You're very welcome, and I'll accept thanks for your retirement too, since I'll be paying for your social welfare. Cheers.
World Economic Collapse is imminent
- Thread starter zpinch
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
Thanks for confirming your stripes.
The last refuge of scoundrels is personal attacks.
Good observation.
Thanks for confirming your stripes.
The last refuge of scoundrels is personal attacks.
Good observation.
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
You're very welcome, and I'll accept thanks for your retirement too, since I'll be paying for your social welfare. Cheers.
No you won't, SSI is paid for by ME through FICA taxes on my income.
Why not complain about illegal aliens getting all manner of
FREE benefits?
You're very welcome, and I'll accept thanks for your retirement too, since I'll be paying for your social welfare. Cheers.
No you won't, SSI is paid for by ME through FICA taxes on my income.
Why not complain about illegal aliens getting all manner of
FREE benefits?
Last edited:
SSI is funded by general tax revenues, which I will continue to pay while you're collecting it, as my investments pay dividends quarterly.
This thread is about finance and savings. If you wish to complain about immigrants, it might be better to start a new thread. I won't engage a topic that will end up with this thread or accounts locked.
This thread is about finance and savings. If you wish to complain about immigrants, it might be better to start a new thread. I won't engage a topic that will end up with this thread or accounts locked.
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
SSI is funded by general tax revenues, which I will continue to pay while you're collecting it, as my investments pay dividends quarterly.
This thread is about finance and savings. If you wish to complain about immigrants, it might be better to start a new thread. I won't engage a topic that will end up with this thread or accounts locked.
So YOU won't accept SSI when you retire?
The facts are clear, illegal aliens collect billions of dollars worth of SSI and welfare benefits that they are NOT LEGALLY entitled to. You DO admit this don't you?
SSI is funded by general tax revenues, which I will continue to pay while you're collecting it, as my investments pay dividends quarterly.
This thread is about finance and savings. If you wish to complain about immigrants, it might be better to start a new thread. I won't engage a topic that will end up with this thread or accounts locked.
So YOU won't accept SSI when you retire?
The facts are clear, illegal aliens collect billions of dollars worth of SSI and welfare benefits that they are NOT LEGALLY entitled to. You DO admit this don't you?
I won't ever collect SSI, because I won't ever be eligible. Your financial illiteracy is showing again.
Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
The facts are clear, illegal aliens collect billions of dollars worth of SSI and welfare benefits that they are NOT LEGALLY entitled to. You DO admit this don't you?
What? They use fake SSNs to withhold social security they never collect on. If a US citizen is lucky enough to share those nine digits they get an extra little bonus years down the road.
The facts are clear, illegal aliens collect billions of dollars worth of SSI and welfare benefits that they are NOT LEGALLY entitled to. You DO admit this don't you?
What? They use fake SSNs to withhold social security they never collect on. If a US citizen is lucky enough to share those nine digits they get an extra little bonus years down the road.
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
Don't waste your time guys. Unless the elite Alex Jones tells him to believe it, he won't. The nutty websites that he gets his info from market gold, so of course they want him to believe that equities are scary (and bonds too?).
Soon enough, the extra fluoride, vaccines, and glyphosate that we're exposing him to will take effect. We are the responsible investors. He will be assimilated.
Not that I totally agree with him/his views....but he is right in many things...
So watch your toothpaste...for fluoride n'stuFF
Don't waste your time guys. Unless the elite Alex Jones tells him to believe it, he won't. The nutty websites that he gets his info from market gold, so of course they want him to believe that equities are scary (and bonds too?).
Soon enough, the extra fluoride, vaccines, and glyphosate that we're exposing him to will take effect. We are the responsible investors. He will be assimilated.
Not that I totally agree with him/his views....but he is right in many things...
So watch your toothpaste...for fluoride n'stuFF
Just to stir the pot, -world-economy-trapped-in-death-spiral.
There is a school of thought among economists that holds that the primary problem in the world economy is a lack of productive investment, not a lack of capital.
We see this in things like companies buying one another rather than investing their capital in things that will create entirely new categories of products.
We see investment in cheap things, like new hardware and software but a lack of investment in expensive things, like infrastructure or major new manufacturing capacity. We see primarily derivative products. What really separates the current version of any phone from the last?
