OT Sold It!!!!!!!!!!!!

From : Annonymousdenny

Q: tbone wrote as for the unemployment figure that is primarily figured on the number of people applying for unemployment insurance wrong! it is primarily computed from labor force surveys. that replaced the unemployment insurance stats long ago for the very reasons you have stated. lets see those gov. sites you claim that state most info is from unemployment insurance stats. lets see these labor force surveys that you are talking about. i asked you who got them and when and as typical for you you didnt answer anything. im done wasting my time here. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

Replies:

From : miles

tbone wrote i said that it does take a more specific desire to want to live there then many other places and that is true. so tell me why phoenix has had one of the highest growth rates in the country per the census.gov site phoenix grew 20.2% from 2000 to 2006. average for the nation was 6.4%. your statement is bogus and clueless! .

From : roy

roy wrote heres a link that is interesting. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6097513/ interesting but the democrats will continue to tell us how bad everything is with their doom and gloom stories. wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. .

From : christopher d thompson

on fri 30 may 2008 085254 -0700 craig c. wrote hey craig havent seen ya post anything in a while. how ya doin man still bustin my butt on school work and family stuff here. -- chris .

From : miles

tbone wrote if the company tanks their stock is worthless or next to it. and your point is a ceo thats paid in stocks has a huge interest in making the company successful and grow. .

From : miles

craig c. wrote on may 31 1036 am miles n...@nopers.com wrote nah just one or two. if the shoe fits! your stereotypical rhetoric above shows just that. oh ouch. you really know how to hurt a guy. btw just how long has it been since youve been laid ya i remember when i had my first beer. bud light .

From : miles

roy wrote if a ceo is making over 500k and his employees are makeing a poverty wage well... and it isnt a handful!! bull. the media mentions a few overpaid ceos and you apply it across the board. total all these 500k+ ceos divided by the # of employees they represent and tell me how much of a dent theyd make if their salary was more in line. .

From : miles

tbone wrote lol just about any of them miles and it is simply just common sense. any of them and yet you cant show one! unemployment is not computed mostly from unemployment claims. .

From : miles

tbone wrote the fact that they dont report much right wing stories actually shows there attempt to reduce bias. huh if they report left wing stories they arent biased huh too funny! at least you just showed your own true bias! .

From : miles

max dodge wrote miles tbone doesnt quote any stats. on the other hand you are correct he discounts any stats he disagrees with no matter the source. he showed the stats to prove how great the economy was in the 90s yet discounted them when they showed a strong economy after 2000. .

From : napalmheart

tbone wrote if the company tanks their stock is worthless or next to it. and your point is a ceo thats paid in stocks has a huge interest in making the company successful and grow. exactly. .

From : roy

roy wrote big snip how about you check out some history. get on the www and check out continental airlines and eastern airlines and especially fred lorenzo. then pay attention to what has happened since with the airline industry. oh watch the end of united play out. .

From : tbone

show me one that claims that they are not used. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving tbone wrote lol just about any of them miles and it is simply just common sense. any of them and yet you cant show one! unemployment is not computed mostly from unemployment claims. .

From : miles

tbone wrote i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. april ended as a comparatively strong month. will have to see if may sustained that. thing is you often discount any stats that go against your belief and quote those that you agree with. .

From : miles

tbone wrote lol it was a housing bubble and the economy was far from booming. lol youre one to talk! you blab all about the great economy of the 90s and ignore the tech bubble that it was. .

From : miles

max dodge wrote if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. it already has improved slightly last time i checked. one of the biggest problems is the rising cost of oil which is always bought in us$s. .

From : miles

tbone wrote please explain how a manufacturer competes with a retailer. lionel owned playworld which competed with toysrus. read up on the lawsuits between the two if you wish to better understand what happened to lionel. lionel won the suits and toysrus was forced to alter its practices but it was too late for lionel. i guess that means that that the global market is really a load of shit that will ultimatly bankrupt the country. thats somewhat true especially if corrupt greedy unions keep it up. how do you justify union bosses earning 10 times what the employees they represent which is why they did not last. no tbone youre clueless. the very same toys are selling well today under the cox brand name. theyre just not entirely american made anymore. then why did they have to sell out because they refused to outsource in order to compete. they tried in vain to keep it 100% american. which is for the most part correct. and there inlies the basis of your own hateful bias. that anyone with wealth got that way through immoral actions rather than hard honest work and abilities. thats what the liberal left teaches you. there are levels of wealth and once you pass a certian point there is no real improvement in lifestyle and after that point it is just greed and nothing more. ya companies should therefor downsize put people out of work rather than to grow and employ more. just so the owners arent greedy. regulating such would crush the very foundation of this country. complete crap. oh geez. regulating wage limits would be good for the country there are countries that do just what you want for the very reasons you list. how are they doing people happy better living guess again. so why do you want whats already been tried and failed i do believe in laws that create fair competition in the market in order to provide equal opportunities for those that seek it. such as what laws against monopolies price fixing patent time limits etc. unfortunately those laws arent enforced very well and on an equal basis. i would probably use the tax system and move to a slightly more protectionist stance on the global economy. we already do use the tax system. the wealthy already pay a very disproportionate % of taxes. you feel they dont. i feel our government already takes far too much from all income levels. the gov. is wasteful ineffective bloated greedy conglomerate. i do not feel the gov. spends money wiser than the private sector. i do agree on tightening our stance in a more protectionist way. we should apply import taxes far more than we do. however i think the american companies such taxes would be used to help should be the recipient of them. im sure you would not agree. you wish to punish corporations so why would you want a more protectionist stance that would allow corporations to grow larger. lol it really depends on what they are selling and of they are making billions even at 1 percent then they hardly need the tax breaks that many of them get. if they earn only 1% profits but make billions then to you thats still too much. name anyone who would invest their money in a company with only 1% returns company isnt going to grow and employ more. margins matter far more than the $s. lol where do you come up with this complete crap if growth increases income why is that a bad thing because if using retained earnings for such growth nets only a 1% gain then its a bad investment and isnt going to happen. if increasing margin means outsourcing then where are all of these new jobs going any way not here. sigh...there are many cases where a company outsourced which allowed it to hire more employees locally. and no most of the jobs outsourced arent the high paid. look at companies who outsourced low paying customer support jobs to india. their manufacturing here grew. you still fail to accept the fact that far more jobs are insourced than outsourced. which is why you and people like you loved the illegals. oh really huh i want the illegals to be sent home. liberals love illegals and are a driving force to granting them amnesty. ya theres some republicans in office that are right there too and i strongly disagree with them. however i know far more republicans against amnesty than democrats. as for politicians that support illegals i think theyre scum no matter what the political side. some where and some were not. saying that they all were is pure bullshit and if that is true then we need to close our borders to most imports as there is no whay that this country can compete. hmmm..youre the one that said companies outsourced purely for greed to increase profits. you now saying most some a few or what i feel most did to survive and compete. once again miles you more than prove my point. it seems that the only incentive that you have that really mea

From : miles

theguy@whatever.net wrote on wed 18 jun 2008 210036 -0700 miles nope@nopers.com wrote tbone wrote cox had an edge and lost it. go back and read the k&n or the torque wrench threads...all of them and many others over the years then get back to me on that. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote cox had an edge and lost it. their sales were fine and still growing today under new owners estes. they were much more than model airplanes etc. lionel folded because they could not compete with toysrus. please explain how a manufacturer competes with a retailer. zebco also could not compete with companies who outsourced. the list of large corporations who refused to join the outsourcing trend and failed is quite large but you ignore them. ya they had bad management because they tried to do what you feel every company should do....pay higher salaries do not outsource and increase benefits except to the higher paid employees. i guess that means that that the global market is really a load of shit that will ultimatly bankrupt the country. i converted one of their cars into a radio control version and had a blast with it and it only had a .049 glow engine. had they developed one themselves with a larger engine and reduced weight they would have made a fortune. in the rc car world the name carries a lot and people do pay more for the name if the name means durability and performance. cox never ever went after the high end top performance market. theyre a toy company and never competed in the high end. which is why they did not last. however your insinuation that they failed because of lack of sales is wrong. their product is still alive and well today sold under the cox brand...but produced by a different company. then why did they have to sell out more bs reasoning. if these companies are doing so many great things why isnt fox talking about it good never sells. you dont read about a house that didnt burn down a murder that didnt happen etc. todays is almost devoid of good . mostly negative because thats what people are glued into. more complete crap. a house that simply didnt burn down is not however a house that was saved from burning down is and is reported. truly positive does get reported. fox doesnt report all of these great things because there is nothing to report. lol once again back to that idiotic on / off reasoning. you have yet to tell me where the line is between wealth and greed. that line is something you yourself have drawn not me. im not the one calling most people who are wealthy as being greedy. that would be yourself. which is for the most part correct. there are levels of wealth and once you pass a certian point there is no real improvement in lifestyle and after that point it is just greed and nothing more. why is that miles how much is too much i do not feel there should be any limit to how much someone can earn. of course not. regulating such would crush the very foundation of this country. complete crap. its based on opportunities that provide incentives to grow. while it starts out that way for some it turns into greed. i do believe in laws that create fair competition in the market in order to provide equal opportunities for those that seek it. such as what the better question would be for you to tell me what regulation or other method do you propose should exist for your perfect world i would probably use the tax system and move to a slightly more protectionist stance on the global economy. i told you that already. no tom you did not. you stated $20/hr would not be enough for your area but would be excessive for some other lower cost of living areas nearby. so how much should minimum wage be for your area there shouldnt be. not every area can or even should support minimum wage incomes. there are nice areas near me that have smaller homes and properties as well as apartments that can provide a safe and reasonably comfortable home to those with lower incomes but not at the pay offered by you and those like you. as i said around $12/hr and if you go to more remote areas the price does go down but so does the income. by definition thats what the gov. in each state declares to be the poverty level. so should minimum pay for an area be just above the poverty level $ amount lol that gubberment definition is pure bullshit. i see. your definition is the one that should count huh lol. ya you know better than the government yet its your liberal democrats who want to impose more government regulation on companies. can you live anywhere in your area for just above that poverty line amount set by the gubberment. if not then as i said it is a pure bullshit definition. lol more spin. i already said that around $12/hr which you deleted near me. my area is lower cost of living that yours yet you feel $10/hr is not enough. guess kids at mcds should earn that $12/hr to start would be nice except doing so wont help their buying power one bit. there is a big difference between kids living at home and working part time and people that have to earn a living

From : Annonymous

on wed 18 jun 2008 210036 -0700 miles nope@nopers.com wrote tbone wrote cox had an edge and lost it. holy jumpin up and down martha. you just dont get it. you and miles are the only ones around here that lost it. their sales were fine and still growing today under new owners estes. they were much more than model airplanes etc. lionel folded because they could not compete with toysrus. zebco also could not compete with companies who outsourced. the list of large corporations who refused to join the outsourcing trend and failed is quite large but you ignore them. ya they had bad management because they tried to do what you feel every company should do....pay higher salaries do not outsource and increase benefits except to the higher paid employees. i converted one of their cars into a radio control version and had a blast with it and it only had a .049 glow engine. had they developed one themselves with a larger engine and reduced weight they would have made a fortune. in the rc car world the name carries a lot and people do pay more for the name if the name means durability and performance. cox never ever went after the high end top performance market. theyre a toy company and never competed in the high end. however your insinuation that they failed because of lack of sales is wrong. their product is still alive and well today sold under the cox brand...but produced by a different company. more bs reasoning. if these companies are doing so many great things why isnt fox talking about it good never sells. you dont read about a house that didnt burn down a murder that didnt happen etc. todays is almost devoid of good . mostly negative because thats what people are glued into. lol once again back to that idiotic on / off reasoning. you have yet to tell me where the line is between wealth and greed. that line is something you yourself have drawn not me. im not the one calling most people who are wealthy as being greedy. that would be yourself. why is that miles how much is too much i do not feel there should be any limit to how much someone can earn. regulating such would crush the very foundation of this country. its based on opportunities that provide incentives to grow. i do believe in laws that create fair competition in the market in order to provide equal opportunities for those that seek it. the better question would be for you to tell me what regulation or other method do you propose should exist for your perfect world i told you that already. no tom you did not. you stated $20/hr would not be enough for your area but would be excessive for some other lower cost of living areas nearby. so how much should minimum wage be for your area by definition thats what the gov. in each state declares to be the poverty level. so should minimum pay for an area be just above the poverty level $ amount lol that gubberment definition is pure bullshit. i see. your definition is the one that should count huh lol. ya you know better than the government yet its your liberal democrats who want to impose more government regulation on companies. lol more spin. i already said that around $12/hr which you deleted near me. my area is lower cost of living that yours yet you feel $10/hr is not enough. guess kids at mcds should earn that $12/hr to start would be nice except doing so wont help their buying power one bit. i dont have one and neither should you. yes you should have because you are the one that insists corporations make too much money even if they only make 1% above...if its in the billions then its too much to you. lol because that is all that really matters. how much more money do they need to make margins dont matter huh with that logic a company has little incentive to grow if it meant declining margins. not a good investment of their retained earnings. damn miles you really are an idiot. who cares what the margin is money is money despite your distorted right wing spin and greed. not so. a corporation is an investment. if the return diminishes then there is lower incentive to invest even more. that means lower growth fewer employees added etc. guess thats all a good thing. that is a lame example. you could simply raise the salary of the bottom two to $12/hr and leave the rest alone unless you are telling me tha the minimum cost of living is $15/hr. the spread between different skill levels needs to be maintained. push the bottom end up and youre gonna push the rest up. just as importing cheap illegal labor will force other salaries down. its economics but you seem to want things more regulated to make it fair. sorry miles but many companies outsourced to increase profits even though they were doing fine here. their profits had been diminishing over the years. ya they wanted to increase them...back to where t

From : miles

tbone wrote cox had an edge and lost it. their sales were fine and still growing today under new owners estes. they were much more than model airplanes etc. lionel folded because they could not compete with toysrus. zebco also could not compete with companies who outsourced. the list of large corporations who refused to join the outsourcing trend and failed is quite large but you ignore them. ya they had bad management because they tried to do what you feel every company should do....pay higher salaries do not outsource and increase benefits except to the higher paid employees. i converted one of their cars into a radio control version and had a blast with it and it only had a .049 glow engine. had they developed one themselves with a larger engine and reduced weight they would have made a fortune. in the rc car world the name carries a lot and people do pay more for the name if the name means durability and performance. cox never ever went after the high end top performance market. theyre a toy company and never competed in the high end. however your insinuation that they failed because of lack of sales is wrong. their product is still alive and well today sold under the cox brand...but produced by a different company. more bs reasoning. if these companies are doing so many great things why isnt fox talking about it good never sells. you dont read about a house that didnt burn down a murder that didnt happen etc. todays is almost devoid of good . mostly negative because thats what people are glued into. lol once again back to that idiotic on / off reasoning. you have yet to tell me where the line is between wealth and greed. that line is something you yourself have drawn not me. im not the one calling most people who are wealthy as being greedy. that would be yourself. why is that miles how much is too much i do not feel there should be any limit to how much someone can earn. regulating such would crush the very foundation of this country. its based on opportunities that provide incentives to grow. i do believe in laws that create fair competition in the market in order to provide equal opportunities for those that seek it. the better question would be for you to tell me what regulation or other method do you propose should exist for your perfect world i told you that already. no tom you did not. you stated $20/hr would not be enough for your area but would be excessive for some other lower cost of living areas nearby. so how much should minimum wage be for your area by definition thats what the gov. in each state declares to be the poverty level. so should minimum pay for an area be just above the poverty level $ amount lol that gubberment definition is pure bullshit. i see. your definition is the one that should count huh lol. ya you know better than the government yet its your liberal democrats who want to impose more government regulation on companies. lol more spin. i already said that around $12/hr which you deleted near me. my area is lower cost of living that yours yet you feel $10/hr is not enough. guess kids at mcds should earn that $12/hr to start would be nice except doing so wont help their buying power one bit. i dont have one and neither should you. yes you should have because you are the one that insists corporations make too much money even if they only make 1% above...if its in the billions then its too much to you. lol because that is all that really matters. how much more money do they need to make margins dont matter huh with that logic a company has little incentive to grow if it meant declining margins. not a good investment of their retained earnings. damn miles you really are an idiot. who cares what the margin is money is money despite your distorted right wing spin and greed. not so. a corporation is an investment. if the return diminishes then there is lower incentive to invest even more. that means lower growth fewer employees added etc. guess thats all a good thing. that is a lame example. you could simply raise the salary of the bottom two to $12/hr and leave the rest alone unless you are telling me tha the minimum cost of living is $15/hr. the spread between different skill levels needs to be maintained. push the bottom end up and youre gonna push the rest up. just as importing cheap illegal labor will force other salaries down. its economics but you seem to want things more regulated to make it fair. sorry miles but many companies outsourced to increase profits even though they were doing fine here. their profits had been diminishing over the years. ya they wanted to increase them...back to where they were years ago. and no many were not doing fine here. they posted year after year of losses. once again miles you more than prove my point. it seems that the only incentive t

From : tbone

tbone wrote lol of course it does miles. you are the one that made the claim that all businesses hire the ceos and every other employee for the lowest possible cost and while you do that for everyone else you dont do it for your ceo which happens to be you which more than proves my point as you are not alone. huh most ceos of major corporations remember you said youre not talking about small businesses do not own the company. the board of directors hires the ceo and fires them. if its all part of the good ol boys club like your rhetoric states then they wouldnt fire them except in extreme cases. yet they come and go just like football coaches. theres no loyalty from some club. as they say miles there is no honor among thieves. funny though how they can be fired from one company and in a short period of time be rehired by a different one. then lets not foregt the golden parachute that many of these ceos get. do you offer that to your other employees when they screw up please give me a list of all of these ceos that have been fired. youre belief is that the majority of corporations are greed corrupt cheat lie swindle etc. which is more than true at least for the bigger ones. bull. a select few that make the headlines that you buy into every time are not how most became successful. a select few that are really bad make the headlines miles but they are not the only ones and even there it depends on what headlines you are looking at. look at how many companies ms destroyed to get where they are now and how many times they were sued for it. yea real honest there. how about intel gm at&t and these are just off the top. sorry miles but this low life crap is sadly just human nature and humans are running these companies. i could sit here all day listing the crap that most of the major companies have done that would be based on what has hit the media or do you have inside info on 100s of corporations. you listen to a few headlines and extrapolate to the industry at large. typical! i have worked for many large and small companies miles and they all do it and the bigger they get the worse it gets. sure many justify doing it just like you do but that still doesnt change what it is. and that is just the surface what we know about. you do not know diddly about 99.99% of the large corporations as they never have hit the . you totally ignore what happened to lionel or cox. why maybe they are the ones that set the trend for most corporations. lol give me a break miles. they failed because they didnt follow the market. they could have went anywhere and it would have made no difference at all. cox had an edge and lost it. there models fell behind in tech and performance and they should have shifted their product lines. they had little glow powered cars when i was a kid and could have developed that line into what is avaliable today and would have been years ahead of anyone else and made a name for themselves. i converted one of their cars into a radio control version and had a blast with it and it only had a .049 glow engine. had they developed one themselves with a larger engine and reduced weight they would have made a fortune. in the rc car world the name carries a lot and people do pay more for the name if the name means durability and performance. only the major screwings get reported. do you hear about every murder in the country i guess that by your logic only a few people are killed a week here in the us. how many stories do you read about someone that did good or isnt a victim your liberal ideology seems to favor looking for victims and ignore the opposite. you dont read about corporations unless they did something bad. with your logic everyone must be a murderer. more bs reasoning. if these companies are doing so many great things why isnt fox talking about it i am not saying that all companies are evil but they are all far from completely honest. as you said they exist to make money and by what ever means. i guess that depends on your definition of immoral. i would say that most got that way by taking from others and then justifying what they do pretty much like you do. thats only because you cant comprehend how anyone can be wealthy and not be a crook cheat corrupt etc. guess in your perfect world nobody would be wealthy. lol once again back to that idiotic on / off reasoning. you have yet to tell me where the line is between wealth and greed. why is that miles how much is too much that really depends on what area of the country and state where the person lives. once again pay should be based on need for the area and not skills knowledge abilities experience etc. in your world. once again you see only what you want to see. pay needs to be based on both. you refuse to state how much and entry level zero skill job should pay for a ty

From : miles

tbone wrote lol of course it does miles. you are the one that made the claim that all businesses hire the ceos and every other employee for the lowest possible cost and while you do that for everyone else you dont do it for your ceo which happens to be you which more than proves my point as you are not alone. huh most ceos of major corporations remember you said youre not talking about small businesses do not own the company. the board of directors hires the ceo and fires them. if its all part of the good ol boys club like your rhetoric states then they wouldnt fire them except in extreme cases. yet they come and go just like football coaches. theres no loyalty from some club. youre belief is that the majority of corporations are greed corrupt cheat lie swindle etc. which is more than true at least for the bigger ones. bull. a select few that make the headlines that you buy into every time are not how most became successful. i could sit here all day listing the crap that most of the major companies have done that would be based on what has hit the media or do you have inside info on 100s of corporations. you listen to a few headlines and extrapolate to the industry at large. typical! and that is just the surface what we know about. you do not know diddly about 99.99% of the large corporations as they never have hit the . you totally ignore what happened to lionel or cox. why maybe they are the ones that set the trend for most corporations. only the major screwings get reported. do you hear about every murder in the country i guess that by your logic only a few people are killed a week here in the us. how many stories do you read about someone that did good or isnt a victim your liberal ideology seems to favor looking for victims and ignore the opposite. you dont read about corporations unless they did something bad. with your logic everyone must be a murderer. i guess that depends on your definition of immoral. i would say that most got that way by taking from others and then justifying what they do pretty much like you do. thats only because you cant comprehend how anyone can be wealthy and not be a crook cheat corrupt etc. guess in your perfect world nobody would be wealthy. that really depends on what area of the country and state where the person lives. once again pay should be based on need for the area and not skills knowledge abilities experience etc. in your world. you refuse to state how much and entry level zero skill job should pay for a typical city not ny sf or some of the opposite end of the spectrum cities. how much should such a job pay in your area no miles i believe that it should be based on both. the minimum pay for a permanent full time job should be based on the minimum cost of living for the area where the job is located by definition thats what the gov. in each state declares to be the poverty level. so should minimum pay for an area be just above the poverty level $ amount if you cannot make enough to survive what exactly is the point of working at all. to learn and work your way up instead of seeking handouts and unwarranted above market value salaries. you should be paid what youre worth for your abilities. not enough then improve your abilities. what your logic will do is this. if a company has to pay an entry level no skills position $20/hr then guess what say goodbye to the entry level no experience required position. the job will go to a more skilled person and they will have more responsibilities. people looking to get started in the work force will be out of luck finding a job. it would be easier to just collect from the government and live better doing it. it looks more like people like you are the ones responsible for the mess with the welfare system. thats because of the liberal messed up welfare system that oppresses rather than actually help people not be so dependent. raising minimum wages will never get people off welfare. it never has never will. your not going to live in my area on minimum wage even at $20/hr but in cost of living in phoenix is probably lower than most of the eastern coast. but you failed to tell me what the minimum wage for your area should be. sounds like you feel it should be more than $20/hr. fine how much more is it that hard for you to answer rather than just tell me what is not enough how much tom give a number please. that all depends. if the businesses made up for the increased labor costs by cutting costs in other areas then to a degree yes. then their profit margin should go down right i asked you already what you felt a reasonable margin should be for a corporation. currently the average is about 7-8%. 20-30 years ago it was 15-25%. the ceos salary is peanuts compared to that difference. tech bubble when more money is in the market the oppertunity for everyone

