Rich not spending

From Bloomberg:

Frugality of High Earners in U.S. Shows Long Shadow of Recession

The nearly rich aren’t spending nearly enough, a trend that’s weighing on U.S. growth.

Six years after the worst recession since the 1930s, Americans who earn $100,000 to $249,999 a year still are “making very careful decisions” when it comes to discretionary purchases, said Pam Danziger, president of Unity Marketing Inc., a luxury research company based in Stevens, Pennsylvania. “That’s smart for them, but it’s certainly not good for the economy.”

These consumers — Danziger calls them HENRYs, or high earners not rich yet — are “feeling squeezed” primarily because their spending power is curbed by sluggish income gains, she said. They spent 10 percent less on luxury goods and services in the fourth quarter compared with the same period in 2013, according to figures from Unity Marketing.

Americans who earn $250,000 or more a year also are cutting back. Their luxury spending fell 17 percent in the fourth quarter from a year earlier — though these consumers make up 2 percent of households, compared with 18 percent for HENRYs, Danziger said.

“The caution of high-income consumers is key to the lackluster retailing environment” because the top 20 percent of households make up more than half of total spending, said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics Inc. in New York. Retail sales are flat year-to-date, following average monthly gains of 0.6 percent in the first four months of 2014, Commerce Department figures show.

Sentiment among Americans earning more than $100,000 has fallen 15.1 points from a nearly eight-year high in mid-April, which is more than double the 7-point drop for all income groups, according to the Bloomberg Consumer Comfort Index.
Many HENRYs have a middle-class mindset, particularly if they live in urban areas, said Ron Kurtz, president of the American

Americans who earn about $100,000-$250,000 a year saved 8.5 percent of their disposable personal income in the fourth quarter, according to Zandi’s calculations based on Fed financial accounts figures. That’s higher than the 7 percent average for all consumers, though it’s consistent with broader trends, he said.

Even so, there are signs spending may pick up. Average daily expenditures among Americans with household incomes of $90,000 or more rose 3.9 percent in April to $160 from a year earlier, according to Gallup Inc. in Washington. May figures are scheduled for release Monday.

As people feel comfortable flaunting big-ticket purchases again, this could spur spending among their neighbors, Zandi said. There’s been a “general cultural shift” away from displays of conspicuous consumption, but some Americans will revert to old habits of “trying to keep up with the Joneses.”

Still, the longer a trend persists, the more likely such behavior becomes habituated, Danziger said. Consumer spending makes up about 70 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, so continued prudence among HENRYs is problematic, she said.

“We’re at a real tipping point,” Danziger said. “The affluent who have spending power are really not spending.”

This entry was posted in Demographics, Economics, National Real Estate. Bookmark the permalink.

138 Responses to Rich not spending

  1. Comrade Nom Deplume, the loan snark says:

    Frist.

  2. Comrade Nom Deplume, the loan snark says:

    Judging by the size of the checks I wrote on 4/15, is it any wonder why my cohort isn’t spending?

  3. grim says:

    The less you spend, the more discretionary income available for taxation I suppose.

  4. Comrade Nom Deplume, the loan snark says:

    [3] grim

    Or … The more taxation, the less discretionary money available.

  5. JJ says:

    And what do they have to spend money on?

    While at car dealer last week getting my last free oil change and car wash before free maint expired I was reading some car magazines. I read one stat I though was a little shocking. The average new car purchaser (not including leases), keeps a new car 9.1 years. Holy cow cars used to fall apart after 3-4 years or used to get new advances like airbags, antilock breaks, Nav, heated seats, all wheel drive you would want to trade up.

    So basically car purchases are a bit cooked for a while. Home prices well still no inventory, I cant trade up even if I wanted. The few good houses in town rarely go on sale. So I sit in my junk box. Sandy also accelerated spending in several towns.

    My neighbor who had full flood in a junk box with two junk cars ended up getting house redone top to bottom everything new for free plus he bought two brand new cars. So what is he spending next ten years. Unless another sandy nothing. I doubt his 2013 Impala and 2013 Camry considering the couple both only do local driving will need replacing for a decade. If no sandy, the old cars had a 1-3 year life span and her dingy dirty old kitchen, dated bath and old roof would have all need fixing soon.

    The contractors in my town are slowly clearing out. Normally in a bull market and a hot job and housing market like back in 2004 everyone was renovating like crazy and pulling equity out. Today everyone is pretty much set for the next ten years on my block.

  6. joyce says:

    Legislators and corporate lobbyists meet in secret at Georgia resort

    At that point the ALEC vice president clasped his hands, closed his eyes, and let out a sigh. He then called over the pack of four deputies without saying another word.

    Sheriff’s Deputy: “I’m going to have to ask you to leave.”
    Keefe: “Alright, I’m a guest of the hotel sir.”
    Sheriff’s Deputy: “Not for long. Not for long.”
    Keefe: “I’m a paying guest of this hotel sir.”
    Sheriff’s Deputy: “We’ll take care of that.”
    Second Deputy: “We’ll escort you up to your room and you can get your things.”

    The deputies called for the hotel manager who ultimately kicked us out of our hotel room for “taking pictures in the hotel.”

    I asked the deputies, “did we violate some law or something? I mean are we violating a law?”

    The first deputy ignored my question and turned to the second deputy telling him, “Don’t say nothing.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNA0-GBuunc

  7. The Great Pumpkin says:

    How come no one is in an uproar over billionaires taking the tax payer for a ride? They have the money, but insist on ripping off the tax payer to make even more money. Same thing happens with states giving corporations tax breaks to stay in their state. Tax payer gets ripped off beyond belief, but let’s blame low level govt workers for the tax issue. How billionaires are able to pull these moves off with tax payer money is beyond me. I would think if you had the money, you would risk your own money and not use the tax payer as an atm to increase your wealth.

    “In fact, L.A. might be the NFL’s most important city, despite not having a franchise for two decades. This is no accident. Leaving America’s second-largest media market without a team pays dividends for owners looking to fund new stadiums. In the 20 years since the L.A. Rams and Raiders moved to St. Louis and Oakland, respectively, the threat of relocating a team back to the City of Angels has been used time and again to extract stadium deals from home markets.

    Take, for example, the recent interest in a return to L.A. by Rams owner Stan Kroenke, one of at least three NFL owners exploring a move. After years of reluctance by Missouri policymakers to overhaul the Edward Jones Dome (built in 1995 to lure the Rams away from L.A.), Kroenke announced plans to build a new stadium in California. Within a week, the governor of Missouri announced that “St. Louis is an NFL city and I am committed to keeping it that way.” By the end of the month Missouri proposed building a publicly funded $985 million open-air stadium.

    The L.A. threat got Kroenke in a matter of weeks what years of negotiation couldn’t. The same story is playing out with the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders, who proposed a joint L.A. stadium as each negotiates with their current cities.”

    Check out this article from USA TODAY:

    Subsidized grass is greener: Column

    http://usat.ly/1HDFKXJ

  8. The Great Pumpkin says:

    I have no problem reading USA Today. It’s a free app that keeps me up with the news.

    Splat What Was He Thinking says:
    June 1, 2015 at 6:59 am
    Punkin, you do realize USA Today is aimed at the segment of the market that can’t read, right?

    Whenever I travel, I love seeing the untouched pile of USA Todays in every hotel lobby.

  9. FKA 2010 Buyer says:

    Now is the time to buy!!! There will never be a better time to buy.

