Kyle, I know you missed the point !

Food stamps used by people that are less fortunate during these hard economic times, do stimulated the economy ! There are no “Ifs & buts” about it. There is no need to argue this fact by asking a ridiculous question that has nothing to do with the fact at hand !

WWonka

September 19th, 2012
5:59 pm

Then we’ll just give them 10k in food stamps for the year and then give them 40k in newly created housing voucher stamps and money spending stamps that work just similar to a food stamp card and from there we will watch the economy just take off. The principle is the same.

Thulsa Doom,

Who do you mean by “THEM” ? ! ?

getalife

September 19th, 2012
6:00 pm

The romney campaign is collapsing.

gop jumping ship.

Worse than mccain and palin and using the same failed redistribution lie.

Just desperately slinging poo.

Will ryan go rogue.

Same ole failed gop crap like 08

getalife

September 19th, 2012
6:03 pm

You can’t collapse our economy then insult half of America and call them names.

What is wrong with the right?

Inarticulate? No ignorance and way out of touch with the American people.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
6:06 pm

They@5:16, It was probably me. A degree in science is a degree in science. I did not spend 4 years in economics classes.
It does not take a degree in science to understand photosynthesis or weather or the politics of carbon trading.

MarkV

September 19th, 2012
6:12 pm

It is no wonder that Kyle urges us to read Kessler’s article, rather than presenting his own version of the arguments, because Kessler’s article is not what Kyle purports it to be – a well-reasoned analysis – but just a bunch of unproven claims not supported by anything else than Kessler’s opinion and lots of strawmen.

As this one related to food stamps: “Sure, it makes sense that the less well-off will spend whatever they are given, but unfortunately, not on the things to spur a hiring binge.”

No matter that nobody has claimed that that issuing food stamps would “spur a hiring binge.”

Another stupidity of the same kind is the one Kyle likes so much, the statement by state Sen. Charlie Bethel, R-Dalton, “If it were true that unemployment checks stimulated local economies, we’d be doing great in Northwest Georgia. We’ve cashed a lot.” Again, nobody claims that unemployment checks are THE answer to the problem of economy.

Probably the worst part of Kessler’s article is when he pooh-poohs the analysis of the multipliers of dollar spent, which showed food stamps having the highest multiplier, which Kessler calls “economic malpractice.” Naturally, he does not present anything that would really disprove that analysis, only the aforementioned stupidity that food stamps have not spurred a hiring binge.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
6:19 pm

@Thulsa…You have a point about the aftermarket. But what you are not recognizing is that stock or capital gains represent wealth creation. And creating wealth then allows us to invest and create more wealth, more jobs, companies, and opportunity. When you start taxing wealth at exorbitant rates you are then disencentivizing innovation, entrepreneurial risk, etc. ”

I am recognizing all that but simply saying that in today’s environment “short term gambling” should not be subsidized. I think it aught to look something like this…

Profit on securities held for less than 1 year should be taxed and 150% of income rates, if held for 1 to less than 5 years profits should be taxed and 100% of income tax rates and profits held for 5 or more years should be at 15% flat. Then we would have shifted the emphasis from short term gambling to long term investing. BTW carried interest bye bye…those are just regular investing profits.

“Doesn’t look like you’re using it if you’re blogging all day. ”

Nope, haven’t since the late 90’s but since then I have raised a bunch of venture capital and run a couple of companies.

“So if a guy owns 51% of the shares of a company are you telling me that that man does not directly own the majority of that company and that he only has some rights conveyed to him by the issuing company? I’m sorry sir but that is downright laughable. You’re going to have a hard time convincing the CEO and the board that this man who owns 51% of the shares doesn’t really directly own a good part of the company and thus has no influence. You have completely lost it with that one”

If you own 51% of a class you have control of the rights of that class. However if you bought that 51% in the aftermarket your investment was not directly in the company. Your future value is tied to the value of that class of stock but you have not invested directly in the company. As for the bit about the CEO…ever hear of a poison pill…ownership of a class gets you only the rights of that class.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
6:20 pm

oops not and 150% but at 150%

BADA BING

September 19th, 2012
6:23 pm

Claiming that Food Stamps stimulate the economy is about like me saying that I am going to buy a truckload of watermelons at $1 each, and sell them for 50 cents. My business plan? I am going to make it up in volume.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
6:30 pm

@BADA BING…”Claiming that Food Stamps stimulate the economy is about like me saying that I am going to buy a truckload of watermelons at $1 each, and sell them for 50 cents. My business plan? I am going to make it up in volume”

Actually from a macro economic perspective it’s like buying watermelons for $1 and selling them for around $9…but don’t let facts get in the way of a good rant on the “moochers”

These Lying Eyes!!!

September 19th, 2012
6:33 pm

OK….Righties out there ( Kyle, This includes you too)

Can any of you tell us anything…I mean ANYTHING in the history of mankind that has been sucessfully built from the top down??????

JDW

September 19th, 2012
6:34 pm

@Thulsa..if you are asking why the 150% on profits of less than a year…it is because 75%+ of daily volume is machine trading…that volatility is hurting real investors not helping…it amounts to skimming.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
6:35 pm

@Lying…”I mean ANYTHING in the history of mankind that has been sucessfully built from the top down”

Only thing I can think of is Dolly Parton… :lol:

BADA BING

September 19th, 2012
6:39 pm

If you rob Peter, to pay Paul, you are certainly not going to get any flak from Paul.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
6:40 pm

kayaker

No offense, but there isn’t much of anything that Obama or his administration is going to do that will be acceptable to you. Be honest.

Not saying you do not have any valid points when you post or have the right to speak your mind, but Obama could fart, whistle or high five Bill Clinton and you would fly off the handle.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
6:42 pm

Excuse me.

Wrong blog. My apologies.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
6:47 pm

JDW

“I am recognizing all that but simply saying that in today’s environment “short term gambling” should not be subsidized.”

So in your opinion a prudent investment decisionis nothing more than gambling. For a guy that has a Series 7 you just lost a serious amount of credibility with that statement.

“Profit on securities held for less than 1 year should be taxed and 150% of income rates, if held for 1 to less than 5 years profits should be taxed and 100% of income tax rates and profits held for 5 or more years should be at 15% flat.”

JDW,

I’m going to say it one more time. Go back to the IRS tables all the way back to the 1920s and look and see what happens to federal tax receipts when we raise capital gains taxes above 30% and higher. We don’t need our opinions on this. We just need the historical facts regarding what happens to treasury receipts when capital gains tax rates are high.

“Then we would have shifted the emphasis from short term gambling to long term investing.”

No it wouldn’t. That’s just an opinion you came up with and its backed up by nothing that I can see.