From : tbone

tbone wrote wrong. my argument is fully backed by what you do yourself. it makes no difference what i do. lol of course it does miles. you are the one that made the claim that all businesses hire the ceos and every other employee for the lowest possible cost and while you do that for everyone else you dont do it for your ceo which happens to be you which more than proves my point as you are not alone. youre belief is that the majority of corporations are greed corrupt cheat lie swindle etc. which is more than true at least for the bigger ones. i could sit here all day listing the crap that most of the major companies have done and that is just the surface what we know about. only the major screwings get reported. do you hear about every murder in the country i guess that by your logic only a few people are killed a week here in the us. your belief is that most that are wealthy got that way in immoral ways. i guess that depends on your definition of immoral. i would say that most got that way by taking from others and then justifying what they do pretty much like you do. apparently you feel minimum wage for an unskilled entry level job should be far above $10/hr. that really depends on what area of the country and state where the person lives. hahahahaha more justifications and complete bullshit. you keep falling back to what people want while im talking about what they need. you feel pay should be based on needs rather than abilities. no miles i believe that it should be based on both. the minimum pay for a permanent full time job should be based on the minimum cost of living for the area where the job is located and then possibly elevated due to skills and experience. if you cannot make enough to survive what exactly is the point of working at all. it would be easier to just collect from the government and live better doing it. it looks more like people like you are the ones responsible for the mess with the welfare system. problem with people working up to what they want but if you pay them less than what they need how can they work for you or if forced to why would they care so minimum wage should be what $20/hr how much tom for your area your not going to live in my area on minimum wage even at $20/hr but in areas near me a single person could get by making around 25k which is around $12.00 per hour and as i said this is just getting by. in a city like phoenix i would say that it requires more than that. what would happen economically if the minimum wage were set so high ya you think everyone would have what they need and be all grand. that all depends. if the businesses made up for the increased labor costs by cutting costs in other areas then to a degree yes. as seen from the tech bubble when more money is in the market the oppertunity for everyone increases but sadly they will simply raise prices. sadly greed kills even capatatilism. in every area there is a minimum cost of living and if you dont meet that then you are just scum. work your way up tom earn what you want and need. i did. why do you and your ilk have such trouble doing so miles you really dont know wtf you are talking about. you really have no idea how much money i have but it is fun watching you assume it. corporations are not full of excessive amounts of piles of money. really then where did nike come up with that 40 million dollars it gave to tiger woods for advertising how much money is exxon making each quarter now and btw afaik they still have not paid their full dept for the valdeez disaster. yea no greed money or corruption there. their profit margins today are well under 10%. lol back to the fuzzy math again. 10% of 1 billion is still 100 million and this is profit not total income. even if you pay the ceos zero its not enough to effect that margin and make even a dent. that is a lame justification for greed. those millions could be used to boost the salaries of those on the bottom that are not making enough to live and no miles they are not just handouts. besides most ceos do not make absurd salaries. only a handful in the country that make the headline . you feel you know otherwise. really lets see you back this complete bullshit up. just because you only hear about a few doesnt mean that only a few make that much. are you really this stupid how much does the head of gm make how much does the head of lowes make how about dow itell micro$oft... now ill use your argument against you. iirc you have about 150 people working for you and if that is true how much real impact would it be to raise the bottom one or two up 5k that would mean id also move the next 2 or 3 up and then the next 2 or 3 after that. why moving the bottom will move everyone up as well. why would not be able to compete but you cant comprehend that. its all so easy an

From : miles

tbone wrote wrong. my argument is fully backed by what you do yourself. it makes no difference what i do. youre belief is that the majority of corporations are greed corrupt cheat lie swindle etc. your belief is that most that are wealthy got that way in immoral ways. apparently you feel minimum wage for an unskilled entry level job should be far above $10/hr. hahahahaha more justifications and complete bullshit. you keep falling back to what people want while im talking about what they need. you feel pay should be based on needs rather than abilities. there is a social system that believes the same way. must be a wonderful place to live. is it problem with people working up to what they want but if you pay them less than what they need how can they work for you or if forced to why would they care so minimum wage should be what $20/hr how much tom for your area what would happen economically if the minimum wage were set so high ya you think everyone would have what they need and be all grand. in every area there is a minimum cost of living and if you dont meet that then you are just scum. work your way up tom earn what you want and need. i did. why do you and your ilk have such trouble doing so corporations are not full of excessive amounts of piles of money. their profit margins today

From : tbone

tbone wrote once again you resort to that idiotic all or nothing reasoning of yours which shows that you really have no valid argument. um...your argument is devoid of validity and full of pure biased opinionated poor views of the majority of corporations. wrong. my argument is fully backed by what you do yourself. theirs. if you dont pay them enough to survive why should they give a shit about the job or the company. because unlike you there are people who take pride and know the way to get what they want is to work hard and earn it and move their way up. they dont just demand it by saying they need it. hahahahaha more justifications and complete bullshit. you keep falling back to what people want while im talking about what they need. i have no problem with people working up to what they want but if you pay them less than what they need how can they work for you or if forced to why would they care in every area there is a minimum cost of living and if you dont meet that then you are just scum. surviving and living the good life and with what you are willing to pay they can do neither. you keep complaining about how you had to live the poor life. funny how you have no problem forcing it on others. where does all this money come from to pay everyone way above the average for a particular position you already said i wasnt making too much. raise prices and be unable to compete outsource move to china and close down our labor force now ill use your argument against you. iirc you have about 150 people working for you and if that is true how much real impact would it be to raise the bottom one or two up 5k as for you making too much as a ratio between your salary and that of those that work for you on the upper level i personally dont see that as excessive but if you are saying that your company doesnt make enough to pay your bottom wrung employees a living wage then you are taking the food out of their mouths to afford your lifestyle. tell me tbone in a typical corporation what is a fair profit margin 5% 10% 30% tell me what you think a fair margin is. i guess the real question miles is how many people your employees you are willing to screw to maintain those margins sure you can miles but you dont offer it to anyone else quite a bit of $s are dumped into 401ks profit sharing and other benefits. then why dont you take advantage of those benefits or do you also take advantage of those as well however no matter what that amount is it will not be enough to you for the simple fact the owner of a corporation may make more and you feel everyone else deserves just as much without the same effort. lol more spin and lame justifications. where do you put the limit on the payback for your initial investment i guess that there is none for you. i never said that everyone should make the same amount as you but all full timers should at least earn a living wage with the oppertunity to work there way up to the better things. to you it must be that everyone who is wealthy got that way through corruption lies cheating or they inherited it. for the most part this is correct but you forgot greed and the lottery - sorry miles but i really dont believe a word of it. you claim that you risked your home and worked in the poor farm for years but if you were so poor how could you afford a home to risk mortages around here have traditionally been far cheaper monthly payments than renting. back then a house was only 25k or so for a 2 bedroom 900sf home. then i guess that there were no rental units in your area because only a fool would rent when they could own for less. you missed the point. all money i had was put into the company. there was no going out no vacations no nice cars no nice meals etc. that meant eating top ramon a lot! i have done that myself miles so you are far from the only one in that boat. i would say that your receptionist has to live that way now with no future due to the salary that you and those like you pay for those positions. i guess that its ok for you to take the food out of their mouth to go buy that new diesel for yourself after all 20+ years ago you took some risks. any way that you want to spin it miles you get the extras because you are in charge and you set the rules and the same goes for corporate ceos and the board of directors. and to you thats a bad thing. someone who works hard for years risking everything they have deserves no more than someone who does not....to you. in your world everyone deserves the same thing with as little of spread between them as possible. thats not what i said miles and you know that but please tell me how that equates to some ceo that was hired off of the street to work at an existing and established company that gets these same benefits. where is the hard work and sacrifice that they did i also guess that

From : miles

tbone wrote once again you resort to that idiotic all or nothing reasoning of yours which shows that you really have no valid argument. um...your argument is devoid of validity and full of pure biased opinionated poor views of the majority of corporations. theirs. if you dont pay them enough to survive why should they give a shit about the job or the company. because unlike you there are people who take pride and know the way to get what they want is to work hard and earn it and move their way up. they dont just demand it by saying they need it. surviving and living the good life and with what you are willing to pay they can do neither. you keep complaining about how you had to live the poor life. funny how you have no problem forcing it on others. where does all this money come from to pay everyone way above the average for a particular position you already said i wasnt making too much. raise prices and be unable to compete outsource move to china and close down our labor force good job! tell me tbone in a typical corporation what is a fair profit margin 5% 10% 30% tell me what you think a fair margin is. sure you can miles but you dont offer it to anyone else quite a bit of $s are dumped into 401ks profit sharing and other benefits. however no matter what that amount is it will not be enough to you for the simple fact the owner of a corporation may make more and you feel everyone else deserves just as much without the same effort. to you it must be that everyone who is wealthy got that way through corruption lies cheating or they inherited it. sorry miles but i really dont believe a word of it. you claim that you risked your home and worked in the poor farm for years but if you were so poor how could you afford a home to risk mortages around here have traditionally been far cheaper monthly payments than renting. back then a house was only 25k or so for a 2 bedroom 900sf home. you missed the point. all money i had was put into the company. there was no going out no vacations no nice cars no nice meals etc. that meant eating top ramon a lot! any way that you want to spin it miles you get the extras because you are in charge and you set the rules and the same goes for corporate ceos and the board of directors. and to you thats a bad thing. someone who works hard for years risking everything they have deserves no more than someone who does not....to you. in your world everyone deserves the same thing with as little of spread between them as possible. lol i didnt say it was easy miles but you are far from the only one to do this. i have worked many a weekend evening and holiday myself as do many in this country and many of them have to do it to survive due to people like you. then why arent you as successful as those you complain about oh ya the only way to be that successful is to be greedy corrupt cheat and lie. never through hard work. the only true point is that the ceos and heads of companies set the rules and will in almost all cases set them up to favor themselves gee someone starts a company to gasp....make money. ya thats horrible. we should pass laws to prevent such capitalism. its evil. .

From : miles

tbone wrote actually they are interested in keeping the stock price up at least until they sell it and sadly in some cases by any means. does enron ring a bell your views of the entire corporate world are based on a few headline stories of a very select number of corporations and ceos. read up on the ones that didnt make headlines because they didnt support the liberal ideology. companies such as lionel whose ceo refused to play the dirty games that its biggest competitor did and lost. or possibly cox whose ceo refused to outsource to china as their competitors did and lost. you pick the corporations that hit the and aid your views and ignore so many companies like lionel and cox. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote if it wasnt so sad it might be but it is true. dont get me wrong the new ceo still needs the right personality type and has to look like they know what they are doing but they are still part of the old boys club and take care of each other as salaries go. well thats a nice opinion through biased beliefs. but you know this how just a belief of yours and nothing more. most ceos are corrupt rich full of lies and just part of the old boys club...in your world. once again you resort to that idiotic all or nothing reasoning of yours which shows that you really have no valid argument. there are degrees of wealth corruption fullness of lies and even being in the good old boys club and not every ceo is maxed out on all of the above but in the big companies you can damn well bet that many of them are a big part of the good old boys club regardless of the amount of wealth and corruption that they may also have. but you do pay your lowest paid employees to little as we discussed before. ya i know. you feel a totally unskilled person hired to answer the phone and spends most of their time reading a book etc. should earn more than $10/hr to start because pay should be based on needs and not skills. lol i am really beginning to doubt that you own anything at all with complete crap like this. that person answering the phone is representing your company. the fact that you underutilize them is your fault not theirs. if you dont pay them enough to survive why should they give a shit about the job or the company. there is a big difference between surviving and living the good life and with what you are willing to pay they can do neither. you keep complaining about how you had to live the poor life. funny how you have no problem forcing it on others. actually miles what you just said here more than proves my point. you justify this as a return on your investment and my question would be where does it end my question would be where does it end for an investment into another company stocks other than my own its not a matter of where it ends it is a matter of the rules and how they apply. when you invest in another company you are bound by the same rules as everyone else on the outside but when it is your company you set the rules and they are always different from the ones you set for those beneath you. your comapny has grown and has long paid back every dime that you have put into it as well as given you a good lifestyle and future security. per your views im not allowed a future security from my own company. sure you can miles but you dont offer it to anyone else which again makes my point those in charge set the rules and usually set them in their own benefit over that of others beneath them. at this point all you are investing is time and skill just like everyone else that is currently working for your company so why is it that you get these extra dividends and the rest do not i risked every penny i had over the years. i risked my home everything i own to build a company from dust up. i worked in the poor farm for decades dumping everything earned back into the company and working nights weekends holidays etc. i gave up more than you seem to realize for far longer than you comprehend most business owners do. now if it is so easy and not worth much then feel free to start your own company as well as anyone else. go right on ahead. nah you wont. you feel youre owed the same without doing so. sorry miles but i really dont believe a word of it. you claim that you risked your home and worked in the poor farm for years but if you were so poor how could you afford a home to risk you also claimed that you walked away from a home because you no longer liked the rates so in reality how important or even a risk was your home anyway not to mention the obvious lack of morals you have for doing that to begin with. then you claim how your parents were successful builders with a nice home where they had parties where you met many higher level politicians and such. perhaps compared to the way you lived at your parents you might consider the way you lived while building your company as being in the poor farm but as with most things a persons definition is just relative to what they know. any way that you want to spin it miles you get the extras because you are in charge and you set the rules and the same goes for corporate ceos and the board of directors. i get the extras because i am the one that risked everything. i am the one who worked the long hours in a very poor lifestyle simply because i dumped my entire paycheck back into the company slowly building it from the ground up. ya its easy no big deal...anyone can do it and deserves the benifits without having to do so. good grief. lol i didnt say it was easy miles but you are far from the only one to do this. i have worked many a

From : tbone

tbone wrote if the company tanks their stock is worthless or next to it. and your point is a ceo thats paid in stocks has a huge interest in making the company successful and grow. actually they are interested in keeping the stock price up at least until they sell it and sadly in some cases by any means. does enron ring a bell -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

tbone wrote if it wasnt so sad it might be but it is true. dont get me wrong the new ceo still needs the right personality type and has to look like they know what they are doing but they are still part of the old boys club and take care of each other as salaries go. well thats a nice opinion through biased beliefs. but you know this how just a belief of yours and nothing more. most ceos are corrupt rich full of lies and just part of the old boys club...in your world. but you do pay your lowest paid employees to little as we discussed before. ya i know. you feel a totally unskilled person hired to answer the phone and spends most of their time reading a book etc. should earn more than $10/hr to start because pay should be based on needs and not skills. actually miles what you just said here more than proves my point. you justify this as a return on your investment and my question would be where does it end my question would be where does it end for an investment into another company stocks other than my own your comapny has grown and has long paid back every dime that you have put into it as well as given you a good lifestyle and future security. per your views im not allowed a future security from my own company. at this point all you are investing is time and skill just like everyone else that is currently working for your company so why is it that you get these extra dividends and the rest do not i risked every penny i had over the years. i risked my home everything i own to build a company from dust up. i worked in the poor farm for decades dumping everything earned back into the company and working nights weekends holidays etc. i gave up more than you seem to realize for far longer than you comprehend most business owners do. now if it is so easy and not worth much then feel free to start your own company as well as anyone else. go right on ahead. nah you wont. you feel youre owed the same without doing so. any way that you want to spin it miles you get the extras because you are in charge and you set the rules and the same goes for corporate ceos and the board of directors. i get the extras because i am the one that risked everything. i am the one who worked the long hours in a very poor lifestyle simply because i dumped my entire paycheck back into the company slowly building it from the ground up. ya its easy no big deal...anyone can do it and deserves the benifits without having to do so. good grief. .

From : miles

tbone wrote because the people that run the company set their own salaries as well as the salaries of everyone else. why would they screw themselves huh so what you are saying is that a board of directors is forced to pay whatever price a potential ceo wants and there are no other ceos that will do the job for less. lol least you admit the board cant get someone for less...otherwise they most certainly would. at chrysler its unknown how much he earns. his salary is listed as $1. and he is still ripping them off. do tell us how he is ripping of chrysler since you seem to be in the know. youre guessing based on your political views that all corporations and all ceos are rich filthy corrupt bastards. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote forced!!!! lol i must say miles you do make me laugh. as i said before in many of these cases it is not what a potential ceo knows its who they know that gets them the job and while they may be potential ceos that will do it for less it really doesnt matter as the salary is already determined. oh i see. a board will hire and pay a new ceo way too much because theyre buddies that know each other. thats too funny! if it wasnt so sad it might be but it is true. dont get me wrong the new ceo still needs the right personality type and has to look like they know what they are doing but they are still part of the old boys club and take care of each other as salaries go. as usual you are full of shit. most of the people on these boards are or have been ceos themselves. why would they screw themselves or upcoming family members and frinds that are destined to fill these positions in the future they hire someone to run the company increase profits hold the line in down years etc. seems you feel the ceo is just a title they just hire some buddy pal for the heck of it. lol not at all. come to think of it miles why do you pay yourself what you do you dont even know what i make and youve already decided its too much. political bias at its worst! from what you have posted in the past i would say somewhere in the area of 180k and since you are looking for engineers between 70k and 100k i dont think that you pay yourself too much but you do pay your lowest paid employees to little as we discussed before. i bet i could find someone to do your job for less and i bet that you could as well so your companies always finding the lowest cost employee just doesnt cut it at least as far as the top positions go. you also have said that you intend to take your full salary even after you retire until either you or your company dies. not necessarily. depends on how well the company does. receiving dividends on ones investment is a bad thing oh ya if i took that money and invested it in someone elses company and collected the same amount back that would be ok to you...just not my own company. actually miles what you just said here more than proves my point. you justify this as a return on your investment and my question would be where does it end your comapny has grown and has long paid back every dime that you have put into it as well as given you a good lifestyle and future security. at this point all you are investing is time and skill just like everyone else that is currently working for your company so why is it that you get these extra dividends and the rest do not any way that you want to spin it miles you get the extras because you are in charge and you set the rules and the same goes for corporate ceos and the board of directors. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

tbone wrote forced!!!! lol i must say miles you do make me laugh. as i said before in many of these cases it is not what a potential ceo knows its who they know that gets them the job and while they may be potential ceos that will do it for less it really doesnt matter as the salary is already determined. oh i see. a board will hire and pay a new ceo way too much because theyre buddies that know each other. thats too funny! as usual you are full of shit. most of the people on these boards are or have been ceos themselves. why would they screw themselves or upcoming family members and frinds that are destined to fill these positions in the future they hire someone to run the company increase profits hold the line in down years etc. seems you feel the ceo is just a title they just hire some buddy pal for the heck of it. come to think of it miles why do you pay yourself what you do you dont even know what i make and youve already decided its too much. political bias at its worst! you also have said that you intend to take your full salary even after you retire until either you or your company dies. not necessarily. depends on how well the company does. receiving dividends on ones investment is a bad thing oh ya if i took that money and invested it in someone elses company and collected the same amount back that would be ok to you...just not my own company. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote because the people that run the company set their own salaries as well as the salaries of everyone else. why would they screw themselves huh so what you are saying is that a board of directors is forced to pay whatever price a potential ceo wants and there are no other ceos that will do the job for less. forced!!!! lol i must say miles you do make me laugh. as i said before in many of these cases it is not what a potential ceo knows its who they know that gets them the job and while they may be potential ceos that will do it for less it really doesnt matter as the salary is already determined. lol least you admit the board cant get someone for less...otherwise they most certainly would. as usual you are full of shit. most of the people on these boards are or have been ceos themselves. why would they screw themselves or upcoming family members and frinds that are destined to fill these positions in the future come to think of it miles why do you pay yourself what you do you also have said that you intend to take your full salary even after you retire until either you or your company dies. that could cost your company millions and im sure that you could find someone to do your job as well as you do it and for far less $$$$. if what you say is true you should fire yourself and hire someone for less but you have yet to do it. at chrysler its unknown how much he earns. his salary is listed as $1. and he is still ripping them off. do tell us how he is ripping of chrysler since you seem to be in the know. youre guessing based on your political views that all corporations and all ceos are rich filthy corrupt bastards. yawn why does everything have to be political with you any way you want to spin it he sucks as a ceo. he destroyed the moral at hd and really did nothing for them at all. he simply got in at the right time where hd would grow with anyone at the helm and when the conditions changed the company did poorly. he didnt deserve the money he made then and doesnt dererve the position he has now but since he has the right friends and is willing to screw anyone to make the bucks.... -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

craig c. wrote once again ... i disagree with the world according to miles and im labeled a liberal democrat. take the blinders off boy. youre not labeled as anything. youre ranting about me being the republican or conservative or bush poster boy with disregard. that is exactly the echos of the rhetoric of the liberal left democrat. just go with the flow. if the shoe fits! conservative compared to what/whom ron paul none. john mccain many. you asked if i would vote for a conservative democrat and i asked you to please tell me which candidate is conservative. there are none. there were conservative republicans running. mccain is all thats left and he is not a conservative. theres the difference. i wont vote for any of them. ill write in a name before i vote for any of these candidates. thats saying you do not care who wins. i will vote for the one that agrees with more of my views than the other. vote for opposing partys in congress and the white house. that i agree with. i feel things work better when the wh and congress are not the same party. thinning forests although important are merely childs play in regards to the current environmental nightmares that plague us. its just one example and its not childs play. forest fires have wrecked havoc on the environment on a very large scale. you must be only talking about air quality. i am all for taking steps to curb pollution lower car emissions etc. however i believe that can only happen through public demand rather than legislation. it costs money and the only ones to fund it is the public. high gas prices drive high demand for more efficient vehicles. thats a start. once again thanks to mr. bushs easing of water quality regulations. on clintons last day in office he deliberately signed a bill to lower arsenic levels full aware it could not be achieved and would make the reps look bad to over turn it as they did. if it was so important to clinton to lower the levels then do tell me why he waited 8 years to the very last day in office concerned with water or a political move had money been put into r/d 7 years ago like some dems tried to push wed be much further ahead. public demand is the only way to get us to newer better technologies. making a fuel efficient car nobody wants does nothing. the only reason its now becoming successful is because of public demand not legislation. more companies are willing to put the money into r/d in amounts that dwarf anything that can be given by tax $ benefits. but no ... mr. crude oil bush felt that funding for alternative energy was a waste of tax payer dollars. you and i argued about this 3-4 years ago miles. you totally defended bush cutting funding of alternative fuels. not so. bush did not veto any alternative fuel bill 3 or 4 years ago. so tell me what bush cut there were some bills that failed in congress. while i was for the alternative fuel r/d part of the bills they were loaded down with unrelated pork and is why they failed. it is the dems that load them down and wonder why they fail. education bills also failed for the same reason. loaded with pork totally unrelated. the public cries foul because they see the title of the bill and not where the money goes how its spent and who controls that spending. you know how a third party candidate gains interest men of good conscience take a stand. not any more. it takes millions to win the wh. its all about power these days. .

