From CBS:
Report: Philadelphia Among Top 10 Most Overvalued Housing Markets In U.S.
Looking to buy a home in Philadelphia? According to a new report, it is one of the top 10 most overvalued housing markets in America.
The report was released by real estate analytics firm CoreLogic.
Researchers say overvalued housing markets have prices that are 10 percent or more above the long-term sustainable level.
As for Philadelphia, the report finds,“Home prices have ascended rapidly in the Philly area (up 16.7% since early 2014, which means it has the fastest home price appreciation of any town on this top-10 list), and now they are priced at 14.2% over sustainable levels.”
Researchers examined market data from the first half of 2015 for the report. Philly was ranked eighth.
From the Record:
Industrial vacancy rate drops to lowest level since 2007
The growth of online shopping has continued to push up demand for industrial space in New Jersey, leaving the vacancy rate at the lowest point since 2007, the real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield reported Monday.
The vacancy rate for industrial space was 6.4 percent in Bergen County and 5.7 percent in Passaic County in the third quarter. Both were down from a year earlier. For all of northern and central New Jersey, the rate was 7.2 percent, down 1.1 percent from a year earlier.
A rise in e-commerce has led to more demand for warehouse space in this densely populated region, as online retailers aim for quick deliveries to their customers. In response to the demand, developers are building more industrial space, with almost 3 million square feet of space currently under construction in the state, according to Cushman & Wakefield’s Jason Price, research director for the tri-state suburbs. Much of the new space is speculative.
The Meadowlands is one of the state’s more active markets, with about 900,000 square feet of space leased during the quarter. That included the lease of 219,000 square feet at 1 Lladro Drive, Moonachie, by Office Star Products.
Rents in North Jersey — which Cushman & Wakefield defines as Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Morris and Passaic counties — rose 5.5 percent in the quarter, compared with a year earlier. Rents averaged $7.59 a square foot in Bergen County and $6.95 a square foot in Passaic County.
“With a strengthening economy, healthy retail sales projected, and online sales anticipated to continue rising, the New Jersey industrial market should finish the year trending in the same direction,” said Price. “We foresee demand remaining healthy along the Turnpike.”
Life can be boring, its what you make of it. With more money in my pocket, life gets less boring because I can do things,not just sit in my house in NJ and pay thru the ass. Im not bored. Heading all over w/ all the extra dough. Greenville, TN, Wilmington soon, Charleston soon, moutains of va, tn , sc along w/ NC mountains. Bored, no way. Money cures that problem. In NJ I was too broke.
Pretty sure this wears off … the novelty of a new place. I know plenty of transplants into the NY metro that are busy every Saturday and Sunday with an event, show, activity, sightseeing, or otherwise. The amount of free or low-cost entertainment and activities is pretty amazing if you take the time to look. They are constantly telling me about events that I had no idea about. Meanwhile I twiddle my thumbs on a Saturday afternoon while mulling mowing the lawn again because there is nothing to do. I’m going to seal the driveway this weekend.
Me, personally, can’t wait for American Psycho to open up. That’ll probably be my most expensive entertainment indulgence over the next few months.
I haven’t tracked this market but I am certain that, as with many markets, some pockets are wildly overvalued and some not so much, if at all. That is certainly the case in South Jersey, which is not at all homogeneous even if it appears that it should be.
There has been a ridiculous amount of development in Philadelphia since I left the city. University City has continued to grow dramatically. Lots of development in my old neighborhood as well with gentrification spreading south and west from Rittenhouse Square and the Schuykill Banks project and the new South Street Bridge opening up the riverfront. I have to imagine that this has been occurring in other parts of the city as well. A friend of mine in Fishtown says that even that area has come up a lot.
Will implosion to big Cities justify this prices?
Really, the entire northeast from Boston to DC could be considered a big “city”. Especially if one uses the same sort of qualitative boundaries that are typical in middle parts of America.
If people continue to move there in large numbers, they will end up with the same costs as nj. You have to remember, low cost areas attract lower income people, so what do you think will be the result long-term? Look what happen to the poconos, attracted low income development and it turned into a ghetto in the country. Same thing with low cost areas by woodbury commons in ny state. Ghetto! Low cost areas are a major gamble long term. It attracts the wrong people.
Marilyn says:
October 13, 2015 at 12:40 am
read the article and you tell me how many will love NJ when they are broke paying for Paco and Guido on the force.
7 – Troll,
And how exactly does your view of the poor differ then the 1% you rage on about?
Ah, I remember. Your also a philanthropist to keep the masses pacified and dragging along the bottom in a direction approved by the party.
The 1% are responsible for the growing poor based on their business policies and their lobbying of the govt. I understand that under capitalism, there must be poor, but not at the levels this country is now dealing with. Yes, the poor must be kept pacified, otherwise there will be chaos.
A Home Buyer says:
October 13, 2015 at 8:55 am
7 – Troll,
And how exactly does your view of the poor differ then the 1% you rage on about?
Ah, I remember. Your also a philanthropist to keep the masses pacified and dragging along the bottom in a direction approved by the party.
Plumpy,
Why haven’t the poor in India revolted. There’s a whole lot of them too.
[9] pumpkin
“Yes, the poor must be kept pacified, otherwise there will be chaos.”
Best not let them have guns then, right?
And did you just call Marilyn the “wrong people”?
yome,
Are you ready to cut SS, Medicare, and Defense to correct the imbalance? I am, let’s get the chainsaws ready.
yome says:
October 13, 2015 at 5:45 am
South Carolina gets $7.87 for every $1 it collects in Federal tax and you are complaining giving to Guido in NJ. I forgot it is better to be a taker.
Joyce,
I was going to say the same thing. Let’s gut the federal welfare state, and gut the progressive income tax as yome is surprisingly suggesting, and see which state wins.
Blue states are collectively voting for their own high income income taxes to be redistributed to poorer states. Glad to see yome is changing stripes. Or maybe he’s just oblivious to the inherent contradictions in his worldview.
#12 Defense,Yes.
SS and Medicare are Annuity insurance run by the Government. Even the 1% collects benefits from the premium that they paid for. If some of the Red Team get their way,(Checking for income to qualify), it will become another Welfare.
SAY WHAT?!
yome says:
South Carolina gets $7.87 for every $1 it collects in Federal tax and you are complaining giving to Guido in NJ. I forgot it is better to be a taker.
The entire premise of your party and your existence on this blog is predicated on being a ‘taker’, LOL. You can’t forget, redistribution is woven into the Blue team’s DNA.
“I understand that under capitalism, there must be poor”
Just under capitalism, pumpy?
#12 Should we cut
SSI for people that never worked- Yes
Should we increase premium on SDI to cover short fall and make it more harder to qualify for Disability -Yes
Should we go with Medicare for every Citizen- Yes. We pay insurance Companies $15T today. Eliminate the insurance and pay $8T to the Government – YES
I never said being a taker is good.Temporary helping the ones in need to get up on their feet was always what the Red Team stood for.That is why I am a moderate Red Team until the far right called me RINO
“The entire premise of your party and your existence on this blog is predicated on being a ‘taker’, LOL. You can’t forget, redistribution is woven into the Blue team’s DNA.”
I’m going to have to think of something original for Halloween this year. Maybe I will make an ISIS themed display. No one can top that!
—–
http://newjersey.news12.com/news/isis-themed-halloween-display-in-butler-taken-down-by-owner-after-threats-1.10953749
There has been plenty of development in Philly and developers are still buying up farm lands for 20-30 home developments in the suburbs so it doesn’t surprise me.
14
You’re in denial about what these programs are because you’re close to retirement and are praying nothing happens to your benefits.
Every time the subject of SS comes up, you get incredibly defensive.
16 – “Those who do not know history’s mistakes are doomed to repeat them”
[7] That’s why the population in Camden is booming.
You have to remember, low cost areas attract lower income people
There is some truth that some people only need an opportunity …
New York inmates defeat Harvard debate team
In a debate between Harvard College students and those from any other college, some might guess that the Harvard students would win. And if the other side was a group of inmates at a maximum-security prison? Maybe even more so.
That would be a mistake.