Nope, haven’t since the late 90’s but since then I have raised a bunch of venture capital and run a couple of companies.

Well then how do you have an active series 7 if you don’t even use it? I gave mine up back in the 90s but am in the process of getting it back.

If you own 51% of a class you have control of the rights of that However if you bought that 51% in the aftermarket your investment was not directly in the company. Your future value is tied to the value of that class of stock but you have not invested directly in the company. As for the bit about the CEO…ever hear of a poison pill…ownership of a class gets you only the rights of that class.

Nope. You’re now just deflecting. If someone owns the majority of the common shares of a company they pretty much own that company and can rule the day. Its real ownership. For example if the Walton’s still own the majority of Walmart common stock then they own the majority of the company. Its as simple as that and going into deflections about the different classes of stock isn’t going to change that. There’s not anyone that disputes that. As for a poison pill that is completely and wholly irrelevant to the conversation at hand. I can’t imagine why you even brought that up.

JDW,

I understand your basic premise which is that you view short term investing as nothing more than gambling. For the sake of argument though lets say you’re right. So what? That “gambling” provides tax revenue and if you raise the capital gains tax rate to the obscene levels that you speak of then you destroy the incentive of that short term “gambling”. And you destroy the massive amount of tax revenues that it generates. History has shown that if we were to make the capital gains tax 100 or 150% as you advocate that enormous amounts of tax revenues would simply disappear. Why you choose to ignore this most basic historical reality is nothing short of shocking.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
6:48 pm

@Thulsa…Kyle too…

http://business.time.com/2012/09/19/jack-bogle-speaks-on-how-to-fix-wall-street/?iid=biz-main-lede

Just came accross this and it is very relevant to our early conversation…Jack Bogle founded Vanguard.

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
6:49 pm

Mary Elizabeth: For the past four decades, many of the super rich have begun to believe that practically all of their money belongs to them
———–

Wow.

The greedy, envious, loser mentality is strong in that one.

If that’s the kind of mental retardation you and your ilk tought the children, it’s no wonder this country is so effed

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
6:50 pm

Mary Elizabeth: For the past four decades, many of the super rich have begun to believe that practically all of their money belongs to them
———–

Wow.

The greedy, envious, loser mentality is strong in that one.

If that’s the kind of mental retardation you and your ilk tought the children, it’s no wonder this country is so effed.

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
6:50 pm

Pardon the double post!

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
6:52 pm

“@Thulsa..if you are asking why the 150% on profits of less than a year…it is because 75%+ of daily volume is machine trading…that volatility is hurting real investors not helping…it amounts to skimming.”

JDW,

I’m well aware of that and perhaps that should be looked into by the authorities. However skimming is a separate issue. You don’t destroy the markets and the substantial tax revenues that are derived from trading just because some program traders are skimming using sophisticated programs and being physically closer to the exchange then anyone else.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
6:53 pm

@Thulsa…”History has shown that if we were to make the capital gains tax 100 or 150% as you advocate that enormous amounts of tax revenues would simply disappear. ”

Read the link, I was right the first time you just don’t reallu understand. Now as to the above statement…if that were true it would be impossible to have both cap gains rates and govt revenue at historical lows at the same time….

WHERE THEY ARE TODAY

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
6:53 pm

Which country will do better in the long run…the country that saves and invest, reducing consumption somewhat, or the country that spends all of its income?

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
6:55 pm

The main thing I get out of reading these blogs everyday is that I live on a different planet than most everybody else.

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
7:02 pm

These Lying Eyes!!!: Can any of you tell us anything…I mean ANYTHING in the history of mankind that has been sucessfully built from the top down??????
——–

Not sure what you mean by “top down”…seems to me Apple is at the top and is pretty good at building things…is that what you meant?

Now maybe YOU can tell US how raising taxes on a business helps the grow and create jobs.

mike

September 19th, 2012
7:04 pm

I have to hand it to you conservative right wingers. You don’t give up.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

No matter how hopeless the situation is.

I invite you to open the link above and review it carefully. Notice that President Barack Obama has 247 electoral college votes and only needs 270 to win.

If my math is correct, that only leaves 23 electoral college votes to win.

Now, if you add Virginia, where President Barack Obama has a 3 point lead, then he has 260 electoral college votes. Just 10 shy of the 270 needed to be elected.

Now, if you add Ohio, where President Barack Obama has a 4.2 point lead, then he has 278 electoral college votes. Enough to be elected.

So, it really doesn’t matter what Florida and all of the rest of the so-called “swing” states do, President Barack Obama will still be elected.

RGB

September 19th, 2012
7:05 pm

Nancy Pelosi thinks that increasing the number of abortions stimulates the economy, which is the justification she used to support increased funding earlier in The Inept One’s presidency.

The fact is, liberal politicians and their followers haven’t a clue. Neither Ba-rock nor Plugs has spent time in the private sector, and these bashers of capitalism have only disdain for people who have.

The liberati are swiftly killing the goose that lays their golden eggs. They’ll squeal like pigs when their “funding” is cut off.

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
7:11 pm

JDW,

I gotta go but before I do I’ll let you know that I read the link. Keep in mind that this is one man’s opinion in that link. And it seems to me your entire argument is based upon one link from one man. Also in reading that link the gentleman barely touched on capital gains taxes and I didn’t see where he advocated 100-150% taxes on capital gains. I might be amenable to doing away with the carried interest that benefits hedge fund managers if it allows them to claim all their earnings as capital gains taxes instead of paying normal income tax rates like everyone else.

And I do understand program trading better than you think and perhaps better than you do. I’ve stated perhaps the authorities need to look into doing away with skimming which does nothing more than give an advantage to sophisticated program traders who do nothing more than take advantage of physical proximity to the floor and powerful computers and algorythms.So yeah I do understand it very well.

Last I’m going to say this for the 3rd or 4th and final time. To hell with your opinion, my opinion, and the opinion of the gentleman in your link. Go to the historical tax tables and take a look at the capital gains tax rates going back to the 1920s and government revenues from capital gains taxes throughout history. The correlation is unmistakable. The higher the rates- especially above 30 or 40 %, the less govt tax revenue we take in. Its not an opinion. Its an historical fact. And if you don’t understand the devastating effect that a 100-150% capital gains tax rate would have on our govt tax revenues then you understand absolutely nothing.

I gotta get going but if you do anything at least take the time to understand the historical reality of what your 100-150% tax rate would do to federal tax receipts.

RW-(the original)

September 19th, 2012
7:14 pm

Planet Hillbilly? Do they decide elections based on polls like apparently some people here think they do?

Thulsa Doom

September 19th, 2012
7:16 pm

if that were true it would be impossible to have both cap gains rates and govt revenue at historical lows at the same time….