    U.S. Home Sales Nationwide Sell at 100 Percent of Full Market Value in April

    According to RealtyTrac, the U.S. housing market was at near perfect price equilibrium in April 2015.

    “Nationwide in April single family homes and condos sold for almost exactly 100 percent of their estimated full market value on average — indicating a good balance between supply from sellers and demand from buyers,” said Daren Blomquist, vice president at RealtyTrac. “At the local level, however, most markets tipped in favor of either sellers or buyers — although there were some Goldilocks markets exhibiting a ‘just right’ balance between buyers and sellers.”

    “We are in a strong balanced market tipping toward a seller’s market,” said Mike Pappas, CEO and president of the Keyes Company, covering the South Florida market, where average sales prices were between 97 and 99 percent of average market values of homes that sold in April in the three counties comprising the metro area. “Even our waning distressed inventory prices are popping and selling above the appraisal price.”

    http://www.worldpropertyjournal.com/real-estate-news/united-states/home-prices-april-2015-realtytrac-daren-blomquist-median-home-prices-best-markets-to-buy-a-home-top-seller-markets-best-buyer-markets-9124.php

  10. Joe says:

    Hi,

    I read this website every now and then and I am posting for the first time today. I recently looked at an open house in Passaic county a few weeks ago and I am thinking about putting in an offer. I was told by a friend that it is not a good idea to use the listing agent because it can create a conflict of interest. I was also told that I now might be stuck and have to use the listing agent since I did not sign up with a buyers real estate agent. I did sign in that I attended the open house.

    Can anyone give me advice on what I should do? If I want to put in offer am i stuck with the open house agent and is it really a bad idea to do that?

    Thanks

  11. The Great Pumpkin says:

    Yup, wasn’t I beating this drum, but was told that I was an idiot. There is no such thing as hoarding money, right? Then why is there no growth in the American or European economies? If it wasn’t for the spending of the rich Russians and Asians, economy would be in full deflationary spiral.

    It’s a consumer based economy. If everyone saved like lib (captain chepo) there would be no economy. People would only buy products that are on sale and on an extreme discount. This leaves the business with not much profit to pay workers more, hire more employees, and expand the business. Problem is, a lot of libs have been created in the economy in the past 8 years.

    Could you imagine if Apple had to sell their products for 50% off to make a sale? Company would be finished. So think about how many companies are dealing with people that won’t buy a product at regular price and what impact this is having on our economy.

    “Still, the longer a trend persists, the more likely such behavior becomes habituated, Danziger said. Consumer spending makes up about 70 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, so continued prudence among HENRYs is problematic, she said.

    “We’re at a real tipping point,” Danziger said. “The affluent who have spending power are really not spending.””

  12. The Great Pumpkin says:

    Market is doing exactly what I said it would do, but was laughed at. It’s now obvious that the market is going down. It will only go up as the economy improves and more buyers come to the table. If wage inflation comes by 2018, you will def regret not taking out a low rate loan and buying some real estate during these opportune times to buy. No doubt that 10 years from now real estate should be worth more.

    FKA 2010 Buyer says:
    June 1, 2015 at 9:47 am
    Now is the time to buy!!! There will never be a better time to buy.

    U.S. Home Sales Nationwide Sell at 100 Percent of Full Market Value in April

    According to RealtyTrac, the U.S. housing market was at near perfect price equilibrium in April 2015.

    “Nationwide in April single family homes and condos sold for almost exactly 100 percent of their estimated full market value on average — indicating a good balance between supply from sellers and demand from buyers,” said Daren Blomquist, vice president at RealtyTrac. “At the local level, however, most markets tipped in favor of either sellers or buyers — although there were some Goldilocks markets exhibiting a ‘just right’ balance between buyers and sellers.”

    “We are in a strong balanced market tipping toward a seller’s market,” said Mike Pappas, CEO and president of the Keyes Company, covering the South Florida market, where average sales prices were between 97 and 99 percent of average market values of homes that sold in April in the three counties comprising the metro area. “Even our waning distressed inventory prices are popping and selling above the appraisal price.”

    http://www.worldpropertyjournal.com/real-estate-news/united-states/home-prices-april-2015-realtytrac-daren-blomquist-median-home-prices-best-markets-to-buy-a-home-top-seller-markets-best-buyer-markets-9124.php

  13. D-FENS says:

    7 – Please report back when they find that reporter dead in a hotel room.

  14. The Great Pumpkin says:

    14- obvious, that the market is not going down

  15. D-FENS says:

    New Jersey Legislators with ALEC Ties

    General Assembly
    Rep. Caroline Casagrande (R-11)[1]
    Rep. Amy Handlin (R-13)[2]
    Rep. Declan O’Scanlon (R-13)[3]
    Rep. Scott Rumana (R-40)[4]
    Rep. Jay Webber (R-26), ALEC State Chair[5]

    Senate
    Sen Joseph Kyrillos (R-13)[6]
    Sen. Steve Oroho (R-24), ALEC State Chair[5]
    Sen. Ronald Rice (D-28) [7]

    Former Governor
    Donald DiFrancesco [8]

    Former Representatives
    Rep. William Bryant [9]
    Rep. Frank Catania [10]
    Rep. Clare Farragher
    Rep. Nicholas Felice [8]

    Former Senators
    Sen. Steven J. Corodemus [11

  16. The Great Pumpkin says:

    Awesome job! This is absolute proof that the govt is hijacked by big industry. How do they get away with this?

    joyce says:
    June 1, 2015 at 9:33 am
    Legislators and corporate lobbyists meet in secret at Georgia resort

    At that point the ALEC vice president clasped his hands, closed his eyes, and let out a sigh. He then called over the pack of four deputies without saying another word.

    Sheriff’s Deputy: “I’m going to have to ask you to leave.”
    Keefe: “Alright, I’m a guest of the hotel sir.”
    Sheriff’s Deputy: “Not for long. Not for long.”
    Keefe: “I’m a paying guest of this hotel sir.”
    Sheriff’s Deputy: “We’ll take care of that.”
    Second Deputy: “We’ll escort you up to your room and you can get your things.”

    The deputies called for the hotel manager who ultimately kicked us out of our hotel room for “taking pictures in the hotel.”

    I asked the deputies, “did we violate some law or something? I mean are we violating a law?”

    The first deputy ignored my question and turned to the second deputy telling him, “Don’t say nothing.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNA0-GBuunc

  17. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [9] punkin,

    The taxpayers want it. In that case, they wanted the Rams to stay so they offered a deal.

    They didn’t have to offer the deal. No gun was held to a head. Vinnie the Mook didn’t personally threaten to kneecap MO legislators.

    If an employee tells an employer “pay me what I want or I walk”, its a mitzpah. If a business says “pay me what I want or I walk”, its a crime. You sound like the folks in Baltimore or Cleveland who lamented the owners taking away “their” teams.

  18. joyce says:

    19
    Are you claiming the elected representatives follow the will of their constituents?

  19. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    Funny thing is that ALEC does what other groups before it have done: Draft model legislation. Many others have done this or continue to do it, including:

    National Association of Insurance Commissioners
    American Law Institute
    Consumers Union
    National Consumer Law Center
    American Civil Liberties Union
    Uniform Law Commission
    American Bar Association
    AFL-CIO
    National Conference of State Legislators

    . . . just to name a few of the bigger ones. Now, a quick perusal of this list shows quite a few groups that one would identify easily as “advocacy groups”, and that use the same methods.

    So what’s the difference? Your point of view.

  20. The Great Pumpkin says:

    You just summed up why our govt has turned into a plutocracy.

    Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:
    June 1, 2015 at 10:26 am
    Funny thing is that ALEC does what other groups before it have done: Draft model legislation. Many others have done this or continue to do it, including:

    National Association of Insurance Commissioners
    American Law Institute
    Consumers Union
    National Consumer Law Center
    American Civil Liberties Union
    Uniform Law Commission
    American Bar Association
    AFL-CIO
    National Conference of State Legislators

    . . . just to name a few of the bigger ones. Now, a quick perusal of this list shows quite a few groups that one would identify easily as “advocacy groups”, and that use the same methods.

    So what’s the difference? Your point of view.

  21. joyce says:

    21
    Is there anything not partisan to you? Truly pathetic. This is one, of millions of examples, of the govt openly brazenly being bought off… as well as them using their jackbooted thugs for their primary intended purpose (protecting THEM and not the “regular people”).

    ALEC isn’t the only one (and no one said they were)… happy now?

  22. The Great Pumpkin says:

    The taxpayers want welfare too, but you complain about that. So why not complain about this?

    The tax payer wants to get ripped off, so I guess it’s okay. Do you think taxpayer even realizes this is happening? Why not have a vote on it?

    Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:
    June 1, 2015 at 10:15 am
    [9] punkin,

    The taxpayers want it. In that case, they wanted the Rams to stay so they offered a deal.

    They didn’t have to offer the deal. No gun was held to a head. Vinnie the Mook didn’t personally threaten to kneecap MO legislators.

    If an employee tells an employer “pay me what I want or I walk”, its a mitzpah. If a business says “pay me what I want or I walk”, its a crime. You sound like the folks in Baltimore or Cleveland who lamented the owners taking away “their” teams.

  23. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    It is instructive at this time to recall von Clauswitz’ famous statement: War is the continuation of politics by other means.

    I posit that the inverse is equally true: Politics is the continuation of war by other means. Not that this view is new or mine (easy, Joyce). Marshal Sovolosky, quoting Lenin, observed that “Politics is the reason, and war is only the tool, not the other way around. Consequently, it remains only to subordinate the military point of view to the political”. Kissinger recognized this as an inverse of Clauswitz, noting that Lenin’s approach is politics as a continuation of war by other means. I merely posit that this view is at the heart such things as the Alinsky “Rules” and, further along the continuum, Sunstein’s “Nudge” theory.

  24. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [23] joyce,

    No. Everything is, or is capable of becoming, partisan.

    I’ve lived too long and seen too much in that regard to feel otherwise.

  25. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [24] punkin,

    “The taxpayers want welfare too, but you complain about that.”

    Yup. Sure do. Was there a point to that observation?

    “So why not complain about this?”

    First, it isn’t my money. Second, you presume I wouldn’t.

  26. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [22] punkin,

    “You just summed up why our govt has turned into a plutocracy.”

    Yeah. But I always thought it was. You seen to feel that it has become so only when the other side’s plutocrats gained ground on your plutocrats.

    It is reminiscent of playing a game with my 6YO. When she finds she isn’t winning, she will call time out and try to change the rules.

  27. joyce says:

    “Everything is, or is capable of becoming, partisan.”
    capable of? sure

    But you’re the one who’s making it partisan right now and very often on this site. You clearly enjoy. Good for you. baa

    Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:
    June 1, 2015 at 10:43 am
    [23] joyce,

    No. Everything is, or is capable of becoming, partisan.

    I’ve lived too long and seen too much in that regard to feel otherwise.

  28. Ragnar says:

    I despise this obsession that economists and the media have with spending.
    Because they are dominated by Keynesians, they’re fixated like Pumkin with the idea that spending or “demand” allows the economy to grow by pulling itself up by its own bootstraps.

    Savings redirected into productive investment is the lifeblood of long term economic growth. (look up the Solow growth model). Keynesian economics doesn’t even have a long run model.

    So this headline in a more rational world, might say – “Wealthy people increasingly saving and preparing for their future, while the poor continue to live hand to mouth, counting on government to take care of their future contingencies”

    Here’s a video for Pimpking to help him understand the concept:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smspKuKqt5c

  29. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [20] Joyce

    “Are you claiming the elected representatives follow the will of their constituents?”

    Yes. They did. It isn’t my place to question the sagacity of the mob’s will or of the willingness of the legislators to feed into it.

    And this wasn’t a fait de accompli. The process was brutish but open. No one’s motives are unknown here. If the vote is against the will of the people, the people will vote them out. But I am guessing that more people wanted the Rams in StL than didn’t.

    You and punkin decry things that happen in politics but they happen for three reasons: First, they aren’t illegal. Second, they represent the will of the motivated majority, and third, if the real majority cared (assuming it is different from the motivated majority), nothing is stopping them from acting.

  30. leftwing says:

    USA Today. Newspaper equivalent of Wiki. Poorly written, terrible logic and reasoning. Probably at a 10th grade level. I’ve pledged to stop commenting on any of punkin’s USA Today articles. Could write a thesis on shortcomings of the reporting and analysis.

    Punkin, on spending, yes. Many people I know including myself are pulling back. Again, your need does not create my obligation. I have no responsibility to spend to ‘support’ employment for anyone. Wanton spending is not a patriotic duty.

    To those looking for ‘support’ in the economy from my spending here is some advice: make something I want at a price I am willing to pay.

    Over the last couple weeks my discretionary spending included $600 on a photograph, $200 on a cover for my jeep, $150 on some gourmet staples, $12,000 for an overseas vacation, and $1,000 on a regional vacation. Those were buys.

    I tried to purchase an area rug for the last two Sundays. Anything I see that is attractive is not well made and overpriced, in excess of $800. That is a hold, I’ll buy if the right one comes along, or if the prices on the ones I’ve looked at drop.

    I am not buying any toxic plastic junk that ends up in a landfill in a year nor any furniture I need to assemble myself. Ever, regardless of price. I’m not paying a premium for an auto just because I can get free nine year money.

    Clear punkin? Free market economy. Make something I want or need at a price I am willing to pay. Multiply by 310 million. There you go. Wonderful thing.

  31. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [30] joyce

    “But you’re the one who’s making it partisan right now”

    For anything to be partisan, there has to be an opposing view/force/etc. If there wasn’t one, it wouldn’t be partisan. If there was no pushback, it wouldn’t be partisan.

    You push back. That act makes my point partisan and makes me a partisan because I pushed it and got opposition.

    Which begs the question: If that makes me partisan, what does that make you?

  32. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [33] leftwing

    “USA Today. . . . Probably at a 10th grade level.”

    I think you are being generous.

  33. grim says:

    USA Today. Newspaper equivalent of Wiki. Poorly written, terrible logic and reasoning. Probably at a 10th grade level. I’ve pledged to stop commenting on any of punkin’s USA Today articles. Could write a thesis on shortcomings of the reporting and analysis.

    I post USA Today all the time, I think it’s one of the best indicators of popular opinion in the press. Look at it for what is said, not what they say … what they say is irrelevant.

  34. D-FENS says:

    Nom,

    The legislators in Georgia purposely exempted themselves from Georgia’s open records act. You have to agree they are acting unethically and in a manner most people would find devious and offensive.

    After viewing the video, why would you even muster an argument in opposition? I noticed a majority of the ALEC members have R’s next to their name. Do you think that influences your thinking?