From : napalmheart

on jun 7 931 pm miles n...@nopers.com wrote do just that and youll find i havent liked bush jr. for years and didnt care for sr. much as well. yet ... you voted for them and have defended them the their various policies time and again right here in this forum. the problem you have is that anyone not agreeing with you must be a bush lover and republican party die hard. quite the opposite milo. i applaud anyone that has the capacity to open their mind and reason. blindly voting republican or democrat flies in the face of 1 what i stand for and 2 what a responsible american should do. in reality im a conservative and proud of it. really and how many times have you voted for the truly conservative candidate regardless of party i.e. ... in the current republican/democrat primaries which candidate did you favor frankly miles im too conservative to vote republican. in fact the presidential candidate that supposedly represents conservative-ism is from your state. undoubtedly youll vote for him and *if* he gets elected youll bitch and complain for the next four years that you dont like him just like you have with bush. the current republican party is anything but conservative. well at least we agree on that. but the dems/liberals seem to be even worse look at what the current dem empowered congress has done. bad = bad. screwed = screwed. either party is going to harm this country. if so how then do you explain that conserving ie. taking care of caring for the environment is a left issue lol youre attempting to define political conservatism your own way and doing a poor job of it. nah ... youre just close minded. i believe in conservation ... at every level and on every subject. with regards to the environment most people from all parties want basically the same thing. we all want less smog for instance. the difference lies in how to achieve it and balance it with the costs and needs of the public. this is where you are dead fucking wrong. republicans havent wanted to do *anything*. they only started coming around when they saw that their energy policy had finally failed. the lack of desire or smarts to get us off of crude have made the current situation worse than it would have been if republicans had only listened to *some* democrats on funding r/d on alternative fuels. instead the republican agenda was to drill for more crude. not to mention republicans have always fought against limiting smog. bush for example has eased the requirements more than once in his 7 years. reagan was handed double digit inflation unemployment and interest rates. and it doesnt help that he overspent on defense now does it miles come on admit it reagan was far from truly conservative too. damn near impossible to overspend on defense. one of the main duties of the federal government. handed to him from a democrat. you just have to get your lame left slams in. im not defending democrats so continually making your stupid comments makes you look well stupid. the other two are anything but conservative and i have said that consistently all along. yet ... you voted for them. youre a victim of a two party system. you do realize that you dont have to choose between only two dont you largely we are all victims of the two party system. im far more of a libertarian than i am a republican but voting democratic would take us even farther away from what i would like to see happen. in a close election voting for a third party hands the election to the side that is farther away from my views. having normally republican voters vote for ross perot handed clinton the presidency with less than 50% of the vote. of course the democrats only scream about that when they dont win. thank god for the electoral college. it makes rural votes more powerful than urban votes. craig c. .

From : craig c

on jun 8 310 pm miles n...@nopers.com wrote i voted for the lesser of evils. i did not like gore or kerry. sure i defend them on policies i agree with and also have spoken out against them on policies i disagree with. you sure seem to be a typical left wing blogger type with that sort of stereotypical rhetoric! once again ... i disagree with the world according to miles and im labeled a liberal democrat. take the blinders off boy. the most conservative was thompson. although ron paul had his warts i respected his conservative stand on many issues. tell me which democrat candidate was conservative conservative compared to what/whom ron paul none. john mccain many. youll most likely vote for obama and had clinton won then for her over mccain. your point theres the difference. i wont vote for any of them. ill write in a name before i vote for any of these candidates. i refuse to play the lesser of two evils game any longer. if i cant think of a name to write in then my last option is grid-lock. vote for opposing partys in congress and the white house. at least more legislation and bullshit spending will grind to a halt and prevent further damaging an already frail economy. that we can agree on. both parties are a mess and working only for power and division rather than unity. unity would make it worse. just imagine the ass raping wed get if both partys united! bull! as i just pointed out above it has been the republicans that wanted to help the forests here in az. thinning forests although important are merely childs play in regards to the current environmental nightmares that plague us. smog is worse now than ever thanks to mr. bush. lung cancer rates are up. water quality is down. once again thanks to mr. bushs easing of water quality regulations. now miles you can argue with me all day that republicans are environmentally conscience but the facts do not support your position. you profess to value facts so drop the argument. to put it simply republicans are more interested in the extra $$ generated from lax environmental policy. the current president has proved it time and time again. democrats failed miserably. its a republican that wants to have tighter smog controls for cars in california and its the dems that shot it down. i dont doubt that there are a *few* good republicans true conservatives. there are also a few good democrats. however its less about their party ideals and more about their personal values. thats why voting for or against a candidate based solely on party affiliation is my biggest issue with you. thats something we badly need and the dems have done everything for decades to stop it and its cost us. had money been put into r/d 7 years ago like some dems tried to push wed be much further ahead. but no ... mr. crude oil bush felt that funding for alternative energy was a waste of tax payer dollars. you and i argued about this 3-4 years ago miles. you totally defended bush cutting funding of alternative fuels. how ya feelin about your argument now you just have to get your lame left slams in. im not defending democrats bull. you keep on bashing republicans and ignore what the dems have done. how biased and convenient of you. this is not a discussion about democrats. its about your innate need to defend a party that has failed you and i. if you were defending dems like you are republicans wed be having the same discussion. only youd be accusing me of being a right-winger. yep i wish a respectable 3rd party and candidate could gain enough interest to be viable. you know how a third party candidate gains interest men of good conscience take a stand. craig c. .

From : miles

craig c. wrote yet ... you voted for them and have defended them the their various policies time and again right here in this forum. i voted for the lesser of evils. i did not like gore or kerry. sure i defend them on policies i agree with and also have spoken out against them on policies i disagree with. you sure seem to be a typical left wing blogger type with that sort of stereotypical rhetoric! really and how many times have you voted for the truly conservative candidate regardless of party i.e. ... in the current republican/democrat primaries which candidate did you favor the most conservative was thompson. tell me which democrat candidate was conservative whats left now are mccain and obama neither of which are conservative. i dont really favor either. they both disgust me. frankly miles im too conservative to vote republican. in fact the presidential candidate that supposedly represents conservative-ism is from your state. nope. he represents the current republican party which is anything but conservative. undoubtedly youll vote for him and *if* he gets elected youll bitch and complain for the next four years that you dont like him just like you have with bush. youll most likely vote for obama and had clinton won then for her over mccain. your point bad = bad. screwed = screwed. either party is going to harm this country. that we can agree on. both parties are a mess and working only for power and division rather than unity. nah ... youre just close minded. i believe in conservation ... at every level and on every subject. i do as well. im an avid outdoorsman. i love the forests nature etc. the difference is all in how to protect it. the democrats here enforced their do not touch policies for decades on our forests. that led to a massive forest fire that could not be contained cold weather and rain with low winds finally did. because of that destructive fire the republicans got threw legislation to clean up the forests to prevent such fires. its worked. the forests have been thinned of excessive growth the remaining trees are stronger etc. newer fires have spread much slower and the forests look great. same goal different methods. this is where you are dead fucking wrong. republicans havent wanted to do *anything*. bull! as i just pointed out above it has been the republicans that wanted to help the forests here in az. they finally won only after the democrats failed miserably. its a republican that wants to have tighter smog controls for cars in california and its the dems that shot it down. instead the republican agenda was to drill for more crude thats something we badly need and the dems have done everything for decades to stop it and its cost us. not to mention republicans have always fought against limiting smog. bush for example has eased the requirements more than once in his 7 years. such limits need to be balanced with cost to the public and the economy. ignoring the latter is foolish. you just have to get your lame left slams in. im not defending democrats bull. you keep on bashing republicans and ignore what the dems have done. how biased and convenient of you. youre a victim of a two party system. you do realize that you dont have to choose between only two dont you yep i wish a respectable 3rd party and candidate could gain enough interest to be viable. .

From : miles

tbone wrote ulti-billion $ corporation yes it will miles. we are not talking about the multi-billion dollor corp or the multi-million dollar execs here miles we are talking about 30k to 60k employees that will be losing their jobs. you really need to stop with the lame distortions in that size firm youre talking about 1000s of employees. still think your peanuts will do dang thing .

From : craig c

on jun 7 931 pm miles n...@nopers.com wrote do just that and youll find i havent liked bush jr. for years and didnt care for sr. much as well. yet ... you voted for them and have defended them the their various policies time and again right here in this forum. the problem you have is that anyone not agreeing with you must be a bush lover and republican party die hard. quite the opposite milo. i applaud anyone that has the capacity to open their mind and reason. blindly voting republican or democrat flies in the face of 1 what i stand for and 2 what a responsible american should do. in reality im a conservative and proud of it. really and how many times have you voted for the truly conservative candidate regardless of party i.e. ... in the current republican/democrat primaries which candidate did you favor frankly miles im too conservative to vote republican. in fact the presidential candidate that supposedly represents conservative-ism is from your state. undoubtedly youll vote for him and *if* he gets elected youll bitch and complain for the next four years that you dont like him just like you have with bush. the current republican party is anything but conservative. well at least we agree on that. but the dems/liberals seem to be even worse look at what the current dem empowered congress has done. bad = bad. screwed = screwed. either party is going to harm this country. if so how then do you explain that conserving ie. taking care of caring for the environment is a left issue lol youre attempting to define political conservatism your own way and doing a poor job of it. nah ... youre just close minded. i believe in conservation ... at every level and on every subject. with regards to the environment most people from all parties want basically the same thing. we all want less smog for instance. the difference lies in how to achieve it and balance it with the costs and needs of the public. this is where you are dead fucking wrong. republicans havent wanted to do *anything*. they only started coming around when they saw that their energy policy had finally failed. the lack of desire or smarts to get us off of crude have made the current situation worse than it would have been if republicans had only listened to *some* democrats on funding r/d on alternative fuels. instead the republican agenda was to drill for more crude. not to mention republicans have always fought against limiting smog. bush for example has eased the requirements more than once in his 7 years. reagan was handed double digit inflation unemployment and interest rates. and it doesnt help that he overspent on defense now does it miles come on admit it reagan was far from truly conservative too. handed to him from a democrat. you just have to get your lame left slams in. im not defending democrats so continually making your stupid comments makes you look well stupid. the other two are anything but conservative and i have said that consistently all along. yet ... you voted for them. youre a victim of a two party system. you do realize that you dont have to choose between only two dont you craig c. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote yawn more of your right wing bullshit. i dont have a problem with them laying off those workers as i really dont see where they had much of a choice and i really cant blame them for the situation they are now in but the not accepting any further salary for the rest of the year is complete bullshit. ya you would have been happy if they took their salary or maybe gave themselves a raise. no because thats pretty much exactly what they did. what they shoud do is create a buyout fund with that money to make it easier on those that have to leave. they took their salary or gave themselves a raise by not accepting any further salary for the year sounds like the logic is being twisted. thats because you are not looking at the big picture. a high % of their bonus is in the form of stock. now what happened to their stock value when they announced the downsizing and that they would not be taking any further compensation for the rest of the year now before you say it i am aware that they are not taking a bonus this year but what about the past years they still own a lot of stock. if the company tanks their stock is worthless or next to it. and your point is -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

craig c. wrote you stand accused by way of your own words. perhaps you should google your own postings. do just that and youll find i havent liked bush jr. for years and didnt care for sr. much as well. the problem you have is that anyone not agreeing with you must be a bush lover and republican party die hard. in reality im a conservative and proud of it. the current republican party is anything but conservative. but the dems/liberals seem to be even worse look at what the current dem empowered congress has done. if so how then do you explain that conserving ie. taking care of caring for the environment is a left issue lol youre attempting to define political conservatism your own way and doing a poor job of it. with regards to the environment most people from all parties want basically the same thing. we all want less smog for instance. the difference lies in how to achieve it and balance it with the costs and needs of the public. id be happy to discuss it further but you still have not explained to me how you can consider the the last 3 republican presidents conservative reagan was handed double digit inflation unemployment and interest rates. handed to him from a democrat. the other two are anything but conservative and i have said that consistently all along. youre just on the bandwagon and view anyone not agreeing with your views as a bush loving ultra republican. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote sure when it comes to most employees this is exactly what they do but when it comes to the upper brass its a whole new set of rules. tell me miles exactly whos pockets are you talking about oh really not tom!! tell us all why a company would pay 6 million for a person to run the company when someone proven just as capable would do it for 1 million because the people that run the company set their own salaries as well as the salaries of everyone else. why would they screw themselves they turn a company around big time and are then a hot item. oh yea like bob nardelli who screwed hd and now is running chrysler llc. its not what they know its sho they know. hds sales doubled in his first 5 years. profit more than doubled. ya he got into tangles with other top brass but hd did grow. sorry miles but hd grew because of the housing boom. hell a trained monkey could have made it grow under those conditions. the fact is that when the situation eroded hd fell like a rock and is now closing stores while lowes is still opening new ones. at chrysler its unknown how much he earns. his salary is listed as $1. and he is still ripping them off. he must be paid in stocks. possibly but then again he might not be being paid anything which is about what hes worth. the reason he was hired because he is a lot like you and can easily justify screwing anyone. thats a risky endevour since chrysler is a high risk stock to own. its not all that high of a risk or the price wouldnt be where it is. sadly all american auto-builders are at a higher risk and the ceos of all of them should be fired. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote no because thats pretty much exactly what they did. what they shoud do is create a buyout fund with that money to make it easier on those that have to leave. a few million $s is gonna make a difference in buyouts for a multi-billion $ corporation yes it will miles. we are not talking about the multi-billion dollor corp or the multi-million dollar execs here miles we are talking about 30k to 60k employees that will be losing their jobs. you really need to stop with the lame distortions -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : napalmheart

tbone wrote yawn more of your right wing bullshit. i dont have a problem with them laying off those workers as i really dont see where they had much of a choice and i really cant blame them for the situation they are now in but the not accepting any further salary for the rest of the year is complete bullshit. ya you would have been happy if they took their salary or maybe gave themselves a raise. no because thats pretty much exactly what they did. what they shoud do is create a buyout fund with that money to make it easier on those that have to leave. they took their salary or gave themselves a raise by not accepting any further salary for the year sounds like the logic is being twisted. thats because you are not looking at the big picture. a high % of their bonus is in the form of stock. now what happened to their stock value when they announced the downsizing and that they would not be taking any further compensation for the rest of the year now before you say it i am aware that they are not taking a bonus this year but what about the past years they still own a lot of stock. if the company tanks their stock is worthless or next to it. .

From : miles

tbone wrote sure when it comes to most employees this is exactly what they do but when it comes to the upper brass its a whole new set of rules. tell me miles exactly whos pockets are you talking about oh really not tom!! tell us all why a company would pay 6 million for a person to run the company when someone proven just as capable would do it for 1 million they turn a company around big time and are then a hot item. oh yea like bob nardelli who screwed hd and now is running chrysler llc. its not what they know its sho they know. hds sales doubled in his first 5 years. profit more than doubled. ya he got into tangles with other top brass but hd did grow. at chrysler its unknown how much he earns. his salary is listed as $1. he must be paid in stocks. thats a risky endevour since chrysler is a high risk stock to own. .

From : miles

tbone wrote no because thats pretty much exactly what they did. what they shoud do is create a buyout fund with that money to make it easier on those that have to leave. a few million $s is gonna make a difference in buyouts for a multi-billion $ corporation .

From : tbone

tbone wrote of course they wouldnt. stop being a fucking idiot. if a company could get the job done for less $s then they most certainly would take the cheaper route. means more $s in their own pockets. they would not go and hire someone for far more $s just because. are you really this stupid or are you just hoping that the rest of us are sure when it comes to most employees this is exactly what they do but when it comes to the upper brass its a whole new set of rules. tell me miles exactly whos pockets are you talking about more complete crap. sure are not a huge number of them but there always seem to be enough for all of the big companies to have them. companies compete heavily for the very successful ones. look at most top ceos. they change from corporation to corporation every few years. yea usually because they screw the pooch and are fired or they leave before it happens. funny how salary limits seem to be set on all of the other jobs in most companies. you are whining that you are having a hard time finding employees but i dont see you taking the cap of of those salary limits. they turn a company around big time and are then a hot item. oh yea like bob nardelli who screwed hd and now is running chrysler llc. its not what they know its sho they know. ya i know you feel we should limit how much a person can make. i dont feel that miles you do. you dont even feel that a starting employee should be paid a living wage so dont give my that bullshit. look tbone you want more then fn earn it. work your way up the ladder and quit whining about those that did. yawn. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote yawn more of your right wing bullshit. i dont have a problem with them laying off those workers as i really dont see where they had much of a choice and i really cant blame them for the situation they are now in but the not accepting any further salary for the rest of the year is complete bullshit. ya you would have been happy if they took their salary or maybe gave themselves a raise. no because thats pretty much exactly what they did. what they shoud do is create a buyout fund with that money to make it easier on those that have to leave. they took their salary or gave themselves a raise by not accepting any further salary for the year sounds like the logic is being twisted. thats because you are not looking at the big picture. a high % of their bonus is in the form of stock. now what happened to their stock value when they announced the downsizing and that they would not be taking any further compensation for the rest of the year now before you say it i am aware that they are not taking a bonus this year but what about the past years they still own a lot of stock. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : napalmheart

tbone wrote yawn more of your right wing bullshit. i dont have a problem with them laying off those workers as i really dont see where they had much of a choice and i really cant blame them for the situation they are now in but the not accepting any further salary for the rest of the year is complete bullshit. ya you would have been happy if they took their salary or maybe gave themselves a raise. no because thats pretty much exactly what they did. what they shoud do is create a buyout fund with that money to make it easier on those that have to leave. they took their salary or gave themselves a raise by not accepting any further salary for the year sounds like the logic is being twisted. dang liberals nothing makes them happy unless its to squash anyone who is successful from their own hard work. lol enough with your bullshit miles. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote yawn more of your right wing bullshit. i dont have a problem with them laying off those workers as i really dont see where they had much of a choice and i really cant blame them for the situation they are now in but the not accepting any further salary for the rest of the year is complete bullshit. ya you would have been happy if they took their salary or maybe gave themselves a raise. no because thats pretty much exactly what they did. what they shoud do is create a buyout fund with that money to make it easier on those that have to leave. dang liberals nothing makes them happy unless its to squash anyone who is successful from their own hard work. lol enough with your bullshit miles. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : craig c

on jun 4 720 pm miles n...@nopers.com wrote lol i disagree with some of your views and im the republican poster boy and preacher as well as a bush lover. dang hypocrite! you stand accused by way of your own words. perhaps you should google your own postings. yet you voted for them. ive also voted for some democrats. once again you sound like a democrat/liberal blogger! you ashamed of what you are im proud to be a conservative. sigh. of course im not ashamed of what i am. quite the opposite. you cant put a political label on me miles. i am not owned by a party. i make the best decision for my family myself and my country. the comical part about it is that someone at some point defined which issues were left and which issues were right. i happen to disagree with the placement of some of the issues. namely environmental issues. would you agree miles that conservative is the root of conservation if so how then do you explain that conserving ie. taking care of caring for the environment is a left issue regardless of this glaring misplacement id be willing to bet that you are further left than i on most if not all issues. id be happy to discuss it further but you still have not explained to me how you can consider the the last 3 republican presidents conservative since they are responsible for 6+ trillion of the 9+ trillion dollar debt. please ... explain republican-boy. craig c. .

From : napalmheart

tbone wrote why is that because the ceo and the the president decided not to take any further salary for the rest of the year big deal. they still made over 240000 each this year and last year the ceos total compensation was near 6 million. gee could they afford to take the cut for the rest of the year figured youd spin it to your view. damned if they do damned if they dont. how to piss off a liberalwork hard be happy and be successful. yawn more of your right wing bullshit. i dont have a problem with them laying off those workers as i really dont see where they had much of a choice and i really cant blame them for the situation they are now in but the not accepting any further salary for the rest of the year is complete bullshit. what would you have them do -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

tbone wrote yawn more of your right wing bullshit. i dont have a problem with them laying off those workers as i really dont see where they had much of a choice and i really cant blame them for the situation they are now in but the not accepting any further salary for the rest of the year is complete bullshit. ya you would have been happy if they took their salary or maybe gave themselves a raise. dang liberals nothing makes them happy unless its to squash anyone who is successful from their own hard work. .

From : miles

tbone wrote of course they wouldnt. stop being a fucking idiot. if a company could get the job done for less $s then they most certainly would take the cheaper route. means more $s in their own pockets. they would not go and hire someone for far more $s just because. more complete crap. sure are not a huge number of them but there always seem to be enough for all of the big companies to have them. companies compete heavily for the very successful ones. look at most top ceos. they change from corporation to corporation every few years. they turn a company around big time and are then a hot item. ya i know you feel we should limit how much a person can make. look tbone you want more then fn earn it. work your way up the ladder and quit whining about those that did. .

From : roy

roy wrote miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. continental would have surely closed down completely erasing 1000s of jobs. those jobs are still present today. possibly different people working them but the jobs still exist. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. most business owners and managers are hard working and honest. most! your view seems to be that most are corrupt scum and that is far from the truth. most businesses are not greedy corrupt filthy rich enterprises. not even close. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . heres some reality for you. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ .

From : tbone

tbone wrote why is that because the ceo and the the president decided not to take any further salary for the rest of the year big deal. they still made over 240000 each this year and last year the ceos total compensation was near 6 million. gee could they afford to take the cut for the rest of the year figured youd spin it to your view. damned if they do damned if they dont. how to piss off a liberalwork hard be happy and be successful. yawn more of your right wing bullshit. i dont have a problem with them laying off those workers as i really dont see where they had much of a choice and i really cant blame them for the situation they are now in but the not accepting any further salary for the rest of the year is complete bullshit. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

napalmheart wrote so the people that make the major decisions for companies dont deserve compensation if the ceo is being overcompensated then the board of directors needs to do their job. thats what gets me too. if a company could get the job done for far less than the ceo currently makes then they would do so in a heart beat. of course they wouldnt. stop being a fucking idiot. people with the capability to run a large corporation arent plentiful. competition for them is high. more complete crap. sure are not a huge number of them but there always seem to be enough for all of the big companies to have them. i find it funny that you always seem to find a limit on how much everyone else makes but there is no holds barred on how much the main execs get. i guess thats because they are the ones that set the limits. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

roy wrote miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. continental would have surely closed down completely erasing 1000s of jobs. those jobs are still present today. possibly different people working them but the jobs still exist. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. most business owners and managers are hard working and honest. most! your view seems to be that most are corrupt scum and that is far from the truth. most businesses are not greedy corrupt filthy rich enterprises. not even close. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . heres some reality for you. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ it seems that this link better supports miles position. why is that because the ceo and the the president decided not to take any further salary for the rest of the year yes i would agree with you if it actually meant something but in all reality it doesnt. its nothing more than a publicity stunt that actually increases their wealth by bumping up their stock value. big deal. they still made over 240000 each this year and last year the ceos total compensation was near 6 million. gee could they afford to take the cut for the rest of the year so the people that make the major decisions for companies dont deserve compensation sure they do but how much is enough if the ceo is being overcompensated then the board of directors needs to do their job. lol yea right. too bad most of them are in the same club and are not about to screw themselves. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

napalmheart wrote http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ it seems that this link better supports miles position. yep but watch the spin! .

From : miles

roy wrote reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . heres some reality for you. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ um whats that got to do with what % of corporations are lead by greedy corrupt bad apples .

From : miles

napalmheart wrote so the people that make the major decisions for companies dont deserve compensation if the ceo is being overcompensated then the board of directors needs to do their job. thats what gets me too. if a company could get the job done for far less than the ceo currently makes then they would do so in a heart beat. people with the capability to run a large corporation arent plentiful. competition for them is high. .

From : miles

tbone wrote why is that because the ceo and the the president decided not to take any further salary for the rest of the year big deal. they still made over 240000 each this year and last year the ceos total compensation was near 6 million. gee could they afford to take the cut for the rest of the year figured youd spin it to your view. damned if they do damned if they dont. how to piss off a liberalwork hard be happy and be successful. .

From : napalmheart

roy wrote miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. continental would have surely closed down completely erasing 1000s of jobs. those jobs are still present today. possibly different people working them but the jobs still exist. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. most business owners and managers are hard working and honest. most! your view seems to be that most are corrupt scum and that is far from the truth. most businesses are not greedy corrupt filthy rich enterprises. not even close. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . heres some reality for you. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ it seems that this link better supports miles position. why is that because the ceo and the the president decided not to take any further salary for the rest of the year yes big deal. they still made over 240000 each this year and last year the ceos total compensation was near 6 million. gee could they afford to take the cut for the rest of the year so the people that make the major decisions for companies dont deserve compensation if the ceo is being overcompensated then the board of directors needs to do their job. ken -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : roy

roy wrote miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. continental would have surely closed down completely erasing 1000s of jobs. those jobs are still present today. possibly different people working them but the jobs still exist. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. most business owners and managers are hard working and honest. most! your view seems to be that most are corrupt scum and that is far from the truth. most businesses are not greedy corrupt filthy rich enterprises. not even close. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . heres some reality for you. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ it seems that this link better supports miles position. it does. miles and i agree on a lot we sorta approach things from a different perspective.g continental before lorenzo was banned for life was horrid. now that it has been in new and different hands for a number of years as well as increased scrutiny of the feds things have changed for the better in part. but having to drop 3000 folks to unemployment checks is not nice. the only plus may be that most dont collect social security unemployment .

From : miles

napalmheart wrote i think what roy means here is that when people without medical insurance finally go to the emergency room because they dont have an alternative we all end up paying for their care through our tax dollars. thats true but these same folks want socialized healthcare with which wed pay just the same and probably far more. .

From : napalmheart

roy wrote miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. continental would have surely closed down completely erasing 1000s of jobs. those jobs are still present today. possibly different people working them but the jobs still exist. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. most business owners and managers are hard working and honest. most! your view seems to be that most are corrupt scum and that is far from the truth. most businesses are not greedy corrupt filthy rich enterprises. not even close. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . heres some reality for you. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ it seems that this link better supports miles position. it does. miles and i agree on a lot we sorta approach things from a different perspective.g continental before lorenzo was banned for life was horrid. now that it has been in new and different hands for a number of years as well as increased scrutiny of the feds things have changed for the better in part. but having to drop 3000 folks to unemployment checks is not nice. the only plus may be that most dont collect social security unemployment 3000 getting laid-off isnt good. if thats what it takes to make the company survive then thats what it takes. if business gets better maybe therell be a company for them to return to. at least in this case the leaders of the company are taking a hit too. ceos getting bonuses after others lose their jobs bothers me despite my conservative libertarian streak. conservative libertarian republican union supporter - how many contradictions are there in that one! ;+ ken .

From : tbone

roy wrote miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. continental would have surely closed down completely erasing 1000s of jobs. those jobs are still present today. possibly different people working them but the jobs still exist. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. most business owners and managers are hard working and honest. most! your view seems to be that most are corrupt scum and that is far from the truth. most businesses are not greedy corrupt filthy rich enterprises. not even close. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . heres some reality for you. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ it seems that this link better supports miles position. why is that because the ceo and the the president decided not to take any further salary for the rest of the year big deal. they still made over 240000 each this year and last year the ceos total compensation was near 6 million. gee could they afford to take the cut for the rest of the year -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : napalmheart

roy wrote miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. continental would have surely closed down completely erasing 1000s of jobs. those jobs are still present today. possibly different people working them but the jobs still exist. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. most business owners and managers are hard working and honest. most! your view seems to be that most are corrupt scum and that is far from the truth. most businesses are not greedy corrupt filthy rich enterprises. not even close. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . heres some reality for you. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6279042/ it seems that this link better supports miles position. .

From : craig c

on may 31 1036 am miles n...@nopers.com wrote nah just one or two. if the shoe fits! your stereotypical rhetoric above shows just that. oh ouch. you really know how to hurt a guy. btw just how long has it been since youve been laid craig c. .

From : miles

roy wrote miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. continental would have surely closed down completely erasing 1000s of jobs. those jobs are still present today. possibly different people working them but the jobs still exist. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. most business owners and managers are hard working and honest. most! your view seems to be that most are corrupt scum and that is far from the truth. most businesses are not greedy corrupt filthy rich enterprises. not even close. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. reality is not the few bad apples blasted on the front page . .

From : roy

roy wrote the final was lorenzo was banned from the airline industry by the feds for his actions but not until he had cost thousands their jobs. i agree he was scum but my point was that he saved far more jobs than he cost. continental would have surely folded completely if he didnt do what he did. miles it is nice that you agree lorenzo was scum. i dont know how you can claimed he saved far more jobs than he cost. he wiped out an entire airline! all the employees were gone. related vendors had to cut back on employees. i just dont follow your logic. if you want you can also check out tim mellons wreck of 4 new england railroads. the state of ny tossed him out and i believe still oversee the operation of the delaware&hudson railroad. yup this is one of thee mellons from pa. same story as above. but mellon hired folks to do his dirty work. what the heck is your point in all this sure theres scum in every corner you look at. but it appears you attempt to extrapolate that across the board as if most business owners and leaders are just the same. my point is that that the problem is much much larger than you state. most are hard working honest people. some are some arent. you look only for the bad. no miles i look at the whole picture that is a bit more based on reality than what you see. .

From : miles

roy wrote the final was lorenzo was banned from the airline industry by the feds for his actions but not until he had cost thousands their jobs. i agree he was scum but my point was that he saved far more jobs than he cost. continental would have surely folded completely if he didnt do what he did. if you want you can also check out tim mellons wreck of 4 new england railroads. the state of ny tossed him out and i believe still oversee the operation of the delaware&hudson railroad. yup this is one of thee mellons from pa. same story as above. but mellon hired folks to do his dirty work. what the heck is your point in all this sure theres scum in every corner you look at. but it appears you attempt to extrapolate that across the board as if most business owners and leaders are just the same. most are hard working honest people. you look only for the bad. .

From : craig c

on jun 3 1034 pm miles n...@nopers.com wrote yep always blame the companies for the problem. i have worked for 3 companies in the past 2 years. all started the off-shore process to control costs. yet the executives receive huge bonuses company cars etc. its happening all around. open your eyes get the republican cock out of your mouth and face reality. never the economics and politics that influence business heavily. oh you mean like the current republican administrations policies which actually encourage off-shoring high-tech jobs many large companies folded up rather than move off shore cox toys zebco for instance. they could not compete on a global market with often absurd union demands as well as massive insurance costs. the view that most wealthy business owners got that way by luck greed lies cheating and corruption rather than hard honest work is pure bs. but thats what you preach and buy into. im not a union supporter. never been part of a union. i am however an american that is watching american middle class jobs being off-shored so executives can pad their pockets. anyone with half a brain can see the tragedy and potential long-term effects of a dwindling middle class. i suppose then that excludes die-hard republicans. craig c. .

From : roy

roy wrote roy wrote big snip how about you check out some history. get on the www and check out continental airlines and eastern airlines and especially fred lorenzo. then pay attention to what has happened since with the airline industry. oh watch the end of united play out. your point continental would have folded and put everyone out of work if lorenzo hadnt filed for bankruptcy. would you rather have everyone out of work as it turned out the pilots ended up making about the same as other airlines were paying at the time. the union wanted almost double the going rate and the only choice for continental was to fold up shop. thats what you would have preferred http//money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortunearchive/1986/11/10/68255/index.htm miles you have shown your usual. ya gotta look at the whole story not just the part that fits into your world. when all was finished what happened was this. continental raided eastern airlines under lorenzos leadership. he pretty much did a wall street the movie was loosely based on the eastern airlines horror show on eastern and wrecked it putting it out of business and all its employees on the street. the final was lorenzo was banned from the airline industry by the feds for his actions but not until he had cost thousands their jobs. if you want you can also check out tim mellons wreck of 4 new england railroads. the state of ny tossed him out and i believe still oversee the operation of the delaware&hudson railroad. yup this is one of thee mellons from pa. same story as above. but mellon hired folks to do his dirty work. .

From : miles

roy wrote roy wrote big snip how about you check out some history. get on the www and check out continental airlines and eastern airlines and especially fred lorenzo. then pay attention to what has happened since with the airline industry. oh watch the end of united play out. your point continental would have folded and put everyone out of work if lorenzo hadnt filed for bankruptcy. would you rather have everyone out of work as it turned out the pilots ended up making about the same as other airlines were paying at the time. the union wanted almost double the going rate and the only choice for continental was to fold up shop. thats what you would have preferred http//money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortunearchive/1986/11/10/68255/index.htm .

From : miles

craig c. wrote oh you mean like the current republican administrations policies which actually encourage off-shoring high-tech jobs no i mean the corrupt greedy unions that force them there. but i also blame world economics even more so. these companies sell world wide. they dont go offshore just to export back to the usa. im not a union supporter. never been part of a union. i am however an american that is watching american middle class jobs being off-shored so executives can pad their pockets. thats a belief thats far from reality but easy for the less informed to believe. skyrocketing insurance costs dramatically increased competition from foreign corporations etc. are far more to blame. .

From : miles

craig c. wrote here we go. i disagree therefore im a democrat/liberal. must be nice living in a world where youre right and everyone else is wrong. lol i disagree with some of your views and im the republican poster boy and preacher as well as a bush lover. dang hypocrite! ive stated quite publicly here for years that i do not like bush and the republican party is anything but conservative. yet you voted for them. ive also voted for some democrats. once again you sound like a democrat/liberal blogger! you ashamed of what you are im proud to be a conservative. .

From : roy

roy wrote miles most go off shore to maximize their profits. no epa regs to adhere to. no worker safety or protectionodd you didnt mention that actually no benefits of any kind. they pay wages that are at the countries level. yep but its not just to maximize profits as you believe. they compete against other companies around the world who arent paying the higher usa benefits. if they stay in the usa they cant be competitive and will die as has happened to many companies. survival is a huge part of it. thinking about it here in this country since unions have become sooo unpopular look at what we have. a shit load of low paying part time jobs no benefits like sick days paid vacations paid holidays no health care. most companies do pay sick vacation holidays and healthcare. youre correct about the vast number of lower end jobs retail fast food etc. not doing so. manufacturing medical administrative etc. mostly do pay. my company does yearly analysis of our benefits compared with companies of similar size through mutual business organizations. now that companies have stopped paying health care and the stuff i listed above where do you think the savings have gone roy you dont own or run a company do you savings do you have any idea how much health care costs a typical company you seem to feel corporations are rolling in $s are greedy and filled with corruption lies and cheating. theres some of that but most are honest hard working and struggling to stay competitive in a very expensive market. whats a fair profit margin for a typical corporation whats their current profit margin what was the margin 20 years ago answer those and then try to tell me where the savings went. we pay for the health care every one of us while big business stuffs more profits into their pockets. bull. profit margins have dropped significantly over the past 20 years or so. dont try to play games talking about a handful of over paid ceos. theyre in the very minuscule minority and dont put a dent into the rapidly shrinking profit margins of most companies. you can call this a pro union rant or whatever. but look back over the past 40 years or so and look where we are. powerful unions are every bit as bad as powerful near monopoly corporations. unions can and have broken companies and industries forcing their closure or moving elsewhere in the world. dont forget these companies sell worldwide and not just in the usa. many have higher sales outside the usa. profit margins for a typical usa company are less than 10%. 30-40 years ago they were easily 20-30% margins. low paying job no dental benefits. eventually her mouth will probably become such a mess that a infection will cause here to be hospitalized and then we all can pay her medical bill. there are many who failed to work hard and earn they way up and learn greater skills. i know many who spent their younger years doing meth and now in their 30s cant find a decent job and are working at walmart or mcdonalds. whose fault is it this is the land of opportunity not handouts. you want it then work for it. i lived very poor for over 20 years working 2-3 jobs living in a tiny studio apartment eating mostly top ramon noodle soup etc. i spent all my free time studying even working in my eventual field for free just to learn the trade. .

From : craig c

on jun 3 1028 pm miles n...@nopers.com wrote not true. bs miles. youre the republican poster boy. there are hundreds of posts proving it. you get out here and preach how republicans are the party for america um nope! you sound like the typical democrat blogger with that rhetoric. here we go. i disagree therefore im a democrat/liberal. must be nice living in a world where youre right and everyone else is wrong. ive stated quite publicly here for years that i do not like bush and the republican party is anything but conservative. yet you voted for them. thanks craig c. .

From : roy

roy wrote miles most go off shore to maximize their profits. no epa regs to adhere to. no worker safety or protectionodd you didnt mention that actually no benefits of any kind. they pay wages that are at the countries level. yep but its not just to maximize profits as you believe. they compete against other companies around the world who arent paying the higher usa benefits. if they stay in the usa they cant be competitive and will die as has happened to many companies. survival is a huge part of it. agree with both of you. thinking about it here in this country since unions have become sooo unpopular look at what we have. a shit load of low paying part time jobs no benefits like sick days paid vacations paid holidays no health care. most companies do pay sick vacation holidays and healthcare. youre correct about the vast number of lower end jobs retail fast food etc. not doing so. manufacturing medical administrative etc. mostly do pay. my company does yearly analysis of our benefits compared with companies of similar size through mutual business organizations. now that companies have stopped paying health care and the stuff i listed above where do you think the savings have gone roy you dont own or run a company do you savings do you have any idea how much health care costs a typical company you seem to feel corporations are rolling in $s are greedy and filled with corruption lies and cheating. theres some of that but most are honest hard working and struggling to stay competitive in a very expensive market. whats a fair profit margin for a typical corporation whats their current profit margin what was the margin 20 years ago answer those and then try to tell me where the savings went. profit margins are down pretty much across the board. thats what gets me about dragging the oil execs in before congress. the oil companies profit margins arent out of line when compared to other industries. if the senators and representatives dont know that they are really ignorant. if they do theyre pandering to the uninformed masses. we pay for the health care every one of us while big business stuffs more profits into their pockets. bull. profit margins have dropped significantly over the past 20 years or so. dont try to play games talking about a handful of over paid ceos. theyre in the very minuscule minority and dont put a dent into the rapidly shrinking profit margins of most companies. i think what roy means here is that when people without medical insurance finally go to the emergency room because they dont have an alternative we all end up paying for their care through our tax dollars. bingo!! you can call this a pro union rant or whatever. but look back over the past 40 years or so and look where we are. powerful unions are every bit as bad as powerful near monopoly corporations. unions can and have broken companies and industries forcing their closure or moving elsewhere in the world. dont forget these companies sell worldwide and not just in the usa. many have higher sales outside the usa. profit margins for a typical usa company are less than 10%. 30-40 years ago they were easily 20-30% margins. too much power concentrated either way usually ends up with things not working the best they could. i say this having been a union member for over 20 years. low paying job no dental benefits. eventually her mouth will probably become such a mess that a infection will cause here to be hospitalized and then we all can pay her medical bill. see above. there are many who failed to work hard and earn they way up and learn greater skills. i know many who spent their younger years doing meth and now in their 30s cant find a decent job and are working at walmart or mcdonalds. whose fault is it this is the land of opportunity not handouts. you want it then work for it. i lived very poor for over 20 years working 2-3 jobs living in a tiny studio apartment eating mostly top ramon noodle soup etc. i spent all my free time studying even working in my eventual field for free just to learn the trade. hard work is usually rewarded if the person sets goals and works toward them. many people could benefit from reading the millionaire next door. .

From : roy

roy wrote miles most go off shore to maximize their profits. no epa regs to adhere to. no worker safety or protectionodd you didnt mention that actually no benefits of any kind. they pay wages that are at the countries level. yep but its not just to maximize profits as you believe. they compete against other companies around the world who arent paying the higher usa benefits. if they stay in the usa they cant be competitive and will die as has happened to many companies. survival is a huge part of it. thinking about it here in this country since unions have become sooo unpopular look at what we have. a shit load of low paying part time jobs no benefits like sick days paid vacations paid holidays no health care. most companies do pay sick vacation holidays and healthcare. youre correct about the vast number of lower end jobs retail fast food etc. not doing so. manufacturing medical administrative etc. mostly do pay. my company does yearly analysis of our benefits compared with companies of similar size through mutual business organizations. now that companies have stopped paying health care and the stuff i listed above where do you think the savings have gone roy you dont own or run a company do you nope. savings do i have a savings account or 401 hell yes!! do you have any idea how much health care costs a typical company i know how much it costs a person who has to pay for it themselves. a typical company pays less than a individual. you seem to feel corporations are rolling in $s are greedy and filled with corruption lies and cheating. you said it not me. theres some of that but most are honest hard working and struggling to stay competitive in a very expensive market. whats a fair profit margin for a typical corporation whats their current profit margin what was the margin 20 years ago answer those and then try to tell me where the savings went. we pay for the health care every one of us while big business stuffs more profits into their pockets. bull. profit margins have dropped significantly over the past 20 years or so. dont try to play games talking about a handful of over paid ceos. if a ceo is making over 500k and his employees are makeing a poverty wage well... and it isnt a handful!! theyre in the very minuscule minority and dont put a dent into the rapidly shrinking profit margins of most companies. you can call this a pro union rant or whatever. but look back over the past 40 years or so and look where we are. powerful unions are every bit as bad as powerful near monopoly corporations. unions can and have broken companies and industries forcing their closure or moving elsewhere in the world. dont forget these companies sell worldwide and not just in the usa. many have higher sales outside the usa. profit margins for a typical usa company are less than 10%. 30-40 years ago they were easily 20-30% margins. low paying job no dental benefits. eventually her mouth will probably become such a mess that a infection will cause here to be hospitalized and then we all can pay her medical bill. there are many who failed to work hard and earn they way up and learn greater skills. i know many who spent their younger years doing meth and now in their 30s cant find a decent job and are working at walmart or mcdonalds. whose fault is it this is the land of opportunity not handouts. you want it then work for it. i lived very poor for over 20 years working 2-3 jobs living in a tiny studio apartment eating mostly top ramon noodle soup etc. i spent all my free time studying even working in my eventual field for free just to learn the trade. .

From : napalmheart

roy wrote miles most go off shore to maximize their profits. no epa regs to adhere to. no worker safety or protectionodd you didnt mention that actually no benefits of any kind. they pay wages that are at the countries level. yep but its not just to maximize profits as you believe. they compete against other companies around the world who arent paying the higher usa benefits. if they stay in the usa they cant be competitive and will die as has happened to many companies. survival is a huge part of it. agree with both of you. thinking about it here in this country since unions have become sooo unpopular look at what we have. a shit load of low paying part time jobs no benefits like sick days paid vacations paid holidays no health care. most companies do pay sick vacation holidays and healthcare. youre correct about the vast number of lower end jobs retail fast food etc. not doing so. manufacturing medical administrative etc. mostly do pay. my company does yearly analysis of our benefits compared with companies of similar size through mutual business organizations. now that companies have stopped paying health care and the stuff i listed above where do you think the savings have gone roy you dont own or run a company do you savings do you have any idea how much health care costs a typical company you seem to feel corporations are rolling in $s are greedy and filled with corruption lies and cheating. theres some of that but most are honest hard working and struggling to stay competitive in a very expensive market. whats a fair profit margin for a typical corporation whats their current profit margin what was the margin 20 years ago answer those and then try to tell me where the savings went. profit margins are down pretty much across the board. thats what gets me about dragging the oil execs in before congress. the oil companies profit margins arent out of line when compared to other industries. if the senators and representatives dont know that they are really ignorant. if they do theyre pandering to the uninformed masses. we pay for the health care every one of us while big business stuffs more profits into their pockets. bull. profit margins have dropped significantly over the past 20 years or so. dont try to play games talking about a handful of over paid ceos. theyre in the very minuscule minority and dont put a dent into the rapidly shrinking profit margins of most companies. i think what roy means here is that when people without medical insurance finally go to the emergency room because they dont have an alternative we all end up paying for their care through our tax dollars. you can call this a pro union rant or whatever. but look back over the past 40 years or so and look where we are. powerful unions are every bit as bad as powerful near monopoly corporations. unions can and have broken companies and industries forcing their closure or moving elsewhere in the world. dont forget these companies sell worldwide and not just in the usa. many have higher sales outside the usa. profit margins for a typical usa company are less than 10%. 30-40 years ago they were easily 20-30% margins. too much power concentrated either way usually ends up with things not working the best they could. i say this having been a union member for over 20 years. low paying job no dental benefits. eventually her mouth will probably become such a mess that a infection will cause here to be hospitalized and then we all can pay her medical bill. see above. there are many who failed to work hard and earn they way up and learn greater skills. i know many who spent their younger years doing meth and now in their 30s cant find a decent job and are working at walmart or mcdonalds. whose fault is it this is the land of opportunity not handouts. you want it then work for it. i lived very poor for over 20 years working 2-3 jobs living in a tiny studio apartment eating mostly top ramon noodle soup etc. i spent all my free time studying even working in my eventual field for free just to learn the trade. hard work is usually rewarded if the person sets goals and works toward them. many people could benefit from reading the millionaire next door. .

