A Couple of Economic articles

[OldMercsRule]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Don't feel bad Murky, going to be in Seattle end of the month. It will give the sheeple one more thing to talk about. I'll be the one looking to do business with other capitalists for profit. That should narrow it down a bit.

Ya got time fer an adult beverage or two with me n' maybe Bro Haut? BTW, they have Northbound I-5 shut down to one lane from Spokane street to I-90 starting tonight fer the next 19 days. N' they allowed the cab drivers ta hose ya more then the normal fee. That will make a real mess from the airport to downtown, not that it isn't normally a mess. JR

 

[ricksrster]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

http://video.stumbleupon.com/#p=xjbnjaisvg

 

[mscher]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

The Sowell article is right-on IMO.

The Sub-prime mortage meltdown - Boy who saw that coming?

Let's see. We'll loan money, no we'll loan A LOT OF MONEY, maybe just throw money, at people to buy overpriced properties, which more than likely they will not be able to pay for. The fact that they may not even qualify for a loan is irrelevent.

Lenders, originators, investors all make great money from the "churn" of all of these wonderful loans and refi's. Property sellers, builders, suppliers all get in on the fun. What could be better for the industry and the U.S Economy?

Oh wait, lot's of people can't pay these loans back. What a surprise.

Anybody remember the Savings and Loan scams of the 80's? The sub-prime mortgage industry has that same stink.

 

[PW2]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

The Sowell article is right-on IMO.

The Sub-prime mortage meltdown - Boy who saw that coming?

Let's see. We'll loan money, no we'll loan A LOT OF MONEY, maybe just throw money, at people to buy overpriced properties, which more than likely they will not be able to pay for. The fact that they may not even qualify for a loan is irrelevent.

Lenders, originators, investors all make great money from the "churn" of all of these wonderful loans and refi's. Property sellers, builders, suppliers all get in on the fun. What could be better for the industry and the U.S Economy?

Oh wait, lot's of people can't pay these loans back. What a surprise.

Anybody remember the Savings and Loan scams of the 80's? The sub-prime mortgage industry has that same stink.

Sowell's article is not compatible with your contention.

He is suggesting that somehow land use regs (as imposed presumably by libs) kept prices artificially high.

You correctly argue that these "creative" mortgage instruments have enabled too many people to qualify for loans they simply can't afford.

Prices were high because of supply and demand. If the lenders had insisted on traditional terms of loans, it would have disqualified many potential buyers, and thereby reduced demand, certainly at the inflated prices. It would have tended to moderate prices.

I'm not suggesting that there was not a problem, but only that the problem was not was Sowell tried to suggest it was, nor was it the fault of libs.

As far as I know, the banking and mortgage industry are not bastions of liberalism.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Sowell's article is not compatible with your contention.

He is suggesting that somehow land use regs (as imposed presumably by libs) kept prices artificially high.

You correctly argue that these "creative" mortgage instruments have enabled too many people to qualify for loans they simply can't afford.

Prices were high because of supply and demand. If the lenders had insisted on traditional terms of loans, it would have disqualified many potential buyers, and thereby reduced demand, certainly at the inflated prices. It would have tended to moderate prices.

I'm not suggesting that there was not a problem, but only that the problem was not was Sowell tried to suggest it was, nor was it the fault of libs.

As far as I know, the banking and mortgage industry are not bastions of liberalism.

For the sake of arguement, I agree. This is more an example of overspeculation, easy money (credit), and if people were restrained by their incomes as is traditionally the case, these spikes would not have occured. With that said I would not be surprised to see government programs to assist those who spent beyond their means. That too would be a mistake. I will note that the spike occured in areas of liberalism, the coasts, SF, LA, NY, Seatle etc. But that is more an observation than an indictment.

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Sowell's article is not compatible with your contention.

He is suggesting that somehow land use regs (as imposed presumably by libs) kept prices artificially high.

You correctly argue that these "creative" mortgage instruments have enabled too many people to qualify for loans they simply can't afford.

Prices were high because of supply and demand. If the lenders had insisted on traditional terms of loans, it would have disqualified many potential buyers, and thereby reduced demand, certainly at the inflated prices. It would have tended to moderate prices.

I'm not suggesting that there was not a problem, but only that the problem was not was Sowell tried to suggest it was, nor was it the fault of libs.