  35. leftwing says:

    New news:

    WASHINGTON, June 1 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed a win to Bank of America Corp by ruling that a second mortgage on an “underwater” home – one with a mortgage balance exceeding its current value – cannot by voided during bankruptcy. On a unanimous vote, the court ruled against two homeowners, David Caulkett and Edelmiro Toledo-Cardona, in Florida, where many homeowners have struggled to pay their mortgages following the recent housing crisis. Caulkett and Toledo-Cardona had both won before the regional appeals court that oversees Florida. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that homeowners in Chapter 7 bankruptcy can void – or in bankruptcy terms “strip off” – a second mortgage when the debt owed to the holder of the first mortgage is more than the property’s current value. That means the lender loses its ability to foreclose on the property even if its value increases. But Bank of America, which is the second mortgage holder in both cases, argued in court papers that the approach taken by the 11th Circuit was different than other appeals courts around the country. The cases are Bank of America v. Caulkett and Bank of America v. Toledo-Cardona, U.S. Supreme Court, Nos. 13-1421 and 14-163. (Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham) ((lawrence.hurley@thomsonreuters.com; 202-809-3080;)) Keywords: USA COURT/BANKRUPTCY

  36. Jason says:

    35.

    My initial thought on the statement that USA Today written at a 10th grade level was indeed being generous, but on further consideration,
    since 10th grade is the new 8th grade, that sounds about right.

  37. joyce says:

    32
    Sometimes, I don’t think you really believe what you’re saying. It’s pure rationalization to make you feel better.

    “First, they aren’t illegal.”

    Hahahaha

  38. leftwing says:

    Grim

    “Look at it for what is said, not what they say … what they say is irrelevant.”

    Point taken. Similar reason I read the NYT editorial page. In this case to keep an eye on the opposition.

  39. joyce says:

    Do you hear yourself?

    Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:
    June 1, 2015 at 10:58 am
    [30] joyce

    “But you’re the one who’s making it partisan right now”

    For anything to be partisan, there has to be an opposing view/force/etc. If there wasn’t one, it wouldn’t be partisan. If there was no pushback, it wouldn’t be partisan.

    You push back. That act makes my point partisan and makes me a partisan because I pushed it and got opposition.

    Which begs the question: If that makes me partisan, what does that make you?

  40. joyce says:

    “First, they aren’t illegal.”

    You mean to tell me that the govt – that selectively enforces the law, selectively interprets the law, et al – doesn’t think what they and their friends are doing is illegal??

    [Insert famous line from Casablanca that will moderate my post]

  41. D-FENS says:

    43 – they write the laws….and they are working within the loopholes and exemptions they created for themselves.

    Don’t ya know Joyce…this is just “how it works” (sarc) . Get real. Public hearings and committee’s where laws are discussed in front of the press are annoyances and things to be circumvented.

  42. D-FENS says:

    It’s ok…it’s our tribe….they have R’s next to their names. A corrupt “R” is better than a corrupt “D” right?

  43. Libturd in Union says:

    “USA Today. . . . Probably at a 10th grade level.”

    I think you are being generous.

    The same thought crossed my mind when I first saw it. The pictograms remind me of Highlights Magazine (remember that anyone) and the color scheme screams of a table mat containing the kids meal menu.

    If the USA Today was not given out for free at hotels, it wouldn’t exist today.

    In my opinion, the best paper out there is the Financial Times. It’s very balanced politically and unlike the Times or the WSJ, doesn’t preach to it’s audience. I really fell in love with it when I was in India seven or so years ago.

    Captain Cheapo tip of the day. British Airways Avios are super valuable on short-term flights on American. Even after taking the family First Class to London and Paris, we still had enough Avios left over to pay for two open jaw trips from Philly to Memphis and then back to Philly via Nashville. We are taking the family to Graceland and then the Opry at the end of June. Will do the 4th of July in Nashville, which is supposed to be pretty cool as well as the Civil Rights Museum. AC is paying for two of our airfares (they won’t pay to fly kids) $300 in food and $500 in free play as well as for all of our tours of Memphis (Sun Studio/Gibson Guitar Factory/Graceland). I love a virtually free vacation. You’re right about one thing Pumpkin…If everyone was as frugal as me, the economy would implode.

  44. Fast Eddie says:

    Six years after the worst recession since the 1930s, Americans who earn $100,000 to $249,999 a year still are “making very careful decisions” when it comes to discretionary purchases, said Pam Danziger, president of Unity Marketing Inc., a luxury research company based in Stevens, Pennsylvania. “That’s smart for them, but it’s certainly not good for the economy.”

    These consumers — Danziger calls them HENRYs, or high earners not rich yet — are “feeling squeezed” primarily because their spending power is curbed by sluggish income gains, she said.

    Really? F.ucking really? You mean some of us refuse to compete against fat, stup1d f.ucks who think making a 650K purchase on a sh1t hole is a good deal? Require everyone to put at least 20% down with an 800 FICO. No, better yet, let ’em drown. And I feel zero sympathy for those @ssholes that purchased during the peak. Your financial f.uckup is your problem, stop looking for a bailout.

  45. The Great Pumpkin says:

    All these attacks on a national newspaper being written at the 10 grade level. Not for nothing, if they wrote at a 15th grade level, no one would understand what they are saying. They will be catering to a tiny minority that will put them out of business.

    Really, is there that much of a difference between a 10th and 12th grade reading level? A few more complex words thrown into the mix to provide the writer with the means to be more descriptive in their presentation of their material. So less words and sentences are used with the implementation of complex words that summarize sentences worth of explanation into a single word.

    For me, I can care less how the ideas or information are presented. I don’t care about the complex vocabulary, all I care about is the idea and the information. The bones. That’s all that matters to me. If you are able to write using words that most people have to look up, more power to you and I’m happy for you. Just understand that most people don’t know what you are talking about when you try to impress them by using a bunch of words they don’t understand.

    So if you are going to sell a national newspaper and want your readers to be able to understand what they are reading, do not go over the 10th grade reading level.

  46. Fast Eddie says:

    Newspapers are written at a theoretic 8th grade level. And the average dem0crat voter comprehends at a 3rd grade level, just fyi.

  47. I like the HENRY acronym. Similarly, I would classify punkin’ as a LENKY – Low Earner, No Knowledge Yet.

  48. 3rd grade reading level. Demonstrably lower in math skills.

    Newspapers are written at a theoretic 8th grade level. And the average dem0crat voter comprehends at a 3rd grade level, just fyi.

  49. Ragnar says:

    Interesting that the Huffington Post has more of its content at the “basic” reading level than most media websites. Bloomberg has the most advanced level content.

    http://www.adamsherk.com/publishing/news-sites-google-reading-level/

  50. homeboken says:

    The Great Pumpkin says:
    June 1, 2015 at 12:02 pm
    All these attacks on a national newspaper being written at the 10 grade level. Not for nothing, if they wrote at a 15th grade level, no one would understand what they are saying

    For the first time ever I agree with a Pumpkin statement!

    USA Today is written for the masses, it’s grammar, vocabulary and style is designed to be digested by the average american. That average american is lucky to read and comprehend at a 10th grade level. Hell – I contend that somewhere between 20-30% of the population has never purchased a newspaper in their lifetime. I am thrilled that somebody is reading, period.

  51. Libturd in Union says:

    “So if you are going to sell a national newspaper and want your readers to be able to understand what they are reading, do not go over the 10th grade reading level.”

    This sounds a lot like the same argument presented by the Anti-PARCC crowd.

  52. D-FENS says:

    We are from NJ. We are so much smarter than everyone else.