Inmates from the Eastern New York Correctional Facility defeated the prestigious Harvard debate team in mid-September as part of the Bard Prison Initiative, a program run by Bard College to provide college education to qualifying prisoners, according to the Wall Street Journal.
If you knew the prison debate club’s record, you might have voted for the inmates. They’ve defeated a nationally ranked team from the University of Vermont and the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, New York. (They lost a rematch against West Point, and it’s become something of a rivalry.)
The prison club had invited the Harvard College Debating Union to participate.
http://www.tristatehomepage.com/news/new-york-inmates-defeat-harvard-debate-team
I saw this on someone’s facebook page:
“If we make guns illegal no one will get shot anymore.
That’s how we got people to stop taking drugs.”
She’s in the wealthier area of Carolina. I was generalizing about the area, not talking about specific locations.
Comrade Nom Deplume, Device-Hopping Today says:
October 13, 2015 at 9:19 am
[9] pumpkin
“Yes, the poor must be kept pacified, otherwise there will be chaos.”
Best not let them have guns then, right?
And did you just call Marilyn the “wrong people”?
10 – Check your
privilegecaste…Besides the Spartan society, tell me which system wasn’t based on the fundamentals of capitalism in history. Cuba, china, and ussr are nothing more than rigged capitalist systems in which the top took everything from the bottom. They have nothing to do with communism, except in name. Monarchies during the middle ages were set up the same way, guys at the top take it all, while the bottom does all the work and gets nothing.
leftwing says:
October 13, 2015 at 9:48 am
“I understand that under capitalism, there must be poor”
Just under capitalism, pumpy?
Bottom line is Social Security and Medicare are the biggest govt expenditures.
More is being taken out than funding these benefits.
Senior Citizens are the primary beneficiaries of these programs.
Income taxes primarily support these programs.
Many on here support eliminating income taxes. How is that going to help grandma and grandpa? Naah, no empathy there.
Many in govt support “phasing” it out. Raise the retirement age to 100, a little at a time.
Let younger workers pay into a system that keeps grandma afloat so they don’t feel guilty and avoid the wrath of the older voting generation.
Time is running out … A decision will have to be made at some point.
re # 28 – If it is rigged then why are you playing the game? You are no Che…..
They have had revolts. How about the Sepoy rebellion?
In the poor areas of this country, the conditions mirror the conditions of an area under revolt. Do you think it’s safe in those areas where the poor are located? It’s pure chaos. India is a complete mess because they let the poor population get too large (just like china), there really isn’t much hope for those areas. Yes, the big cities with all the rich are safe, but step into the poor areas (the places china and india don’t want foreigners to know about), and you will see how screwed those countries really are.
Could you imagine if they tracked the scores of their poor in their education rankings like we do here in the states? Would paint a picture of how screwed their society really is. Never mind the poor that have to live in total polluted conditions.
Libturd in Union says:
October 13, 2015 at 9:15 am
Plumpy,
Why haven’t the poor in India revolted. There’s a whole lot of them too.
I look forward to living in the kind of world my parents told me about when I was a kid, the communist controlled world they lived in. Perfectly equal, no one was more better off than their neighbor. No rich, no poor. Can you imagine how nice it was to live in this?
Everything was rationed, you had little books with stamps. Meat, Sugar, Butter, Flour. Even you ability to buy clothing or an appliance was restricted. It was a great point of pride to be permitted to buy a refrigerator, or an automobile!
Wanted to bake a cake for a party? Sorry, no coupon for sugar. Even when you had a coupon, there was probably no sugar. But it’s OK, because nobody had sugar.
Everyone was employed, everyone had a job, in a completely unproductive futile endeavor, with no possibility of advancement. But that’s OK, because everyone had a job, even if it was your job to stand around all day drunk because there was nothing else for you to do.
30 He plays the game because he has no other choice- (well he does, technically, but not really).
31 – Did you not read the article I posted yesterday? The Nobel Prize winner for economics contradicts everything you say about the poor. He points out that the infant death rate has plummeted, poverty has greatly decreased, and advances in medicine have increased lifespans. Quality of life on earth for human beings is far better than what it was. All thanks to capitalism.
Angus Deaton Awarded Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences
Professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University wins for his analysis of consumption, poverty, and welfare
http://www.wsj.com/articles/angus-deaton-awarded-nobel-prize-in-economic-sciences-1444649456
Although his chosen profession was famously labelled “the dismal science” by the Victorian historian Thomas Carlyle, Mr. Deaton provided an upbeat assessment of human progress over the last 250 years in his 2013 book, “The Great Escape: Health, Wealth, and the Origins of Inequality.”
“Life is better now than at almost any time in history,” he wrote. “More people are richer and fewer people live in dire poverty. Lives are longer and parents no longer routinely watch a quarter of their children die.”
Across its 370 pages, Mr. Deacon sought to explain why the world is a better place than it used to be, with substantial increases in wealth, health and longevity, but also why there are vast inequalities between and within nations.
He concluded that international aid had little to do with that progress, and suggested that free trade and new incentives for drug companies would make a larger contribution in the future.
His attack on international aid efforts was itself criticized by Bill Gates.
Pumpkin providing the freshmen Pol-Sci major defense of failed communist countries: “they were all fascist/capitalist, trust me, a real communist society would all be peace, love, and sharing, (in my dreams)”. Yet evading that the only way to make these communist dreams come true is via the point of a gun and knife, forcing people to be equal like bloody Procrustes.
re # 33 – No choice? Baloney Pumpkin is in the top 5-10% and really wants to be in top 1% but apparently not the top .01%, all though that remains to be seen if he will redistribute his wealth with the time comes.
Pumpkin who get’s it all if you get cancer?
36. The medical center.
Pumpkin who get’s it all if you get cancer?
Top 5% is roughly 160k. I would guess for most of those 5%, that is a 2 income family.
One person gets disabled, unemployed, downsized– they are no longer in the top 5% anymore.
Save and save, one divorce, one illness, one stock market crash, one termination, one crappy investment banker and you are toilet.
As JJ would say, 160k in NJ you are a pauper. Until you have saved enough to retire on and be able to easily pay for your healthcare/prescriptions/disability you are not secure.
“Bottom line is Social Security and Medicare are the biggest govt expenditures.
More is being taken out than funding these benefits.
Income taxes primarily support these programs”
Not a single penny is paid from income taxes to pay for SS and Medicare. Premium is collected from your Pay check to pay for this program. SS and Medicare is a stand alone program. It can not spend money that it does not have. Not a single penny from Federal Income Tax collection goes to pay for this programs
32. Are there really no rich people in a communist system?
Do the rulers in communism really eat the same things that a common person would?
Do they get the same healthcare?
I’m sure in communism certain people live much better than others.
Capitalism works much better, but it has it’s limits.
Brought my car to the capitalist car dealer.
Told me my car with 30k miles needs an alignment– really, no, just capitalist, dishonest, greedy. Probably baits at least 10 suckers a day.
Then go to pick up car, charge me for routine service that I have already paid for as part of a contract–what, the computer does not tell you that?? Yeah, right. not buying it..
Problem with capitalism is when money is the primary motivation you may end up with a dental crown you don’t need cause someone wants money. I can’t wait for the day they come up with an app that you can point at the car dealer, dentist, banker, police officer, lawyer, etc and it tells you when they are lying…..
#2 HAHA!! Your right its what you make of it. Sometimes Im happy doing nothing, so it does not matter what chair im sitting my butt on. In otherwords, its cheaper for my butt to be here in NC than sit in NJ. HAHA!!! Its cheaper to sit here. Look I love it so far, maybe when I get the inheritance I will be happy to sit my butt in NJ. For now its good. Love you GRIMMY!!!
42. Can’t sum it up any better than that…..
How can I argue when the entirety of my career for the past 20 years is predicated on a butt being cheaper there versus here?
#7 I agree. That’s why I picked an area with a good economy. Not St. Augustine, Fl. The economy is great here in this little Raleigh/CH/Durham. I know you don’t want to believe that but its great. Now if I picked Ashville, Murphy, Jacksonville FL, Fayetteville I would agree . Need jobs, good jobs for good economy.