From : miles

craig c. wrote nope. im not a straight party voter miles. you are. not true. you get out here and preach how republicans are the party for america um nope! you sound like the typical democrat blogger with that rhetoric. ive stated quite publicly here for years that i do not like bush and the republican party is anything but conservative. the difference with me is that i do not see the democrats as having any solution and their recent example in congress has proved just that. honestly im disgusted with both parties. .

From : christopher d thompson

on tue 03 jun 2008 190416 -0700 craig c. wrote frankly at the rate jobs like mine are being off-shored im not sure that i wont be telling the same story soon. im on my 3rd job in 2 years thanks to greedy fucking companies giving high tech jobs away. well hopefully you dont have to go through what we went through it is pure hell. shes home now and recovering so hopefully life can return to its usual hectic nature from the total chaos of recent history. again sorry for the misfortune. geez. hope all goes well. thanks shes getting better back on her feet now to a degree but still has some bandages and some pain. fortunately she works from home so next week shell pick business back up. no just had the weird in and out of lockup problem like it was trying but couldnt hold lockup they replaced the converter under the recall and my problem went away. had the #3 glow plug die twice then no problems since up till i sold it long story miss that little truck were biding our time to dump it. i dont trust it anymore after throwing me into the intersection a few times. if i was in a position to buy it off ya i would. she really needs something better than the durango for round town stuff but its what we have and she wont drive the jeep no top no a/c just isnt her thing! good to hear from you. good to hear from you too. i trust you still have my email. drop me a line from time to time. -- chris .

From : craig c

on may 30 1146 pm christopher d. thompson nos...@nospam.nospam wrote getting along lost the house had a baby tore up a truck... ya know life! sorry to hear about the misfortune. but glad to see that youre staying positive about it. frankly at the rate jobs like mine are being off-shored im not sure that i wont be telling the same story soon. im on my 3rd job in 2 years thanks to greedy fucking companies giving high tech jobs away. the funny thing is once all of the going back and forth headaches missed deadlines and the general charlie foxtrot that comes managing an off-shore team is onsidered most companies end up spending more to off-shore. especially when you factor in lost customers. for example verizon has lost my business because of it. dell also lost a lot of customers due to their off- shoring all of their call centers. i read that they are now bringing them back to the u.s. shes home now and recovering so hopefully life can return to its usual hectic nature from the total chaos of recent history. again sorry for the misfortune. geez. hope all goes well. no just had the weird in and out of lockup problem like it was trying but couldnt hold lockup they replaced the converter under the recall and my problem went away. had the #3 glow plug die twice then no problems since up till i sold it long story miss that little truck were biding our time to dump it. i dont trust it anymore after throwing me into the intersection a few times. good to hear from you. craig c. .

From : miles

roy wrote miles most go off shore to maximize their profits. no epa regs to adhere to. no worker safety or protectionodd you didnt mention that actually no benefits of any kind. they pay wages that are at the countries level. yep but its not just to maximize profits as you believe. they compete against other companies around the world who arent paying the higher usa benefits. if they stay in the usa they cant be competitive and will die as has happened to many companies. survival is a huge part of it. thinking about it here in this country since unions have become sooo unpopular look at what we have. a shit load of low paying part time jobs no benefits like sick days paid vacations paid holidays no health care. most companies do pay sick vacation holidays and healthcare. youre correct about the vast number of lower end jobs retail fast food etc. not doing so. manufacturing medical administrative etc. mostly do pay. my company does yearly analysis of our benefits compared with companies of similar size through mutual business organizations. now that companies have stopped paying health care and the stuff i listed above where do you think the savings have gone roy you dont own or run a company do you savings do you have any idea how much health care costs a typical company you seem to feel corporations are rolling in $s are greedy and filled with corruption lies and cheating. theres some of that but most are honest hard working and struggling to stay competitive in a very expensive market. whats a fair profit margin for a typical corporation whats their current profit margin what was the margin 20 years ago answer those and then try to tell me where the savings went. we pay for the health care every one of us while big business stuffs more profits into their pockets. bull. profit margins have dropped significantly over the past 20 years or so. dont try to play games talking about a handful of over paid ceos. theyre in the very minuscule minority and dont put a dent into the rapidly shrinking profit margins of most companies. you can call this a pro union rant or whatever. but look back over the past 40 years or so and look where we are. powerful unions are every bit as bad as powerful near monopoly corporations. unions can and have broken companies and industries forcing their closure or moving elsewhere in the world. dont forget these companies sell worldwide and not just in the usa. many have higher sales outside the usa. profit margins for a typical usa company are less than 10%. 30-40 years ago they were easily 20-30% margins. low paying job no dental benefits. eventually her mouth will probably become such a mess that a infection will cause here to be hospitalized and then we all can pay her medical bill. there are many who failed to work hard and earn they way up and learn greater skills. i know many who spent their younger years doing meth and now in their 30s cant find a decent job and are working at walmart or mcdonalds. whose fault is it this is the land of opportunity not handouts. you want it then work for it. i lived very poor for over 20 years working 2-3 jobs living in a tiny studio apartment eating mostly top ramon noodle soup etc. i spent all my free time studying even working in my eventual field for free just to learn the trade. .

From : roy

craig c. wrote im on my 3rd job in 2 years thanks to greedy fucking companies giving high tech jobs away. yep always blame the companies for the problem. never the economics and politics that influence business heavily. many large companies folded up rather than move off shore cox toys zebco for instance. they could not compete on a global market with often absurd union demands as well as massive insurance costs. the view that most wealthy business owners got that way by luck greed lies cheating and corruption rather than hard honest work is pure bs. but thats what you preach and buy into. miles most go off shore to maximize their profits. no epa regs to adhere to. no worker safety or protectionodd you didnt mention that actually no benefits of any kind. they pay wages that are at the countries level. thinking about it here in this country since unions have become sooo unpopular look at what we have. a shit load of low paying part time jobs no benefits like sick days paid vacations paid holidays no health care. wait a sec thats what happens off shore. do ya think corporations have turned the u.s. into a off shore country no not yet but close. now that companies have stopped paying health care and the stuff i listed above where do you think the savings have gone lower prices not hardly. we pay for the health care every one of us while big business stuffs more profits into their pockets. with a lot of this countries workers doing two or three jobs where has that put us look at the family unit for a lot of families it is just not there. rank and file workers do not make corporate decisions the folks at the board room do. you can call this a pro union rant or whatever. but look back over the past 40 years or so and look where we are. learn from history you just might repeat it. i lived it now im retired wondering wtf is going to happen and it sure dont look good. just a side note. we were in wally world last night to grab a few items. the girl probably about 30 years old was bagging our stuff talking all the while. i had to look away every one of her teeth were rotten actually she was missing about every other one of her front teeth. low paying job no dental benefits. eventually her mouth will probably become such a mess that a infection will cause here to be hospitalized and then we all can pay her medical bill. oh she did say that she was from ny and was laid off and came to fl to live with relatives a few years ago. .

From : miles

craig c. wrote im on my 3rd job in 2 years thanks to greedy fucking companies giving high tech jobs away. yep always blame the companies for the problem. never the economics and politics that influence business heavily. many large companies folded up rather than move off shore cox toys zebco for instance. they could not compete on a global market with often absurd union demands as well as massive insurance costs. the view that most wealthy business owners got that way by luck greed lies cheating and corruption rather than hard honest work is pure bs. but thats what you preach and buy into. .

From : craig c

on jun 1 1001 pm miles n...@nopers.com wrote you didnt answer the question. no surprise there. i bet you havent been laid in at least a decade. you craig are certainly showing your age! you are showing that 1 you have no sense of humor and 2 you need a good lay. oh geez. our current republican party is anything but conservative. yet the current democrat led congress has increased the spending rate even further. explain that. nope. im not a straight party voter miles. you are. i have nothing to explain. you do. you get out here and preach how republicans are the party for america and everyone who doesnt agree is a liberal. think about what your party has done to not for this country. you make excuse after excuse for your republican butt buddys and point finger at anyone else that disagrees. youre just as intolerant and deaf as those you vote for. the government shouldnt give idiots like you voting rights. besides ... you still did not answer the question. all 6+ trillion doesnt belong to dubya. a large part of it belongs to daddy and mr. reagan himself. explain that. craig c. .

From : napalmheart

tbone wrote please explain how this figure is not influenced by either of these values. hmm...now were getting somewhere. you are confused as to what median refers to. median is the center of a distribution curve. say we have 2 poor at $5000/yr 50 at $45000/yr and 2 at $1000000/yr. whats the median now say the rich 2 make $20000000/yr. whats the median now understand median now doubt it. in both cases the median is $45000/yr. ken .

From : miles

tbone wrote please explain how this figure is not influenced by either of these values. hmm...now were getting somewhere. you are confused as to what median refers to. median is the center of a distribution curve. say we have 2 poor at $5000/yr 50 at $45000/yr and 2 at $1000000/yr. whats the median now say the rich 2 make $20000000/yr. whats the median now understand median now doubt it. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote he doesnt understand numbers anyways. hes confused as to the meaning of median and average numbers when he stated that median income levels are falsely skewed by a few very rich individuals. lol please repost anything were i said that. you cannot do it because i never said that. you stated the following with which i know youll spin what you meant it is so right wing of you to come up with a deceptive number like the median income when that number is an unweighted combination of the richest of the rich and the poorest of the poor. median income is not about the richest of the rich or the poorest of the poor. it tells what most are earning. please explain how this figure is not influenced by either of these values. your bs about it being wrong because its family income is well bs. perhaps you should go back and look at how these figures are calculated. thats what i did and on the site that you referenced back then. thats quite easy to to dispel based on population and housing figures that dont match up to the increased median income. lol perhaps because households that do not fit the requirements are not included. if they changed the computations perhaps you would care to provide them. you and max keep talking about the numbers lets see either of you back them up for a change. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

tbone wrote he doesnt understand numbers anyways. hes confused as to the meaning of median and average numbers when he stated that median income levels are falsely skewed by a few very rich individuals. lol please repost anything were i said that. you cannot do it because i never said that. you stated the following with which i know youll spin what you meant it is so right wing of you to come up with a deceptive number like the median income when that number is an unweighted combination of the richest of the rich and the poorest of the poor. median income is not about the richest of the rich or the poorest of the poor. it tells what most are earning. your bs about it being wrong because its family income is well bs. thats quite easy to to dispel based on population and housing figures that dont match up to the increased median income. .

From : tbone

true. that and his failure to grasp the k&n percentages 3% is 50% larger than 2% percentages are really nothing more than fuzzy math that can easily be distorted which is why you love them so much. it is still a 1% total volume increase and with the volume so low 50% more of just about nothing is still just about nothing. along with helium being weightless lol helium is boyant in our atmosphere at sea level so it really depends on what definition of weight you use. i understand that this is way above you but i never said that helium has no mass and some definitions of weight equate it to mass. prove to me that tbone would like to have everyone think he knows far more than he does. damn max now this is the definiton of pkb. what it comes down to is that people such as myself still have our investments our pay is enough to deal with the problems we have despite fuel costs and some of us are able to take advantage of all the foolish liberal failures of economics. and this means what oh yea not a damn thing. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

craig c. wrote you didnt answer the question. no surprise there. i bet you havent been laid in at least a decade. you craig are certainly showing your age! explain why you consider republicans the conservative/responsible party when 6+ trillion of the 9+ trillion dollar debt was run up under republican presidents. go ahead ... look it up. its true. oh geez. our current republican party is anything but conservative. yet the current democrat led congress has increased the spending rate even further. explain that. i know the dems cant be held accountable because they dont claim to have any values. .

From : tbone

max dodge wrote no numbers on your part means no grasp of the concepts no proof of the claims and no brains behind the mouth. he doesnt understand numbers anyways. hes confused as to the meaning of median and average numbers when he stated that median income levels are falsely skewed by a few very rich individuals. lol please repost anything were i said that. you cannot do it because i never said that. i must say that i find it funny that you make the claim that i am confused by the meanings of average and median income but when you were asked twice to define them to see if you have a clue you as usual were unable to do it. we went over your median income bullshit months ago when you made the claim that because median income went up that people were making more money and doing better which is now an invalid assumption which turns it into complete bullshit. the median income that you reference was based on families of 4 and included the income of all members of the family including minors. i went over many examples of where the median income of a family went up while the expendable income of that same family went down which shows that even though the family was making more money they are not doing better which indicates that median income is a poor indicator on the state of the economy. average income otoh can be more easily influenced by a few overpaid very rich individules. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : craig ccraig c

on may 31 1146 pm miles n...@nopers.com wrote ya i remember when i had my first beer. bud light you didnt answer the question. no surprise there. i bet you havent been laid in at least a decade. speaking of avoiding questions ... heres one you never answered despite my posting it at least six times to you last time we had a discussion explain why you consider republicans the conservative/responsible party when 6+ trillion of the 9+ trillion dollar debt was run up under republican presidents. go ahead ... look it up. its true. i doubt youll answer it this time too. you havent got the ability to accept any responsibility for your bs political arguments. its that liberal thinking. craig c. .

From : max dodge

true. that and his failure to grasp the k&n percentages 3% is 50% larger than 2% along with helium being weightless prove to me that tbone would like to have everyone think he knows far more than he does. what it comes down to is that people such as myself still have our investments our pay is enough to deal with the problems we have despite fuel costs and some of us are able to take advantage of all the foolish liberal failures of economics. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york max dodge wrote no numbers on your part means no grasp of the concepts no proof of the claims and no brains behind the mouth. he doesnt understand numbers anyways. hes confused as to the meaning of median and average numbers when he stated that median income levels are falsely skewed by a few very rich individuals. .

From : miles

max dodge wrote no numbers on your part means no grasp of the concepts no proof of the claims and no brains behind the mouth. he doesnt understand numbers anyways. hes confused as to the meaning of median and average numbers when he stated that median income levels are falsely skewed by a few very rich individuals. .

From : miles

craig c. wrote thing is you label everyone a liberal or democrat if they dont agree with you. i swear miles reading your nonsense is exactly like turning on the tv and listening to to our fearless leader speak about ... anything. one dumbass is enough frankly. nah just one or two. if the shoe fits! your stereotypical rhetoric above shows just that. .

From : max dodge

no numbers on your part means no grasp of the concepts no proof of the claims and no brains behind the mouth. post away. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york no numbers yet i see. let me know when you have something to say that has value. sorry max but i know you all to well. no matter what numbers i post you will just spin it or deny seeing it and you are simply not worth the trouble. funny how the governor of your state seems to see the big picture and the real problems as well as just about every financial instution on the plannet. they may not all fully agree on the cause but they do see that there are problems. the fact that you post and rely on numbers that you cant even explain says it all max. bye-bye -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : christopher d thompson

on fri 30 may 2008 105125 -0700 craig c. wrote on may 30 1143 am christopher d. thompson nos...@nospam.nospam wrote hey craig havent seen ya post anything in a while. how ya doin man im great. you getting along lost the house had a baby tore up a truck... ya know life! catchin up on school work like i said ot at work then my wife going into the hospital got me so far behind i may never see the light of day now. ill spend the bulk of tomorrow doing shell scripts and taking tests to catch up. oh the joy of it! shes home now and recovering so hopefully life can return to its usual hectic nature from the total chaos of recent history. still bustin my butt on school work and family stuff here. keep up the good work. i dropped out in the fall of 2007 due to taking a new job getting married and buying a home. im hoping to get back to it this fall. havent needed to post anything here. at $4.69 per gallon for diesel my truck sits in the driveway 29 out of 30 days per month. the wife drops me off at work every morning. - btw ... did you have as many problems with the torque converter recall on your liberty crd it was dangerous to drive ... it kept lurching forward when coming to a stop. finally after a heated call to chrysler they agreed to put a whole new torque converter in it. no problems since. craig c. no just had the weird in and out of lockup problem like it was trying but couldnt hold lockup they replaced the converter under the recall and my problem went away. had the #3 glow plug die twice then no problems since up till i sold it long story miss that little truck my 05 is no more either. bought then sold a f350 now ive got a little yj as my play toy. my wife has the 99 durango again bought it back from the inlaws ill keep it till the end of time plan is to get her a little gas saver and only use the durango when we must haul more than 4 or 5 people. or for those occasions when only something like the durango will get the job done. ive got my eye on one of the suzuki cars theres a dealer near me and they have the little 37mpg jobs epa estimate for around 12k new with one heck of a warr. sporty looking little thing. -- chris .

From : craig c

on may 30 1143 am christopher d. thompson nos...@nospam.nospam wrote hey craig havent seen ya post anything in a while. how ya doin man im great. you still bustin my butt on school work and family stuff here. keep up the good work. i dropped out in the fall of 2007 due to taking a new job getting married and buying a home. im hoping to get back to it this fall. havent needed to post anything here. at $4.69 per gallon for diesel my truck sits in the driveway 29 out of 30 days per month. the wife drops me off at work every morning. - btw ... did you have as many problems with the torque converter recall on your liberty crd it was dangerous to drive ... it kept lurching forward when coming to a stop. finally after a heated call to chrysler they agreed to put a whole new torque converter in it. no problems since. craig c. .

From : craig c

on may 28 826 am miles n...@nopers.com wrote april ended as a comparatively strong month. will have to see if may sustained that. thing is you often discount any stats that go against your belief and quote those that you agree with. thing is you label everyone a liberal or democrat if they dont agree with you. i swear miles reading your nonsense is exactly like turning on the tv and listening to to our fearless leader speak about ... anything. one dumbass is enough frankly. craig c. .

From : tbone

no numbers yet i see. let me know when you have something to say that has value. sorry max but i know you all to well. no matter what numbers i post you will just spin it or deny seeing it and you are simply not worth the trouble. funny how the governor of your state seems to see the big picture and the real problems as well as just about every financial instution on the plannet. they may not all fully agree on the cause but they do see that there are problems. the fact that you post and rely on numbers that you cant even explain says it all max. bye-bye -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodge

he showed the stats to prove how great the economy was in the 90s yet discounted them when they showed a strong economy after 2000. of course not a republican was in the white house and congress was republican controlled nothing could be going right. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york max dodge wrote miles tbone doesnt quote any stats. on the other hand you are correct he discounts any stats he disagrees with no matter the source. he showed the stats to prove how great the economy was in the 90s yet discounted them when they showed a strong economy after 2000. .