  53. Libturd in Union says:

    “We are from NJ. We are so much smarter than everyone else.”

    You got that rite!

  54. Fast Eddie says:

    Ragnar [52],

    It’s really no surprise, the earners are proactive, self-sufficient; thus, always looking to enhance themselves while the takers are less motivated and more willing to consume the sludge-filled portion of life.

  55. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    Joyce and D-FENS.

    Yeah, I hear myself. Do you?

    As for defending it, I can because it’s what I do and it can be defended. It is defensible, if not palatable to you. The fact that you disagree doesn’t make it wrong. GA voters can change it if they like. They haven’t, at least not yet.

    As for being illegal or not, I say not. Make your case why it is.

  56. Fast Eddie says:

    We are from NJ. We are so much smarter than everyone else.

    We’re prestigious and insulated, too.

  57. Libturd in Union says:

    I wish my multi was insulated!

  58. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [45] D-FENS

    “A corrupt “R” is better than a corrupt “D” right?”

    Depends on what corrupted them. I will endure welfare over a lot of things my “tribe” allegedly supports.

    But, in general, consider this when picking sides: When’s the last time a poor person gave you a job?

  59. Libturd in Union(beating JJ to the punch) says:

    “When’s the last time a poor person gave you a job?”

    Does that include the kind of job that results in a happy ending?

  60. NJT says:

    “We are from NJ. We are so much smarter than everyone else.

    We’re prestigious and insulated, too.”.

    New Jersey and you, perfect together. :).

  61. JJ says:

    Over by the Javitts Center in the 1980s I gave plenty a few poor ladies a job.

    Libturd in Union(beating JJ to the punch) says:
    June 1, 2015 at 12:41 pm
    “When’s the last time a poor person gave you a job?”

    Does that include the kind of job that results in a happy ending?

  62. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:
  63. D-FENS says:

    The ALEC members of the Georgia state legislature are not conducting themselves in a way that is supported by either party.

  64. Libturd in Union says:

    “The ALEC members of the Georgia state legislature are not conducting themselves in a way that is supported by either party.”

    Stop being a smart ALEC.

  65. D-FENS says:

    Or, they gave you one….

    JJ says:
    June 1, 2015 at 12:44 pm
    Over by the Javitts Center in the 1980s I gave plenty a few poor ladies a job.

  66. FKA 2010 Buyer says:

    Pay me my money or I will sue you arse.

    The hedge fund manager suing Argentina just had his ‘That’s it!’ moment

    Paul Singer has had it.

    The billionaire investor leading a group of hedge fund managers suing Argentina over a decade-old debt has finally filed to add the claims of over 500 more creditors on top of his original lawsuit.

    Consider this Singer’s “That’s it!” moment.

    Here’s why:

    Argentina technically defaulted last summer after ignoring a US judge’s ruling to pay Singer and his cohorts (known collectively as NML) over $1.7 billion in sovereign debt dating from its last default.

    One of the excuses Argentina used to explain its recalcitrance was that if it paid NML it would be opening itself up to claims from hundreds more investors because of something called the RUFO clause.

    If RUFO kicked in, instead of being on the hook for $1.7 billion, Argentina would be on the hook for around $5.3 billion, according to its own law. That’s quite a price tag for a country whose central bank is usually holding under $30 billion in cash. Most observers were skeptical about this reasoning but, hey, Argentina stood by it.

    The thing is, RUFO expired in January.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/me-too-creditors-added-to-argentina-suit-2015-6#ixzz3bpW1NFY1

  67. D-FENS says:

    The comments today have rapidly descended to a USA Today level.

  68. Fast Eddie says:

    The comments today have rapidly descended to a USA Today level.

    Once we get to this level, the Oblama supporters will join in:

    http://www.amazon.com/Biscuit-My-First-Can-Read/dp/0064442128

  69. chicagofinance says:

    BOTBTHHAT – Born On Third Base Thinks He Hit A Triple

    The Original NJ ExPat says:
    June 1, 2015 at 12:10 pm
    I like the HENRY acronym. Similarly, I would classify punkin’ as a LENKY – Low Earner, No Knowledge Yet.

  70. NJT says:

    So you were a pimp? ;).

    This reminds me of when I did technical field service for a communications company in the tristate area back then (mosty NYC and Philly). Servers would always crash late on Friday and Saturday nights. Ah, the situations and stories! One of my favorites was a pimp that used the parking lot of one of our rented units (full of servers) for ” ‘bidness”.

    Guy was a character right out of a 70s blaxploytation movie. White caddy (pimped out) jewelry, gold teeth. Funny, too!

    Him: (first time encountering me): “Your boss own this building?”.
    Me: For now.
    Him: “What kinda cut would he be willing to take” (or something like that).
    Me: Let me call him (walked away and pretended to call from the truck). $500 a week.
    Him: Deal.

    Collected for…a couple months until he… disappeared.

    Years later told my boss about it. He though it was funny and didn’t ask for his ‘cut’.

    BTW – this was in Philly.

  71. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [70] D-FENS says:
    June 1, 2015 at 12:50 pm
    The comments today have rapidly descended to a USA Today level.”

    Agreed. Though I am certain we disagree on who led the race to the bottom.

  72. FKA 2010 Buyer says:

    Since we are heading to the bottom…I’m at a loss for words.

    “Call me Caitlyn”

  73. JJ says:

    I tell you where the rich are spending summer rentals in the Hamptons and by me are way up since summer of 2014. people are getting 30-40K for a monthly rental. And that is not a group, that is a single family paying that much.

  74. NJT says:

    ” 30-40K for a monthly rental”. HS! Too far away for me (as a landlord) though. Damn!

  75. Libturd in Union says:

    Who remembers Pug?

  76. chicagofinance says:

    Read it all the way to the end…..

  77. Libturd in Union says:

    She blew the pooch too.

  78. Libturd in Union says:

    That dirty dog!

  79. Libturd in Union says:

    Must add lascivious to my vocabulary.

  80. anon (the good one) says:

    yep, most right wingers here are like Nom

    truly awful

    joyce says:
    June 1, 2015 at 10:50 am
    “Everything is, or is capable of becoming, partisan.”
    capable of? sure

    But you’re the one who’s making it partisan right now and very often on this site. You clearly enjoy

  81. JJ says:

    They never mention if the kid she has is from a dog or a human

    chicagofinance says:
    June 1, 2015 at 1:40 pm
    The End Is Nigh (Literally Screw The Pooch Edition):
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/florida-woman-perverted-charged-sex-teen-article-1.2212056

  82. anon (the good one) says:

    that happens when most people stop reading and none but a newspaper

    quality goes dow

    Am a paying subscriber to the NYT among many other fine publications

    leftwing says:
    June 1, 2015 at 10:56 am

    USA Today. Newspaper equivalent of Wiki. Poorly written, terrible logic and reasoning. Probably at a 10th grade level.

  83. anon (the good one) says:

    as I said, finest newspaper in the nation

    leftwing says:
    June 1, 2015 at 11:27 am

    I read the NYT editorial page.

  84. anon (the good one) says:

    absolutely.
    here we hate ALL politicians…. except the ones from our party

    D-FENS says:
    June 1, 2015 at 11:45 am

    It’s ok…it’s our tribe….they have R’s next to their names. A corrupt “R” is better than a corrupt “D” right?

  85. JJ says:

    I am not talking even Hamptons on some rentals, this house in Lido beach rented for 60k for just two months. Look at plot size. This aint asking this is what they got
    76 Cheltenham St, Lido Beach NY, 11561 ( Rented )
    Lot Size:45 X 80
    Rented Price:
    $60,000

    Out by Hamptons seeing 100K monthly rentals and this guy locked in by in Feb for his $104.500 deal.