As a micro example, consider that in the fifteen years ending in the early seventies, Boeing designed and built four entirely new aircraft programs, the 707/720, the 727, the 737 and the 747.
In the fifteen years after that, there was only the 757/767.
In the fifteen years after that, there were only the 777 and the 787 with derivatives of the 747 and 737 soldiering on.
What happened to a company that was once willing to make one bet-the-company investment after another to make it so cautious?
This is only a microcosm of what's happening everywhere in the world economy.
That's what's wrong. It isn't a lack of available funds or skilled workers.
Incentives?
Create incentives for companies to take real risks on real programs and delete incentives for unproductive uses of capital.
Rearranging the deck chairs is not productive investment and should not be treated in policy as though it were.
Create incentives for real engineering and eliminate those for financial engineering and most of the current worldwide malaise could be remedied.
We see this in things like companies buying one another rather than investing their capital in things that will create entirely new categories of products.
We see investment in cheap things, like new hardware and software but a lack of investment in expensive things, like infrastructure or major new manufacturing capacity. We see primarily derivative products. What really separates the current version of any phone from the last?
As a micro example, consider that in the fifteen years ending in the early seventies, Boeing designed and built four entirely new aircraft programs, the 707/720, the 727, the 737 and the 747.
In the fifteen years after that, there was only the 757/767.
In the fifteen years after that, there were only the 777 and the 787 with derivatives of the 747 and 737 soldiering on.
What happened to a company that was once willing to make one bet-the-company investment after another to make it so cautious?
This is only a microcosm of what's happening everywhere in the world economy.
That's what's wrong. It isn't a lack of available funds or skilled workers.
Incentives?
Create incentives for companies to take real risks on real programs and delete incentives for unproductive uses of capital.
Rearranging the deck chairs is not productive investment and should not be treated in policy as though it were.
Create incentives for real engineering and eliminate those for financial engineering and most of the current worldwide malaise could be remedied.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
As a micro example, consider that in the fifteen years ending in the early seventies, Boeing designed and built four entirely new aircraft programs, the 707/720, the 727, the 737 and the 747.
In the fifteen years after that, there was only the 757/767.
In the fifteen years after that, there were only the 777 and the 787 with derivatives of the 747 and 737 soldiering on.
What happened to a company that was once willing to make one bet-the-company investment after another to make it so cautious?
Developing a completely new airplane like the 787 Dreamliner takes tons of capital cash from the company. It takes a lot of sales after production starts to recoup all the money put into development. And the new derivatives and constant updating of current models is no small task. Boeing has a lot more business going on besides commercial jet liners too, so they need to look at the whole company business and make smart decisions on where to spend R&D money based on the future market outlook. And their outlook and plannning is way out in the future, which takes a lot more insight and skill on what's going to happen. It's not like developing a new iPhone every 6 months so they can keep getting profit from everyone who has to have the "latest cool device" in their hands.
As a micro example, consider that in the fifteen years ending in the early seventies, Boeing designed and built four entirely new aircraft programs, the 707/720, the 727, the 737 and the 747.
In the fifteen years after that, there was only the 757/767.
In the fifteen years after that, there were only the 777 and the 787 with derivatives of the 747 and 737 soldiering on.
What happened to a company that was once willing to make one bet-the-company investment after another to make it so cautious?
Developing a completely new airplane like the 787 Dreamliner takes tons of capital cash from the company. It takes a lot of sales after production starts to recoup all the money put into development. And the new derivatives and constant updating of current models is no small task. Boeing has a lot more business going on besides commercial jet liners too, so they need to look at the whole company business and make smart decisions on where to spend R&D money based on the future market outlook. And their outlook and plannning is way out in the future, which takes a lot more insight and skill on what's going to happen. It's not like developing a new iPhone every 6 months so they can keep getting profit from everyone who has to have the "latest cool device" in their hands.
fdcg27, that's a great post and a really good point.
Was listening to an economist the other day, and along the lines of "if your only tool is a hammer, then every problem has to be a nail", he was making the observation that if massive lowering of interest rates and stimulus spending hasn't fixed it, what makes anyone think thta negative rates WILL fix it.