43. Do you ever see yourself leaving NJ, sweet little Grimmy?? Do you plan on staying till death? Just wondering? Have you ever lived anywhere else? If you could live anywhere else w/ money not being an issue where would you go?
Phoenix in a communist system it wouldn’t be a problem. You wouldn’t be allowed to own a car.
On that note, lots of chatter lately about 2016 COLA and impact on wage increases in 2016 for big services employers.
Gas prices and CPI being nearly negative doesn’t bode well for large employment contracts that base wage raises off of CPI. Enjoy the cheap gasoline, it means you aren’t getting a raise.
Punkin – Not good for your thesis. And will likely put huge pressure on potential wage increases over the next 12 months, especially at the low end of the market.
So for the same reason that NJ minimum wage won’t see an increase in 2016, many employers that work in outsource arrangements will not see any increase in client billing from which to provide their employees with raises. Those who will, will likely provide smaller raises, as those raises mean lower profit (or no profit at all).
There has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government. The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been “put into the general fund of the government.”
Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the “unified budget.” This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are “on-budget.” This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken “off-budget.” This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are “on-budget” or “off-budget” is primarily a question of accounting practices–it has no effect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.
https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html
Grim, your parents didn’t experience communism, they experienced a capitalist system in which the top took everything from the bottom. They wouldn’t even let them own anything. Only the top owned everything.
Communism itself is impossible to happen due to human nature (people will always try to take more than they need), but true communism has no leadership or no property, everything is collectively owned by the people. In theory, everyone does what they are supposed to because society is owned by everyone. You are telling me that communism existed on this planet? If so, where? I have never seen a true communist state in the history of mankind. Just like there has never been a true democracy in history (greeks didn’t allow the slave class to vote in athens).
grim says:
October 13, 2015 at 10:41 am
I look forward to living in the kind of world my parents told me about when I was a kid, the communist controlled world they lived in. Perfectly equal, no one was more better off than their neighbor. No rich, no poor. Can you imagine how nice it was to live in this?
Everything was rationed, you had little books with stamps. Meat, Sugar, Butter, Flour. Even you ability to buy clothing or an appliance was restricted. It was a great point of pride to be permitted to buy a refrigerator, or an automobile!
Wanted to bake a cake for a party? Sorry, no coupon for sugar. Even when you had a coupon, there was probably no sugar. But it’s OK, because nobody had sugar.
Everyone was employed, everyone had a job, in a completely unproductive futile endeavor, with no possibility of advancement. But that’s OK, because everyone had a job, even if it was your job to stand around all day drunk because there was nothing else for you to do.
From the NY Post:
Cheap gasoline is screwing over Social Security recipients
For just the third time in 40 years, millions of Social Security recipients, disabled veterans and federal retirees can expect no increase in benefits next year, which is unwelcome news for more than one-fifth of the nation’s population.
They can blame low gas prices. By law, the annual cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA, is based on a government measure of inflation, which is being dragged down by lower prices at the pump.
The government is scheduled to announce the COLA — or lack of one — on Thursday, when it releases the Consumer Price Index for September. Inflation has been so low this year that economists say there is little chance the September numbers will produce a benefit increase for next year.
Prices actually have dropped from a year ago, according to the inflation measure used for the COLA.
“It’s a very high probability that it will be zero,” said economist Polina Vlasenko, a research fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research. “Other prices — other than energy — would have to jump. It would have to be a very sizable increase that would be visible, and I don’t think that’s happened.”
Congress enacted automatic increases for Social Security beneficiaries in 1975, when inflation was high and there was a lot of pressure to regularly raise benefits. Since then, increases have averaged 4 percent a year.
Only twice before, in 2010 and 2011, have there been no increases.
Are you kidding me here? Poverty has greatly decreased? That’s funny. I will come back to this one when I get a free second.
D-FENS says:
October 13, 2015 at 10:49 am
31 – Did you not read the article I posted yesterday? The Nobel Prize winner for economics contradicts everything you say about the poor. He points out that the infant death rate has plummeted, poverty has greatly decreased, and advances in medicine have increased lifespans. Quality of life on earth for human beings is far better than what it was. All thanks to capitalism.
Angus Deaton Awarded Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences
Professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University wins for his analysis of consumption, poverty, and welfare
http://www.wsj.com/articles/angus-deaton-awarded-nobel-prize-in-economic-sciences-1444649456
Although his chosen profession was famously labelled “the dismal science” by the Victorian historian Thomas Carlyle, Mr. Deaton provided an upbeat assessment of human progress over the last 250 years in his 2013 book, “The Great Escape: Health, Wealth, and the Origins of Inequality.”
“Life is better now than at almost any time in history,” he wrote. “More people are richer and fewer people live in dire poverty. Lives are longer and parents no longer routinely watch a quarter of their children die.”
Across its 370 pages, Mr. Deacon sought to explain why the world is a better place than it used to be, with substantial increases in wealth, health and longevity, but also why there are vast inequalities between and within nations.
He concluded that international aid had little to do with that progress, and suggested that free trade and new incentives for drug companies would make a larger contribution in the future.
His attack on international aid efforts was itself criticized by Bill Gates.
OMFG yome,
Changes are coming to your SS benefits, just accept it.
While NJ statewide continues to have the highest foreclosure inventory rate in the United States, according to the latest Corelogic report, ladies and gentlemen we have a new MSA leader:
Nassau-Suffolk MSA is now the US large MSA leader at 4.9%, followed by the Newark MSA with 4.5%. LI is now the foreclosure leader.
Hard to justify retiring in New Jersey when you have a state estate tax with a very low deduction point of $675k.
53 – Perhaps we should start confiscating assets from U-Haul trucks that are attempting to leave?
I have no doubt
“Changes are coming to your SS benefits, just accept it.”
“Hard to justify retiring in New Jersey”
Why would anyone choose to retire here?
I must be master of the obvious.
52. Ouch.
55. Just cut off the funds to the most dependent states. Everything will take care of itself…
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/
59 – We should do that in NJ with Fuel taxes. Why do we have to send it to the Feds, only to have to beg to get it back….(less of it than was sent)….with strings attached?
One in five residents in South Carolina receives Social Security benefits — compared with just 13% in California. As an aging state, South Carolina will be more dependent on federal programs such as Social Security in the coming decade, according to AARP.
46. D-Fens,
Not true. I would still be driving the car that my father did. That car would be able to collect Social Security too.
61. D-Fens
You are right. You would think with the big hug Christie gave Obama that could have happened.
Maybe the hug was a little too tight. Or a little too loose.
39. Yome,
Semantics. Premium vs Tax. Bottom line is money is deducted and given to someone else. Someone else who may have been able to retire earlier as the rules were different. AKA Ida May Fuller. She retired in 1939, having paid just three years of payroll taxes. She received monthly Social Security checks until her death in 1975 at age 100. By the time of her death, Fuller had collected $22,888.92 from Social Security monthly benefits, compared to her contributions of $24.75 to the system.
Now the older folks keep wanting their bennies raised, but they want younger people to work longer till they collect, and to be able to collect less. Just like they enjoyed the higher tiers of the 2 tier wage system, and the benefits of real pensions that ended up bankrupting corporations and sending jobs overseas…
“Not a single penny is paid from income taxes to pay for SS and Medicare. Premium is collected from your Pay check to pay for this program. “
#4 – CNDM:
“There has been a ridiculous amount of development in Philadelphia since I left the city.”.
Yup. Took the family down last year for a tour (used to work there often). – North side is still garbage but with some signs of revival.
Downtown…whoa. Almost ran over a WASP.
*Funny story about working there back in the 90s (North side). Was installing a POS (Point Of Sale) computer system and on lunch break walked next door to the WaWa. NOONE was around because…they were all on the floor! Missed the hold up by a minute. Whew.
METS!!!!
Not to nitpick but the dude never hugged obama. It was something Greta Van Susteren made up on Fox.
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/08/watch_fox_news_host_apologizes_to_christie_for_oba.html
phoenix says:
October 13, 2015 at 12:39 pm
61. D-Fens
You are right. You would think with the big hug Christie gave Obama that could have happened.
