USA & World Economics

[QUOTE=Tiny12;440743] Easy-to-get, government-subsidized loans for liberal arts educations, which have enabled universities to raise tuition to ridiculous levels, should be eliminated. Students should be encouraged to learn skills that they can actually use and to undertake marketable trades and professions.[/QUOTE]Right on. The last thing we need is people who can think, people who have some broader understanding of the world, of history, of culture. We need trained, docile employees who can be relied on to not make waves, show up on time, and do what they're told.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;440743] subsidizing seniors who are already wealthier than everyone else.[/QUOTE]The only senior subsidy I can think of at the federal level is the additional personal exemption of $1200. A maximum value of about $475 a year and much less for most folks. OK, I suppose there are discounts on admissions to national parks but that could just be savvy pricing and not a subsidy. Big deal. Medicare certainly isn't a subsidy. Social Security (OASDI) is an anti-subsidy; its return diminishes the more years you work and thus with age. Other subsidies exist at the local level or are provided by private industry. Here some of the discounts or subsidies I get for being old:

1) My city, and most cities around here, charge non-residents more to use the facilities. These people never took cost accounting and have no concept of break-even point. But, I found a neighboring city that not only charges residents and non-residents the same, but gives a senior discount at age 55 vs. My city's age 62. $18 a month. Not surprisingly, the neighboring city does a healthy business while my city's facility is underutilized. However, the facility I use is not overcrowded during the hours I go there.

2) My state provides numerous silly discounts and few of them are means-tested. There is a $20,000 pension exclusion starting the year you turn 55 and then it goes to $24,000 at 65. Social Security, IRA withdrawals, IRA conversions, annuities, traditional pensions, etc. All qualify. There is a scheme whereby if you are 65 and low income (but could have assets out the ying yang), you never have to pay your property tax during your lifetime. It just creates a lienhold to be paid on sale or death. There is a similar scheme for utility bills but that one is means-tested.

3) 50% off on our transit system but it sucks so much it's not worth mentioning. I think this kicks in at 62 but it might be 65.

4) Albertson's gives 10% off the first Wednesday of the month at age 55 and they don't check I'd. Kohl's has a discount day that starts at 55 too.

5) AARP has the cheapest car rental rates. Check it out.

Now Tiny, you are ignoring an important point. Yes, seniors have lower poverty rates than the other two age brackets BUT they have a lot less opportunity to improve their situation! So looking at youth poverty vs. Senior poverty might not be as important as following the poverty rate for 19-64. That could be a better economic indicator. I think rather than being subsidies, a lot of these are marketing ploys.

[QUOTE=RevBS;440752]Obama has NOT been able to escape the patronage of the American election system. But in ObamaCare and Frank-Dodds, he has shown he is willing to rectify some imbalances, yet he has been vilified for them. Why?[/QUOTE]Because he's not very competent. Universal health care is very important. Taking health care costs from 16% to 20% of GDP without improving outcomes is not a good approach to accomplish this. And that's what's going to happen. Obama should have been listening to the guy from Taiwan that testified in front of the Congressional Committee that you provided the video for. Health care there costs 6.6% of GDP and outcomes are similar to the USA. However, instead Obama's creating a monster. Same with Dodd-Frank -- extremely important goals, but wrong approach. Obama, like lawyers in general, comes up with "solutions" that are inefficient and complicated beyond belief.

[QUOTE=RevBS;440752]You don't think the educational loans have not been corrupted and exploited by the loan sharks. And now we are hearing of the sub-prime loans in the auto buying industry. Corruption like poverty is never ending. As I said before, it has been made legal in the US. And some of you seem to like it. The US was dominant because of its middle class. The decline of the middle class is a part of the evolution of the world economy. There are many ways in which the government can stymie that decline, but we cannot do it because we are dysfunctional. As stated before, look in the mirror, and what do you see?[/QUOTE]I agree with what you wrote above. However, Obama is part of the disease, not the cure.

[QUOTE=RockinBob;440752]Right on. The last thing we need is people who can think, people who have some broader understanding of the world, of history, of culture.[/QUOTE]Right on. We need to educate lots of art history and philosophy majors. Then government can pay them to sit on their asses and do whatever it is that they do.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;440758]


Right on. We need to educate lots of art history and philosophy majors. Then government can pay them to sit on their asses and do whatever it is that they do.[/QUOTE]Think, mostly.