Tax receipts are low because of the absymal economy we are in. Did you not know how weak our economy is? Where have you been the last few years. And you think that govt revenue would be higher if we stuck a 150% new tax on capital gains? Yeah. I’m sure that would drive people straight into the markets huh?

Real Athens

September 19th, 2012
7:20 pm

“The main thing I get out of reading these blogs everyday is that I live on a different planet than most everybody else” … here on this blog.

mike

September 19th, 2012
7:26 pm

Oh! did I deflate everyone’s hopes and dreams? I’m so sorry!

Maybe in 2024, your luck will change.

Hopes and Dreams and Change. Where have I heard that before?

Truth Squad

September 19th, 2012
7:27 pm

The truth is:Romney is losing.

Reading from the comments it is easy to see why the Republican Party is headed for minority status.It takes a certain kind of personality type to want to be in league with people who are so contemptuous of people who are not like them.

Shame on y’all for trying to turn the Henry Ford story into some modern Republican Party allegory.

Real Athens

September 19th, 2012
7:28 pm

“They@4:45, A degree in Economics might be in arts at one university or in science at another. Mine is a Bachelor of Science.” … in Home Economics.

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...

September 19th, 2012
7:31 pm

If Romney’s campaign is in “disarray,” then obozo’s must be flat out dysfunctional.

Oh wait… never mind.

ld

September 19th, 2012
7:39 pm

Long and short of it is that Henry Ford, like all the rest of the employer class, acts in their own best interest — sometimes benefitting the employees, usually not — but NEVER with benefitting the employees as an equal or priority motivation.

Romney is “employer class” and has NEVER, to my knowledge, acted for the benefit of employees to the detriment of the moneyed investor employer class — and you can be fracking sure he never will.

mike

September 19th, 2012
7:52 pm

I almost forgot to comment on Kyle’s post.

It is certainly true that some schlub working at at factory job making more than minimum wage is overpaid.

In fact, why he even has a job is open for discussion. Can there be any doubt in Republispeak world, that that job should have been sent to China years ago?

It just makes sense, doesn’t it? Why pay some slob $7.25 an hour when you get a Chinaman in a sweatshop for $200 a month?

These Americans! They’re spoiled! If they hadn’t made Bad Choices, they wouldn’t be in the predicament they find themselves in now.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
8:02 pm

@Thulsa…”I’m sure that would drive people straight into the markets huh?”

See thats the part you aren’t getting…I want them out of the short term markets and spending their time and energy on something productive. Say helping build new companies or inventing something.

Right now we are wasting significant brain power learning new ways to game the system by program trading etc… They need to go to work for a living and add something to society.

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
8:02 pm

RW

Just the polls that are taken the first Tuesday in November, in even numbered years.

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
8:03 pm

If they’re worth more than $7.25 an hour, why aren’t they getting it?

I know why, but I’m guessing your answer will be quite entertaining and well worth waiting for.

JDW

September 19th, 2012
8:05 pm

@Thulsa…”Tax receipts are low because of the absymal economy we are in. Did you not know how weak our economy is? ”

OK its hard to let this pass…abysmal economy…hummmm I wonder did capital markets run amok have anything to do with that…why yes…YES INDEED

mike

September 19th, 2012
8:08 pm

“If they’re worth more than $7.25 an hour, why aren’t they getting it?” -Lil Barry

Because a Chinaman will do the same job for $200/month.

Since you know why, I would love to hear it. This has to be good.

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
8:10 pm

MarkV @ 6:12 pm

“Another stupidity of the same kind is the one Kyle likes so much, the statement by state Sen. Charlie Bethel, R-Dalton, “If it were true that unemployment checks stimulated local economies, we’d be doing great in Northwest Georgia. We’ve cashed a lot.” Again, nobody claims that unemployment checks are THE answer to the problem of economy.”

This “genius” seems to think unemployment checks create jobs, which I think we all agree is the key ingredient needed in improving the economy:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/01/pelosi-unemployment-checks-best-way-create-jobs/

Sucks to have her on your side, doesn’t it? ;-)

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
8:21 pm

Because they aren’t worth it.

It was a trick question.

In a free market, transactions happen when each side receives something of greater value to them than what they are giving up. If someone is willing to work for $7.25 an hour, they obviously value their time at sovarying less than that.

Duh.

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
8:23 pm

These Lying Eyes @ 6:33 pm

“OK….Righties out there ( Kyle, This includes you too)

Can any of you tell us anything…I mean ANYTHING in the history of mankind that has been sucessfully built from the top down??????”

Easy. My business. By definition, since the business is me (since according to the Board of Dentistry, that business cannot exist or run without me) and I am and always have been at the top, it was built top-down.

What do I win?

P.S. And I did build that.

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
8:23 pm

Dang, got fat fingers tonight. Meant to say “something less than that”.

Del

September 19th, 2012
8:28 pm

What it really gets down to is that around half the country just doesn’t see Obama as a very good president worthy of a second term and won’t be voting for him. About the same will be voting for him once again. The battle will be for the one to three percent undecided or for those who may change their decision during the final few days before the election. As the race stands now I feel it favors Obama, only because Romney has assumed for too long that the electorate will turn out against Obama because of the poor economy. His problem is that the electorate knows we have a poor economy but Romney hasn’t done a sufficient job in succinctly describing his plan for fixing it. Now I can understand what he would do and most of my fellow conservatives understand as well, but the majority of the total electorate probably does not. It’s not too late for Romney but it’s close to being too late. He must lay out a plan that people can understand and attack Obama aggressively on his lack of leadership not just on his failure to fix the economy. Additionally, he must significantly out perform Obama in the upcoming debates. He must rise to the challenge and get the job done because four more years of Obama would in all probability set this country back beyond recovery.

Bigguy

September 19th, 2012
8:30 pm

I could rob a bank and use ’stimulating the economy’ as my excuse

td

September 19th, 2012
8:30 pm

mike

September 19th, 2012
8:08 pm

“If they’re worth more than $7.25 an hour, why aren’t they getting it?” -Lil Barry

Because a Chinaman will do the same job for $200/month.

Since you know why, I would love to hear it. This has to be good.

How much are you willing to pay for your goods and services?

mike

September 19th, 2012
8:37 pm

“How much are you willing to pay for your goods and services?” –td

Well, td, since the labor portion of most goods produced only accounts for about 10% of their wholesale cost (using American workers), I would be willing to pay extra for prosperity to return to America again.

How about you?

mike

September 19th, 2012
8:39 pm

I think it’s important to note that multinational corporations DO NOT pass along the savings they realize from using foreign labor to the consumer.