Maybe the hug was a little too tight. Or a little too loose.
68 D-Fens
I feel much better now. Odd thing to make up, however….
64 that is why it is called Annuity. You give your money for a promise of a lifetime income. In this case is 6.4 % of your working life income up to the limit. If you are willing to give up that income for your belief , I applaud you
” bottom line is money is deducted and given to someone else. Someone else who may have been able to retire earlier as the rules were different. AKA Ida May Fuller. She retired in 1939, having paid just three years of payroll taxes. She received monthly Social Security checks until her death in 1975 at age 100. By the time of her death, Fuller had collected $22,888.92 from Social Security monthly benefits, compared to her contributions of $24.75 to the system.”
perpetuity
#69…willing to give it up? There is an option? I have had FICA taken out since 1979.
64 it is actually 10 years of full working hours to get benefit. What you just describe is disability insurance. 2 different programs
Wrong again, yome. The law was different back then. Laws and government programs change. Shocker.
71. Yome, I get the idea. In theory. Then someone decides to change the rules 30 years later. You know, like Romney 54 and younger get a voucher.
Wanna make it solvent in a fair way, cut the current benefits immediately and do not raise the retirement age requirement. Increase the amount of deduction to compensate for a more accurate target in the future. In return, you will get lower housing prices as those who are getting more than they paid in will have to make it up by getting reverse mortgages or selling their houses.
Jeb Bush- Push back the retirement age to 68 or 70.
Ted Cruz-Raise retirement age; cap increases to inflation rate. (Aug 2012)
Transition younger workers into personal savings system.
Rand Paul-Raise retirement age to save program for younger generation. (Apr 2015)
Raise the retirement age to deal with Baby Boomers. (Feb 2011)
Raise retirement age gradually; allow opting out. (Feb 2011)
I’ve never challenged constitutionality of Social Security. (Oct 2010)
Raise the retirement age for people under age 55.
“You give your money for a promise of a lifetime income. In this case is 6.4 % of your working life income up to the limit.”
Rand paul
Work till you die. No need for social security….
Ok it was enacted 1935. To me it does not matter. You want to give up 6.4 % of your income and can not even save 10% for retirement. Again I applaud you
72 Condo,
Sorry, nahh, you did not make the cutoff. You worked one year less than the required time to get Social Security and Medicare. I think you need to work till you are 80 in order to collect, the older people need the money now and you don’t.
By the way, I will give you a voucher coupon for 50% off your next hospital visit. You don’t need Medicare, you are not old enough. That was for a different generation.
Some animals are more equal than others. Too bad you were not born earlier, blame your parents.
Signed, The political party of your choice, Red or Blue….
yome,
WTF are you arguing? There is no choice, there is no option… if you are W2, you can’t even try to evade payroll taxes… they are withheld immediately.
Are you retarded?
These are all examples of ponzi schemes predicated on the economic growth of another era…
I’m fine with all of these forced savings schemes, but not when they are predicated on math that requires exponential growth of the underlying worker base to fund current requirements.
payout = pay-in * actual investment growth
Why is this a shocker?
74
It is solvent. SS will be able to pay 77% of what is promised benefits after 2033 when Trust Fund is exhausted. Shall we just let it lapse and collect what is collected? I think so. All this promises are just going to collect more Surplus and the Government will keep on spending the money. Let it lapse!!
80 True.
Problem is, each year these “ponzi” schemes could have been tweaked and adjusted to compensate for future imbalances. None of this happened overnight.
Same thing with the state pension plans, and govt pension plans.
Balance the budget each year, every year, no exceptions.
Nope, the older generation kept asking for more, and never wanted to pay in, never wanted a tax increase. Never voted to balance the budget. Me me me, mine mine mine. Add that to the theft of those in power and this is where you end up.
82. Of course, let it lapse. Why should the older generation care about anybody else but themselves.
Please read and understand this. I will post it in two parts, due to the length. Because someone has an iphone, or were able to have a baby without it dying, does not mean they are now not poor. Don’t compare people living 200 years ago to today, and make naive statements that capitalism has helped eliminate poverty. Poverty is directly linked to the system. So read this and understand why.
“As a society, then, we are stuck, and we’ve been stuck for a long time. One reason we’re stuck is that the problems are huge and complex. But on a deeper level, we tend to think about them in ways that keep us from getting at their complexity in the first place. It is a basic tenet of sociological practice that to solve a social problem we have to begin by seeing it as social. Without this, we look in the wrong place for explanations and in the wrong direction for visions of change.
Consider, for example, poverty, which is arguably the most far-reaching, long-standing cause of chronic suffering there is. The magnitude of poverty is especially ironic in a country like the United States whose enormous wealth dwarfs that of entire continents. More than one out of every six people in the United States lives in poverty or near-poverty. For children, the rate is even higher. Even in the middle class there is a great deal of anxiety about the possibility of falling into poverty or something close to it – through divorce, for example, or simply being laid off as companies try to improve their competitive advantage, profit margins, and stock prices by transferring jobs overseas.
How can there be so much misery and insecurity in the midst of such abundance? If we look at the question sociologically, one of the first things we see is that poverty doesn’t exist all by itself. It is simply one end of an overall distribution of income and wealth in society as a whole. As such, poverty is both a structural aspect of the system and an ongoing consequence of how the system is organized and the paths of least resistance that shape how people participate in it.
The system we have for producing and distributing wealth is capitalist. It is organized in ways that allow a small elite to control most of the capital – factories, machinery, tools – used to produce wealth. This encourages the accumulation of wealth and income by the elite and regularly makes heroes of those who are most successful at it – such as Microsoft’s Bill Gates. It also leaves a relatively small portion of the total of income and wealth to be divided among the rest of the population. With a majority of the people competing over what’s left to them by the elite, it’s inevitable that a substantial number of people are going to wind up on the short end and living in poverty or with the fear of it much of the time. It’s like the game of musical chairs: since the game is set up with fewer chairs than there are people, someone has to wind up without a place to sit when the music stops.
In part, then, poverty exists because the economic system is organized in ways that encourage the accumulation of wealth at one end and creates conditions of scarcity that make poverty inevitable at the other. But the capitalist system generates poverty in other ways as well. In the drive for profit, for example, capitalism places a high value on competition and efficiency. This motivates companies and their managers to control costs by keeping wages as low as possible and replacing people with machines or replacing full-time workers with part-time workers. It makes it a rational choice to move jobs to regions or countries where labor is cheaper and workers are less likely to complain about poor working conditions, or where laws protecting the natural environment from industrial pollution or workers from injuries on the job are weak or unenforced. Capitalism also encourages owners to shut down factories and invest money elsewhere in enterprises that offer a higher rate of return.
These kinds of decisions are a normal consequence of how capitalism operates as a system, paths of least resistance that managers and investors are rewarded for following. But the decisions also have terrible effects on tens of millions of people and their families and communities. Even having a full-time job is no guarantee of a decent living, which is why so many families depend on the earnings of two or more adults just to make ends meet. All of this is made possible by the simple fact that in a capitalist system most people neither own nor control any means of producing a living without working for someone else.
To these social factors we can add others. A high divorce rate, for example, results in large numbers of single-parent families who have a hard time depending on a single adult for both childcare and a living income. The centuries-old legacy of racism in the United States continues to hobble millions of people through poor education, isolation in urban ghettos, prejudice, discrimination, and the disappearance of industrial jobs that, while requiring relatively little formal education, nonetheless once paid a decent wage. These were the jobs that enabled many generations of white European immigrants to climb out of poverty, but which are now unavailable to the masses of urban poor.”
The Great Pumpkin says:
October 13, 2015 at 11:42 am
Are you kidding me here? Poverty has greatly decreased? That’s funny. I will come back to this one when I get a free second.
D-FENS says:
October 13, 2015 at 10:49 am
31 – Did you not read the article I posted yesterday? The Nobel Prize winner for economics contradicts everything you say about the poor. He points out that the infant death rate has plummeted, poverty has greatly decreased, and advances in medicine have increased lifespans. Quality of life on earth for human beings is far better than what it was. All thanks to capitalism.