As far as I know, the banking and mortgage industry are not bastions of liberalism.

Yer makin' sense PW.......
That & the unimpeded flow of illegal immigrants also boosts the prices through reduced availability.....
Thankfully I own my house......
I weep for the future of the children of the so called 'majority'......​

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Sowell's article is not compatible with your contention.

He is suggesting that somehow land use regs (as imposed presumably by libs) kept prices artificially high.

OK, one more time: PW2. Dr. Sowell is correctly talking about the effects of restrictions of supply in a vibrant market with ALREADY strong demand, (spanning more then a decade). Regulations that place burdens on developement: RESTRICT SUPPLY. Real simple if yer intellectually honest. PW2 is effectively trying to say restrictions on supply in hot markets do not matter, that is dead wrong: artificial restrictions of hot markets effect things in a HUGE WAY. The green "growth management" regulations here in the Peoples Republic of King County have clearly and obviously pushed prices upward. (hint: thats Martin Luther King County now: PW2, [Libs like to change the familier names of things too, it costs the Government more money, yer tax dollars at work, to change all the signage n' stationary; even: Bro Haut luvs it]).

If the demand were not strong in the first place, or if the supply was unlimited, regulations would still increase the cost of new construction and developement. The limitations the Liberals in the Seatlle area have in fact placed on all aspects of home construction n' land use in favor of tight restrictions would have less effect if there was weak demand and abundant supply. It would put people building new homes out of business, (never a particular big corncern of Libs here in Gods' Country). Dr. Sowell should have qualified his article with a statement about this effect: on the margin (as apposed to presenting it as a 'primary' cause), and PW2 could not get the milage he has gotten here denying the obvious. Hot markets always pull in all the players n' goof balls doin' all sorts of things with fancy financin' et al, (that is how observers with at least one functional brain cell can tell it's time to batton down the hatches). That is a DEMAND issue, not SUPPLY, where the Libs always do their dirty work with their tool of choice: OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENT.

Some regulations n' restrictions are necessary: of course. Ya don't want fools building things outa cardboard. That said: Modern Domestic Liberals have this insatiable desire to CORNTROL EVERYTHING. They pass regulations intended to force people out of cars into busses n' trains. The people here, (many Liberal): drive anyway. They place barriers n' islands on nearly every road they can: to force more congestion. They pass laws prohibiting developement of "open areas". They give subsidies, (by taxing the rest of us), to concentrated condos in the central core. This all has had a huge effect on upward prices in this LIBERAL TOWN. PW2 can smoke his wacky tabacky all he wants n' deny this obvious result of these restrictions, it still does not make his smoke filled version of reality true.


You correctly argue that these "creative" mortgage instruments have enabled too many people to qualify for loans they simply can't afford.

Demand issue: PW2, easy financin' encourages demand.

Prices were high because of supply and demand.

Why yes: PW2, n' artifical social engineerin' restrictions LIMIT SUPPLY.

If the lenders had insisted on traditional terms of loans, it would have disqualified many potential buyers, and thereby reduced demand, certainly at the inflated prices. It would have tended to moderate prices.

Different issue: PW2. It's called DEMAND. Yer analysis is sound here.

I'm not suggesting that there was not a problem, but only that the problem was not was Sowell tried to suggest it was,

Yes it was, he just exagerated the significance to a 'primary' cause, where it is actually on the margin, n' still VERY SIGNIFICANT.

nor was it the fault of libs.

Don't know as much about the rest of the Country as I do about the Seattle area. In Seattle it is CLEARLY MIND YER BUSINESS N' CORNTROL YER LIVES LIBERAL DEMOCRATS.

As far as I know, the banking and mortgage industry are not bastions of liberalism.

That is the demand side PW2, n' yer right, business is business to a Lib or Cornservative, the supply side is where the LIBERALS assert their CORNTROL OVER YER, yah I said YER PROPERTY, as Libs always do. N' the choice of Libs is pass laws n' regs based on the dumbest turd in the sewer, that the MSM hypes up fer the dim wit Democrat supporters to knash their teeth over n' cede more of all our personnal rights n' responsibilities to NANNY GOVERNMENT. Jus' remember that when ya hear "its fer the children" those are the words the MSM n' dim wits use to get yer feelins' worked up so ya cede them (LIBERAL DEMOCRATS) more power. JR

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Boy o' Boy. It sure seems easy to cornfuse a valid yet admittidly inarticulately stated argument about a large cormplex subject that touches many of us here on iboats.