From : max dodge

and this would be different from you in what way this would be different from miles in that you havent provided any figures for him to refute factually or like you just because you dont like them. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york tbone wrote i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. april ended as a comparatively strong month. will have to see if may sustained that. thing is you often discount any stats that go against your belief and quote those that you agree with. and this would be different from you in what way -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone bring your stats to the table or shut the hell up. more anger lol! once again all that shows is the fact that you dont have a clue and realise how foolish you look. you like to post numbers so lets see you expalin them to us. i discussed stagflation several posts ago at length. we are not currently experiencing stagflation. no you didnt becaue you dont even know what it means. inflation isnt rising dramatically at all. over the past few years its stayed fairly steady between 1 and 5%. btw while you are claiming infaltion has gone up dramatically that same increase in percentage is the amount of dirt getting through a k&n filter yet you claim thats miniscule. inflation will rise dramatically when it rises more than two or three percent over a month like it did in the early 80s. yawn inflation or around 3% per month is a big deal when salaries are not increasing and the cost of fuel is rising as astounding rates. any rise in inflation that exceeds rise in income is a bad thing. what this comes down to is once again you claim to know it all yet wont provide any proof of your assertions. lol sorry max but i am in agreement with most of the financial institutions as well as the stock market. you otoh dont have a clue. babble on but you are done here. at least here you are correct i am done with you. i keep forgetting that arguing with an idiot serves no purpose other than to waste time and i have sadly wasted way to much time with you here. bye-bye. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving according to http//inflationdata.com/inflation/inflationrate/currentinflation.asp inflation is down from 3.98% in march to 3.94% in april. january was at 4.28% and february was at 4.03%. this proves that tbones claim of stagflation is false and his claim that inflation is rising is also false. it says no such thing max. to bad you dont understand wtf you are reading. it says exactly what it claims to say. which is nothing at all and if you understood what you were reading you would know that. while the numbers have gone down slightly there is no data about the rise or fall of the national income. rise and fall of national income has nothing to do with the rate of inflation. lol i never said that it did but it does affect the results and impact of this inflation on the economy. you also didnt bother to mention that we are almost a point and a half above what we were the same time last year. true we are above where we were last year. but the claim made by you was that inflation was increasing. it is not. once again max you make a fool out of yourself. in the long term inflation rose dramatically. in the past few months it dropped a little but in the last two months it barely dropped at all and i bet that the next figure will show a slight rise. the point is max that between last year and this year inflation has risen dramatically and even though the rate has dropped slightly in the short term the prices continue to increase and much faster that the level of most incomes which further hurts the economy. unless income has also increased by near or greater than this amount it is still stagflation. i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. income has nothing to with inflation stagflation or any other flation. inflation is a measure of the increase in price of various staple items over a set amount of time. as i said you really dont have a friggen clue. while you might be able to recite some definitions it is more than obvious that you really dont understand them. please define stagflation for us. according to http//www.bls.gov/.release/empsit.nr0.htm unemployment is down a tenth of a percent despite the first quarters loss of 250000 jobs. even at that number of jobs lost the first quarter of 2008 saw only a tenth of a percent rise in unemployment over the fourth quarter of 2007. but that still reveals no data about current salaries. if a person loses a job paying 60k and is forced to take one paying 30k that is not reflected here. it also does not take into account any people who have decided to try and go it on their own as they are no longer considered unemployed even if they are making no money at all. the jobless rate is not about pay rate. people who go it on their own are most certainly considered employed and will tell you about the taxes they have to pay because they are considered employed. again you have nothign to refute the data supplied except a blind eye. as i said max you really dont have a friggen clue. you are correct the jobless rate is not about pay rate which makes it a meaningless number to begin with. at one time there was a valid assumption that if someone lost their job they would find one at a similar pay rate. this i

From : max dodge

no numbers yet i see. let me know when you have something to say that has value. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york ok so if the percentage in april was 0.2% and we allow for an average of twice that say 0.5% each month from august of last year we get 5% total through may or nine months total. you say 5% is far less than it really is. so far ap says you are wrong. its time for you to present real numbers instead of refusing to look at the reported numbers. what are these numbers based on max is that percentage based on mortgages taken out within the last few years or all existing mortgages ap says 0.2% of mortgages. they did not qualify the number so it should be assumed it was all mortgages. feel free to look up aps story and judge for yourself. if this number is based on all mortages then it is of little value. the reality is ap reported the numbers you have reported nothing. ill take aps report. sure you will max because they agree with what you want to believe but you have no idea what they are based on. youve reported nothing nor have you supplied any sources. since ap reported solid numbers based on research theyve done ill take their numbers as the most correct available. again. being the most correct available and actually being correct can be two very different things. but even if they are 100% correct so what unemployment numbers have little meaning in todays economy and basing the mortgage default level on a percentage of all mortgages is misleading and again have no meaning in todays economy. dunno dont care it dropped. this proves your claim about stagflation is wrong. since you cannot back up your claim it proves nothing at all. my claim is based on an ap story. look it up. then go get your own numbers to prove me wrong. lol like you would or even could admit to being wrong about anything. all you need do is look at the reports available on yahoo. on the other hand you who refuses all offered numbers have also refused to offer any of your own. lol i watch the the financial channels cnbc and i see what shape the banks and builders are in. sorry max but you really dont have a clue. i have a clue and you have yet to post any facts or figures from your alleged sources. talk to your own governor and get back to me. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

ok so if the percentage in april was 0.2% and we allow for an average of twice that say 0.5% each month from august of last year we get 5% total through may or nine months total. you say 5% is far less than it really is. so far ap says you are wrong. its time for you to present real numbers instead of refusing to look at the reported numbers. what are these numbers based on max is that percentage based on mortgages taken out within the last few years or all existing mortgages ap says 0.2% of mortgages. they did not qualify the number so it should be assumed it was all mortgages. feel free to look up aps story and judge for yourself. if this number is based on all mortages then it is of little value. the reality is ap reported the numbers you have reported nothing. ill take aps report. sure you will max because they agree with what you want to believe but you have no idea what they are based on. youve reported nothing nor have you supplied any sources. since ap reported solid numbers based on research theyve done ill take their numbers as the most correct available. again. being the most correct available and actually being correct can be two very different things. but even if they are 100% correct so what unemployment numbers have little meaning in todays economy and basing the mortgage default level on a percentage of all mortgages is misleading and again have no meaning in todays economy. dunno dont care it dropped. this proves your claim about stagflation is wrong. since you cannot back up your claim it proves nothing at all. my claim is based on an ap story. look it up. then go get your own numbers to prove me wrong. lol like you would or even could admit to being wrong about anything. all you need do is look at the reports available on yahoo. on the other hand you who refuses all offered numbers have also refused to offer any of your own. lol i watch the the financial channels cnbc and i see what shape the banks and builders are in. sorry max but you really dont have a clue. i have a clue and you have yet to post any facts or figures from your alleged sources. talk to your own governor and get back to me. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodge

miles tbone doesnt quote any stats. on the other hand you are correct he discounts any stats he disagrees with no matter the source. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york tbone wrote i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. april ended as a comparatively strong month. will have to see if may sustained that. thing is you often discount any stats that go against your belief and quote those that you agree with. .

From : miles

tbone wrote tbone wrote i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. april ended as a comparatively strong month. will have to see if may sustained that. thing is you often discount any stats that go against your belief and quote those that you agree with. and this would be different from you in what way very different. i use the same stats to show how our economy has been doing the past 7 years as was used in the 90s. you on the other hand tout the great economy of the 90s using those same stats but discounted them the past 7 years. .

From : miles

tbone wrote well according to you your area is simply the place to be. if that is true then where are all of these engineers are you saying that they no longer exist gee what could possibly cause that there is a shortage of skilled mechanical structural and electronic engineers nationwide. its not unique to phoenix. for an experienced engineer depending on the area of experience it is far from a high salary depends on the job itself. but now youre spun from saying below average to saying not a high salary. good grief! well with its high population density..... you figure it out. much of the east cost is densly populated but its growth rate is very low and many cities are falling. meanwhile the west has been growing rapidly in most years. you figure it out. rather clear and clear are two different things. far clearer than nj which is one polluted state! course many areas export all their smog and crap elsewhere. cities like san francisco being on the coast do much the same thing. having clear air doesnt mean they dont produce a ton of crap. nj is one of the worst. ive been in newark. it wasnt even rather clear. i am fully aware of that. my point is that we have the ability to get water from this area as well as other areas such as our own mountians and we still have water supply issues during times of drought from over building. arizona hasnt had such water problems even in phoenix with its over 3 million metro area population. so what are you talking about water issues in the desert for your area has far worse problems. the point is that as it grows those reserves and their ability to sustain a drought are reduced. then when you add on idiots that try and turn the desert into florida or some tropical resort..... thats true nationwide. however arizona has much more water than most. theyve developed a much better water system that works and is currently being expanded. in states such as california they have water problems mostly caused by political roadblocks that have prevented increased water storage etc. actually i asked to see if you could explain it and as i thought you couldnt. roflmo!!! you honestly do not understand what median means!!! you are the one that stated that median income figures were skewed by a few very high income people. that proves you are clueless as to what median means. lol they pay less because the cost of living is less. partly but it doesnt usually balance out. .

From : max dodge

tbone bring your stats to the table or shut the hell up. i discussed stagflation several posts ago at length. we are not currently experiencing stagflation. inflation isnt rising dramatically at all. over the past few years its stayed fairly steady between 1 and 5%. btw while you are claiming infaltion has gone up dramatically that same increase in percentage is the amount of dirt getting through a k&n filter yet you claim thats miniscule. inflation will rise dramatically when it rises more than two or three percent over a month like it did in the early 80s. what this comes down to is once again you claim to know it all yet wont provide any proof of your assertions. babble on but you are done here. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york according to http//inflationdata.com/inflation/inflationrate/currentinflation.asp inflation is down from 3.98% in march to 3.94% in april. january was at 4.28% and february was at 4.03%. this proves that tbones claim of stagflation is false and his claim that inflation is rising is also false. it says no such thing max. to bad you dont understand wtf you are reading. it says exactly what it claims to say. which is nothing at all and if you understood what you were reading you would know that. while the numbers have gone down slightly there is no data about the rise or fall of the national income. rise and fall of national income has nothing to do with the rate of inflation. lol i never said that it did but it does affect the results and impact of this inflation on the economy. you also didnt bother to mention that we are almost a point and a half above what we were the same time last year. true we are above where we were last year. but the claim made by you was that inflation was increasing. it is not. once again max you make a fool out of yourself. in the long term inflation rose dramatically. in the past few months it dropped a little but in the last two months it barely dropped at all and i bet that the next figure will show a slight rise. the point is max that between last year and this year inflation has risen dramatically and even though the rate has dropped slightly in the short term the prices continue to increase and much faster that the level of most incomes which further hurts the economy. unless income has also increased by near or greater than this amount it is still stagflation. i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. income has nothing to with inflation stagflation or any other flation. inflation is a measure of the increase in price of various staple items over a set amount of time. as i said you really dont have a friggen clue. while you might be able to recite some definitions it is more than obvious that you really dont understand them. please define stagflation for us. according to http//www.bls.gov/.release/empsit.nr0.htm unemployment is down a tenth of a percent despite the first quarters loss of 250000 jobs. even at that number of jobs lost the first quarter of 2008 saw only a tenth of a percent rise in unemployment over the fourth quarter of 2007. but that still reveals no data about current salaries. if a person loses a job paying 60k and is forced to take one paying 30k that is not reflected here. it also does not take into account any people who have decided to try and go it on their own as they are no longer considered unemployed even if they are making no money at all. the jobless rate is not about pay rate. people who go it on their own are most certainly considered employed and will tell you about the taxes they have to pay because they are considered employed. again you have nothign to refute the data supplied except a blind eye. as i said max you really dont have a friggen clue. you are correct the jobless rate is not about pay rate which makes it a meaningless number to begin with. at one time there was a valid assumption that if someone lost their job they would find one at a similar pay rate. this is no longer a valid assumption. another assumption was that if someone lost their job they would find another one before their unemployment insurance ran out and if they didnt it was because they choose to leave the employment force. this is also no longer valid which makes the number inaccurate at best. i realize that this is well beyond your comprehension but the facts are what they are and they are that while these assumptions were valid this number was also a valid indicator on the state of the economy but in reality there are probably many more people unemployed than that number says and that many of those that are still employed are making less and in many cases much less than they were before and that hurts the econ

From : tbone

tbone wrote i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. april ended as a comparatively strong month. will have to see if may sustained that. thing is you often discount any stats that go against your belief and quote those that you agree with. and this would be different from you in what way -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote and thats why you are having such a hard time filling positions. in order for someone to work at your company the pay has to at least meet what they need to survive or they simply cannot work for you. and you feel that my company must pay far too little huh it cant possibly be because too few skilled workers looking for a job sorry tbone skilled workers are difficult to come by nationwide. that causes pay scales to go up not down. then perhaps your competitors are not paying a valid salary either. oh sure that must be it! well according to you your area is simply the place to be. if that is true then where are all of these engineers are you saying that they no longer exist gee what could possibly cause that you told me what the starting salary was and that you are looking for experienced people and you live in a city. sorry miles but the salary that you mentioned is far from excessive and below average in states like nj for the same skills. 75k-100k+ is not below average for even nj. for an experienced engineer depending on the area of experience it is far from a high salary we have a few from that area. they moved here because of low salaries compared with cost of living where they were. ya nj is the place people are swarming to live huh lol well with its high population density..... you figure it out. then why are you offering slightly above entry level pay entry level is what a college grad with no experience would make. you telling me a college grad entry level job pays 100k+ get real tbone not even close. i said that you were slightly above entry level and while that may be a bit of an exagurationmit is hardly a stunning salary what would cause many to uproot and move down there. lol you should be the last one to talk about polution compared to phoenix. downtown phoenix area has bad smog in the winter. the entire rest of the metro area sits on the opposite side of mountains and is rather clear. rather clear and clear are two different things. the point miles is that you are still in the desert and the more houses they build there the worse the water situation is going to get. we are dealing with the same thing here now and we are not in the desert. what you fail to realize is that the desert cities of arizona get no water from the desert. i am fully aware of that. my point is that we have the ability to get water from this area as well as other areas such as our own mountians and we still have water supply issues during times of drought from over building. arizona is mountainous with heavy snowpacks lakes and streams. the deserts below get their water from the mountain runoff through a very large system of lakes as well as from the colorado river. arizona has more water than it needs and sells the excess to california. the point is that as it grows those reserves and their ability to sustain a drought are reduced. then when you add on idiots that try and turn the desert into florida or some tropical resort..... do you understand the difference between median and average um it would appear you do not! please explain it to me. omg! you really dont know the difference between median and average!! lol they let anyone graduate high school! actually i asked to see if you could explain it and as i thought you couldnt. it is still a city and will be far more expensive to live in then a more rual area. cost of living wise thats not true. in rural areas there are few jobs and those generally pay far less than in the city. lol they pay less because the cost of living is less. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

tbone wrote and thats why you are having such a hard time filling positions. in order for someone to work at your company the pay has to at least meet what they need to survive or they simply cannot work for you. and you feel that my company must pay far too little huh it cant possibly be because too few skilled workers looking for a job sorry tbone skilled workers are difficult to come by nationwide. that causes pay scales to go up not down. then perhaps your competitors are not paying a valid salary either. oh sure that must be it! you told me what the starting salary was and that you are looking for experienced people and you live in a city. sorry miles but the salary that you mentioned is far from excessive and below average in states like nj for the same skills. 75k-100k+ is not below average for even nj. we have a few from that area. they moved here because of low salaries compared with cost of living where they were. ya nj is the place people are swarming to live huh lol then why are you offering slightly above entry level pay entry level is what a college grad with no experience would make. you telling me a college grad entry level job pays 100k+ get real tbone not even close. lol you should be the last one to talk about polution compared to phoenix. downtown phoenix area has bad smog in the winter. the entire rest of the metro area sits on the opposite side of mountains and is rather clear. the point miles is that you are still in the desert and the more houses they build there the worse the water situation is going to get. we are dealing with the same thing here now and we are not in the desert. what you fail to realize is that the desert cities of arizona get no water from the desert. arizona is mountainous with heavy snowpacks lakes and streams. the deserts below get their water from the mountain runoff through a very large system of lakes as well as from the colorado river. arizona has more water than it needs and sells the excess to california. do you understand the difference between median and average um it would appear you do not! please explain it to me. omg! you really dont know the difference between median and average!! lol they let anyone graduate high school! it is still a city and will be far more expensive to live in then a more rual area. cost of living wise thats not true. in rural areas there are few jobs and those generally pay far less than in the city. .

From : miles

tbone wrote i can see the problems that many others are having and how much worse it can get. the world has problems and always will. those that dwell on the negative will generally be less happy than those that see the good and think positive. you see doom and gloom in everything. not a good way to make it through the low times. besides things arent anywheres near as bad as youve painted them to be. most are doing just fine. meanwhile me and most of my conservative friends are happy doing well and living life to its fullest. on the backs of others. oh of course!! seems to you we all must be doing bad dwelling in gloom and doom or if not then were being bad and greedy to others. no other way!! of course you do as you and those like you are the cause of most of the issues that are hurting so many others. yep cant be successful and happy in your doom and gloom world. .

From : max dodge

tbone just show us any statistic that backs your wild claims. any at all. oh and do try to reply to the post where i gave you more stats and facts with more than a those arent accurate because i refuse to believe them. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york show me one that claims that they are not used. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving tbone wrote lol just about any of them miles and it is simply just common sense. any of them and yet you cant show one! unemployment is not computed mostly from unemployment claims. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote lol you really do like to spin. how exactly can you have such high growth and at the same time be one of the highest in property value declines as reported on msnbc yesterday 20% is growth!! lots of it! what msnbc failed to tell you was the amount of increase in values prior. phoenix saw the largest increases in the housing bubble in the country. that is correct as far as increases go but you cannot have both falling prices and rapid growth at the same time unless phoenix is either being populated by idiots or they are still building far more houses than are needed. if demand is high then prices either hold or go up not down unless the supply is even greater but even then why would you buy when it is almost a guarantee that you will lose money due to falling prices sorry miles but something just doesnt make much sense here! as you said that led to massive speculator buying and also a large price correction now. however from jan. to april of this year saw an increase in new home construction not a loss as the rest of the country is still experiencing. you still arguing that arizona and phoenix are not traditionally popular high growth areas new housing means nothing unless you have buyers for it and thats only going to happen if you have a limited supply of available housing or you dont mind building them at a loss. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

according to http//inflationdata.com/inflation/inflationrate/currentinflation.asp inflation is down from 3.98% in march to 3.94% in april. january was at 4.28% and february was at 4.03%. this proves that tbones claim of stagflation is false and his claim that inflation is rising is also false. it says no such thing max. to bad you dont understand wtf you are reading. it says exactly what it claims to say. which is nothing at all and if you understood what you were reading you would know that. while the numbers have gone down slightly there is no data about the rise or fall of the national income. rise and fall of national income has nothing to do with the rate of inflation. lol i never said that it did but it does affect the results and impact of this inflation on the economy. you also didnt bother to mention that we are almost a point and a half above what we were the same time last year. true we are above where we were last year. but the claim made by you was that inflation was increasing. it is not. once again max you make a fool out of yourself. in the long term inflation rose dramatically. in the past few months it dropped a little but in the last two months it barely dropped at all and i bet that the next figure will show a slight rise. the point is max that between last year and this year inflation has risen dramatically and even though the rate has dropped slightly in the short term the prices continue to increase and much faster that the level of most incomes which further hurts the economy. unless income has also increased by near or greater than this amount it is still stagflation. i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. income has nothing to with inflation stagflation or any other flation. inflation is a measure of the increase in price of various staple items over a set amount of time. as i said you really dont have a friggen clue. while you might be able to recite some definitions it is more than obvious that you really dont understand them. please define stagflation for us. according to http//www.bls.gov/.release/empsit.nr0.htm unemployment is down a tenth of a percent despite the first quarters loss of 250000 jobs. even at that number of jobs lost the first quarter of 2008 saw only a tenth of a percent rise in unemployment over the fourth quarter of 2007. but that still reveals no data about current salaries. if a person loses a job paying 60k and is forced to take one paying 30k that is not reflected here. it also does not take into account any people who have decided to try and go it on their own as they are no longer considered unemployed even if they are making no money at all. the jobless rate is not about pay rate. people who go it on their own are most certainly considered employed and will tell you about the taxes they have to pay because they are considered employed. again you have nothign to refute the data supplied except a blind eye. as i said max you really dont have a friggen clue. you are correct the jobless rate is not about pay rate which makes it a meaningless number to begin with. at one time there was a valid assumption that if someone lost their job they would find one at a similar pay rate. this is no longer a valid assumption. another assumption was that if someone lost their job they would find another one before their unemployment insurance ran out and if they didnt it was because they choose to leave the employment force. this is also no longer valid which makes the number inaccurate at best. i realize that this is well beyond your comprehension but the facts are what they are and they are that while these assumptions were valid this number was also a valid indicator on the state of the economy but in reality there are probably many more people unemployed than that number says and that many of those that are still employed are making less and in many cases much less than they were before and that hurts the economy and makes this number just about meaningless here. according to http//www.npr.org/templates/story/story.phpstoryid=18943622 home forclosures in the worst metropolitan area were 5% in detroit in 2007. this was 4.8 times the national average. this means the national average is just over 1%. thus 99% of homeowners lol are you really this stupid. this data means nothing. 5% of all homes is a meaningless number. how many of the loans taken out in the past 2 years when the prices were at there highest have gone into forclosure this is where the real problem lies as the banks will never recover all of the money that they lent out you really dont understand this stuff do you you have no clue. again. you refute numbers because you dont like them bringing no proof of any of your stupid ideas to the table. no i refute them because t

From : max dodge

ok so if the percentage in april was 0.2% and we allow for an average of twice that say 0.5% each month from august of last year we get 5% total through may or nine months total. you say 5% is far less than it really is. so far ap says you are wrong. its time for you to present real numbers instead of refusing to look at the reported numbers. what are these numbers based on max is that percentage based on mortgages taken out within the last few years or all existing mortgages ap says 0.2% of mortgages. they did not qualify the number so it should be assumed it was all mortgages. feel free to look up aps story and judge for yourself. the reality is ap reported the numbers you have reported nothing. ill take aps report. sure you will max because they agree with what you want to believe but you have no idea what they are based on. youve reported nothing nor have you supplied any sources. since ap reported solid numbers based on research theyve done ill take their numbers as the most correct available. again. dunno dont care it dropped. this proves your claim about stagflation is wrong. since you cannot back up your claim it proves nothing at all. my claim is based on an ap story. look it up. then go get your own numbers to prove me wrong. all you need do is look at the reports available on yahoo. on the other hand you who refuses all offered numbers have also refused to offer any of your own. lol i watch the the financial channels cnbc and i see what shape the banks and builders are in. sorry max but you really dont have a clue. i have a clue and you have yet to post any facts or figures from your alleged sources. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : miles

tbone wrote show me one that claims that they are not used. never said that unemployment claims were not used. i said they were not the primary source of data used to compute unemployment stats. you did say just that. .

From : miles

tbone wrote really according to you your city has been at a steady 20% for years. i gave the exact years for that 20% figure because you claimed phoenix isnt the place where so many would want to live. the last few years its growth has slowed yet is still positive while most of the country is seeing a negative growth rate. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote why is it that you seen to think that a living wage is a high salary there is a big difference between the two. tbone you fail to realize that pay is and should be based on abilities and not based on need. now if you disagree with that then there are countries that believe in pay based on need. are they the better place to be they have happier workers and thats why you are having such a hard time filling positions. in order for someone to work at your company the pay has to at least meet what they need to survive or they simply cannot work for you. once again nuthin but distortions and bullshit. who said anything should be handed out what exactly is you definition of rewards basing ones salaries on needs rather than abilities is handouts. lol more spin. a salary needs at a minimum the amount to support the needs of the average person living in that area. anything above that can be considered awards. and that is why your company is having the hard time that it is attracting talent. how so our wages are considerbly higher than the average along with above average benifits packages. we pay for high skills and pay well to keep such. if we didnt they would go to our competitors. however contrary to your belief our competitors are having a hard time finding skilled workers as well. then perhaps your competitors are not paying a valid salary either. you told me what the starting salary was and that you are looking for experienced people and you live in a city. sorry miles but the salary that you mentioned is far from excessive and below average in states like nj for the same skills. you can only set the bar so low and eventually people are simply going to choose to do something else. and how much experience do they require to get hired within this salary range would a college grad with lets say a masters and little work experience qualify how about a ba a college degree isnt required nor a masters or ba. experience is. these jobs are not entry level. then why are you offering slightly above entry level pay that still doesnt change the fact that the climate there is not for everyone. neither is the midwest east southeast etc. everyone has different tastes. however the fact still remains that the southwest continues to be the fastest growing. phoenix housing grew last month not declined like most of the country has. so did nc what is your point they had grass lawns and fruit trees it looked like a mini florida except for the smog that florida doesnt have. florida has incredible humidity hurricanes and flat as a pancake. sure it appeals to many. its a very crowded over populated state. since you referred to an entire state florida and not a particular city then you must be aware that arizona is far from all hot desert. there are many areas of florida that are not heavily populated but what exactly does florida have to do with the point at hand. i didnt say that florida was a better place to live only that many of the people that live in phoenix are trying to make it into something else. much is thickly wooded and quite snowy and cold. ill take the wide open spaces of arizona and the southwest any day over the crowded polluted east coast cities. lol you should be the last one to talk about polution compared to phoenix. and even then there were water issues and im sure that it isnt any better now and probably worse unless some serious restrictions have been put in place which would make it less desirable for many and perhaps more desirable for some. there were a few years where water levels in lakes were rather low. we had several years of little rain and snowfall in the state. levels are back to normal now. during the low times there were no restrictions in place. contrary to your beliefs there are far worse states with regards to water. california several of the southeast states etc. for instance. the point miles is that you are still in the desert and the more houses they build there the worse the water situation is going to get. we are dealing with the same thing here now and we are not in the desert. lol you are kidding right!!!! i doubt very much that you could live quite nice on $45000 there. thats not what i said but i know how you love to twist things! to correct you i stated the median income here was 45k and most at my company are well above that. so what what is the median income or better yet the required income to live near your company if i lived in pheonix what salary woud i need to support a family of 4 you trying to say that entry level jobs should earn more than 45k they need and want more if that is what it take to live in that area and im not talking luxury then yes or you will not be able to retain valuable employees. it is so right wing of you to come up with a deceptive number like the

From : miles

tbone wrote that is correct as far as increases go but you cannot have both falling prices and rapid growth at the same time um true...so yet phoenix is seeing positive growth rate and slowly rising house prices right now. most of the country is still negative. yet you still argue that phoenix isnt a place where people want to be. new housing means nothing unless you have buyers for it sorry tom argue all you want but phoenix is seeing positive growth and rising home prices now. most of the country is not. ya phoenix is not the place people want to be!! too funny. .