They pocket the difference.

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
8:43 pm

How much are you willing to pay for your goods and services?

We can pay more for goods and services or we can pay taxes for the safety net for people who are out of work or underemployed. I’d rather keep my neighbors working.

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
8:47 pm

Mike @ 9:39,

“I think it’s important to note that multinational corporations DO NOT pass along the savings they realize from using foreign labor to the consumer.

They pocket the difference.”

Uh, they do until a competitor sees the opportunity to do the same thing with a smaller margin but make it up in volume.

And if you’re right, why is WalMart known for it’s high prices on all those items made in China? Isn’t that why nobody shops at WalMart and their parking lots are always empty?

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
8:48 pm

HillBilly

Agreed. It isn’t all a “win win” as the jobs went bye bye.

It appears so on the surface, but there is a price to pay long term.

mike

September 19th, 2012
8:51 pm

“why is WalMart known for it’s high prices on all those items made in China? Isn’t that why nobody shops at WalMart and their parking lots are always empty?”–Dr Boag

I read an article today that said that an any given time, over 78% of the shoppers at Wal-Mart are shopping for food in the food section.

You can’t spend those EBT on Chinese crap. Just food.

mike

September 19th, 2012
8:58 pm

Dr. Boag: let me ask you a question. And I want you to answer honestly. Did you work your way through dental school? Did you pay your own tuition? Did someone support you during this time?

Why, oh, why can’t everyone be rich like me? What a wonderful world this would be.

I’ll tell you why, because they made Bad Choices like being born poor. Or they were born without the obvious intelligence you have.

No matter what, they’re parasites, moochers on the productive class. If they had any sense they would’ve become dentists like me.

That’s it! A world full of dentists.

Del

September 19th, 2012
9:01 pm

What many don’t seem to understand is the global market playing field. As it began it wasn’t level for American based multinationals because of labor costs and because, while we opened up our markets wide our trading partners opened theirs narrowly. The multinational corporations had to wheel and deal internationally on their own because of the ineptitude of our politicians to do so in a manner that ensured parity much less trade advantage. Our corporations had to learn to negotiate with foreign governments to open up their markets for goods and services. The bargaining chips became access to our technologies and best practices and unfortunately jobs outside of the United States. Before anyone castigates American corporations for being ruthless profiteers filled with greed depriving American workers they should consider what the politicians from both parties created for our place in the so called global economy.

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
9:05 pm

Del

agreed 100%

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
9:07 pm

but there is a price to pay

mike

September 19th, 2012
9:07 pm

Dr. Boag: you have to be slowest typist ever! I bet I couldn’t even read your prescriptions, either!

I guess it’s time to call it a night. Let me know if anything new comes up, OK?

Del

September 19th, 2012
9:11 pm

I should have included not only jobs created outside the United States but also jobs within the United States filled by foreign workers who come here on H1B visas and L1’s. No their not here because they’re cheaper they’re here as payoff to the governments of their respective countries to be trained as professionals and as managers. They then return to their home countries with knowledge that they gained here, talk about brain drains out from this country.

td

September 19th, 2012
9:11 pm

mike

September 19th, 2012
8:37 pm

“How much are you willing to pay for your goods and services?” –td

Well, td, since the labor portion of most goods produced only accounts for about 10% of their wholesale cost (using American workers), I would be willing to pay extra for prosperity to return to America again.

How about you?

If labor cost $2 per hour in China and cost $10 per hour in the US then it can not be a 10% cost of the product. If a TV takes 10 hours to build then it will cost $80 dollars or 80% more in the US to build.

Now if you have the exact same TV’s sitting side by side at best buys and one is made in China and sales for $1000 and the other made in the US and sales for $1800 then which one are you going to buy?

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
9:12 pm

Del @ 9:01

I think both get an ample share of the blame. No clean hands when it comes to globalism, in my mind.

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
9:13 pm

Now if you have the exact same TV’s sitting side by side at best buys and one is made in China and sales for $1000 and the other made in the US and sales for $1800 then which one are you going to buy?

I’m not buying either one. That’s too damn much for a TV.

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
9:14 pm

Of course, that’s a moot point because as far as I know, there are no U.S made TVs. If there is, I’m unaware of it.

mike

September 19th, 2012
9:18 pm

“Now if you have the exact same TV’s sitting side by side at best buys and one is made in China and sales for $1000 and the other made in the US and sales for $1800 then which one are you going to buy?” –td

td: I know now that you were flirting with the pretty girl in arithmetic class.

The one made in China would be $1,000 and the one made in the U.S.A. would be $1,080.

If it had a PROUDLY MADE IN THE U.S.A. sticker on it, there wouldn’t be any choice for me!

Del

September 19th, 2012
9:21 pm

H.D.

Oh I don’t think that all in corporate America are goody two shoes by any stretch but their job is to turn profits for their shareholders. They’ve had to learn to compete and survive internationally because our politicians once again in both parties have been and continue to be inept.

td

September 19th, 2012
9:22 pm

mike

September 19th, 2012
9:18 pm

I know I am going to regret this but I have want to understand the logic. When labor cost are 80% more in the US and material cost are the same then how in the world can the same product be the cost the same amount?

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
9:25 pm

their job is to turn profits for their shareholders.

That’s a good point but it does bring up another question. How many stocks pay dividends any more? I don’t follow it but seems it’s not many from what I hear from people who are into that stuff. They’ve pretty well got things now where the shareholders have very little voice in what goes on. They all sit on each other’s board and the game is rigged, in my opinion. That’s one reason I choose not to play.

mike

September 19th, 2012
9:29 pm

td: let me break it down for you (and I’m going to write this real slow so you can get it)

If a television takes 10 hours to build, then it would cost $20 (10 x $2/hr) to build it in China. It would cost $100 (10 x $10/hr) to build it in the U.S.A. (Assuming, of course, that the multinational corporations pass that savings on to consumers).

Savings per television set = $80 ($100 – $20)

Therefore a television set built in China that cost $1,000 would cost $1,080 if built in the U.S.A.

Get it? Please say yes.

RC--(R--apoi)

September 19th, 2012
9:31 pm

Well, it’s good to see someone put the lie to that Henry Ford thing. Everyone knows Ford was so stingy the pennies he spent were squeezed so much they looked like a fried egg. He wouldn’t of paid a penny more than he had to.

I hope Wingfield takes up this George Washington lie pretty soon. Everybody knows he done it. He cut down that cherry tree and then lied like a cheap rug to try and get out of the Death Penalty he deserved.