Angus Deaton Awarded Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences
Professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University wins for his analysis of consumption, poverty, and welfare
http://www.wsj.com/articles/angus-deaton-awarded-nobel-prize-in-economic-sciences-1444649456
Reagan created more problems fixing SS in 1983 that will not start collecting deficits 30 years later
You clearly do not know what certain words mean.
yome says:
October 13, 2015 at 1:27 pm
74
It is solvent. SS will be able to pay 77% of what is promised
84- cont.
“Clearly, patterns of widespread poverty are inevitable in an economic system that sets the terms for how wealth is produced and distributed. If we’re interested in doing something about poverty itself – if we want a society largely free of impoverished citizens – then we’ll have to do something about both the system people participate in and how they participate in it. But public debate about poverty and policies to deal with it focus almost entirely on the latter with almost nothing to say about the former. What generally passes for ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ approaches to poverty are, in fact, two variations on the same narrow theme of individualism.
A classic example of the conservative approach is Charles Murray’s book Losing Ground. Murray sees the world as a merry-go-round. The goal is to make sure that “everyone has a reasonably equal chance at the brass ring – or at least a reasonably equal chance to get on the merry-go-round.” He reviews thirty years of federal antipoverty programs and notes that they’ve generally failed. He concludes from this that since government programs haven’t worked, poverty must not be caused by social factors.
Instead, Murray argues, poverty is caused by failures of individual initiative and effort. People are poor because there’s something lacking in them, and changing them is therefore the only effective remedy. From this he suggests doing away with public solutions such as affirmative action, welfare, and income support systems, including “AFDC, Medicaid, food stamps, unemployment insurance, and the rest. It would leave the working-aged person with no recourse whatsoever except the job market, family members, friends, and public or private locally funded services.” The result, he believes, would “make it possible to get as far as one can go on one’s merit.” With the 1996 welfare reform act, the United States took a giant step in Murray’s direction by reaffirming its long-standing cultural commitment to individualistic thinking and the mass of confusion around alternatives to it.
The confusion lies in how we think about individuals and society, and about poverty as an individual condition and as a social problem. On the one hand, we can ask how individuals are sorted into different social class categories, what characteristics best predict who will get the best jobs and earn the most. If you want to get ahead, what’s your best strategy? Based on many people’s experience, the answers come fast and easy: work hard, get an education, never give up.
There is certainly a lot of truth in this advice, and it gets to the issue of how people choose to participate in the system as it is. Sociologically, however, it focuses on only one part of the equation by leaving out the system itself. In other words, it ignores the fact that social life is shaped both by the nature of systems and how people participate, by the forest and the trees. Changing how individuals participate may affect outcomes for some. As odd as this may seem, however, this has relatively little to do with the larger question of why widespread poverty exists at all as a social phenomenon.
Imagine for a moment that income is distributed according to the results of a footrace. All of the income in the United States for each year is put into a giant pool and we hold a race to determine who gets what. The fastest fifth of the population gets 48 percent of the income to divide up, the next fastest fifth splits 23 percent, the next fastest fifth gets 15 percent, the next fifth 10 percent, and the slowest fifth divides 4 percent. The result would be an unequal distribution of income, with each person in the fastest fifth getting nine times as much money as each person in the slowest fifth, which is what the actual distribution of income in the United States looks like.
If we look at the slowest fifth of the population and ask, “Why are they poor?” An obvious answer is, “They didn’t run as fast as everyone else, and if they ran faster, they’d do better.” This prompts us to ask why some people run faster than others, and to consider all kinds of answers from genetics to nutrition to motivation to having time to work out to being able to afford a personal trainer.
But to see why some fifth of the population must be poor no matter how fast people run, all we have to do is look at the system itself. It uses unbridled competition to determine not only who gets fancy cars and nice houses, but who gets to eat or has a place to live or access to health care. It distributes income and wealth in ways that promote increasing concentrations among those who already have the most. Given this, the people in this year’s bottom fifth might run faster next year and get someone else to take their place in the bottom fifth.
But there has to be a bottom fifth so long as the system is organized as it is. Learning to run faster may keep you or me out of poverty, but it won’t get rid of poverty itself. To do that, we have to change the system along with how people participate in it. Instead of splitting the ‘winnings’ into shares of 48 percent, 23 percent, 15 percent, 10 percent, and 4 percent, for example, we might divide them into shares of 24 percent, 22 percent, 20 percent, 18 percent, and 16 percent. There would still be inequality, but the fastest fifth would get only 1.5 times as much as the bottom instead of 12 times as much, and 1.2 times as much as the middle fifth rather than more than 3 times as much.
People can argue about whether chronic widespread poverty is morally acceptable or what an acceptable level of inequality might look like. But if we want to understand where poverty comes from, what makes it such a stubborn feature of social life, we have to begin with the simple sociological fact that patterns of inequality result as much from how social systems are organized as they do from how individuals participate in them. Focusing on one without the other simply won’t do it.
The focus on individuals is so entrenched, however, that even those who think they’re taking social factors into account usually aren’t. This is as true of Murray’s critics as it is of Murray himself. Perhaps Murray’s greatest single mistake is to misinterpret the failure of federal antipoverty programs. He assumes that federal programs actually target the social causes of poverty, which means that if they don’t work, social causes must not be the issue. But he’s simply got it wrong. Welfare and other antipoverty programs are ‘social’ only in the sense that they’re organized around the idea that social systems like government have a responsibility to do something about poverty. But antipoverty programs are not organized around a sociological understanding of how systems produce poverty in the first place. As a result, they focus almost entirely on changing individuals and not systems, and use the resources of government and other systems to make it happen.”
cont.
“If antipoverty programs have failed, it isn’t because the idea that poverty is socially caused is wrong. They’ve failed because policymakers who design them don’t understand what makes the cause of something ‘social.’ Or they understand it but are so trapped in individualistic thinking that they don’t act on it by targeting systems such as the economy for serious change.
The easiest way to see this is to look at the antipoverty programs themselves. They come in two main varieties. The first holds individuals responsible by assuming that financial success is solely a matter of individual qualifications and behavior. In other words, if you just run faster, you’ll finish the race ahead of people who are currently beating you, and then they’ll be poor instead of you. We get people to run faster by providing training and motivation. What we don’t do, however, is look at the rules of the race or question whether the basic necessities of life should be distributed through competition.
The result is that some people rise out of poverty by improving their competitive advantage, while others sink into it when their advantages no longer work and they get laid off or their company relocates to another country or gets swallowed up in a merger that boosts the stock price for shareholders and earns the CEO a salary that in 2005 averaged more than 262 times the average worker’s pay. But nothing is even said – much less done – about an economic system that allows a small elite to own and control most of the wealth and sets up the rest of the population to compete over what’s left.
And so, individuals rise and fall in the class system, and the stories of those who rise are offered as proof of what’s possible, and the stories of those who fall are offered as cautionary tales. The system itself, however, including the huge gap between the wealthy and everyone else and the steady proportion of people living in poverty, stays much the same.
A second type of program seems to assume that individuals aren’t to blame for their impoverished circumstances, because it reaches out with various kinds of direct aid that help people meet day-to-day needs. Welfare payments, food stamps, housing subsidies, and Medicaid all soften poverty’s impact, but they do little about the steady supply of people living in poverty. There’s nothing wrong with this in that it can alleviate a lot of suffering. But it shouldn’t be confused with solutions to poverty, no more than army field hospitals can stop wars.
In relation to poverty as a social problem, welfare and other such programs are like doctors who keep giving bleeding patients transfusions without repairing the wounds. In effect, Murray tells us that federal programs just throw good blood after bad. In a sense, he’s right, but not for the reasons he offers. Murray would merely substitute one ineffective individualistic solution for another. If we do as he suggests and throw people on their own, certainly some will find a way to run faster than they did before. But that won’t do anything about the ‘race’ or the overall patterns of inequality that result from using it as a way to organize one of the most important aspects of human life.
Liberals and conservatives are locked in a tug of war between two individualistic solutions to problems that are only partly about individuals. Both approaches rest on profound misunderstandings of what makes a problem like poverty ‘social.’ Neither is informed by a sense of how social life actually works as a dynamic relation between social systems and how people participate in those systems. This is also what traps them between blaming problems like poverty on individuals and blaming them on society. Solving social problems doesn’t require us to choose or blame one or the other. It does require us to see how the two combine to shape the terms of social life and how people actually live it.