First: ya bring up TOTALLY UNRELATED but valid corncerns about supply side limitations of cornstruction materials and production cornstraints, (that I do not disagree with, BTW).

Second: ya bring up valid corncerns about factors effecting the demand side, (still totally unrelated to the primary contention by PW2 that Dr. Sowell's article is "ludicrious").

Third: ya wieve the valid, but TOTALLY UNRELATED arguments into a believable rant that brings otherwise clear thinkers to yer side.

Purdy good PW2.

Dr Sowell should stick to bloviating about politics. His valid thesis should have been stated in a way that acknowledged the other more powerfull forces that have defined this housing and realestate boom in the first place. He overly simplified his point to where PW2 was able to derail his valid thesis with his smoke.

People who move or have sucessfully moved giant markets fer profit, like George Soros, n' Jay Gould know the corncept Dr. Sowell inarticulately tries to put forth: a concentrated well timed action in the direction of a trend can multiply the move in prices an unbelievable amount. That is an elemental 101 corncept to financial types like me.

I know this is not very well known by non financial types, but it is the primary reason for many of the existing trading regulations that the SEC imposes on our securities markets today.

If ya spot a trend, n' are very sharp ya concentrate all yer funds n' hit the bid, (if ya wanna drive prices down), or (ask if ya wanna drive prices up) at the point that the market is ready to crack due to the exhaustion of the primary factors driving the trend. This is just an example to demonstrate my point (not related to this particular issue in realestate), but certianly is related to my fear of Soveriegn Permenant Funds that PW2 also Poo Poos.

The Libs have done that same type of thing here in Gods' Country with residential realestate. The trend went on much longer then a rational observer would have thought possible. (If yer using the Government to effect things the trend to exploit must be very durable.) Realestate is illiquid so the moves take time to build, n' peak. Essential to get the effect of the concentration I am talking about.

This type of market (residential realestate) was moved by restrictions of supply, (John Rockefeller, and OPEC used or uses the same exact tactics with Oil). A restriction that seems rather minor in a very tight market really has VERY dramatic effects.

All or most of the factors PW2 brings up are valid, (just totally unrelated to the thesis of Dr. Sowell). He may or may not know how unrelated those issues are, (can't read minds). That said: social engineering regulations DO add cost and DO restrict supply, if ya do that in a hot Left Coast market the price moves are definitley multiplied. It is NOT INSIGNIFICANT. All the other valid corncerns would have happened anyway, as they have in past cycles. The Liberal Government policies here in the State of Washington created the 'perfect storm' and definately added a great deal to the price move, (n' the price move would have never happend with out the primary DEMAND in the first place).

Moral of the story. Almost every time Government causes problems when they overplay their hand. Liberals LUV government. They cornstantly work to grow it and nurish it with yer tax dollars. It's all about corntrol.

Great job cornfusing everyone PW2! JR

 

[treedancer]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Quote OldMercsRule



That is a DEMAND issue, not SUPPLY, where the Libs always do their dirty work with their tool of choice: OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENT.



Care to explain the part of that sentence that I underlined JR. Having a bit of a problem how being a Lib can effect supply and demand.

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Quote OldMercsRule



That is a DEMAND issue, not SUPPLY, where the Libs always do their dirty work with their tool of choice: OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENT.



Care to explain the part of that sentence that I underlined JR. Having a bit of a problem how being a Lib can effect supply and demand.

Ok Mr Tree I'll play fer a bit.

Let's say the central city has loads of open space in every direction 360 degrees arround the city. BTW: Liberal bright blue havens like Seattle n' San Fransico n' New York City already have many natural geographical limitations that makes this particular strategy much MUCH easier to execute fer the Libs.

Ya get the dim wits to ellect ya by promissin' to RAISE TAXES n' save a scarce misquito, cockroach or slug or some such irrational promise, especially if ya can figure out how ta make it "fer the children", (that seems ta turn the dim wits' cranks for whatever unknown reason the dim wits' cranks seem ta turn). Maybe an Owl with spots or Eagles nestin', (as they tried to suggest with me at RR island), or fish in a stream, (that prolly will turn yer and my cranks too). BTW, sometimes the Liberal Tyrants in black robes legistate the requirements FROM THE BENCH to protect bugs birds or fish ta get the ball rollin'. Ya know: the ends justify the means: Mr Tree!!! Point is: it does not matter how ya get the "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING" blood curdling scream that scares every Cornservative with a functional brain cell. Ya just need some experts on homosexuality that are snoozin' or activist vicitims that are plentifull here in God's country ta lead the charge, the sheeple will generally follow.