Anyhow, I’m going to get off of here now. Alot of the people on this blog are crazier than Betty Mae Boggess ever was. I don’t want to catch nothing.

yuzeyurbrane

September 19th, 2012
9:35 pm

Kyle, ask all those merchants in Athens who cashed the checks or took the credit cards of all those students at Athens whose source of funds were either student loans or the heavily govt. subsidized UGA budget, including yourself. Oh, you are different. You are not a parasite because that money was an investment in you, not a handout.

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 19th, 2012
9:39 pm

They pocket the difference.
———–

It’s not a charity, Einstein.

BADA BING

September 19th, 2012
9:41 pm

Since it doesn’t matter where the money comes from ( in the “food stamp that stimulates the economy” scenario) why don’t we all just pay 10 times the normal price of all purchases? That would really stimulate the economy.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
9:51 pm

mike@8;37, 8;39, 8;31, 8;51, 9;07, 9;15, 9:29, etc. You are so misguided & the epitome of the reason that the states & the local governments need to take back our educational system from the federal government.

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
9:52 pm

Mike @ 8:58,

“Dr. Boag: let me ask you a question. And I want you to answer honestly. Did you work your way through dental school? Did you pay your own tuition? Did someone support you during this time?”

Honest answers: My parents paid for our college educations. However, my brother, who was valedictorian of his class in HS took 5 years to finish college. I did it in 3, so to be fair, my parents paid for year one of dental school, which was roughly equal to 2 yrs of college. The rest was up to me, all six figures of it. And I’m STILL paying the loans, thank you very much. Otherwise, I was married with a wife who worked as a nurse while I finished school. I also worked, but part-time.

“Why, oh, why can’t everyone be rich like me? What a wonderful world this would be.”

Why do you assume I’m rich? We are middle class, just now starting to see the higher part of that middle class, but it hasn’t always been that way, let me tell you! Ramen noodles remain in my cupboards and a semi-regular menu choice even now. Who is stereotyping whom here?!

“I’ll tell you why, because they made Bad Choices like being born poor. Or they were born without the obvious intelligence you have.”

My dad never made six figures in his life. He worked for Ford for 37 1/2 years, and they saved their money. We didn’t vacation except for going camping. My parents still live in the same house I grew up in literally 1.5 miles from the city line of Detroit. Nothing exceptional about their house. Except when I was an infant, I have NEVER even had my own bedroom. And now that I’m married 20 years, I hope it stays that way the rest of my life. Some of us actually build our lives because we choose to reach for our potentials, but that doesn’t make us all “rich” whatever that means.

“No matter what, they’re parasites, moochers on the productive class. If they had any sense they would’ve become dentists like me.”

It’s a great profession. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants to do it, but I’ll tell you that whoever does it better like it, because there are WAY easier ways to make money than dentistry! I do it because I love it! But the truth is that it is not for everyone. And it’s not even close to being all about smarts. I’m an intelligent guy. I recognize openly that God has given me my ability to think, but I also say that I have made more good choices than bad ones in committing to my education and working hard to be the best husband, dentist, and father I can be, and I don’t apologize for now beginning to see some of the fruits of those years of study and labor. Dental school SUCKS, and it is not cheap. Like I said, I am still paying off my student loans and will be for probably 10 more years. But I made the choice to study my butt off and not party in college. That’s how I finished in 3 years. A lot of my friends had a lot more fun than I did. Now, I get to have some, and it feels really good. I’m not going to apologize for what I make today. We literally lived paycheck to paycheck for the first 17-18 years of my marriage.

The truth is there are a LOT more guys and gals just like me than there are Mitt Romney’s in this world, but even though I don’t look down my nose at people, I still believe in the potential of the individual. I’m walking proof.

mike

September 19th, 2012
9:52 pm

Thanks, Linda.

Coming from you, that’s a real compliment!

mike

September 19th, 2012
9:57 pm

Dr. Boag: thanks for that heartfelt reply.

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
10:01 pm

You’re welcome, mike. Hope it gave you something to consider a different perspective.

Have a great night.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
10:03 pm

mike@9:52, I apologize if I interrupted your back & forth with Dr.Boag. Just ignore me as you usually do & read Dr. Boag’s comments. It will do you a whirl of good.
Also, read the article that Kyle referenced today on the WSJ. That might give you just a little bit of insight of the economics that are playing into to 2012.

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
10:05 pm

Something to consider related to these lines, and NOT from a conservative source. For your consideration:

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/joachim_de_posada_says_don_t_eat_the_marshmallow_yet.html

Hope it stimulates some thought.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
10:08 pm

Look at this idiot “David Boag” your customers built your business, doof. Without them, you would be sitting on top of an old refrigerator box trying to find a way to repay your education bills. (Since you did it yourself, I’ll assume Mommy and Daddy didn’t bankroll your six year education plan.) Thanks to your infinite wisdom of putting your name on this blog connected with your ill informed bloviations, I suggest you prepare for that customer base to shrink. Build on that, sucker.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
10:10 pm

mike@9:57, mike without a capital, That’s it? You only thank Dr. Boag for a “heartfelt reply?” Evidently you did not even read his comment. Even if you read his comment, it is evident that you could not even comprehend his comment. Don’t you wish your parents, assuming you had such, had home-schooled you?

They BOTH suck

September 19th, 2012
10:15 pm

Gravy

While not adhering to much of how David views political issues, at least based on what I have read, why would you be knocking him?

Yes he must have customers to succedd and he said his parents paid a portion of his education, however he still must be able to service those customers and he did earn that DDS based on his efforts.

Again, he and I probably would probably have many political differences, but I see no need to demean his efforts to get where he is at.

No matter the help he received, he still had to put in the work.

Yes, one can argue that others do not have same same “leg up” or argue that some had more opportunity, but knocking David’s efforts seems petty to say the least.

RW-(the original)

September 19th, 2012
10:17 pm

Of course, that’s a moot point because as far as I know, there are no U.S made TVs. If there is, I’m unaware of it.

There’s a company named Element that was supposed to start making TV’s in Michigan this year. I have no idea if they did but it might be worth looking in to if you’re looking for a set.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
10:18 pm

Boag, why don’t you share with the rest of us what health insurance companies do to your price scale. I can already hear it now: “…blah,blah…sliding scale…negotiating with insurance companies is tough…no, I don’t inflate my prices when billing an insurer…no, the whole transaction between doctors (even quasi-doctors), insurers and pharmaceutical companies is not a racket…”

Linda

September 19th, 2012
10:19 pm

Gravy Train@10:08, What did you think of the I-Economics vs. the G-Economics that the article by Kessler that Kyle referenced today? Let me guess. You did not even read the article. Democrats/ liberals are not interested in the economy, just junk propaganda from the corrupt media.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
10:20 pm

“Built it myself” seems most petty of all

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
10:26 pm

It’s the opinion of a douche bag, Linda. It takes place in the GOP land of make believe. Henry Ford was an antisemitic Nazi and he spent much of his fortune promoting those views. I’m still waiting for Kyle to take on the plutocrats that are wrecking the GOP. I wont even mention the “brain drain” epidemic of the last 12 years within those same ranks. How about the fact that there are still a few logical R’s left, but they are allowing plutocrats and the morons who follow them to lead the party straight into the jaws of another crushing defeat.