Because social problems are more than an accumulation of individual woes, they can’t be solved through an accumulation of individual solutions. We must include social solutions that take into account how economic and other systems really work. We also have to identify the paths of least resistance that produce the same patterns and problems year after year. This means that capitalism can no longer occupy its near-sacred status that holds it immune from criticism. It may mean that capitalism is in some ways incompatible with a just society in which the excessive well-being of some does not require the misery of so many others. It won’t be easy to face up to such possibilities, but if we don’t, we will guarantee poverty its future and all the conflict and suffering that go with it.”
This is what you suggested. Cutting benefits by increasing the Retirement Age. I say,Let it lapse and cut benefits
“Rand Paul-Raise retirement age to save program for younger generation. (Apr 2015)
Raise the retirement age to deal with Baby Boomers. (Feb 2011)
Raise retirement age gradually; allow opting out. (Feb 2011)
I’ve never challenged constitutionality of Social Security. (Oct 2010)
Raise the retirement age for people under age 55.”
This is exactly what you are seeing today.
“In part, then, poverty exists because the economic system is organized in ways that encourage the accumulation of wealth at one end and creates conditions of scarcity that make poverty inevitable at the other. But the capitalist system generates poverty in other ways as well. In the drive for profit, for example, capitalism places a high value on competition and efficiency. This motivates companies and their managers to control costs by keeping wages as low as possible and replacing people with machines or replacing full-time workers with part-time workers. It makes it a rational choice to move jobs to regions or countries where labor is cheaper and workers are less likely to complain about poor working conditions, or where laws protecting the natural environment from industrial pollution or workers from injuries on the job are weak or unenforced. Capitalism also encourages owners to shut down factories and invest money elsewhere in enterprises that offer a higher rate of return.”
Phoenix
Let it go, yome can’t read.
Pumpkin,
The problem is that your opinion of what is a “just society” is incompatible with human nature. So you and your friends want to reforge humanity to fit your anti-human view of justice, using blunt force.
90 – Please stop vomiting nonsense
How does capitalism eliminate poverty? It’s impossible. Understand this to understand why people are poor. No idea why people like rags have no understanding of this when they claim to be the defenders of logical thought.
“If we look at the slowest fifth of the population and ask, “Why are they poor?” An obvious answer is, “They didn’t run as fast as everyone else, and if they ran faster, they’d do better.” This prompts us to ask why some people run faster than others, and to consider all kinds of answers from genetics to nutrition to motivation to having time to work out to being able to afford a personal trainer.
But to see why some fifth of the population must be poor no matter how fast people run, all we have to do is look at the system itself. It uses unbridled competition to determine not only who gets fancy cars and nice houses, but who gets to eat or has a place to live or access to health care. It distributes income and wealth in ways that promote increasing concentrations among those who already have the most. Given this, the people in this year’s bottom fifth might run faster next year and get someone else to take their place in the bottom fifth.
But there has to be a bottom fifth so long as the system is organized as it is. Learning to run faster may keep you or me out of poverty, but it won’t get rid of poverty itself. To do that, we have to change the system along with how people participate in it. Instead of splitting the ‘winnings’ into shares of 48 percent, 23 percent, 15 percent, 10 percent, and 4 percent, for example, we might divide them into shares of 24 percent, 22 percent, 20 percent, 18 percent, and 16 percent. There would still be inequality, but the fastest fifth would get only 1.5 times as much as the bottom instead of 12 times as much, and 1.2 times as much as the middle fifth rather than more than 3 times as much.”
What is nonsense about the points made? It doesn’t take a liberal or conservative approach, it’s just a breakdown of why there is poverty. So please explain what is wrong about it.
grim says:
October 13, 2015 at 1:43 pm
90 – Please stop vomiting nonsense
Please explain what is wrong about what DFENS posted! See I can do it too.
I would do it, if you actually read the text from the book I posted. You guys just turn a blind eye, only logical explanation for your comment below. I clearly explained why dfens was wrong.
joyce says:
October 13, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Please explain what is wrong about what DFENS posted! See I can do it too.
As noted, SS is a pay as you go program, as long as their are workers something will be paid. Pay as you go was anathema when I studied pension funding, but as we see “funded” pensions are no real guarantee to a payout either.
If he posted his link after you posted your stuff… would that make him the victor? Whomever posts lasts wins?
The Great Pumpkin says:
October 13, 2015 at 1:52 pm
I would do it, if you actually read the text from the book I posted. You guys just turn a blind eye, only logical explanation for your comment below. I clearly explained why dfens was wrong.
joyce says:
October 13, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Please explain what is wrong about what DFENS posted! See I can do it too.
As someone trying to start a business and create jobs in the State of NJ, I will tell you.
The state and local governments are hell bent against creating jobs in NJ. The barriers that have been erected are insurmountable by nearly anyone but big business with deep pockets. Even the citizens of NJ are hell bent against creating jobs.
Go ahead and prove me wrong.
We’ve now spent in excess of 6 figures, and are still waiting on the State of NJ to allow us to be in business.
Everyone feels they are justified in telling everyone else what they should pay for a job, but they never tried to actually create a job themselves.
If it’s so easy, put everything you have on the line to try to create a job.
Any human being without capital is going to be poor. Watch “Man vs Wild” or any of the survival shows on TV for evidence. The “poor” in the US are immeasurably richer than 99.9% of anyone born 200 years ago, thanks to capitalism and thanks to being born in a country with many people who have accumulated wealth under something somewhat resembling capitalism.
Try being a pizza delivery boy or a pensioner in Nigeria or Mumbai.
Turns out Lauren Batchelder, the young woman who grilled Trump at a rally on Monday, works for the Jeb Bush campaign. CNN and other bigs just ran with her attacks, while her identity and affiliation with the Bush 2016 campaign were identified and thoroughly documented by a lowly blogger.
Does capitalism eliminate poverty? It’s impossible based on the structure of the system, therefore his statement is bunk. Comparing the standard of living of poor people today with poor people of 200 years ago, does not prove that capitalism eliminates poverty. All that proves is technology makes lives easier. Without capitalism, there would be no new technology or improvement?….sure, tell me another false line.
joyce says:
October 13, 2015 at 1:56 pm
If he posted his link after you posted your stuff… would that make him the victor? Whomever posts lasts wins?
The Great Pumpkin says:
October 13, 2015 at 1:52 pm
I would do it, if you actually read the text from the book I posted. You guys just turn a blind eye, only logical explanation for your comment below. I clearly explained why dfens was wrong.
joyce says:
October 13, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Please explain what is wrong about what DFENS posted! See I can do it too.
It starts in the home. Always. Give a child guidance, support and discipline I’ll bet they will not be poor.
Michael, I’ve read it, understood it and have come to the conclusion that Allan G. Johnson is a dunce.
I’m not surprised you like reading his work.
I’m a consumer, I’ve been creating jobs with my demand since I was born. I get your point, but that has to do with big business that lobbied govt to eliminate their competition. You are direct competition to big business and they have a done a great job of keeping you from competing with them. Thank the system that has been hijacked by big money.
“Everyone feels they are justified in telling everyone else what they should pay for a job, but they never tried to actually create a job themselves.
If it’s so easy, put everything you have on the line to try to create a job.”
Tell that to the kid with poor parents that have given up on moving up in the system. Then understand why they live the way they do.
Fast Eddie says:
October 13, 2015 at 2:17 pm
It starts in the home. Always. Give a child guidance, support and discipline I’ll bet they will not be poor.
Okay, please explain how capitalism eliminates poverty if he is a dunce.
D-FENS says:
October 13, 2015 at 2:17 pm
Michael, I’ve read it, understood it and have come to the conclusion that Allan G. Johnson is a dunce.
I’m not surprised you like reading his work.
Tell that to the kid with poor parents that have given up on moving up in the system. Then understand why they live the way they do.