They inspire other men to act. Like say Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, who apply ideas into political movements, say. Tom Paine, who wrote pamphlets to rouse the colonists to action. George Washington, who led an army and fought for these ideas. The USA was born in a Revolution based on new ideas, that people had a right to self government, not depending on the whims of monarchs. Freedom. Liberty. Even hear those words? Just two centuries ago the western world was ruled by monarchs and the Catholic church.

Ideas change the face of the world.

Nowadays, nobody cares about thinking. That's why everybody is regressing back to being serfs. The Bill of Rights is nothing more than a piece of paper. Freedom and democracy just words.

Slaves used to fight to be free. Now, free men fight to be slaves. They go in debt up their eyeballs to get a marketable skill so they can get worked to death and still live at home with their parents. If they're lucky.

I really love The Big Lebowski.

LEBOWSKI.

My wife is not the issue here. I hope that my wife will someday learn to live on her allowance, which is ample, but if she doesn't, sir, that will be her problem, not mine, just as your rug is your problem, just as every bum's lot in life is his own responsibility regardless of whom he chooses to blame. I didn't blame anyone for the loss of my legs, some chinaman in Korea took them from me but I went out and achieved anyway. I can't solve your problems, sir, only you can.

Let's keep those Little Lebowski Urban Achievers coming, folks!

[QUOTE=Tiny12;440758]Because he's not very competent. Universal health care is very important. Taking health care costs from 16% to 20% of GDP without improving outcomes is not a good approach to accomplish this. And that's what's going to happen. Obama should have been listening to the guy from Taiwan that testified in front of the Congressional Committee that you provided the video for. Health care there costs 6.6% of GDP and outcomes are similar to the USA. However, instead Obama's creating a monster. Same with Dodd-Frank -- extremely important goals, but wrong approach. Obama, like lawyers in general, comes up with "solutions" that are inefficient and complicated beyond belief.

I agree with what you wrote above. However, Obama is part of the disease, not the cure.

Right on. We need to educate lots of art history and philosophy majors. Then government can pay them to sit on their asses and do whatever it is that they do.[/QUOTE]You are the only member of the "Gang that Cannot Shoot Straight" to acknowledge that Universal Healthcare and Dodd-Frank are important. The rest of the gang usually dismiss them as Marxist ideas.

I think you and I have the potential to solve all of America's ills. I know the perfect location, too. Food, massage, hot tubs and FS are available when we need a break or two.

[QUOTE=RevBS;440763]You are the only member of the "Gang that Cannot Shoot Straight" to acknowledge that Universal Healthcare and Dodd-Frank are important. The rest of the gang usually dismiss them as Marxist ideas.

I think you and I have the potential to solve all of America's ills. I know the perfect location, too. Food, massage, hot tubs and FS are available when we need a break or two.[/QUOTE]Reverend, Please be realistic. While we could get enebriated to the point where we believed we could solve America's ills, we wouldn't have the power to get that done. Actually I'd consider Obama and Reid to the be the current heads of the "Gang that Can't Shoot Straight" club. My heroes are straight shooters -- Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Lee Kuan Yew. My models for health care are Singapore and Hong Kong, which include private sector providers and hospitals, allow consumers a choice, and allow the free market to operate (outside of the public hospitals). And produce outcomes better than the USA at far lower costs. Democrats and Republicans played a big part in screwing up the financial system. Dodd Frank isn't a good solution. Instead it's better to have simple, effective rules and get regulators that do their jobs. And never bail out shareholders or bondholders of financial companies.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;440767]Reverend, Please be realistic. While we could get enebriated to the point where we believed we could solve America's ills, we wouldn't have the power to get that done. Actually I'd consider Obama and Reid to the be the current heads of the "Gang that Can't Shoot Straight" club. My heroes are straight shooters -- Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Lee Kuan Yew. My models for health care are Singapore and Hong Kong, which include private sector providers and hospitals, allow consumers a choice, and allow the free market to operate (outside of the public hospitals). And produce outcomes better than the USA at far lower costs. Democrats and Republicans played a big part in screwing up the financial system. Dodd Frank isn't a good solution. Instead it's better to have simple, effective rules and get regulators that do their jobs. And never bail out shareholders or bondholders of financial companies.[/QUOTE]Sometimes, we take ourselves far too seriously. My tongue in cheek comments were meant to say that my contribution to any solutions in community & life only reaches to the people that I come into contact with on a daily routine basis. And within this small circle, that I practice the golden rule. Nothing more than that.