    By condo buildings contractor who lives up the block from my condo rented his house for July already for 38k.

    I use to rent in the Hamptons and 6k was a tiny shack in Hampton Bays and 20K got you a nice Southampton house. Today it is like 18k a shack and 118K a super nice house. The high end really took off.

    355 Terry Ln, Southold NY, 11971 ( Rented )
    Share
    Rented Price:
    $104,500
    Date:02/20/2015
    |

    June 1, 2015 at 1:31 pm
    ” 30-40K for a monthly rental”. HS! Too far away for me (as a landlord) though. Damn!

  86. Ragnar says:

    Looks like they found a clip of Denny Hastert teaching young boys wrestling
    http://southpark.cc.com/clips/251913/the-fine-sport-of-wrastling
    “I have half a mind to report you to the police, sir!” said one youth.

  87. POS cape says:

    [5] 10 Richest Towns:

    “The borough of Ho-Ho-Kus is in central New Jersey,…”

    Once again, manufactured in China, like everything else.

  88. leftwing says:

    72. TANSTAAFL

    First econ class in college, Professor wrote this fellow’s on the board and asked us about his economic theory. We are all racking our brains like who the heck is this Swedish economist anyway.

    The Tanstaafl Theory is “there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”.

  89. leftwing says:

    Nom

    Thanks for the link. Two questions, the second one comes with all disclaimers of no relationship and that I am an idiot if I rely on the internet for any legal matter if you are kind enough to answer:

    1. Who the heck takes a case over about $90k to the Supremes? I understand BoA, they have a lot at stake as a precedent. But the other side? Does a lawyer do it pro-bono just to get in front of the Court? Can’t make sense economically if paying for counsel.

    2. Non-real estate asset, competing claims. Can a second lienholder force foreclosure proceedings?

  90. 1987 Condo says:

    Here you can scroll down and see “readability”

    http://www.ravensheadservices.com/readability_checker.php

  91. Libturd in Union says:

    I wonder where Twitter falls?

  92. JJ says:

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-is-what-bruce-jenner-looks-like-as-caitlyn-jenner-2015-06-01?link=MW_home_latest_news

    Bruce Jenner new name is Caitlyn, and may is he an ugly chick, wonder who the first guy to boink him will be? You know it will be a tell all book

  93. The Great Pumpkin says:

    This not an attack on you or your money.

    Your spending habits sum up the problem with too much money at the top. Why do you complain about paying taxes or worry about making more money, when you clearly have more than enough. You have nothing to spend it on, so why you need more is beyond me. If you can sit here and look at me with a straight face and tell me that someone needs a billion dollars, I will not question it. Otherwise, I have to question why someone would need to be worth 79 billion. That’s doing harm to the economy in a major way for no good reason at all but to give an individual the right to own as much of the economy as they wish.

    It comes down to doing what’s right for the system and not worrying only about your self. With that kind of money, comes major responsibility. If you don’t like the responsibility that comes with that kind of money, then get rid of the excess money you will never use and be on with your life. Easy as that.

    “Punkin, on spending, yes. Many people I know including myself are pulling back. Again, your need does not create my obligation. I have no responsibility to spend to ‘support’ employment for anyone. Wanton spending is not a patriotic duty.

    To those looking for ‘support’ in the economy from my spending here is some advice: make something I want at a price I am willing to pay.

    Over the last couple weeks my discretionary spending included $600 on a photograph, $200 on a cover for my jeep, $150 on some gourmet staples, $12,000 for an overseas vacation, and $1,000 on a regional vacation. Those were buys.

    I tried to purchase an area rug for the last two Sundays. Anything I see that is attractive is not well made and overpriced, in excess of $800. That is a hold, I’ll buy if the right one comes along, or if the prices on the ones I’ve looked at drop.

    I am not buying any toxic plastic junk that ends up in a landfill in a year nor any furniture I need to assemble myself. Ever, regardless of price. I’m not paying a premium for an auto just because I can get free nine year money.

    Clear punkin? Free market economy. Make something I want or need at a price I am willing to pay. Multiply by 310 million. There you go. Wonderful thing.”

  94. 1987 Condo says:

    Supreme Ruling:

    WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Underwater homeowners who file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection are still on the hook for secondary loans tied to their properties, the Supreme Court said Monday.

    In a nine-to-zero decision, the court said in Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett that borrowers whose homes are completely underwater — debtors owe more on a mortgage than the home is worth — cannot void or “strip off” a junior lien when they file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. A junior lien, such as a home-equity loan, is taken after a first mortgage, and uses a home as collateral.

    In the case, two borrowers each had two mortgages on their homes, with Bank of America BAC, +0.30% holding the junior liens. Both borrowers were underwater and filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy two years ago. The borrowers wanted to “strip off” the junior mortgages, shedding those debts.

    On Monday the Supreme Court cited a decision from a prior case, Dewsnup v. Timm, finding that lenders still have a secured claim, “regardless of whether the value of that property would be sufficient to cover the claim.”

    The decision “is a clear victory for mortgage lenders” said Isaac Boltansky, an analyst at Compass Point Research & Trading, a Washington-based investment firm.

    “It clarifies the path to recoveries for second lien holders in bankruptcy,” Boltansky said. “This decision will undoubtedly make the bankruptcy process more difficult for impacted borrowers.”

    The housing market has healed in recent years, and the numbers of troubled properties and struggling borrowers have dropped. Foreclosure filings recently hit the lowest level since mid-2006, shortly before the housing market started to melt down.

    Given the current economy — home prices are rising and the labor market is strengthening — the court’s decision “is likely to be muted in the near-term,” Boltansky said.

    But that doesn’t mean that there won’t be consequences, he added.

    “The true economic impact of the Supreme Court’s decision may not be seen until the next economic downturn,” Boltansky said.

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/supreme-court-hands-defeat-to-struggling-homeowners-2015-06-01?link=MW_home_latest_news

  95. McDullard says:

    Re everything becoming partisan and the Supreme Court… What’s worse than partisanship? Partisanship without a clue or balls.

    In the case of a PA guy sentenced to 44 months for posting threats on Facebook, the SCOTUS reached a 7-2 decision that the standard to decide if a threat was made was too low.

    [my opinion: the guy was already fired from his job, so prison seemed a bit too much… also, 7-2 is not fairly strong decision].

    How does Huffington Post present this? Article is “Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Man Convicted Of Threatening Wife On Facebook”, and the click-bait title is: “SCOTUS Sides With Man Convicted Of Threatening Wife: ‘Hurry Up And Die B***h'”. I should slap myself if I ever read that shit site.

    At the risk of getting into trouble, I would ask the website to hurry up and die! These guys talk the talk about progressive values, liberal ideals, etc., and then try to shit on everything if they can get just one more click.

  96. leftwing says:

    Punkin, you have no idea of the amount of money I have given away to charitable causes.

    If you can pull your head above the fold of USA Today you may realize that the economy is not a zero sum game. One person’s wealth accumulation does not deprive other individuals of that wealth.

    In fact, the wealth and especially the standard of living of the bottom rungs has continued to increase over time even as the upper tiers have continued to amass more wealth. The economy expands, it is not static.