If you’re supporting your children and teaching them, how is that giving up? I don’t want you to answer or offer rebuttal, I know you’re just trolling for effect.
Did you have a crackhead or methhead as a parent? I didn’t think so. Not everyone is born on an equal playing field. Some people’s childhood is a living nightmare, but you wouldn’t know anything about that, based on what you say.
Fast Eddie says:
October 13, 2015 at 2:29 pm
Tell that to the kid with poor parents that have given up on moving up in the system. Then understand why they live the way they do.
If you’re supporting your children and teaching them, how is that giving up? I don’t want you to answer or offer rebuttal, I know you’re just trolling for effect.
Did you have a crackhead or methhead as a parent?
Thank you for proving my point.
It doesn’t. It makes you responsible for your own outcome.
The Great Pumpkin says:
October 13, 2015 at 2:24 pm
Okay, please explain how capitalism eliminates poverty if he is a dunce.
#101, what I read from your writing , your very smart. We need to hear more from you!!!
I’m a consumer, I’ve been creating jobs with my demand since I was born.
So, you have zero experience in actually creating a job.
Grim,
I thought the same thing exactly when I read it.
81. Grim
Bingo. I agree. Forced saving schemes are very helpful, but the output and input must be variable in order to be effective.
Also, anyone who is in any control over these savings plans need to be monitored-any theft/corruption/nepotism- financial penalty and mandatory 30 year prison sentence.
Financial thieves love financial penalties as they have already calculated the amount into the theft. What they would not like is for them and their family to spend the next 30 years in a cell with Bubba.
“I’m fine with all of these forced savings schemes, but not when they are predicated on math that requires exponential growth of the underlying worker base to fund current requirements.”
grim, Lib,
bingo. “Demand-Side” economics and their advocates have convinced poopkins that being born and pooping his diapers makes him a bigger plus to the economy than the great inventors, industrialists, and entrepreneurs of the world. Oblivious to the generations of invention, savings, investment, and reinvestment that it took to create a world where even a world class idiot like himself is able to type his inane nonsense to a mostly unreceptive world, via inventions and invested capital he neither appreciates nor understands.
“All that proves is technology makes lives easier. Without capitalism, there would be no new technology or improvement?….sure, tell me another false line. ”
Tell me the 5 greatest technology accomplishments that occurred in communist Russia…
119. I’m sure there are plenty of technology accomplishments from Russia. Remember, capital goes where it’s treated well and is welcome. Anything of value is then sold to the highest bidder using a capitalist system. Without a doubt, money is a great motivator.
What interest rate do the trust funds’ assets earn?
The rate of interest on special issues is determined by a formula enacted in 1960. The rate is determined at the end of each month and applies to new investments in the following month.
The numeric average of the 12 monthly interest rates for 2014 was 2.271 percent. The annual effective interest rate (the average rate of return on all investments over a one-year period) for the OASI and DI Trust Funds, combined, was 3.58 percent in 2014. This higher effective rate resulted because the funds hold special-issue bonds acquired in past years when interest rates were higher.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html#&a0=2
Where is your republican knight now I ask…..
Voters haven’t had such an unfavorable perception of the state of New Jersey since Jon Corzine was governor, according to a new poll. And that negativity is reflected in the decline in popularity of Corzine’s successor, Chris Christie.
The latest Rutgers-Eagleton poll shows small improvements in some areas for Christie, a Republican, but overall his support is steadily eroding. The once-widely popular governor now has the most votes ever for an F letter grade, at 28 percent, and the fewest votes for an A grade, at 5 percent, according to the poll.
Fueling Christie’s low approvals and bad outlook is an increasing sense of disappointment from residents and voters in areas that Christie promised to fix: the state economy, the public employee pension fund and taxes.
118. Rusian Technology Best Technology.
118.
1. Anna Kournikova
2. Stoli Vodka
Anything else they invented doesn’t really matter.
Where is your republican knight now I ask…..
He’s not s.ucking c0ck at a truck stop on the Turnpike.
All hail pride of motherland glorious tractor. One hundred thousand tractors produced this month.
124 – it would probably help his polling if he was
Essex,
I saw Ken Langone on Bloomberg TV this AM talking about how wonderful Christie is, and how he should be the next president. Then he blamed Christie’s low polling numbers on hugging BO, claiming that NJ would have been flat on its back without CC. Langone has really lost his mind. I had some hopes for CC in his first few months but his “tough choices” rhetoric is just that. He did one kind of brave thing early on, and since then has done nearly nothing innovative, besides searching for camera time.
Didn’t Stalin pay Henry Ford to build a tractor factory in Russia?
Christie has surrounded himself with the usual imbeciles. He seems incapable of doing anything productive in terms of tax reform. It’s a lost cause.
So much for not being a politician….
I not sure of a full top 5, but I know “…providing Snowden will asylum/human-hacking the NSA…” and “cutting edge cyber-attacks” are certainly in the mix…….
All Hype says:
October 13, 2015 at 3:46 pm
Tell me the 5 greatest technology accomplishments that occurred in communist Russia…
assuming you consider Putin’s Russia as communism…..
Please explain to me how Russia was a communist nation. Because they called themselves communists as a ploy to gain power? What the hell was communist about the U.S.S.R? People throw around terms and they have no idea what they mean.
All Hype says:
October 13, 2015 at 3:46 pm
“All that proves is technology makes lives easier. Without capitalism, there would be no new technology or improvement?….sure, tell me another false line. ”
Tell me the 5 greatest technology accomplishments that occurred in communist Russia…
If a country is commun!st, how the hell do they purchase things? There is no money in a true communist state. Hence, there has never ever been any type of commun!sm that has existed on this planet (EVER!). Amazing how many countries label themselves, or are labeled by others, as commun!st. Shows you how many people know nothing about what they are talking about. Propaganda is a powerful tool, don’t even get me started on social!sm labeled as a dirty word. What a joke.
grim says:
October 13, 2015 at 4:53 pm
Didn’t Stalin pay Henry Ford to build a tractor factory in Russia?
Then how the hell did they compete with us in a Cold War for forty years? Ak-47? Jets? Nuclear subs? Give me a break. America was in its glory and barely beat out U.S.S.R. for world supremacy. Took an overload of govt spending to defeat them in the 80’s. Yes, govt spending in an arms race won us that war. I thought govt spending is evil. I thought social!sm is evil. Yes, our military is a form of social!sm.
All Hype says:
October 13, 2015 at 3:46 pm
“All that proves is technology makes lives easier. Without capitalism, there would be no new technology or improvement?….sure, tell me another false line. ”
Tell me the 5 greatest technology accomplishments that occurred in communist Russia…
Really? So the consumer demand doesn’t matter. So I ask you, what motivation does one have to invent something if there will be nobody to sell it to? Every single consumer matters in the economy. They are just as important as the inventor, but for some reason you place more importance on the inventor. Here lies the fault in your logic.
Ragnar says:
October 13, 2015 at 3:43 pm
grim, Lib,
bingo. “Demand-Side” economics and their advocates have convinced poopkins that being born and pooping his diapers makes him a bigger plus to the economy than the great inventors, industrialists, and entrepreneurs of the world. Oblivious to the generations of invention, savings, investment, and reinvestment that it took to create a world where even a world class idiot like himself is able to type his inane nonsense to a mostly unreceptive world, via inventions and invested capital he neither appreciates nor understands.
Can we say the same about how capitalistic this country is? Or not cause it wouldn’t help your argument
The Great Pumpkin says:
October 13, 2015 at 5:50 pm
Please explain to me how Russia was a communist nation. Because they called themselves communists as a ploy to gain power? What the hell was communist about the U.S.S.R? People throw around terms and they have no idea what they mean.
http://www.nj.com/entertainment/celebrities/index.ssf/2015/10/bruce_springsteen_house_rumson.html
Def capitalist. Only problem is that it is crony capitalism.
joyce says:
October 13, 2015 at 6:35 pm
Can we say the same about how capitalistic this country is? Or not cause it wouldn’t help your argument
The Great Pumpkin says:
October 13, 2015 at 5:50 pm
Please explain to me how Russia was a communist nation. Because they called themselves communists as a ploy to gain power? What the hell was communist about the U.S.S.R? People throw around terms and they have no idea what they mean.