Nobody and no party can claim to have the perfect solution / answer. Life in general is a series of pragmatic compromises. You win some, and you lose some. You cannot blame Obama for any significant failure if you fail to come to the table. Obama's youth and surprise nomination & victory meant that he had a uphill battle within the Democratic leadership, let alone the screaming rejection & hate from across the aisle. As in the AP forum. You all deny this? A magic wand does NOT Obama have.

Today, America looks very different than 50 years ago, and 50 years from now, it will be very different again. So can we say that we have a more cut-throat culture / society today? Why and who have contributed to all this? The rise of corporate culture in the last 3-4 decades into our homes and daily lives. Frenzy and getting more frenzy. That's the way it is. I am no fan of this lifestyle. Mental health, already the next explosion. I cannot keep up with all these new disorders.

The leaders you attributed are rare. They are leaders who have the long view, and they view community / nation over the individual. Yes, they did. It might be a surprise to some people who approve of them.

[URL]http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-israel-displaced-20140809-story.html[/URL]

[URL]http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0810-bird-gaza-israel-20140810-story.htmlll[/URL]

Nobody will give in. The never ending self destructive nature of mankind.

[QUOTE=RevBS;440769]You cannot blame Obama for any significant failure if you fail to come to the table.[/QUOTE]Obama is the one who failed to come to the table.

[QUOTE=RevBS;440769]Obama's youth and surprise nomination & victory meant that he had a uphill battle within the Democratic leadership, let alone the screaming rejection & hate from across the aisle[/QUOTE]"[I]Obama's youth and surprise nomination & victory[/I]" is just another way of saying that he skated his way into the White House without ever demonstrating that he possessed even a modicum level of executive management skills.

His subsequent inability to deal with the "[I]uphill battle within the Democratic leadership[/I]" clearily demonstrated that he did not and does not have the leadership skills for the job.

Jax.

[QUOTE=RevBS;440801]Nobody will give in.[/QUOTE]Bullshit.

The Palestinians could have peace tomorrow if they stop firing missiles into their neighboring country.

It's that simple.

Thanks,

Jax.

[QUOTE=Jackson;440806]Obama is the one who failed to come to the table.

"[I]Obama's youth and surprise nomination & victory[/I]" is just another way of saying that he skated his way into the White House without ever demonstrating that he possessed even a modicum level of executive management skills.

His subsequent inability to deal with the "[I]uphill battle within the Democratic leadership[/I]" clearily demonstrated that he did not and does not have the leadership skills for the job.

Jax.[/QUOTE]You remind me of some tennis players whose calls are always in their favor whenever it is a close call. Right, they insist they can see better from across the court when you are standing right where the ball drop.

[QUOTE=Jackson;440807]Bullshit.

The Palestinians could have peace tomorrow if they stop firing missiles into their neighboring country.

It's that simple.

Thanks,

Jax.[/QUOTE]And you know, Jackson, all them Arabs would have peace tomorrow if they would just give up idolatry and accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.

It's that simple!

[QUOTE=RockinBob;440828]And you know, Jackson, all them Arabs would have peace tomorrow if they would just give up idolatry and accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.

It's that simple![/QUOTE]RB, that's ridiculous.

I don't believe anyone has suggested that the Palestinians "[I]give up idolatry and accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.[/I]", but perhaps you might post a link quoting the source of this statement.

In the mean time, do you have a problem understanding that the Palestinians have been firing rockets from the Gaza strip into populated neighborhoods of Israeli?

How do you justify that?

If you were Israeli, what would you do? Surrender?

Curious minds want to know.

Thanks,

Jax.

[QUOTE=Jackson;440830]RB, that's ridiculous.

I don't believe anyone has suggested that the Palestinians "[I]give up idolatry and accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.[/I]", but perhaps you might post a link quoting the source of this statement.

In the mean time, do you have a problem understanding that the Palestinians have been firing rockets from the Gaza strip into populated neighborhoods of Israeli?

How do you justify that?

If you were Israeli, what would you do? Surrender?

Curious minds want to know.

Thanks,

Jax.[/QUOTE]I suggested it. I wasn't quoting anyone.