Old Timer

September 19th, 2012
10:27 pm

When the taxpayers become less than the government money recipents the end is near. Keep your powder dry. Obama thinks he is Santa Claus,

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
10:29 pm

Gravy,

You don’t get it. I live what I believe. I don’t hide who I am, because I don’t NEED to hide who I am. My patients choose me because of me and how I have chosen to run my office.

Guess which came first: My decisions for how to run the office to attract patients in order to build the business or the patients themselves? Your response assumes they walked in my door by default. Nothing could be further from the truth. But you go on going to all those businesses who are holding guns to your head in your world to make you go there.

I’m not trying to be everyone’s dentist, and apparently, I’ll never be yours. I’ll live. So will you. No hard feelings, at least not from my side.

To my knowledge, I’ve never held a gun to anyone’s head to make them come to see me. They choose to do so, because they want what I have to offer, and I don’t hide who I am, because I live my life honestly and in the open. Funny, my business is just now getting up to speed. The slow, but steady, road to success. There’s a big price to pay up front, but the reward on the back end looks like it’ll be really good.

Thanks for your concern.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
10:32 pm

Gravy Train@10:08 The only way that the rising costs of health insurance will be curbed is when health insurance will be treated like hazard insurance & vehicle insurance. When health insurance is used during a crisis, then health insurance is actually health insurance.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
10:39 pm

You still didn’t address the racket…pleading the 5th huh? Also, your customers decided to give you a try and you provided a service. At the end of the day you are nothing without them and you know it. You’re not the only one with business acumen, Boag. There are thousands of other dentists to take your place. Thanks for your little heart string story mixed with the standard Fox News talking points. For your sake, I’ll just assume you are telling the truth in the first place. However, when you start throwing out moronic statements like: “I did build it myself” I have my doubts

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
10:40 pm

David R. Boag, DDS @ 10:05

That isn’t really surprising. Self-discipline is something that seems to be fading as the years go by, at least in my part of the world. People want patience…….and they want it right now. Is it any wonder the world’s a mess?

Reminds me of something I heard attributed to Steven Colbert (who I don’t really care for) the other day, he said about this year’s election “The fate of our country is now in the hands of people who don’t think about what they want until they get right up to the register at McDonald’s,” referring to the “undecideds”.

mike

September 19th, 2012
10:43 pm

“The only way that the rising costs of health insurance will be curbed is when health insurance will be treated like hazard insurance & vehicle insurance. When health insurance is used during a crisis, then health insurance is actually health insurance.” –Linda

For once, Linda, I agree with you. I remember when health insurance was “major medical.” In other words, only used if something really bad happened to you.

Now it’s just a medical administration service. And I’m paying for everyone else’s “pecker pills.”

Linda

September 19th, 2012
10:46 pm

Gravy@10:26, If you think it’s cool to call me names, you are misguided. If you think that calling me names will cause me to cower in my basement, you are misguided.
I hope that Kyle will sever your ties to this blog forever. .

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
10:50 pm

Boag, where did you go, pal? You can run your business and carry yourself however you like. It doesn’t mean squat if the customers don’t come through the door. Lots of people come up with great ideas to make money in a service industry, only a few will survive. Why is that? The idea is great and the management is sound but not enough customers are coming through the door. Turn off the lights, lock the door, closed for business within a year. Stop trying to push your fairy tale and pray your arrogance doesn’t diminish your customer base

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
10:51 pm

Now it’s just a medical administration service.

Seems to me that these problems started back in the 70’s. People griped about health insurance then, too, but looking back on it, things weren’t that bad. Then along came something called the HMO. As I remember, and I’ll admit my memory gets hazy sometimes, one of the selling points was that you’d only pay a co-pay for doctor visits. The HMO was supposed to be the be-all, end-all of problems in health care and rising costs. Quickly behind that came, for profit hospitals, corporate groups (It’s hard to find a family doctor who owns his own practice any more), etc. Then the HMO got phased out and in came the PPO.

I’ve known several doctors, who for various reasons, had their own private practice but were forced to sell out to a corporate practice. A visit to them immediately changed. No longer could they take their time with you, some of them told me in confidence about constantly being pressured to “see more patients”. I even personally know one doctor who was fired for “spending too much time with the patients”.

In my opinion, what we have now doesn’t work for doctors and it doesn’t work for patients. I don’t think any of this has been progress. There’ve been great strides in the medical side of things but the business end sucks.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
10:52 pm

Kyle, Gravy’s comments @10:26 are entirely over the top, totally inappropriate.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
10:52 pm

I didn’t call you a name, lady. I was referring to the author of the crap Kyle is pushing on us. Reading comprehension is your friend.

Matz

September 19th, 2012
10:53 pm

The Dentist imagines:
“To my knowledge, I’ve never held a gun to anyone’s head to make them come to see me. They choose to do so, because they want what I have to offer, and I don’t hide who I am, because I live my life honestly and in the open.”

Bless your heart, but NO they don’t. There are two reasons people come to see you: (1) They have dental insurance as part of their compensation package at work, and want to make use of it regularly while they still have jobs because they could not afford it otherwise, and (2) Painful or broken teeth.

They might come back to you because they like you, how you run the office, what you yammer at them while their mouths are propped open and full of stuff, etc. Or maybe they come back because you were not overly offensive or ouch-ful — for a dentist.

But hey, I like the way you make it all about YOU. Heh…. Sure it is, buddy. Sure it is.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
10:54 pm

Kyle, Linda is obviously lacking in basic comprehension. I demand she be banned as well. LOL

Hillbilly D

September 19th, 2012
10:54 pm

It’s true that a lot of new businesses fail, for various reasons. In my personal experience, the number one cause of business failures in new businesses is that they underestimate how much operating money they will need. They may manage to make a small to modest profit but they run into cash flow problems and it sinks a lot of them before they can get squared away.

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
11:10 pm

Gravy,

“You still didn’t address the racket…pleading the 5th huh? Also, your customers decided to give you a try and you provided a service. At the end of the day you are nothing without them and you know it. You’re not the only one with business acumen, Boag. There are thousands of other dentists to take your place. Thanks for your little heart string story mixed with the standard Fox News talking points. For your sake, I’ll just assume you are telling the truth in the first place. However, when you start throwing out moronic statements like: “I did build it myself” I have my doubts”

You’ so close to getting it, because you’re right, there are thousands of others they are also free to choose. I wonder why they keep choosing me, then? Could it be that they receive some kind of benefit that they desire and that I just happen to be able and willing to provide it at a fee that seems fair to them?