Ya need some of PW2's smoke ta understand the merrits of these arguments, n' I don't have any, so I: with only a single functioning brain cell, don't get it!! BTW: RR island has no eagle nests, (at least for the last 51 years give or take my family has owned the place). Once ya force say a 20 acre minimum lot size or so per residence, or make each lot build a freeway off ramp to serve each new home built, (or similar restrictions), the potential density arround the city is forever changed until ya flush the terlet of the Pols n' bureaurocrats runnin' the particular city in question. BTW, the chance of doin' that, (as PW2 also suggests), is not so good. My Brother in AK luvs ta say: "there's a band in Boise called: FAT CHANCE, n' they have a hit single called: NO F*****G WAY!!!"

Once ya have sufficient concentration of dopes n' dim wits in the central city, ya restrict traffic by placin' barriers in most the intersections, and refuse to expand existing roads. Ya hope the dim wits sell their cars n' ride bikes or busses or the nearly worthless LIGHT RAIL ya talked em into spendin Billions fer, but they like 'em soooooo much, (even the Lib dim wits), ya get lots' o traffic to complain about n' raise taxes to solve the problem ya intentionally created in the first place. N' if yer real skilled n' have some like minded buds in the MSM n' local VERY LIBERAL media, ya can blame the traffic or maybe a bridge that fails 'cause ya took the taxes ta build a new staduim r' somethin' kool, (or put the $ in yer freezer if ya live in New Orleans), instead of fixin' the transportation mess on YOU GUESSED IT: ol' George Bush!! Remember KATRINA? Great stuff eh: Mr. Tree?

Hope that helps ya understand how the Libs got corntrol n' runs things here in Seattle anyhoo! Now that always leads to that inevitable ol' nagin' question: Is Liberalism a mental disorder? I report: you decide! Respectfully, JR

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Hey that light rail will give the bums, derelicts & mutants not just a place to sleep but fast efficient way to get downtown to sell their crack at Third & Pine as well as size up potential mugging candidates....
Meantime the Demwit Norm Rice is trying to build new bike trails on existing RR tracks that could provide some useful mass transit on the eastside for those who actually work......
More bike trails & redoing the King County logo to appease a fractional minority of the population (at taxpayer expense)is far more important..
Frankly the mayor & the entire city council should get the boot!.....
Ah, Murky, ya struck a nerve!......:redface:​

 

[POINTER94]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Murky,

I agree with everything in the above post. It is true that some people will do anything including lie, (which some people ignore, because everyone does it, right?) abuse others (Cindy Sheehan), assemble a straw man (snail darter), race baiting (THE REV JACKSON), class warfare (tax structures) to get what they want. Liberals are funny cuz they use these brain dead emotional arguements to rationalize tangible situations. Frankly, I don't believe a word that comes out of their mouths is sincere. I guess calling Rap music, violent and counterproductive and a vehicle for hatred made me a racist 5 years ago, but I have been absolved by Al Sharpton. BFD!! As I have said on a regular basis, being a liberal means never having to say you are wrong or you are sorry. The neat thing is this sorry group is more often than not wrong.

What is occuring though is again those of us idiots who live in the midwest (flyover country) and voted for Bush, and go to church (mindless lot that we are), live within our means, understand personal responsibility, are the ones who again will be paying the freight for those "visionaries" who inhabit the coasts. You know us types, driving 10 year old gas guzzling pickups instead of Lexus or Mercedes because they are paid for, who live in average homes instead of mansions, people who buy their clothes as sears and not sak's, the kind of people who's handshake means more than some lawyers contract. The type of people who understand what a dollar is. Moral types. (This should trigger some interesting responses - MORAL) Meanwhile those on the edges are spending more money than they could ever attain or every hope to pay off. I call this pretend capitalism. In pretend capitalism, there are no consequences, there is always someone to blame, and a dollar is just a word. That is not to say we don't have a number of these types in the Midwest, we just know who they are in short order and they are not lionized but ignored. They frequently show up in an area for about 5 years then disappear. Probably ending up on the coasts.