From : miles

tbone wrote yawn. that would be your bias miles. according to you if it isnt right wing then it must be left and there is nothing else. huh ive said fox is right wing biased. at least fox does have a few liberal hosts and guest commentators on. cbs never has any right wing hosts. but cbs is very left wing biased and yet you claim otherwise. cnn abc are also left wing biased but you wont admit that because they agree with your views by leaving out the right wing side of stories. .

From : milesmiles

tbone wrote nope. you still didnt answer the question. what is your definition of subprime and who did they go to mostly went to people trying to buy far more than they could afford. lenders conned buyers into subprimes which allowed them to qualify for a far larger more expensive home than they would otherwise. most buyers were not poor not high risk and not poor credit and not low income. .

From : max dodge

according to http//inflationdata.com/inflation/inflationrate/currentinflation.asp inflation is down from 3.98% in march to 3.94% in april. january was at 4.28% and february was at 4.03%. this proves that tbones claim of stagflation is false and his claim that inflation is rising is also false. it says no such thing max. to bad you dont understand wtf you are reading. it says exactly what it claims to say. while the numbers have gone down slightly there is no data about the rise or fall of the national income. rise and fall of national income has nothing to do with the rate of inflation. you also didnt bother to mention that we are almost a point and a half above what we were the same time last year. true we are above where we were last year. but the claim made by you was that inflation was increasing. it is not. unless income has also increased by near or greater than this amount it is still stagflation. i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. income has nothing to with inflation stagflation or any other flation. inflation is a measure of the increase in price of various staple items over a set amount of time. according to http//www.bls.gov/.release/empsit.nr0.htm unemployment is down a tenth of a percent despite the first quarters loss of 250000 jobs. even at that number of jobs lost the first quarter of 2008 saw only a tenth of a percent rise in unemployment over the fourth quarter of 2007. but that still reveals no data about current salaries. if a person loses a job paying 60k and is forced to take one paying 30k that is not reflected here. it also does not take into account any people who have decided to try and go it on their own as they are no longer considered unemployed even if they are making no money at all. the jobless rate is not about pay rate. people who go it on their own are most certainly considered employed and will tell you about the taxes they have to pay because they are considered employed. again you have nothign to refute the data supplied except a blind eye. according to http//www.npr.org/templates/story/story.phpstoryid=18943622 home forclosures in the worst metropolitan area were 5% in detroit in 2007. this was 4.8 times the national average. this means the national average is just over 1%. thus 99% of homeowners lol are you really this stupid. this data means nothing. 5% of all homes is a meaningless number. how many of the loans taken out in the past 2 years when the prices were at there highest have gone into forclosure this is where the real problem lies as the banks will never recover all of the money that they lent out you really dont understand this stuff do you you have no clue. again. you refute numbers because you dont like them bringing no proof of any of your stupid ideas to the table. according to http//money.cnn.com/2008/03/06/realestate/defaultscontinueclimb/index.htm home foreclosures in march reached 900000 or 2.04% of all mortgages. another 0.83% saw the process inititated. as such less than 3% of mortgaged properties are in foreclosure. so what who cares. your figures are adding in all homes including the ones already paid for. the banks really dont care much about them. old mortgages also dont mean much as the banks already made their money back on them and most of them are doing just fine. it is the new loans where the bank has the most to lose that count get it yet all forclosures count just ask the people going through it. get it yet according to tbone none of the above is true and all the sources are biased. your turn tbone. post the real numbers. perhaps you should post valid points and realistic facts. no you should. youve decided that miles and i have no clue. enlighten us jackass. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : tbone

according to http//inflationdata.com/inflation/inflationrate/currentinflation.asp inflation is down from 3.98% in march to 3.94% in april. january was at 4.28% and february was at 4.03%. this proves that tbones claim of stagflation is false and his claim that inflation is rising is also false. it says no such thing max. to bad you dont understand wtf you are reading. while the numbers have gone down slightly there is no data about the rise or fall of the national income. you also didnt bother to mention that we are almost a point and a half above what we were the same time last year. unless income has also increased by near or greater than this amount it is still stagflation. i will be curious to see what the may numbers show as the amount of decrease between march and april was almost nothing. according to http//www.bls.gov/.release/empsit.nr0.htm unemployment is down a tenth of a percent despite the first quarters loss of 250000 jobs. even at that number of jobs lost the first quarter of 2008 saw only a tenth of a percent rise in unemployment over the fourth quarter of 2007. but that still reveals no data about current salaries. if a person loses a job paying 60k and is forced to take one paying 30k that is not reflected here. it also does not take into account any people who have decided to try and go it on their own as they are no longer considered unemployed even if they are making no money at all. according to http//www.npr.org/templates/story/story.phpstoryid=18943622 home forclosures in the worst metropolitan area were 5% in detroit in 2007. this was 4.8 times the national average. this means the national average is just over 1%. thus 99% of homeowners lol are you really this stupid. this data means nothing. 5% of all homes is a meaningless number. how many of the loans taken out in the past 2 years when the prices were at there highest have gone into forclosure this is where the real problem lies as the banks will never recover all of the money that they lent out you really dont understand this stuff do you according to http//money.cnn.com/2008/03/06/realestate/defaultscontinueclimb/index.htm home foreclosures in march reached 900000 or 2.04% of all mortgages. another 0.83% saw the process inititated. as such less than 3% of mortgaged properties are in foreclosure. so what who cares. your figures are adding in all homes including the ones already paid for. the banks really dont care much about them. old mortgages also dont mean much as the banks already made their money back on them and most of them are doing just fine. it is the new loans where the bank has the most to lose that count get it yet according to tbone none of the above is true and all the sources are biased. your turn tbone. post the real numbers. perhaps you should post valid points and realistic facts. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

less than one fifth of 1% are in foreclosure. its a very good number. the exact definition of this number is... one in fivehundred nineteen houses is in foreclosure proceedings. given that the process takes at least three months it probably covers all of the first quarter as well. lol get real. do you really think that all of the foreclosures started in the first quarter i hate to burst your bubble but an uncontested foreclosure can happen much faster than that. now the bank or whatever financial may still be going after the homeowner for fines or other compensation and that could take months or even years but the foreclosure itself could be completed within a month. ok so if the percentage in april was 0.2% and we allow for an average of twice that say 0.5% each month from august of last year we get 5% total through may or nine months total. you say 5% is far less than it really is. so far ap says you are wrong. its time for you to present real numbers instead of refusing to look at the reported numbers. what are these numbers based on max is that percentage based on mortgages taken out within the last few years or all existing mortgages you can close your eyes as tight as you want to max it still has no effect on reality. the reality is ap reported the numbers you have reported nothing. ill take aps report. sure you will max because they agree with what you want to believe but you have no idea what they are based on. dropped to what dunno dont care it dropped. this proves your claim about stagflation is wrong. since you cannot back up your claim it proves nothing at all. all you need do is look at the reports available on yahoo. on the other hand you who refuses all offered numbers have also refused to offer any of your own. lol i watch the the financial channels cnbc and i see what shape the banks and builders are in. sorry max but you really dont have a clue. what a whiner you are. anything to claim that numbers gathered by people with far more expertise than you are wrong. for the record my source wouldnt fudge the numbers. for the record how do i know you even have a source. for all i know your source could be fox . any way that you want to spin it max people will do whatever they can to make themselves look good and figures are fudged all of the time. not all the time just when you look at them. lol sure max. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote the fact that they dont report much right wing stories actually shows there attempt to reduce bias. huh if they report left wing stories they arent biased huh too funny! at least you just showed your own true bias! yawn. that would be your bias miles. according to you if it isnt right wing then it must be left and there is nothing else. to me there are right wing left wing and everything else which is neither. unlike you miles i can see when something is right biased left biased or simply a story that is neither. what i was saying was unlike fox they dont accredit all good to one party and all bad to the other. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote lol it was a housing bubble and the economy was far from booming. lol youre one to talk! you blab all about the great economy of the 90s and ignore the tech bubble that it was. thats because the tech bubble as you call it created high paying jobs all over the place and many were doing well not just the tech investors. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote once again what you say makes no sense. if what you say is true then there could never be a building boom as there would never be enough workers. most cities do not sustain building booms. construction workers move around the country following the work. however what you say is true. in a booming city such as phoenix in most years finding enough framers drywallers etc. can be very difficult. most construction sites always have huge signs advertising for such. yea because they are looking for cheap labor. if the field workers move with it as you say why are they standing on the street looking for work why didnt they just move to the next area like you claim that they do i dont see such workers on the street corners. ive been all over the country and have not seen anyone on a street corner looking for construction work. your area must be unique. nice try miles but im not the one who made that claim that would be roy but even here i have seen it. you otoh see only what you want to see. no city has a sustained amount of construction with a steady number of workers. not gonna happen. it varies up and down. really according to you your city has been at a steady 20% for years. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote wtf are you talking about miles what exactly is your definition of subprime sorry miles but there is a big difference between high risk and poor credit and they do not always go hand in hand. ill clarify for ya! most subprimes did not go to high risk or poor credit or low income etc. got it nope. you still didnt answer the question. what is your definition of subprime and who did they go to -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote things are bad and it is not just democrats that see it. see what i mean with you always looking negative no its called looking at the big bicture. im doing ok myself but unlike you i can see the problems that many others are having and how much worse it can get. meanwhile me and most of my conservative friends are happy doing well and living life to its fullest. on the backs of others. sure we face the same ups and downs but we have a totally different look towards things....postive and happy rather than negative doom and gloom. of course you do as you and those like you are the cause of most of the issues that are hurting so many others. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote while the rising price of oil is one of the biggest problems it is further increased by falling home values and stagnent income levels. home prices have simply returned to where they should be. that is correct. its a market correction after a massivly over inflated bubble. once again that is correct. my home is down $75k from where it was 2 years ago. yes but you didnt buy it 2 year ago when it was worth $75k more than it is now and many people did and are now stuck with negative equity and high mortgage payments. please state where you obtained your data proving stagnant income levels . you are kidding right!!! just about every financial agency has made this claim. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

tbone wrote lol you really do like to spin. how exactly can you have such high growth and at the same time be one of the highest in property value declines as reported on msnbc yesterday 20% is growth!! lots of it! what msnbc failed to tell you was the amount of increase in values prior. phoenix saw the largest increases in the housing bubble in the country. as you said that led to massive speculator buying and also a large price correction now. however from jan. to april of this year saw an increase in new home construction not a loss as the rest of the country is still experiencing. you still arguing that arizona and phoenix are not traditionally popular high growth areas .

From : miles

tbone wrote once again what you say makes no sense. if what you say is true then there could never be a building boom as there would never be enough workers. most cities do not sustain building booms. construction workers move around the country following the work. however what you say is true. in a booming city such as phoenix in most years finding enough framers drywallers etc. can be very difficult. most construction sites always have huge signs advertising for such. if the field workers move with it as you say why are they standing on the street looking for work why didnt they just move to the next area like you claim that they do i dont see such workers on the street corners. ive been all over the country and have not seen anyone on a street corner looking for construction work. your area must be unique. no city has a sustained amount of construction with a steady number of workers. not gonna happen. it varies up and down. .

From : tbone

this is your most intelligent post in this entire thread. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. hopefully the money made available in the fourth quarter of last year will start to be returned to the fed and there will be a shift away from oil speculation. sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodge

god only knows what you are talking about since you havent referred to a solid bit of proof for anything youve claimed. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york max dodge wrote if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. it already has improved slightly last time i checked. one of the biggest problems is the rising cost of oil which is always bought in us$s. while the rising price of oil is one of the biggest problems it is further increased by falling home values and stagnent income levels. oil prices are not affected by home values at all. stagnant income levels do not have an effect on oil prices either. i was talking about what compounds the problem or rising oil prices not what effects the price itself. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodge

tbone you need to read this http//.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080524/aponbige/moneyinthetank;ylt=ap8cwbvke5vkdolowbzp7r6s0nue take note of the paragraphs that say prices are a function of the open market the result of futures contracts being traded on the new york mercantile exchange or nymex and other exchanges around the world. buying the current july crude oil futures contract means youre buying oil that will be delivered by the end of july. but most investors who trade futures have no intention of ever accepting the underlying oil like stock investors who frequently buy and sell their holdings theyre simply betting that prices will rise or fall. of late on the nymex oil futures have been rising. why blame the falling dollar. oil is priced in u.s. dollars and the weaker the dollar gets the more attractive dollar-denominated oil contracts are to foreign investors - or any investor looking for a safe haven in the turbulent stock market. the rush of buyers keeps pushing oil futures to a series of new records and the rest of the energy complex including gasoline futures has followed. that pushes up the price of gas that goes into your tank. or will you now claim that ap is flawed and has no accuracy to their stories -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. proof speculators do not normally start trends they follow them and there simply not enough of them to cause the price to rise like this. the real problem is in demand. do to our idiotic globalization we have awakened a few sleeping giants such as india and china. now many of the people in these countries can afford and want things such as cars and they require fuel. then when you add in the fact that these two countries as well as a few others subsidize the cost of fuel the soaring cost of oil has no effect on the citizens of these countries and the demand continues. if it were primarily caused by pure speculation the last rise in oil supplies should have sent the price of oil down but instead it not only held it went up. now the word on the street is that many of these countries will end their subsidies of fuel prices very soon as well as china after the olympics which will hopefully return the price of oil to a more managable level. that is until the moronic population of the us gets another bug up there ass and begins buying oversized gas guzzeling beasts again and since we have already done this very thing twice before i see no reason why it will not happen again. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodge

max dodge wrote if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. it already has improved slightly last time i checked. one of the biggest problems is the rising cost of oil which is always bought in us$s. while the rising price of oil is one of the biggest problems it is further increased by falling home values and stagnent income levels. oil prices are not affected by home values at all. stagnant income levels do not have an effect on oil prices either. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : Annonymous

on fri 23 may 2008 120224 -0400 tbone noway@nothere.com wrote tbone wrote that would make sense except for one small issue and that would be where did all of these people come from to begin with i really dont think that the construction worker fairy just dropped them all off there and then simply abandoned them. it is more like these workers came from other fields where they either lost their jobs or were not making enough money to survive. they came from the wherever their last job was. most likely in construction. thats the construction biz. it goes up and down from town to town and the field workers move with it. they go to the town thats got the building going on at the time. once again what you say makes no sense. well miles has no special rights to that claim. neither one of you two make a bit of sense. if you two enjoy this sophomoric crap you are idiots.......as in truly brainless. if you actually think that you are having an argument that is by any definition intelligent then you are both idiots.......as in morons. thats all im sayin. if what you say is true then there could never be a building boom as there would never be enough workers. if the field workers move with it as you say why are they standing on the street looking for work why didnt they just move to the next area like you claim that they do .

From : miles

tbone wrote wtf are you talking about miles what exactly is your definition of subprime sorry miles but there is a big difference between high risk and poor credit and they do not always go hand in hand. ill clarify for ya! most subprimes did not go to high risk or poor credit or low income etc. got it .

From : miles

tbone wrote things are bad and it is not just democrats that see it. see what i mean with you always looking negative meanwhile me and most of my conservative friends are happy doing well and living life to its fullest. sure we face the same ups and downs but we have a totally different look towards things....postive and happy rather than negative doom and gloom. .

From : miles

tbone wrote while the rising price of oil is one of the biggest problems it is further increased by falling home values and stagnent income levels. home prices have simply returned to where they should be. its a market correction after a massivly over inflated bubble. my home is down $75k from where it was 2 years ago. that puts it slightly above where it was 3 years ago. please state where you obtained your data proving stagnant income levels . .

From : max dodge

sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. proof -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. hopefully the money made available in the fourth quarter of last year will start to be returned to the fed and there will be a shift away from oil speculation. sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodge

-- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. hopefully the money made available in the fourth quarter of last year will start to be returned to the fed and there will be a shift away from oil speculation. sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

max dodge wrote if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. it already has improved slightly last time i checked. one of the biggest problems is the rising cost of oil which is always bought in us$s. while the rising price of oil is one of the biggest problems it is further increased by falling home values and stagnent income levels. oil prices are not affected by home values at all. stagnant income levels do not have an effect on oil prices either. i was talking about what compounds the problem or rising oil prices not what effects the price itself. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodge

sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. proof speculators do not normally start trends they follow them and there simply not enough of them to cause the price to rise like this. well thats where you start to be wrong. there have always been enough speculators since anyone with money can be a speculator especially now that the pc can get you on the world markets. so weve got the numbers. next with the dollar down the way it is a lot of normally conservative overseas investment funds have extra cash. commodities like oil are a great way to hedge against the falling dollar. hell if you doubt me take a look at any ap story about oil prices. there is always a short paragraph explaining this. thus we also have the cash. numbers of investors with extra cash to invest and they want to protect themselves against the falling dollar. oil is the way to do it. the real problem is in demand. the demand currently is not any more than it was this time last year according to many sources including this one http//www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ipsr/t17.xls if you look u.s. demand falls slightly over the past year. also were using about 25% of the oil compared to some that say we use 33%. another interesting note the europeans use 75% as much as we do yet have roughly 50% of the population and area. this site http//omrpublic.iea.org/ suggests that global oil product demand has been lowered for both 2007 and 2008 to 85.8 mb/d and 86.8 mb/d respectively. slower economic growth high prices and 2006 baseline adjustments suggest that oecd oil demand will contract for the third successive year in 2008. non-oecd demand growth in 2008 led by china and the middle east remains strong at 3.7% or 1.4 mb/d leaving growth for the world as a whole at 1.2% +1.0 mb/d. demand appears to be dropping even with china using more. true this is due to prices but the prices are driving demand down rather than demand driving prices up. do to our idiotic globalization we have awakened a few sleeping giants such as india and china. now many of the people in these countries can afford and want things such as cars and they require fuel. our idiotic globalization was/is driven by two things capitalism and humanitarianism. we want cheaper goods but we dont want the them made in sweatshops. then when you add in the fact that these two countries as well as a few others subsidize the cost of fuel the soaring cost of oil has no effect on the citizens of these countries and the demand continues. thats true. but as noted above worldwide demand is on a downward trend. if it were primarily caused by pure speculation the last rise in oil supplies should have sent the price of oil down but instead it not only held it went up. actually your statement above should read since it was primarily caused by pure speculation the last rise in oil supplies should have sent the price of oil down but instead it not only held it went up. what you seem to have missed is you note that supplies have gone up. you also note that the normal result is prices will go down. you further note they did not. you failed to note that the reason is exactly what you discarded speculation. now the word on the street is that many of these countries will end their subsidies of fuel prices very soon as well as china after the olympics which will hopefully return the price of oil to a more managable level. this may have an effect but the primary reason why we have high prices is because of the low value of the dollar. this can be directly attributed to the fed flooding the market with money to keep wall street banks solvent. the problem is this if the fed had not flooded the market then more banks would have failed dumping more people out of work causing a huge ripple effect on the world economy. instead we average joes get to suffer through the results of greedy bankers that made stupid decisions and used questionable lending 120% equity loans on a home practices. that is until the moronic population of the us gets another bug up there ass and begins buying oversized gas guzzeling beasts again and since we have already done this very thing twice before i see no reason why it will not happen again. sure itll happen again and again. no big deal thats economics 101. but the real question here is this where is your proof that speculation has nothing to do with the price of oil ive shown proof of world demand going down. ive also shown proof that the dollar is weak and told you that you can find proof of the connection in any ap story on oil. now again where is your proof that its a simple demand problem -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : max dodge

sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. proof speculators do not normally start trends they follow them and there simply not enough of them to cause the price to rise like this. well thats where you start to be wrong. there have always been enough speculators since anyone with money can be a speculator especially now that the pc can get you on the world markets. so weve got the numbers. next with the dollar down the way it is a lot of normally conservative overseas investment funds have extra cash. commodities like oil are a great way to hedge against the falling dollar. hell if you doubt me take a look at any ap story about oil prices. there is always a short paragraph explaining this. thus we also have the cash. numbers of investors with extra cash to invest and they want to protect themselves against the falling dollar. oil is the way to do it. the real problem is in demand. the demand currently is not any more than it was this time last year according to many sources including this one http//www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ipsr/t17.xls if you look u.s. demand falls slightly over the past year. also were using about 25% of the oil compared to some that say we use 33%. another interesting note the europeans use 75% as much as we do yet have roughly 50% of the population and area. this site http//omrpublic.iea.org/ suggests that global oil product demand has been lowered for both 2007 and 2008 to 85.8 mb/d and 86.8 mb/d respectively. slower economic growth high prices and 2006 baseline adjustments suggest that oecd oil demand will contract for the third successive year in 2008. non-oecd demand growth in 2008 led by china and the middle east remains strong at 3.7% or 1.4 mb/d leaving growth for the world as a whole at 1.2% +1.0 mb/d. demand appears to be dropping even with china using more. true this is due to prices but the prices are driving demand down rather than demand driving prices up. do to our idiotic globalization we have awakened a few sleeping giants such as india and china. now many of the people in these countries can afford and want things such as cars and they require fuel. our idiotic globalization was/is driven by two things capitalism and humanitarianism. we want cheaper goods but we dont want the them made in sweatshops. then when you add in the fact that these two countries as well as a few others subsidize the cost of fuel the soaring cost of oil has no effect on the citizens of these countries and the demand continues. thats true. but as noted above worldwide demand is on a downward trend. if it were primarily caused by pure speculation the last rise in oil supplies should have sent the price of oil down but instead it not only held it went up. actually your statement above should read since it was primarily caused by pure speculation the last rise in oil supplies should have sent the price of oil down but instead it not only held it went up. what you seem to have missed is you note that supplies have gone up. you also note that the normal result is prices will go down. you further note they did not. you failed to note that the reason is exactly what you discarded speculation. now the word on the street is that many of these countries will end their subsidies of fuel prices very soon as well as china after the olympics which will hopefully return the price of oil to a more managable level. this may have an effect but the primary reason why we have high prices is because of the low value of the dollar. this can be directly attributed to the fed flooding the market with money to keep wall street banks solvent. the problem is this if the fed had not flooded the market then more banks would have failed dumping more people out of work causing a huge ripple effect on the world economy. instead we average joes get to suffer through the results of greedy bankers that made stupid decisions and used questionable lending 120% equity loans on a home practices. that is until the moronic population of the us gets another bug up there ass and begins buying oversized gas guzzeling beasts again and since we have already done this very thing twice before i see no reason why it will not happen again. sure itll happen again and again. no big deal thats economics 101. but the real question here is this where is your proof that speculation has nothing to do with the price of oil ive shown proof of world demand going down. ive also shown proof that the dollar is weak and told you that you can find proof of the connection in any ap story on oil. now again where is your proof that its a simple demand problem -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : tbone

sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. proof speculators do not normally start trends they follow them and there simply not enough of them to cause the price to rise like this. the real problem is in demand. do to our idiotic globalization we have awakened a few sleeping giants such as india and china. now many of the people in these countries can afford and want things such as cars and they require fuel. then when you add in the fact that these two countries as well as a few others subsidize the cost of fuel the soaring cost of oil has no effect on the citizens of these countries and the demand continues. if it were primarily caused by pure speculation the last rise in oil supplies should have sent the price of oil down but instead it not only held it went up. now the word on the street is that many of these countries will end their subsidies of fuel prices very soon as well as china after the olympics which will hopefully return the price of oil to a more managable level. that is until the moronic population of the us gets another bug up there ass and begins buying oversized gas guzzeling beasts again and since we have already done this very thing twice before i see no reason why it will not happen again. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