Need to create/use different tools.
Prospect of negative Interest is being talked about in Oz ATM, and will just encourage people not to save...
As if there wasn't enough disincentive to save for retirement...now one party wants to use our retirement savings for their projects.
http://www.solepurposetest.com/news/labor-plans-unlock-superannuation-infrastructure/
Was listening to an economist the other day, and along the lines of "if your only tool is a hammer, then every problem has to be a nail", he was making the observation that if massive lowering of interest rates and stimulus spending hasn't fixed it, what makes anyone think thta negative rates WILL fix it.
Need to create/use different tools.
Prospect of negative Interest is being talked about in Oz ATM, and will just encourage people not to save...
As if there wasn't enough disincentive to save for retirement...now one party wants to use our retirement savings for their projects.
http://www.solepurposetest.com/news/labor-plans-unlock-superannuation-infrastructure/
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
There is a school of thought among economists that holds that the primary problem in the world economy is a lack of productive investment, not a lack of capital.
We see this in things like companies buying one another rather than investing their capital in things that will create entirely new categories of products.
Very true. And the end to this means is that the market share of a given product (that they happen to make) will increase. But I doubt that the motivation is a choice between developing a new product or increasing market share for that product. I have the feeling the consideration for developing the "new product" rarely enters into it. Bu again the saving of overhead..getting rid of workers/executives means more market share with lowered costs.
If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em.
Good post.
There is a school of thought among economists that holds that the primary problem in the world economy is a lack of productive investment, not a lack of capital.
We see this in things like companies buying one another rather than investing their capital in things that will create entirely new categories of products.
Very true. And the end to this means is that the market share of a given product (that they happen to make) will increase. But I doubt that the motivation is a choice between developing a new product or increasing market share for that product. I have the feeling the consideration for developing the "new product" rarely enters into it. Bu again the saving of overhead..getting rid of workers/executives means more market share with lowered costs.
If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em.
Good post.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
I won't ever collect SSI, because I won't ever be eligible. Your financial illiteracy is showing again.
You haven't provided the entire story of your situation. So you have NEVER been employed by anyone else for any period of time?
Even if it was a fairly short period of time you still can receive partial benefits. This is more common than you think.
I won't ever collect SSI, because I won't ever be eligible. Your financial illiteracy is showing again.
You haven't provided the entire story of your situation. So you have NEVER been employed by anyone else for any period of time?
Even if it was a fairly short period of time you still can receive partial benefits. This is more common than you think.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
I won't ever collect SSI, because I won't ever be eligible. Your financial illiteracy is showing again.
You haven't provided the entire story of your situation. So you have NEVER been employed by anyone else for any period of time?
Even if it was a fairly short period of time you still can receive partial benefits. This is more common than you think.
I think you're confused.
This may help you out.
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
I won't ever collect SSI, because I won't ever be eligible. Your financial illiteracy is showing again.
You haven't provided the entire story of your situation. So you have NEVER been employed by anyone else for any period of time?
Even if it was a fairly short period of time you still can receive partial benefits. This is more common than you think.
I think you're confused.
This may help you out.
Pushing on a string?
If abundant cheap capital hasn't spurred real investment, why would giving people money to borrow it make things any better?
The irony is that a higher cost of capital might force investment in the kinds of things that lead to higher rates of return which might in turn force investors to take risks.
Cheap money allows investors to go after low risk low return plays and therefore does little to encourage investment in programs with potentially high returns that involve considerable risk.
If I can get a nice spread while accepting little or no risk, then why wouldn't I, particularly since abundant capital allows me to make up in volume what I'm giving up in potential return.
If abundant cheap capital hasn't spurred real investment, why would giving people money to borrow it make things any better?
The irony is that a higher cost of capital might force investment in the kinds of things that lead to higher rates of return which might in turn force investors to take risks.
Cheap money allows investors to go after low risk low return plays and therefore does little to encourage investment in programs with potentially high returns that involve considerable risk.
If I can get a nice spread while accepting little or no risk, then why wouldn't I, particularly since abundant capital allows me to make up in volume what I'm giving up in potential return.
- Status
Similar threads