Ah, the Israel-Palestine question. Ain't going to go there, Jackson. I can only deal with objective facts and logical reasoning and when you are dealing with the Israel Palestine problem, facts and reason have no place.

[QUOTE=Jackson;440830]RB, that's ridiculous.

I don't believe anyone has suggested that the Palestinians "[I]give up idolatry and accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.[/I]", but perhaps you might post a link quoting the source of this statement.

In the mean time, do you have a problem understanding that the Palestinians have been firing rockets from the Gaza strip into populated neighborhoods of Israeli?

How do you justify that?

If you were Israeli, what would you do? Surrender?

Curious minds want to know.

Thanks,

Jax.[/QUOTE]And they reply, you took our land, and you kick us out. And on, and on, and on, it goes. In the end, it's the problem of not wanting to share, like everything else in life.

By the way, what is the latest on the Hatfields and the McCoys? Have not heard too much lately. They all can/t be dead? New generation, new thinking?

Written 25 years ago, it is a spy novel but it has good insight about American, Israelis, and Palestinian relationships. To paraphrase a key concluding paragraph: Israelis are like the wife and Arabs are like the mistress. Americans always return to the wife.

The novel supposedly is base on the life of Robert Ames who is the subject of recently published biography.

[URL]http://www.amazon.com/Agents-Innocence-Novel-David-Ignatius/dp/0393317382/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407803812&sr=1-1&keywords=agents[/URL]+of+innocence.

[URL]http://www.amazon.com/Good-Spy-Life-Death-Robert/dp/0307889750/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407803846&sr=1-1&keywords=the[/URL]+good+spy+the+life+and+death+of+robert+ames.

[QUOTE=BigBossMan;440834]Written 25 years ago, it is a spy novel but it has good insight about American, Israelis, and Palestinian relationships. To paraphrase a key concluding paragraph: Israelis are like the wife and Arabs are like the mistress. Americans always return to the wife.

The novel supposedly is base on the life of Robert Ames who is the subject of recently published biography.

[URL]http://www.amazon.com/Agents-Innocence-Novel-David-Ignatius/dp/0393317382/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407803812&sr=1-1&keywords=agents[/URL]+of+innocence.

[URL]http://www.amazon.com/Good-Spy-Life-Death-Robert/dp/0307889750/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407803846&sr=1-1&keywords=the[/URL]+good+spy+the+life+and+death+of+robert+ames.[/QUOTE]For up to date perspective & policies on the Middle East, David Ignatius writes almost daily for the Washington Post. I believe he was their Middle East Bureau Chief for a long time. Agents of Innocence was one of his first novel, he has had several more exciting novels, all of them of Middle East based.

[URL]http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-americans-optimism-is-dying/2014/08/12/f81808d8-224c-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html?hpid=z2[/URL]

Well, what do you know. In 1967, I left Singapore for the United States for further studies. The future of Singapore was definitely uncertain. This October, my grand-nephew will be coming to Bangkok from the US to look for a job. He has a BA and has been scrambling for the last 5/6 years. Change and more changes a-coming.

I have expressed the opinion in this thread that Presidents don't matter much to the economy. Out comes research that supports my opinion. One of the authors is Mark Watson who was a grad student teaching assistant where I went to college. I spent many hours in his office before midterms and finals learning statistics.

[URL]http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2014/08/25/do_dems_run_the_economy_better_nope_101241.html[/URL]

Samuelson obviously disagrees with Watson's and Binders's conclusion.

The argument that Presidents do matter to the economy reminds me of the "great man" theory of history. I am more an adherent of each person taking individual action which, if enough of them head in the same direction, creates history. Leaders need to individuals to make a choice to follow.

The greatest book on this subject in my ken is not academic but fiction. "War and Peace" by Tolstoy. Of course you need a whole summer to read it and who has that much time.

[URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/09/opinion/joe-nocera-inversion-delusion.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region&region=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region&_r=0[/URL]

Read it and take it with some alka-seltzer.

On a smaller scale, I was trying to book a hotel room in Sydney on Expedia. Because I had also purchased a flight from them, they were offering me special hotel prices for the same dates. But I had only 7 days to take advantage of the offer.

Guess what? After 7 days, prices for the same hotels were offered at lower rates for the same dates to any Tom, Dick, and Osama.

[QUOTE=RevBS;440832]And they reply, you took our land, and you kick us out. And on, and on, and on, it goes. In the end, it's the problem of not wanting to share, like everything else in life.