POINTER PREDICTION: We will all be forking out cash for those poor decieved souls who signed contracts without reading them, (decieved by big banking) because if we don't they will be living in the streets or abandoned cars without our help! Oh yea, and they won't have healthcare. The support will be generated by the ol' "it will benefit all of us in the long run BS." Puke.

Perhaps what Sowell is saying applies in your area, but where I live it just isn't the case. As a nationally syndicated writer he should be more clear in his choice of words and frame of reference. U got 2 enderstand, weez jist aint 2 sharp rite heer in da stiks. All the brain power is in San Fransicko and New Yerk. In fact, without some of those zoning regulations we would have been overrun by the Pretend Capitalists. Far too many of their skeletons litter our landscapes the way it is. Zoning and land use planning should not be economic development, it should be the buffer between the necessary and the expedient.

 

[treedancer]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Quote OldMercsrule


Let's say the central city has loads of open space in every direction 360 degrees arround the city. BTW: Liberal bright blue havens like Seattle n' San Fransico n' New York City already have many natural geographical limitations that makes this particular strategy much MUCH easier to execute fer the Libs.Ya get the dim wits to ellect ya by promissin' to RAISE TAXES n' save a scarce misquito, cockroach or slug or some such irrational promise, especially if ya can figure out how ta make it "fer the children", (that seems ta turn the dim wits' cranks for whatever unknown reason the dim wits' cranks seem ta turn). Maybe an Owl with spots or Eagles nestin', (as they tried to suggest with me at RR island), or fish in a stream, (that prolly will turn yer and my cranks too). BTW, sometimes the Liberal Tyrants in black robes legistate the requirements FROM THE BENCH to protect bugs birds or fish ta get the ball rollin'. Ya know: the ends justify the means: Mr Tree!!! Point is: it does not matter how ya get the "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING" blood curdling scream that scares every Cornservative with a functional brain cell. Ya just need some experts on homosexuality that are snoozin' or activist vicitims that are plentifull here in God's country ta lead the charge, the sheeple will generally follow.
Ya need some of PW2's smoke ta understand the merrits of these arguments, n' I don't have any, so I: with only a single functioning brain cell, don't get it!! BTW: RR island has no eagle nests, (at least for the last 51 years give or take my family has owned the place). Once ya force say a 20 acre minimum lot size or so per residence, or make each lot build a freeway off ramp to serve each new home built, (or similar restrictions), the potential density arround the city is forever changed until ya flush the terlet of the Pols n' bureaurocrats runnin' the particular city in question. BTW, the chance of doin' that, (as PW2 also suggests), is not so good. My Brother in AK luvs ta say: "there's a band in Boise called: FAT CHANCE, n' they have a hit single called: NO F*****G WAY!!!"

Once ya have sufficient concentration of dopes n' dim wits in the central city, ya restrict traffic by placin' barriers in most the intersections, and refuse to expand existing roads. Ya hope the dim wits sell their cars n' ride bikes or busses or the nearly worthless LIGHT RAIL ya talked em into spendin Billions fer, but they like 'em soooooo much, (even the Lib dim wits), ya get lots' o traffic to complain about n' raise taxes to solve the problem ya intentionally created in the first place. N' if yer real skilled n' have some like minded buds in the MSM n' local VERY LIBERAL media, ya can blame the traffic or maybe a bridge that fails 'cause ya took the taxes ta build a new staduim r' somethin' kool, (or put the $ in yer freezer if ya live in New Orleans), instead of fixin' the transportation mess on YOU GUESSED IT: ol' George Bush!! Remember KATRINA? Great stuff eh: Mr. Tree?

Hope that helps ya understand how the Libs got corntrol n' runs things here in Seattle anyhoo! Now that always leads to that inevitable ol' nagin' question: Is Liberalism a mental disorder? I report: you decide! Respectfully, JR
__________________
A proud n' rare Independent Cornservative from the Seattle Metro area, who runs the finest old black boat anchors money can buy! .

?
OK, I think I have peeled the ole onion back enough to make it understandable. You’re contending that Seattle elects Democrats/Liberals so they can raise taxes.