You make it sound like I’m taking something from them. I am not. I am simply providing a desired service for which my patients are willing to part with their money. My business is providing dental services in a caring manner. That they give me money for doing so with their permission is both their choice and a testament to the way that I care.

That you cannot see that what sets my business apart from ALL the others is ME, but rather giving the credit to the patients for building my business is short-sighted. Where were they when I signed that $400K loan when I chose to begin to build the office? Nowhere. Without building the office, they don’t show up.

So, you can run away from it all you want, but the fact is that this business started with me, and I continue to drive it: who I am, what I do, and HOW I do it, and the people I have selected and who have chosen to work for me are committed to continuing our commitments to those principles. We have to continually work at it. It is not easy.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
11:10 pm

@ Linda, show me where I called you a name. You asked me what I thought about the referenced article. Here is my reply: “It’s the opinion of a douche bag, Linda. It takes place in the GOP land of make believe. Henry Ford was an antisemitic Nazi and he spent much of his fortune promoting those views. I’m still waiting for Kyle to take on the plutocrats that are wrecking the GOP. I wont even mention the “brain drain” epidemic of the last 12 years within those same ranks. How about the fact that there are still a few logical R’s left, but they are allowing plutocrats and the morons who follow them to lead the party straight into the jaws of another crushing defeat.”

Unless you are an opinion of a douche bag, I see an insult addressed to you no where.

MarkV

September 19th, 2012
11:14 pm

David R. Boag, DDS @ 8:10 pm

Was that supposed to be an argument about anything?

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
11:17 pm

Matz @ 10:53:

“Bless your heart, but NO they don’t. There are two reasons people come to see you: (1) They have dental insurance as part of their compensation package at work, and want to make use of it regularly while they still have jobs because they could not afford it otherwise, and (2) Painful or broken teeth.”

Question, Matz: Why don’t they come to see you? Why me instead of you? What’s the difference?

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
11:18 pm

Boag, I respect your gamble, I really do. Where did you accumulate enough capital for collateral on your loan without your customer’s monies? But you are being disingenuous at best by not acknowledging the racket all hospitals, medical offices and dentists play with the insurers. Then there are the pharmaceutical reps that give you incentives to push their products. I’ve seen the inside, too. I know how the game works. Let’s get back to reality, shall we?

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
11:20 pm

MarkV @ 11:14,

“Was that supposed to be an argument about anything?”

Nope. Just an explanation. That’s what the previous writer was referring to regarding unemployment checks supposedly stimulating the economy.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
11:24 pm

If you were really all about dentistry, as you claim Boag, why not set up a non-profit office for under privileged children? Your repeat customers obviously like you well enough to come back. Then again, you may just be the closest office covered by their plans. Ever thought of that? Let’s talk about “sliding price scales” now? Perhaps blatant over-billing to insurers because you know they are going to come back with a lower number?

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
11:28 pm

How about the inflation of prices to cover the loss of the inflated claims the insurers refuse to pay? Maybe you service uninsured people who wont pay as well? Care to talk about how you factor all of this into your pricing to maximize profits?

David R. Boag, DDS

September 19th, 2012
11:32 pm

Gravy @ 11:18,

Dang you do like your assumptions about how it works. Let me be blunt and honest:

We dentists don’t get ANY of our products for free. Those toothbrushes and toothpastes we give away? Did those use to be given to us by manufacturers? Yep, but they stopped doing that LONG before I ever started practicing.

And BTW, until last year, I was completely non-contracted with insurance companies. That means that patients paid me for my services 100% and not an insurance company. I only just began to participate in insurance at the beginning of last year, and I did so to provide more opportunity for more people to experience what I do and the way that I do it. I will not be in-network forever. And if and when the gov’t ever tries to FORCE me to provide my services at whatever fees they decide, I will sell my office and do something else.

There is nothing–NOTHING–as honest, simple, and MUTUALLY gratifying as being able to offer a beneficial service to my patients and them willingly pay a fee that both parties deem fair to get it without involving anyone else. If they want to have an insurance company reimburse them for a prtion of what they pay, that is their business, and I’m glad they find that valuable in making what I do fit their budget better. But by doing the services for an honest fee, it allows me to diagnose honestly–I don’t have to try to push people to do more expensive things, because I’ve set all of my fees myself for every procedure, knowing that if I do that procedure for that fee, I’ll be happy, and hopefully they will too.

Is that really so hard for you to understand or believe? If it is, it says more about your preconceived notions that you brought with you into this dialogue than it does about me.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
11:34 pm

Gravy@10:52, You just don’t seem to get it. Your four-letter word that starts with a “c” is inappropriate. Thank you for emphasizing my parents’ role in my upbringing.

Linda

September 19th, 2012
11:38 pm

Gravy@10:54, I won’t miss you.

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
11:44 pm

Okay Boag. I understand that you wouldn’t be wise to get real. Not only are there legal ramifications, but I suspect you are now fearing the potential alienation of current or prospective clients. I think many of them will be able to read between the lines of your diatribe as it were. You are really running a max profit business disguised as a dentist office. Where did you get the capital to use as collateral for your loan?

Gravy Train

September 19th, 2012
11:48 pm

Sorry Linda. I don’t see any four letter “c’” words in my post. Care to point them out? I’ll re-post again:

It’s the opinion of a douche bag, Linda. It takes place in the GOP land of make believe. Henry Ford was an antisemitic Nazi and he spent much of his fortune promoting those views. I’m still waiting for Kyle to take on the plutocrats that are wrecking the GOP. I wont even mention the “brain drain” epidemic of the last 12 years within those same ranks. How about the fact that there are still a few logical R’s left, but they are allowing plutocrats and the morons who follow them to lead the party straight into the jaws of another crushing defeat.

Do you know what a plutocrat is? Is that what you mean?

Linda

September 19th, 2012
11:54 pm

Gravy@11:10, Do I need to explain to you how inappropriate your comments are?
You reiterated that noun that started with a “d” & ended with another noun that was “bag.” How revolting!
Thank you for reminding me what great parents I had.
If Kyle banned foul-mouthed liberals from his blog, he could take his days off for investigative reporting.

Matz

September 20th, 2012
12:15 am

Dr. Boag: “Question, Matz: Why don’t they come to see you? Why me instead of you? What’s the difference?”

What makes you so certain they don’t… or won’t?