    Commercially appropriating $79 billion dollars from others is not possible. Accumulating it by offering valuable services that others freely desire to line up to purchase, yes. In fact, the mere generation of that amount of wealth is a positive sign for the economy as it indicates something two parties view as having great value has exchanged hands freely. The economy and human condition of everyone is worse off because of Apple? Because of Microsoft?

    That was the crux of my examples. In fact, my spending view may very well be good for the American economy in the long term. If you read carefully I have all but boycotted cheaply made (usually foreign) goods in favor of higher quality artisanal products and specialized services. Mostly these better items are manufactured closer to home (domestic employment). By definition, services are almost always provided locally.

    It really is quite simple. If you want people employed put them in an endeavor others are willing to pay for and others will spend money for it.

    There was a time for nearly two centuries before our government debased our currency last decade that saving was rewarded and thrift was a virtue. The economy and society did fine. How have we become so perverted that building savings is now a vice and an open-ended, default expected overextended credit line a virtue?

  97. joyce says:

    WACO JUDGE AGREES TO LET MOST BIKERS GO – IF THEY SIGN A CONTRACT VOWING NOT TO SUE FOR WRONGFUL ARREST
    http://washingtonweeklynews.com/texas-tyranny-waco-judge-agrees-to-let-most-bikers-go-if-they-sign-a-contract-vowing-not-to-sue-for-wrongful-arrest/

  98. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:
  99. leftwing says:

    What is it about Waco? Disproportionate ratio of bad headlines to population. Could have been worse I guess, Reno could be AG.

  100. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [84] anon (and for good reason)

    Insults from the likes of you mean that I must be doing something right.

    And if you ever need me to tell you what all those big words in the NYT editorial section mean, I’m happy to help. BTW, by big, I meant polysyllabic words in the section you don’t read, not the big ones you read at the top of the story.

    Hey, I will give you some credit. You mentioned a news source other than Twitter. That’s an improvement. You get a cookie.

  101. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    Some heavy T-storms coming right up the Route 1-Turnpike corridor. Just in time for your commutes.

  102. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [93] leftwing

    Only out of my cone of silence momentarily but here goes.

    1. I don’t know and won’t unless I read the papers. But assuming no oral argument, it wasn’t that much more work to prepare and file a brief.

    2. It’s been so long since I looked at that issue, I can’t say. My gut says yes, the secondary holder can force involuntary proceedings but, as a practical matter, it rarely makes sense.

  103. The Great Pumpkin says:

    Lefty, if there is no such thing as hoarding, solve this riddle.

    “There were a few who were opposed to the hoarding label and who appeared to have no problem with the endless accumulation of wealth, largely because they seem to believe that the wealth was still being invested but offered no validation of this premise. As well that seems to be a rather specious argument if all the investing does is acquire more wealth. “

  104. leftwing says:

    Thx Nom. At a commercial logjam on something and considering whether if this right exists moving on it may spring things loose.

    Going to have to pay for some advice I guess. No issue giving value for services but just wrote my final divorce atty invoice and feeling like I’ve already done my share for the legal profession recently lol.

  105. JJ says:

    deadbeats have to pay off their helocs, yea!!!

  106. The Great Pumpkin says:

    “Capitalist mythology notwithstanding, wealth distribution is ALWAYS a zero-sum game: for some to have more, others must have less. If you doubt this, then please explain why we have budget battles. Realized wealth is always finite, and it doesn’t rally matter how much more you create as long as some insist on growing already huge fortunes.”

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/26/1373507/-Is-unlimited-wealth-accumulation-a-human-right

  107. The Great Pumpkin says:

    “At the root of the inequality problem is the unstated notion that there exists a human right to unlimited wealth accumulation.

    Let me be perfectly clear about this:

    If you accept this as true, then what you are really saying is that it is the only human right that really exists, for in accepting it, you deny the existence of all other human rights.

    No other human rights can coexist with this false one.

    Freedom of speech?

    Not when wealth can buy the media outlets and determine what is allowed to be said, and back it up by buying the courts to provide cover.

    Self-government?

    Not when wealth (Koch brothers) can buy political parties and the machinery to keep them under control.

    A right to a hunger-free, securely decent life?

    Not when wealth is the measure by which we allow individuals to control all working conditions.

    Unrestricted wealth accumulation is very dangerous for societies: history is replete with fabulously wealthy people and families who were ruthless oppressors who eventually drove their societies into revolution and mass deaths.

    There isn’t a single thing wrong with acknowledging that this practice is archaic, and only leads to a fight among the very top few for complete control of humanity. They can’t help it: their lust for wealth and power makes it inevitable.”

  108. The Great Pumpkin says:

    “Indeed, a case can be made that those at the very top of the economic pyramid have a strong degree of mental illness that manifests in hoarding behavior, accumulating things that give them little permanent pleasure, dissatisfied with life even though they have access to all that is possible to be on offer, constantly demanding more, more, MORE even though they have so much they literally have no idea what to do with it or even how much they have, utterly thoughtless, uncompassionate and and uncaring about the damage they wreak upon the planet and humanity in their mad quest to be the richest and most powerful on the planet.

    Sure there are a few who don’t fit the profile, but the few are the exception that hides the ugliness of the rest.

    And you know what?

    Neither Steve Jobs nor Bill Gates personally created their wealth or the products it was based upon. They relentlessly drove others to create for them, and took both the credit and the wealth for it. They MANAGED others, but they rarely contributed genuine, concrete code or engineering designs. Gates swindled MS-DOS out of the inventor, then used family connections to gain a monopoly position from which he destroyed his competition through use of pressure and false release dates. Look it up.”

  109. The Great Pumpkin says:

    “Jobs was better, but not by much.

    And Facebook wealth? Generated by using misplaced trust and stealing the personal data of its users and selling it.

    We need as a species to realize that unlimited wealth accumulation always results in more negatives than positives, and place a reasonable upper limit on it.

    Who can argue that a wealth cap of a billion or five is unreasonable, or that it would somehow stifle the economy, or cause fewer innovations?

    If you want to make a case for those, fine: prove it with facts rather than emotions.

    Against any fact you muster, I will set the whole of human history, and the repeated pattern of social collapse brought about by over-reaching greed.

    To end most of the world’s conflicts and misery, the answer is very, very simple.

    Cap wealth accumulation.

    Too much wealth inequality creates economic, social, and political instability. For capitalism to thrive in a stable manner, it needs both upper and lower limits in wealth distribution: a maximum amount of individual wealth at one end and a minimum at the other.

    At the low end is a living wage so that everyone with a job is a net taxpayer, and doesn’t need government support to meet healthy living needs: food, shelter, healthcare, education, etc.

    At the high end, a maximum amount of wealth an individual may accumulate.

    A solid economic house needs a roof as well as a floor.

    All discussion of minimum wages is moot unless and until there is a discussion about whether or not there exists a human right to unlimited wealth (actually, unlimited POWER accumulation) accumulation.

    There is only one possible answer to that question: a resounding NO!

    For if you allow that there is a basic human right to such unlimited accumulation, you are saying that no other human rights exist, for that one trumps all others, as any right that interferes with wealth accumulation will be negated. A right to unlimited wealth accumulation cannot coexist with any other human rights.

    Until we recognize that there are substantial societal dangers in allowing unlimited wealth accumulation, dangers that outweigh by far any benefits derived therefrom, and place a cap (substantial, but a hard cap nevertheless) on wealth accumulation, we will never alleviate any of the economic problems and dangers the world faces. These dangers have a new component: life extension technology.

    In the past wealth accumulation was limited by shorter lifespans and longer transit/communication times. Today those limits are gone or disappearing fast. What happens when life extension technology allows some few, due to the expense, to live half again as long as everyone else?