As part of there platform they say say that if elected, we will raise your taxes, because we have found a misquito, cockroach or slug, that we want to save from extinction? Comon now JR, surely with all if the brainpower in Seattle, they wouldn’t elect someone with a platform like that? Your pulling old Trees leg aren’t you?

or some such irrational promise, especiquote ally if ya can figure out how ta make it​

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Quote OldMercsrule


Let's say the central city has loads of open space in every direction 360 degrees arround the city. BTW: Liberal bright blue havens like Seattle n' San Fransico n' New York City already have many natural geographical limitations that makes this particular strategy much MUCH easier to execute fer the Libs.Ya get the dim wits to ellect ya by promissin' to RAISE TAXES n' save a scarce misquito, cockroach or slug or some such irrational promise, especially if ya can figure out how ta make it "fer the children", (that seems ta turn the dim wits' cranks for whatever unknown reason the dim wits' cranks seem ta turn). Maybe an Owl with spots or Eagles nestin', (as they tried to suggest with me at RR island), or fish in a stream, (that prolly will turn yer and my cranks too). BTW, sometimes the Liberal Tyrants in black robes legistate the requirements FROM THE BENCH to protect bugs birds or fish ta get the ball rollin'. Ya know: the ends justify the means: Mr Tree!!! Point is: it does not matter how ya get the "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING" blood curdling scream that scares every Cornservative with a functional brain cell. Ya just need some experts on homosexuality that are snoozin' or activist vicitims that are plentifull here in God's country ta lead the charge, the sheeple will generally follow.
Ya need some of PW2's smoke ta understand the merrits of these arguments, n' I don't have any, so I: with only a single functioning brain cell, don't get it!! BTW: RR island has no eagle nests, (at least for the last 51 years give or take my family has owned the place). Once ya force say a 20 acre minimum lot size or so per residence, or make each lot build a freeway off ramp to serve each new home built, (or similar restrictions), the potential density arround the city is forever changed until ya flush the terlet of the Pols n' bureaurocrats runnin' the particular city in question. BTW, the chance of doin' that, (as PW2 also suggests), is not so good. My Brother in AK luvs ta say: "there's a band in Boise called: FAT CHANCE, n' they have a hit single called: NO F*****G WAY!!!"

Once ya have sufficient concentration of dopes n' dim wits in the central city, ya restrict traffic by placin' barriers in most the intersections, and refuse to expand existing roads. Ya hope the dim wits sell their cars n' ride bikes or busses or the nearly worthless LIGHT RAIL ya talked em into spendin Billions fer, but they like 'em soooooo much, (even the Lib dim wits), ya get lots' o traffic to complain about n' raise taxes to solve the problem ya intentionally created in the first place. N' if yer real skilled n' have some like minded buds in the MSM n' local VERY LIBERAL media, ya can blame the traffic or maybe a bridge that fails 'cause ya took the taxes ta build a new staduim r' somethin' kool, (or put the $ in yer freezer if ya live in New Orleans), instead of fixin' the transportation mess on YOU GUESSED IT: ol' George Bush!! Remember KATRINA? Great stuff eh: Mr. Tree?

Hope that helps ya understand how the Libs got corntrol n' runs things here in Seattle anyhoo! Now that always leads to that inevitable ol' nagin' question: Is Liberalism a mental disorder? I report: you decide! Respectfully, JR
__________________
A proud n' rare Independent Cornservative from the Seattle Metro area, who runs the finest old black boat anchors money can buy! .

?
OK, I think I have peeled the ole onion back enough to make it understandable. You’re contending that Seattle elects Democrats/Liberals so they can raise taxes.

YES, That was not 'tongue in cheek [no wise cracks from the peanut gallery], (as some of me other carp was).

I know it is surprizing, (especially to someone livin' in the mid West, where most people: Lib n' Cornservative are almost normal), but now that I own a business, I am less carefull runnin' off at the mouth n' spewin' politics then I used to be. (I would never be spewin' here on iboats if I still worked at MEGA BROKERAGE FIRM like I used to.)