David R. Boag, DDS

September 20th, 2012
12:18 am

Gravy,

“Okay Boag. I understand that you wouldn’t be wise to get real. Not only are there legal ramifications, but I suspect you are now fearing the potential alienation of current or prospective clients. I think many of them will be able to read between the lines of your diatribe as it were. You are really running a max profit business disguised as a dentist office. Where did you get the capital to use as collateral for your loan?”

If I’m so afraid, Gravy, then why do I put my actual name on here?

I’m not a discount dentist. I do not compete for the low end. I worked in that environment (Medicaid and HMO) for many years, and when I found out that I couldn’t even offer my very best to my patients in that environment because I couldn’t do it and make money, I decided to open my office and live honestly. I provide excellent value for what I do. You don’t sound like a value shopper to me. That’s fine. Nothing wrong with that. It just means I’m probably not a good fit for a guy like you. Fair enough. There are others who are looking for the kind of care I provide, and they are willing to pay more for it than you might be. I fail to see how you can justifiably call me a crook for doing so or at least treat me like one any more than you can call Porsche a crooked company for selling their cars at the prices that they do. If you actually do think that, you have that right, but it doesn’t make you correct. It just means that having a fine automobile isn’t a priority of yours, whether by choice or not by choice.

There is absolutely nothing evil about charging a fee that both parties are willing to agree on before we proceed with care, despite what seems to be a driving force for your point of view, that you believe that is true. My patients don’t have to sign any treatment plan they dont want to. They are free to leave my office, and some do, and that’s OK. i wish them well. I want everyone to feel good about the treatment they receive, even if it means they won’t get it at my office. I decided long ago that trying to be the dentist for everyone did not fit my skill set or my heart. I could not get comfortable cutting the corners that are required to do dentistry at HMO or Medicaid fees and stay profitable. Anyone who believes that they are getting the best care in those environments or even in a PPO envrionment is fooling themselves. I don’t know if this also applies in the medical setting or not, but I can tell you for dang sure that it is true in dentistry. I know that our profit margins are typically lower than those in medicine, because our startup costs are WAY higher. Even now, for my in-network patients, I STILL cannot offer them my best dentistry, but at least I don’t try to dishonestly try to fake it that I am. Most people don’t necessarily want the best…until they do, and usually that comes from having had it done less-than-the-best and been disappointed.

Some will. Some won’t. Some wait. So what? How is that different from any other business out there?

The reason my business is different is me.

David R. Boag, DDS

September 20th, 2012
12:25 am

Matz @ 12:15 am,

“What makes you so certain they don’t… or won’t?”

Nothing at all. You’re welcome to join our profession if you think you can do it successfully. It’s a great profession. That’s the great thing about it. Maybe there’s something about you that you have to offer that might attract them to you. I wouldn’t hold it against you. Business, even if the face of this bad economy is getting better for me. There is a reason for that. Word’s getting around. It’s a good thing.

Listen, it’s late. It’s been real guys! Goodnight to all.

Gravy Train

September 20th, 2012
12:57 am

Anyone else notice how quiet Boag is about where he got the capital to use as collateral for his supposed $400K loan? Could it be that he actually got some help along the way? Either that or his whole diatribe was just another GOP fairy tale to begin with. I understand not wanting to discuss the billing racket on a public forum for previously stated reasoning. Some people just can’t admit that they are not as all encompassing and powerful as they would like to think they are. Boag is your proof.

Gravy Train

September 20th, 2012
1:05 am

Linda, again the term was not directed at you. Have you ever thought that your ideology could be just as offensive to people as you think that term is? Yes, call me a liberal because I don’t buy your crap. You have no idea what party, if any, that I belong to and further, you have no idea how I vote. Typical of the narrow minded xenophobe. And they wonder why the GOP is having such a hard time courting new and diverse members. By the way, if Kyle would keep people like you off of these blogs, he might get a much broader audience. Rational people tend to shy away from people like you…

David R. Boag, DDS

September 20th, 2012
1:14 am

Gravy,

Here’s the BIG SECRET: I used a specialty lender for dentistry. I used my personal assets as collateral. But the truth is that it really wasn’t enough. They gave me the loan because actuarially it is VERY rare when dentists don’t succeed. Or at least that’s how it was when I obtained the loan. It was different then than it is now, I’m sure.

So, the truth is that I didn’t have collateral, and no one else signed for the loan but my wife and myself.

Can you come off your high horse now?

David R. Boag, DDS

September 20th, 2012
1:22 am

Oh, and that risk they are taking in giving me the loan without all the collateral is reflected in my rate, in case you haven’t figured that out yet. Probably should have said that. It wasn’t a basement bottom rate. You forgive me if I don’t share any more details than that. It’s not really any of your business, but its the reality and since you don’t seem to be aware of it, I thought I could help bring you back to it.

Once again, have I hidden anything from you? Can you please let go of your incorrect assumptions and realize that many conservatives are just normal people like you and me and not the monsters that the left likes to caricature us as?

Thanks. And finally, goodnight. This time, I mean it.

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 20th, 2012
5:17 am

Y’all shouldn’t let Gravy get you all riled up…no one can be that stupid. She’s merely trying to keep you busy responding to her inanities.

marko

September 20th, 2012
6:04 am

People being paid enough to buy the products they produce a myth? As a case of revisionist history, this has got to rate right up there with the Constitution being based on the Bible. Evidentially America’s a place where you can never be sure about your past. The truth is the founding fathers may have been philandering, duel fighting, slave owners, but they never used phony bankruptcy laws to steal the pension plans of their employees.

The truth is that Henry Ford may have been an anti-Semitic Nazi lover, but at least he wasn’t a vulture capitalist. Look up Fordism. I’d also suggest that you spend a couple of minutes researching your subject matter.

cc

September 20th, 2012
6:23 am

Lil’ Barry Bailoutt@5:17 am:
Any prognostication of what and who will be bailed out next?

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 20th, 2012
6:23 am

they never used phony bankruptcy laws to steal the pension plans of their employees
———

…and employees were never lame and careless enough to trust the government or their employer to provide for them in their old age.

Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American

September 20th, 2012
6:26 am

The next bailout? Looks like either California or Illinois, two Democrat nirvanas that apparently can’t raise taxes fast enough to pay their bills!

cc

September 20th, 2012
6:34 am

I do believe you are right. California has committed fiscal suicide with its ‘social programs’ and their tax base is busily relocating in other states. Illinois has almost unionized themselves out of existence.

yuzeyurbrane

September 20th, 2012
10:46 am

Gravy Train—-the sooner you realize this is Linda’s blog and that Kyle is her assistant, the better off you will be. She could have banned you but was lady enough to simply deplore your use of language.