By the way, what is the latest on the Hatfields and the McCoys? Have not heard too much lately. They all can/t be dead? New generation, new thinking?[/QUOTE]Both sides took Esten's advice and applied for government treatment as oppressed minorities. Their combined properties are now free from all taxation and they are using government grants to build the Fuedin, Gamblin and Drinkin Casino & Hotel.

[QUOTE=RevBS;441236][URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/09/opinion/joe-nocera-inversion-delusion.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region&region=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region&_r=0[/URL]

Read it and take it with some alka-seltzer.[/QUOTE]This article is absolutely bizarre. The writer recognizes that $2 trillion is parked overseas in subsidiaries of USA companies, never to return because of the USA Tax code. So what's his solution? Maybe change the system so they don't pay tax when they bring the money back to the USA to invest, grow the economy, and create jobs? Hell no! The solution is to keep the money locked outside the USA forever.

Interesting though. I appreciate your contributing that Reverend. The USC law professor points out that foreign companies can loan money to USA subsidiaries without creating taxable income, except for the interest received by the parent. But if a USA company borrows from a foreign subsidiary, the entire amount of the loan is taxable*. And that's a large part of what drives inversions. There are easy fixes that would simplify the tax code, help grow the economy, and actually increase the amount of taxes paid by corporations. They won't happen though, because of the desire of some politicians, mostly Democrats, to screw the corporations.

*This is an example of "Subpart F" income, reported on IRS Form 5471. It's incredibly difficult to calculate, and an example of how truly fucked up the USA tax code is. Congressmen and Jack Lew should be forced at gunpoint to fill in a Form 5471 and calculate tax owed as a result of loans from a foreign subsidiary to a USA parent. They would quickly become advocates for tax simplification.

Can anybody tell me how Elon Musk was able to seduce Wall Street and made electrical cars sexy. When all I hear on AP is "drill, baby, drill" and lots of laughter.

[QUOTE=RevBS;441336]Can anybody tell me how Elon Musk was able to seduce Wall Street and made electrical cars sexy. When all I hear on AP is "drill, baby, drill" and lots of laughter.[/QUOTE]Hollywood's liberal elite want them because that proves they are politically correct. Cool people wanting them makes the cars cool too.

All sources of energy are needed, so there is no choice between drill baby drill and electrical cars. We just need to stop subsidizing certain types of energy and let profit seekers figure out how to make renewable energy products that can compete with hydrocarbon energy.

[QUOTE=Dccpa;441337] We just need to stop subsidizing certain types of energy[/QUOTE]And stop using the tax code to subsidize certain types of lifestyles, such as marriage, homeownership, and children. But the good news is, the last tobacco subsidies go out next month. And the funny thing is, the few US tobacco growers who remain after the shakeout are (wait for it): [B]profitable on their own![/B].

Good luck trying to wean our Latin friends from subsidies, though. It's like mothers' milk to them.

Should I clean out the shoe boxes and invest in Alibaba? Can the average Joe get even close enough to have a sniff?

Depends on whether you view shares as pieces of paper like Esten, or actual ownership in a business, as I do. There's probably a quick buck to be made if you are allocated shares in the IPO and sell shortly thereafter. As to being a long term holder, this company is scary. It's a Cayman Islands holding company whose legal ownership of Chinese businesses is tenuous. Some of the businesses are owned through Jack Ma, the CEO, and not directly by Alibaba. I had the unfortunate experience of being a shareholder in a company with a similar structure. The insiders sucked the money out of the parent, stole the chops (company seals) of the Chinese subsidiaries, and then made off with the Chinese assets. Minority shareholders were left with paper. Hey, maybe Esten is right.

While this is a little like comparing a whale to minnows, other Chinese public companies that have their main listing in markets besides China and Hong Kong have been fools' plays. Alibaba chose to list in the USA because they couldn't get the Hong Kong or Chinese stock exchanges to agree to their crooked voting structure, where insiders will be able to control the company with a minority ownership position.

It is hours before the results of the referendum is released, what will it be? The astronomical high turn out to vote can only mean one result, independence of Scotland. Of course, I have been wrong many times.

Changes, evolution, nothing can stop history. Look out, Spain! How will the USA look like in 50 years?

[QUOTE=RevBS;441356] The astronomical high turn out to vote can only mean one result, independence of Scotland. [snip]

[/QUOTE]Is that egg I see on your face? ROFLMAO.