I made the mistake of jokin' with a Lib, (did not know she was a Lib before she took me head off), about sales taxes Ol' Joe Stalin had forced me to unlawfully charge some of me customers before we forced 'em to obey state law n' stop it. My food sales are totally sales tax exempt, n 8.9% is a big load ta carry. It was a light hearted attempt to joke with her and she got real mad that I would joke about something as sacred as payin' taxes to the blood suckers in Olympia, even if it is against the law. I WAS SHOCKED. Since that time, I have learned to shut up about that with my predominantly female predominantly Liberal clients. Not as Liberal as in Seattle, (here in Bellevue, WA), but very Liberal compared to most in St Louis. That little slip may have cost me a $200. order, so it was not as bad as loosing a Million dollar investment account, but: what an eye opener, none the less!! I have overheard other dim wits give the same reaction since that time, so from my lil' unscientific corner here in Bellevue: local Libs WANT TO PAY TAXES N' FORCE ALL OF US TOO. The fruits n' berrys livin' here in Gods' Country, (West of the Cascades), would really surprize ya: Mr Tree.

As part of there platform they say say that if elected, we will raise your taxes, because we have found a misquito, cockroach or slug, that we want to save from extinction? Comon now JR, surely with all if the brainpower in Seattle, they wouldn’t elect someone with a platform like that? Your pulling old Trees leg aren’t you?

Yah, I was funnin' on that one, they generally talk about water quality fer fish n' or some such, n' package the tax n' OPPRESSIVE increase in government in a more subtle way, that may even get close to trickin' ol' Murky before I carefully check things out. But they really do some real outrageous things here. The Seattle dim wits actually voted to build a 'mono rail' that was totally upside down, never even close to bein' feasable, n' I think they spent a bunch of the money to study it and cornclude that it was not possible which was obvious in BLACK n' WHITE before the vote EVER happened. They are generally very good in packaging tax increases here Mr. Tree. They wrap it in a bunch of fuzz n' the dim wits go fer it. The "growth management laws" they passed are really very VERY bad in most respects, and forced prices of existing homes way up in price, IMHO. When the next stupid deal comes along I'll cite an example that you will get a good laugh out of. I was using what I thought humorous examples to make the hypothetical point you bated me to make: Mr. Tree. Respectfully, JR

or some such irrational promise, especiquote ally if ya can figure out how ta make it​

123

 

[Plainsman]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

quote haut:
"...More bike trails & redoing the King County logo to appease a fractional minority of the population (at taxpayer expense)is far more important....."

Isn't that the way things are done throughout the nation? I agree it's wrong, but it seems to be the norm anymore. The 10 Commandments, Christmas come to mind as well as the stupid hate crime laws, sanctuary cities and the list goes on.... politicians trying to appease the few instead of the many.

 

[treedancer]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Don?t pay any attention to me JR, I?m a having withdrawal symptom from my pledge to myself and Mike, to not bash our President, nor his administration for the weekend. Feel your pain on some of the environmental issues, seeing as I was put out of work when I came out of the military because of the spotted owl. (Medford)

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

quote haut:
"...More bike trails & redoing the King County logo to appease a fractional minority of the population (at taxpayer expense)is far more important....."

Isn't that the way things are done throughout the nation? I agree it's wrong, but it seems to be the norm anymore. The 10 Commandments, Christmas come to mind as well as the stupid hate crime laws, sanctuary cities and the list goes on.... politicians trying to appease the few instead of the many.

Mainly on the Coasts: Eric, not likely as often in "flyover Country". In this upside down VERY strange town, (Seattle), full of whack jobs n' nair do wells, it prolly is the majority HERE who like that STUPID stuff: Eric. I don't think Bro Haut is actually a Liberal. I think he jus' does what he has too to get peoples' goats here, (very effectively). I bet he did not vote fer the Vet or I would be REAL surprized if he did, (he may not have voted fer Prez in 2004, as he surely does not like President Bush either). JR

 

[PW2]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

For the sake of arguement, I agree. This is more an example of overspeculation, easy money (credit), and if people were restrained by their incomes as is traditionally the case, these spikes would not have occured. With that said I would not be surprised to see government programs to assist those who spent beyond their means. That too would be a mistake. I will note that the spike occured in areas of liberalism, the coasts, SF, LA, NY, Seatle etc. But that is more an observation than an indictment.

Well, Pointer, the telling thing will be where the inevitable government bailout will be targeted.

Will it be to the banks and mortage companies who suffered losses in their zeal to feed speculators?

Or will it be to the borrower who got talked into this?

Time will tell, but I have my guesses!

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: A Couple of Economic articles

Yeah, that's a tough one, PW!.......
Seems someone pumped a few billion dollars out to steady the situation.....​