    Do you really want to live in a world where the Kochs, Cruz, and Walker live to be 150 years old? And you die in your 60s or 70s?

    Capping wealth accumulation = solve many economic and political problems.

    At the very least we need to rationally discuss the issue without resort to capitalist dogma.”

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/26/1373507/-Is-unlimited-wealth-accumulation-a-human-right

  110. The Great Pumpkin says:

    Please read it and understand what I mean by hoarding. Don’t be so naive to think that someone worth 79 billion has no effect on everyone else under that economic system.

  111. NJT says:

    Funny:

    I was telling the pimp story to my in-laws a few years ago (now deceased…no…
    ‘MONEY’) when unknown to me my daughter wanders into the kitchen. She asked me: “What’s a Pimp?”. I said: A guy that has girls working for him but he takes most of the money” (Hey, on the spot it wasn’t that bad of an explanation).

    Her response: “I would NEVER do that!!

    NO. She won’t. Won’t have to or want to.

  112. Ragnar says:

    Typical pumpking late afternoon diarrhea, one dimwit seduced by another, who rebroadcasts for nobody’s enjoyment.

    Also from the Daily Kos – someone there is upset that someone at Fox news is calling Kaitlyn (Bruce) Jenner a “he”. I notice that Wikipedia has already swapped all the use of “he” to “she”. But also notice that (s)he still has a whangle tool and nuts. Until it chops that off, I think “he” is still fair game.

  113. Bystander says:

    #12,

    Leaving Joe hanging..

    Yes, the listing agent now owns your soul and first born bc you signed into an open house. C’mon man..if this is even remotely serious, please step away from home buying process.

  114. leftwing says:

    Oh punkin, where to start? Riddle to you, gibberish to me.

    “There were a few who were opposed to the hoarding label and who appeared to have no problem with the endless accumulation of wealth, largely because they seem to believe that the wealth was still being invested but offered no validation of this premise. As well that seems to be a rather specious argument if all the investing does is acquire more wealth.“

    First, ‘no investment’ is neither good nor bad. It simply reflects current conditions, ie. whether the allocation of resources to a project is efficient or not.

    Second, how does one “endlessly accumulate wealth” without investment? Please let me know so I can sign up. I wasn’t aware there was magical wealth creating machine somewhere. Investment creates wealth, by way of producing a product or service that people want to purchase. Wealth is a byproduct of that investment and the subsequent product or service. They are inseparable.

    Third, ask the investors in pets.com if they wish they ‘hoarded’ those funds instead. Make an argument those investors are better off for that investment. Make an argument society is better off for that investment.

    Investment is simply how society efficiently allocates resources. In most places that investment is made by those who have proven track records, eg those who have successfully done it in the past and are therefore wealthy. If they sit on their funds, there is generally good reason. How about that sock puppet?

  115. Anon E. Moose says:

    Leftwing [38]; Nom [65];

    From the syllabus:

    [A] straightforward reading of the statute would
    seem to favor [party A]. This Court’s construction of §506(d)’s term
    “secured claim” in Dewsnup v. Timm, 502 U. S. 410, however, forecloses
    that reading and resolves the question presented here.

    So even thought the statute says one thing, the ivy leaguers in black robes have said otherwise — and the latter wins the day. I work in this world and that still rubs me the wrong way.

    And Condo [98], what was at issue was the underwater second mortgage whose only power was to gum up the works, with no legitimate hope of any cognizable value. On the other hand, it was only relevant if the homeonwer wanted to keep the house. If they let go of the secured asset in BK, the underwater second gets extinguished when the house is sold. Everybody wants something for nothing.

    Didn’t read too closely, but it might have been one of those cases where you wanted both sides to lose.

  116. leftwing says:

    Tapping out Punkin. Clearly you don’t read or don’t understand the garbage you re-post. Dissecting the daily kos broad based incorrect assertions and painfully faulty logic would take more time than it’s worth.

    Keep cutting and pasting blindfolded. I’m out.

  117. leftwing says:

    What, a liberal opposed to legislating from the bench? Well there’s the pot calling the kettle black…

    Suppose you’ll change your view if the Queen is coronated in Nov 2016 and gets a couple of picks….

    “So even thought the statute says one thing, the ivy leaguers in black robes have said otherwise — and the latter wins the day. I work in this world and that still rubs me the wrong way.”

  118. joyce says:

    LW,
    You may have confused who posted that comment.

    Moose,
    “the black robes have said otherwise”

    Like I’ve said, and was called wrong, they ignore OR use laws/precedents when they want to.

  119. POS cape says:

    [103] Waco:

    I asked on here once why the houses in Waco shown on that HGTV show were so cheap. Now I know.

  120. Anon E. Moose says:

    Leftwing [121];

    What, a liberal opposed to legislating from the bench? Well there’s the pot calling the kettle black…

    I think you just called me a liberal — but it might be the first time its happened, so I’m not exactly sure. Care to clarify?

  121. The Great Pumpkin says:

    It’s not faulty logic. We just have different perspectives on the issue.

    leftwing says:
    June 1, 2015 at 5:47 pm
    Tapping out Punkin. Clearly you don’t read or don’t understand the garbage you re-post. Dissecting the daily kos broad based incorrect assertions and painfully faulty logic would take more time than it’s worth.

    Keep cutting and pasting blindfolded. I’m out.

  122. joyce says:

    2 + 2 = 5

    I’m not wrong; I just have a different perspective.

  123. Fabius Maximus says:

    #126 Joyce

    Slightly pedantic, but Number Theory shows it can be true.

  124. Fabius Maximus says:

    #17 D-FENS

    That list is missing CC. Their biggest proponent.
    ALEC is a conservative think tank so it is all on the R side. CC just threw Common Core under the bus and it was not because of the PARCC results.

    Here is an interesting piece on the group, offered without comment.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/03/alec-funding-crisis-big-donors-trayvon-martin

  125. Fabius Maximus says:

    Lib,

    yes the FT is the best newspaper in the world and shows the best sources for news can come from Liberal Europe.

  126. joyce says:

    127
    post a link so i can debunk it

  127. Comrade Nom Deplume, the loan snark says:

    Vigoda>Chief Jay Strongbow.

  128. leftwing says:

    Moose, sorry, wrong ‘anon’. Didn’t mean to insult you lol.

  129. D-FENS says:

    You and Nom should have a non partisan baby together.

    Fabius Maximus says:
    June 1, 2015 at 8:42 pm
    #17 D-FENS

    That list is missing CC. Their biggest proponent.
    ALEC is a conservative think tank so it is all on the R side. CC just threw Common Core under the bus and it was not because of the PARCC results.

    Here is an interesting piece on the group, offered without comment.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/03/alec-funding-crisis-big-donors-trayvon-martin

  130. Fabius Maximus says:

    #130 joyce

    Google it.
    It comes down to the fact that that SQRT(x^2) = x only holds when x>0

  131. Fabius Maximus says:

    #132 left wing

    It always gives me a chuckle when peoples autocorrect, will change their vitriolic response to “anon”, to “Anon”

  132. Fabius Maximus says:

    #133 D-FENS

    You got issues!

  133. joyce says:

    Yes, I’m familiar with it. And familiar with the fact that it’s wrong (just as you said).

  134. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [133] D-FENS

    Ewwwww.

    As usual, I don’t agree with Rory Martin on your issues, but it was a flat attempt at humor.

Comments are closed.