[QUOTE=Punter127;441361]Is that egg I see on your face? ROFLMAO.[/QUOTE]No egg on my face, but than I am American, I am incapable of shame. It was a very close call, and Cameron had to mortgage his wife to salvage the vote. But I was happy that I could help you have your moment of triumph. I remember shaking hands with you in Pattaya about the election in 2012, but somehow we forgot to decide on the bet. And I also forgot to needle you on that.

[B]Sure looks like egg to me.[/B]

[QUOTE=RevBS;441364]No egg on my face, but than I am American, I am incapable of shame. It was a very close call, and Cameron had to mortgage his wife to salvage the vote.[/QUOTE]Surely you knew of Camerons actions before you proclaimed the "independence of Scotland" as the only possible outcome because of the "astronomical high turn out".

It's amazing how rash statements have a way of coming back to haunt you.

Just for the record Flexible Horn predicted this outcome months ago, and he was spot on.

[QUOTE=Punter127;441376][B]Sure looks like egg to me.[/B]

Surely you knew of Camerons actions before you proclaimed the "independence of Scotland" as the only possible outcome because of the "astronomical high turn out".

It's amazing how rash statements have a way of coming back to haunt you.

Just for the record Flexible Horn predicted this outcome months ago, and he was spot on.[/QUOTE]I am glad I can make your day! Kudos to Flexible Horn, a very deserving fellow.

And so what, if I am the king of rash statements!

[QUOTE=RevBS;441344]Should I clean out the shoe boxes and invest in Alibaba? Can the average Joe get even close enough to have a sniff?[/QUOTE]For the average Joe, that's a terrible investment based completely on speculation. Might as well just go to the casino.

[QUOTE=Riina;441379]For the average Joe, that's a terrible investment based completely on speculation. Might as well just go to the casino.[/QUOTE]I just thought that since I missed out on Google, that I might as well go double or nothing.

[QUOTE=Riina;441379]For the average Joe, that's a terrible investment based completely on speculation. Might as well just go to the casino.[/QUOTE]Well, they are not really similar because at the casino, the rules are clearly stated and all customers are treated equally. With IPOs, not so much.

Wall Streeters with good connections were able to buy at 68 and sell at 94. Instant 38% profit.

Billions more flowed into the coffers of the 1%.

It's all good, Conservatives who promote free market capitalism tell us these profits will soon trickle down, and we'll all be better off.

[QUOTE=Esten;441384]Wall Streeters with good connections were able to buy at 68 and sell at 94. Instant 38% profit.

Billions more flowed into the coffers of the 1%.

It's all good, Conservatives who promote free market capitalism tell us these profits will soon trickle down, and we'll all be better off.[/QUOTE]Left standing out in the pouring rain & peeping through the windows.

[QUOTE=Esten;441384]Wall Streeters with good connections were able to buy at 68 and sell at 94. Instant 38% profit.

Billions more flowed into the coffers of the 1%.

It's all good, Conservatives who promote free market capitalism tell us these profits will soon trickle down, and we'll all be better off.[/QUOTE]Hey Esten,

So fucking what?

Did any of this make you any poorer?

Did any of this make anyone any poorer?

Then what's your complaint?

Oh, I get it, you just don't like that somebody else made some money.

Thanks,

Jax.

[QUOTE=Esten;441384]Wall Streeters with good connections were able to buy at 68 and sell at 94. Instant 38% profit.

Billions more flowed into the coffers of the 1%.

It's all good, Conservatives who promote free market capitalism tell us these profits will soon trickle down, and we'll all be better off.[/QUOTE]Socialists who denigrate free market capitalism believe that the private sector can grow out of thin air, without investment. Thus it's reasonable to suck as many tax dollars as you can from businesses, and spend the money on government and transfer payments.

Read the press. Jack Ma and others spent nine hours figuring out how to allocate the shares, and they ended up mostly in the hands of mutual funds who they believed were likely to be long term holders of the stock.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;441389]Socialists who denigrate free market capitalism believe that the private sector can grow out of thin air, without investment. Thus it's reasonable to suck as many tax dollars as you can from businesses, and spend the money on government and transfer payments.[/QUOTE]Capitalism has raised more people out of poverty that any other economic system in the history of the human race.

Thank you,

Jackson.