“Well, the alternatives are a misnomer. There is no moral superiority to capitalism. The most expensive answers are pushed, not the best ones. These solutions make millions for a few, but act like a parasite to the rest. The Pharmaceutical industry is the most blatant example of this phenomenon. The will not look for the cure for cancer, type two diabetes, etc, they will keep pushing the expensive drugs on the market if they actually do anything or not. http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/fda-approves-cancer-drugs-without-proof-theyre-extending-lives-b99348000z1-280437692.htm
This is the world of capital. Making billions off the sick dead and dying. All along refusing to even look at research that might kill their cash cow.
http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/06/cancer-is-finally-cured-in-canada-but-big-pharma-has-no-interest.html.
In every corner of the economy this goes on, and for a long time.
Even in the automotive industry, http://www.allpar.com/old/200-mpg-carburetor.html.
Capital does not look for the best answers, just the ones that can make a few billionaires at the expense of the rest of us. If you are thinking about USSR styled communism as your reason to avoid social!sm you are just being mislead. That old pariah called the Soviet Union was a mass of deception from the small minority of criminals that narrated the words without engaging in the concepts. They went straight from a feudal state to one that was supposed to be a communist paradise. Now if you had bothered to really understand Marxist theory, you would know this would never work. If you have not then you do not want to have a real understanding of social evolution. Believe it or not one needs to have more than a glancing view to truly criticize anything.”
“Well, the alternatives are a misnomer. There is no moral superiority to capitalism. The most expensive answers are pushed, not the best ones. These solutions make millions for a few, but act like a parasite to the rest. The Pharmaceutical industry is the most blatant example of this phenomenon. The will not look for the cure for cancer, type two diabetes, etc, they will keep pushing the expensive drugs on the market if they actually do anything or not. http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/fda-approves-cancer-drugs-without-proof-theyre-extending-lives-b99348000z1-280437692.htm
This is the world of capital. Making billions off the sick dead and dying. All along refusing to even look at research that might kill their cash cow.
http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/06/cancer-is-finally-cured-in-canada-but-big-pharma-has-no-interest.html.
In every corner of the economy this goes on, and for a long time.
Even in the automotive industry, http://www.allpar.com/old/200-mpg-carburetor.html.
Capital does not look for the best answers, just the ones that can make a few billionaires at the expense of the rest of us. If you are thinking about USSR styled communism as your reason to avoid social!sm you are just being mislead. That old pariah called the Soviet Union was a mass of deception from the small minority of criminals that narrated the words without engaging in the concepts. They went straight from a feudal state to one that was supposed to be a commun!st paradise. Now if you had bothered to really understand Marxist theory, you would know this would never work. If you have not then you do not want to have a real understanding of soc!al evolution. Believe it or not one needs to have more than a glancing view to truly criticize anything.”
“Well, the alternatives are a misnomer. There is no moral superiority to capitalism. The most expensive answers are pushed, not the best ones. These solutions make millions for a few, but act like a parasite to the rest. The Pharmaceutical industry is the most blatant example of this phenomenon. The will not look for the cure for cancer, type two diabetes, etc, they will keep pushing the expensive drugs on the market if they actually do anything or not. http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/fda-approves-cancer-drugs-without-proof-theyre-extending-lives-b99348000z1-280437692.htm
This is the world of capital. Making billions off the sick dead and dying. All along refusing to even look at research that might kill their cash cow.
http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/06/cancer-is-finally-cured-in-canada-but-big-pharma-has-no-interest.html.
In every corner of the economy this goes on, and for a long time.
Even in the automotive industry, http://www.allpar.com/old/200-mpg-carburetor.html.
Capital does not look for the best answers, just the ones that can make a few billionaires at the expense of the rest of us. If you are thinking about USSR styled commun!sm as your reason to avoid social!sm you are just being mislead. That old pariah called the Soviet Union was a mass of deception from the small minority of criminals that narrated the words without engaging in the concepts. They went straight from a feudal state to one that was supposed to be a commun!st paradise. Now if you had bothered to really understand Marx!st theory, you would know this would never work. If you have not then you do not want to have a real understanding of soc!al evolution. Believe it or not one needs to have more than a glancing view to truly criticize anything.”
“Well, the alternatives are a misnomer. There is no moral superiority to capital!sm. The most expensive answers are pushed, not the best ones. These solutions make millions for a few, but act like a parasite to the rest. The Pharmaceutical industry is the most blatant example of this phenomenon. The will not look for the cure for cancer, type two diabetes, etc, they will keep pushing the expensive drugs on the market if they actually do anything or not. http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/fda-approves-cancer-drugs-without-proof-theyre-extending-lives-b99348000z1-280437692.htm
This is the world of capital. Making billions off the sick dead and dying. All along refusing to even look at research that might kill their cash cow.
http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/06/cancer-is-finally-cured-in-canada-but-big-pharma-has-no-interest.html.
In every corner of the economy this goes on, and for a long time.
Even in the automotive industry, http://www.allpar.com/old/200-mpg-carburetor.html.
Capital does not look for the best answers, just the ones that can make a few billionaires at the expense of the rest of us. If you are thinking about USSR styled commun!sm as your reason to avoid social!sm you are just being mislead. That old pariah called the Soviet Union was a mass of deception from the small minority of criminals that narrated the words without engaging in the concepts. They went straight from a feudal state to one that was supposed to be a commun!st paradise. Now if you had bothered to really understand Marx!st theory, you would know this would never work. If you have not then you do not want to have a real understanding of soc!al evolution. Believe it or not one needs to have more than a glancing view to truly criticize anything.”
“Well, the alternatives are a misnomer. There is no moral superiority to capital!sm. The most expensive answers are pushed, not the best ones. These solutions make millions for a few, but act like a parasite to the rest. The Pharmaceutical industry is the most blatant example of this phenomenon. The will not look for the cure for cancer, type two diabetes, etc, they will keep pushing the expensive drugs on the market if they actually do anything or not. http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/fda-approves-cancer-drugs-without-proof-theyre-extending-lives-b99348000z1-280437692.htm“
“This is the world of capital. Making billions off the sick dead and dying. All along refusing to even look at research that might kill their cash cow.
http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/06/cancer-is-finally-cured-in-canada-but-big-pharma-has-no-interest.html.”
“In every corner of the economy this goes on, and for a long time.
Even in the automotive industry, http://www.allpar.com/old/200-mpg-carburetor.html. “
“Capital does not look for the best answers, just the ones that can make a few billionaires at the expense of the rest of us. If you are thinking about USSR styled commun!sm as your reason to avoid social!sm you are just being mislead. That old pariah called the Soviet Union was a mass of deception from the small minority of criminals that narrated the words without engaging in the concepts. They went straight from a feudal state to one that was supposed to be a commun!st paradise. Now if you had bothered to really understand Marx!st theory, you would know this would never work. If you have not then you do not want to have a real understanding of soc!al evolution. Believe it or not one needs to have more than a glancing view to truly criticize anything.”
Who approved the drug? The FDA
The Great Pumpkin says:
October 13, 2015 at 8:32 pm
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/fda-approves-cancer-drugs-without-proof-theyre-extending-lives-b99348000z1-280437692.htm“
Let’s socialize punkin’s keyboard and grandma’s house and redistribute it to the poor.
Bernie just hit it. Who gives a crap about the stupid emails. Our middle class is disappearing!! Stick to the issues that matter!!
The beginning of the debate where they introduced themselves was telling. Bernie went straight to the issues. He didn’t talk about his family or achievements, like a salesman trying to sell you something. Instead he went straight to the issues and didn’t sound like some rehearesed bs. Guy is the real deal.
This guy is the man! Finally, a real option for president!
There is some kind of debate tonight?
Peaceful coexistence is the arch enemy of authority.
@JosietheOutlaw1: All I want for Christmas is for @realDonaldTrump to @kanyewest tonight’s debate.
I’m really inspired together with your writing talents as neatly as with the layout to your blog. Is this a paid subject matter or did you customize it yourself? Either way stay up the excellent high quality writing, it is rare to look a great blog like this one today..