... the numbers used to determine unemployment are the most accurate given. and this means what oh yea not a dam thing. just because they are the most accurate given does not mean that they actually are accurate or even close. it means you have no other numbers no other source and no way to refute what ive posted thats what it means. i can make up some numbers if it makes you feel better but they would be no more accurate than the ones that you posted. how accurate they are is beyond your or my ability to know since there is no other method. therefore the numbers presented are the best to be had. which again means nothing. actually i am wrong here. since you have claimed that the accuracy is beyond either of our ability to know they are worse than meaningless as they can actually be purposely misleading us. they could be but they arent. thats just your paranoid view. how do you know you were the one that made the claim that how accurate they are is beyond your or my ability to know so by your own admission you dont. sorry no. stagflation was the 1970s. now we still have economic growth unemployment isnt rising at a terrible rate if at all and inflation isnt very high. lol inflation is high compared to increases in income. thats not what you originally said. i know what i said but what is the point of beating a dead horse. you are only going to see what you want to and never admit to any type of error so what is the point further id venture a guess that some employers give more than 5% raises per year. and thats all it would be is a guess and a bad one at that. while im sure that a few did get that and possibly more most did not. thus your original statment is clearly forgotten now that you know you are wrong and your new claim is debatable depending on employee and employer pay rates. lol wrong again and im not the one that came up with this. this came from the experts on cnbc whos word i would take over yours any day of the week. any way you want to spin it max prices on most things are going up due to massive increases in energy and commodities costs while employee salaries are stagnant and the economic growth is miniscule and that is stagfaltion. again false. as much as i hate to say it the economy was doing very well during the bush presidency after 2002. until 2007 it was in a boom period especially the housing industry. lol it was a housing bubble and the economy was far from booming. if the economy was so great his approval rating would not be the disaster that it is. first yes it was a housing bubble with regard to prices. it is not a housing bubble with regard to the need for new housing. lol you really need to read some of those reports you keep talking about. there was no need for most of that housing because if there were there simply could not be what is now considered an 11 month supply. second the approval rating of a president proves nothing when it comes to the health of the economy. are you really this stupid it damn well does. what this tells me is that again you have no solid proof of what you are trying to claim so you insist on tying two totally unrelated concepts together in the hopes of making yourself sound logical. no it is just more of your lame spin as usual. the biggest indicator of the dollar is the oil market. otherwise commodities trade just like everything else. stagflation isnt an issue at all at this time. more complete crap. the dollar value is only a small portion of the problem. if salaries remain consistant and inflation increases then you have stagflation even if the economy has a microscopic level of growth. however inflation has decreased since the first of the year. thus no matter what you call stagflation if it involves a rising rate of inflation its not happening now due to the decrease in the rate of inflation. yawn please show me exactly where prices are falling. now the rate of infaltion may have dropped some but until it drops below the level of pay increases it still exists. for someone with 2 degrees you still dont have a clue. this is because of the low dollar not the economy. try reading a few reports on this rather than making assinine assumptions. reports are for the most part complete bullshit. try opening your eyes and see what is happening rather than making your assinine assumptions. reports are complete bullshit only to those that a dont read them or b dont agree with their contents. you fit both categories. until you post numbers proving me wrong you can argue with yourself. the numbers are what they are but only a fool would believe them on blind faith especially when every economic indicator says something very different. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodge

.... the numbers used to determine unemployment are the most accurate given. and this means what oh yea not a dam thing. just because they are the most accurate given does not mean that they actually are accurate or even close. it means you have no other numbers no other source and no way to refute what ive posted thats what it means. how accurate they are is beyond your or my ability to know since there is no other method. therefore the numbers presented are the best to be had. which again means nothing. actually i am wrong here. since you have claimed that the accuracy is beyond either of our ability to know they are worse than meaningless as they can actually be purposely misleading us. they could be but they arent. thats just your paranoid view. sorry no. stagflation was the 1970s. now we still have economic growth unemployment isnt rising at a terrible rate if at all and inflation isnt very high. lol inflation is high compared to increases in income. thats not what you originally said. further id venture a guess that some employers give more than 5% raises per year. thus your original statment is clearly forgotten now that you know you are wrong and your new claim is debatable depending on employee and employer pay rates. again false. as much as i hate to say it the economy was doing very well during the bush presidency after 2002. until 2007 it was in a boom period especially the housing industry. lol it was a housing bubble and the economy was far from booming. if the economy was so great his approval rating would not be the disaster that it is. first yes it was a housing bubble with regard to prices. it is not a housing bubble with regard to the need for new housing. second the approval rating of a president proves nothing when it comes to the health of the economy. what this tells me is that again you have no solid proof of what you are trying to claim so you insist on tying two totally unrelated concepts together in the hopes of making yourself sound logical. the biggest indicator of the dollar is the oil market. otherwise commodities trade just like everything else. stagflation isnt an issue at all at this time. more complete crap. the dollar value is only a small portion of the problem. if salaries remain consistant and inflation increases then you have stagflation even if the economy has a microscopic level of growth. however inflation has decreased since the first of the year. thus no matter what you call stagflation if it involves a rising rate of inflation its not happening now due to the decrease in the rate of inflation. this is because of the low dollar not the economy. try reading a few reports on this rather than making assinine assumptions. reports are for the most part complete bullshit. try opening your eyes and see what is happening rather than making your assinine assumptions. reports are complete bullshit only to those that a dont read them or b dont agree with their contents. you fit both categories. until you post numbers proving me wrong you can argue with yourself. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : miles

roy wrote it is chevies retro toy. sorta on the idea of a pt crusier only bigger. ive heard lots of bad stories of major problems with the hhr. dunno if they resolved them all on the newer models. i like the looks of them and the latest minor revisions are nice. .

From : tbone

if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. hopefully the money made available in the fourth quarter of last year will start to be returned to the fed and there will be a shift away from oil speculation. sadly much of the problem is not comming from speculation. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote for the record how do i know you even have a source lol you ask for a source you still refuse to tell me what gov. sites you claimed to find that show unemployment stats are computed mostly from unemployment insurance claims. lol just about any of them miles and it is simply just common sense. they get unemployment insurance reports every day. sure the gubberment knows that unemployment claims are no longer accurate and claim to be moving to other methods like you claim they use but those methods take time and are also not all that accurate. while they may attempt to make corrections from surveys that they send out the primary daily adjustment comes from unemployment claims and probably always will. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote once again miles you resort to fuzzy math and are the one who is both bogus and clueless but you do make me laugh. you are comparing a specific area to a national average lol! 20% growth means few like it here huh good grief! talk about fuzzy math! the area has sustained a very high growth rate for decades and yet you continue to argue about what you are clueless on. well you do that a lot! lol you really do like to spin. how exactly can you have such high growth and at the same time be one of the highest in property value declines as reported on msnbc yesterday my thinks you are full of shit. perhaps miles you are having a hard time finding people is because you have a bad reputation. good recruters and networks know and talk about the compensation and working conditions of companies in a given area and the skilled workers that you are looking for talk to and are part of these organizations espesially the ones moving into a new area. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote its not a matter of truth or lies miles its a matter of bias. yep and if fox is biased so is cbs. im sure that to some degree they are. but to liberals that just aint so! yawn back to the political bs again. its biased if it has reports they disagree with. cbs is one of the most biased there is but since it doesnt report much right wing stories youll easily disagree! thats the truth! how exactly are they one of the most biased there is perhaps because they dont agree with your extreme right wing ideas. the fact that they dont report much right wing stories actually shows there attempt to reduce bias. when things are both good and bad according to their beliefs and bias they report it but unlike fox they do not attribute all good to one side and all bad to the other. sure they do bash bush every now and then but the man is an idiot and will go down as one of our worst presidents and ranks right up there with carter in how bad of a job he did. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote that would make sense except for one small issue and that would be where did all of these people come from to begin with i really dont think that the construction worker fairy just dropped them all off there and then simply abandoned them. it is more like these workers came from other fields where they either lost their jobs or were not making enough money to survive. they came from the wherever their last job was. most likely in construction. thats the construction biz. it goes up and down from town to town and the field workers move with it. they go to the town thats got the building going on at the time. once again what you say makes no sense. if what you say is true then there could never be a building boom as there would never be enough workers. if the field workers move with it as you say why are they standing on the street looking for work why didnt they just move to the next area like you claim that they do -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

just because the number is doubled doesnt mean that the number of people were doubled and there is no way to know how accurate this number even is. times are very different now and the assumptions used to create this number are far more invalid now then they were 20 + years ago. they are based on people in the work force employed long enough to collect unemployment insurance and if a person doesnt find a job by the time it runs out they are determined to be no longer looking for work and are no longer included in that number. i wonder how many people were removed from the counted work force during the crash at the beginning of bushs first term that were never added back. the numbers used to determine unemployment are the most accurate given. and this means what oh yea not a dam thing. just because they are the most accurate given does not mean that they actually are accurate or even close. how accurate they are is beyond your or my ability to know since there is no other method. therefore the numbers presented are the best to be had. which again means nothing. actually i am wrong here. since you have claimed that the accuracy is beyond either of our ability to know they are worse than meaningless as they can actually be purposely misleading us. the inflation rates are not subject to your claimed inaccuracies and we still havent hit the nearly 15% of the early 1980s. the difference is then it was inflation and now it is stagflation which is far worse. sorry no. stagflation was the 1970s. now we still have economic growth unemployment isnt rising at a terrible rate if at all and inflation isnt very high. lol inflation is high compared to increases in income. the current recession is subject to much debate. recession implies that the economy is shrinking. currently the economy is not shrinking it simply isnt growing at the rate which it has the past several years. if you have studied history or economics you know that economic growth cannot continue unabated or rampant inflation follows. usually something intervenes such as a readjustment. such is exactly the case this time. bullshit. the economy was hardly raging at any time during the bush term and much of that was due to the housing bubble and the recovery of the crash in 2001. again false. as much as i hate to say it the economy was doing very well during the bush presidency after 2002. until 2007 it was in a boom period especially the housing industry. lol it was a housing bubble and the economy was far from booming. if the economy was so great his approval rating would not be the disaster that it is. believe what youd like but the facts speak for themselves. the economy showed about 1% growth in the first quarter unemployment is hovering around 5% and inflation is around 6%. none of these are anywhere near as bad as the early 80s. you are comparing apples to cars. the growth in the economy can be and usually is fudged to make it look better than it really is unless it really is good and even then.... pure rubbish. you have no grounds to stand on with this claim. lol. until another census is taken nobody has any idea how accurate those unemployment numbers really are and that number also doesnt take into account the number of people who lost a job and were forced to take another one at half of their previous pay. inflation isnt as big of an issue as stagflation which we are currently dealing with. the biggest indicator of the weakness in the economy is the commodities markets. the biggest indicator of the dollar is the oil market. otherwise commodities trade just like everything else. stagflation isnt an issue at all at this time. more complete crap. the dollar value is only a small portion of the problem. if salaries remain consistant and inflation increases then you have stagflation even if the economy has a microscopic level of growth. even with reports of excesses like in oil the price not only doesnt go down as they should they set new records which shows that the people in the know see how bad things really are and keep putting their money where they feel it is safest regardless of reports. this is because of the low dollar not the economy. try reading a few reports on this rather than making assinine assumptions. reports are for the most part complete bullshit. try opening your eyes and see what is happening rather than making your assinine assumptions. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

wtf are you talking about miles what exactly is your definition of subprime sorry miles but there is a big difference between high risk and poor credit and they do not always go hand in hand. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving tbone wrote actually many of them took these loans to buy a home period. that would be the minority except in your biased belief world! most subprimes were not to high risk poor credit borrowers. .

From : tbone

roy wrote heres a link that is interesting. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6097513/ interesting but the democrats will continue to tell us how bad everything is with their doom and gloom stories. lol damn miles does everything need to be political bullshit with you things are bad and it is not just democrats that see it. my right wing sister sees it as do many of my right wing friends. the price of oil sets new records every week increasing living costs housing values continue to fall reducing net worth salaries are for the most part stagnant reduced disposable income. you can keep your head in the sand if you wish as that doesnt change the truth. as for that article it is nothing more than wishful thinking. i watch cnbc when i can and they tend to do the same thing. if there is the slightest uptick they make the claim that everything is ok and when it goes down they come up with some bullshit excuse as to why. they are not doing that so much anymore as there reputation and credibility is coming into question. even they depend on viewers to make money and when too many think that they are full of shit dollars slip. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

max dodge wrote if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. it already has improved slightly last time i checked. one of the biggest problems is the rising cost of oil which is always bought in us$s. while the rising price of oil is one of the biggest problems it is further increased by falling home values and stagnent income levels. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : dennydennydennyaarcuda69062aarcuda69062aarcuda69062aarcuda69062aarcuda69062aarcuda69062aarcuda69062aarcuda69062fmbfmbmilesmilesmilesmilesmilesmilesmil

tbone wrote its not a matter of truth or lies miles its a matter of bias. yep and if fox is biased so is cbs. but to liberals that just aint so! its biased if it has reports they disagree with. cbs is one of the most biased there is but since it doesnt report much right wing stories youll easily disagree! thats the truth! .

From : curmudgeonroyroyroychristopher d thompsonchristopher d thompsonandy sdetailing dudedetailing duderoyroyroymac davismac davismac davis

tbone wrote im done wasting my time here. lol! youre the one who made the claim about gov. sites saying unemployment stats are from insurance claims. those sites musta closed down or something! you bought the typical liberal rhetoric and just repeat it. even liberal politicians arent making your claim!! too funny. .

From : mac davis

on mon 19 may 2008 183136 -0700 miles nope@nopers.com wrote mac davis wrote just because some folks never out grew the high school locker room you dont have to go there any more... schools over.. now thats downright funny! this forum has been a pissing contest room for you and most everyone else for many years. about the same on most male dominated automotive forums! ya play the innocent one! lol. check the archives miles... i dont think youll find any thread that was an argument that i was in for long.. i leave shit like that to the experts.. mac please remove splinters before emailing .

From : miles

denny wrote but some grow up and move on...... hmm...most here have been here for years and its all the same. once in awhile some newbies come in and complain about the pissing contests and is called a net nanny. i find it ironic that some will whine about one contest only to start or join another. ya its always others! lol .

From : denny

mac davis wrote just because some folks never out grew the high school locker room you dont have to go there any more... schools over.. now thats downright funny! this forum has been a pissing contest room for you and most everyone else for many years. about the same on most male dominated automotive forums! ya play the innocent one! lol. but some grow up and move on...... denny .

From : miles

mac davis wrote just because some folks never out grew the high school locker room you dont have to go there any more... schools over.. now thats downright funny! this forum has been a pissing contest room for you and most everyone else for many years. about the same on most male dominated automotive forums! ya play the innocent one! lol. .

From : roy

on sun 18 may 2008 222648 -0400 roy roy@fhome.net wrote read the subject! ot sold it!!!! me selling a house is political only when you turned the thread into a political circus. ya gotta deal with reality bro... i tend to ignore any thread that has alternating miles/tbone posts but saw you posting and read a bit.. ive found that whatever the topic starts at it becomes miles and tbone pissing on each others feet.. just because some folks never out grew the high school locker room you dont have to go there any more... schools over.. you are correct bro. i kfd bone some time ago grew tired of scrolling through a thread to find the same bs so all i was seeing was miles who imo posts some intersesting stuff most of the time. it is what it is i guess. roy mac please remove splinters before emailing .

From : mac davis

on sun 18 may 2008 222648 -0400 roy roy@fhome.net wrote read the subject! ot sold it!!!! me selling a house is political only when you turned the thread into a political circus. ya gotta deal with reality bro... i tend to ignore any thread that has alternating miles/tbone posts but saw you posting and read a bit.. ive found that whatever the topic starts at it becomes miles and tbone pissing on each others feet.. just because some folks never out grew the high school locker room you dont have to go there any more... schools over.. mac please remove splinters before emailing .

From : roy

roy wrote as your post is directed at any dems. as one who will vote dem this in the upcoming election it was directed at me. tell ya what roy. bash the reps and bush all ya want. i may agree with ya on many points and would not take it personal because it wouldnt be....except you made it such. okay. .

From : miles

roy wrote as your post is directed at any dems. as one who will vote dem this in the upcoming election it was directed at me. tell ya what roy. bash the reps and bush all ya want. i may agree with ya on many points and would not take it personal because it wouldnt be....except you made it such. .

From : miles

roy wrote read the subject! ot sold it!!!! me selling a house is political only when you turned the thread into a political circus. read what i replied to!!! it was an article whose subject most certainly is a hot part of the current political debate. gee who posted that article hmm good grief. .

From : roy

roy wrote it is chevies retro toy. sorta on the idea of a pt crusier only bigger. ive heard lots of bad stories of major problems with the hhr. dunno if they resolved them all on the newer models. i like the looks of them and the latest minor revisions are nice. they had some early problems with the 2.2. .

From : roy

roy wrote as one who will vote dem this in the upcoming election it was directed at me. lol a sure sign of your insecurity! a say something against the dem party in general and you feel its directed at you personally. hmm...guess the shoe fits then! i know i said the last was your but... where have we heard the term insecure or insecurity before do ya think nah well maybe. sorry roy the topic you posted was/is a hot political topic. read the subject! ot sold it!!!! me selling a house is political only when you turned the thread into a political circus. its part of both parties current campaign whether you like it or not. deal with it. deal with some reality will ya. your a political junkie trolling for a debate. .

From : miles

roy wrote as one who will vote dem this in the upcoming election it was directed at me. lol a sure sign of your insecurity! a say something against the dem party in general and you feel its directed at you personally. hmm...guess the shoe fits then! sorry roy the topic you posted was/is a hot political topic. its part of both parties current campaign whether you like it or not. deal with it. .

From : roy

roy wrote yet you certainly took a shot at directly at me with your own bs. factual bs. hmm...figured youd say that. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. that was a cheap shot directed at me and devoid of truth in the matter. my comment was not directed at you. would have been ok but your shot showed the stereotyping rhetoric of your side of politics as i have repeatedly said here that i do not like bush. try again or better yet ignore! merely pointing out what ya do. i do i did not direct my comment at you personally. that would be something you do yourself. ill go real slow here. i said you contiue to arrempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. that is what you do imo.yup it was directed at you as it was written in respone to your post. as your post is directed at any dems. as one who will vote dem this in the upcoming election it was directed at me. last is yours .

From : miles

roy wrote yet you certainly took a shot at directly at me with your own bs. factual bs. hmm...figured youd say that. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. that was a cheap shot directed at me and devoid of truth in the matter. my comment was not directed at you. would have been ok but your shot showed the stereotyping rhetoric of your side of politics as i have repeatedly said here that i do not like bush. try again or better yet ignore! merely pointing out what ya do. i do i did not direct my comment at you personally. that would be something you do yourself. .

From : roy

roy wrote miles you introduced the political bs in this thread. too bad! if ya dont like it then ignore it! my original comment did not attack you. never said it did. yet you certainly took a shot at directly at me with your own bs. factual bs. would have been ok but your shot showed the stereotyping rhetoric of your side of politics as i have repeatedly said here that i do not like bush. try again or better yet ignore! merely pointing out what ya do. .

From : miles

roy wrote miles you introduced the political bs in this thread. too bad! if ya dont like it then ignore it! my original comment did not attack you. yet you certainly took a shot at directly at me with your own bs. would have been ok but your shot showed the stereotyping rhetoric of your side of politics as i have repeatedly said here that i do not like bush. try again or better yet ignore! .

From : denny

on sat 17 may 2008 221800 -0400 denny wrote well he could load some 9mm and .357 for me and ship it down here of course in my plan he foots the bill cause he enjoys loading ammo so much and then after an appropriate range trip ill send him some empty brass.... one of these days youll step up to a real handgun... the s&w 500... your pecker will never feel the same..... bg if my daughter will shoot it so can you...... denny ah yes the s&w 500 id love to touch one of those off. but its a bit out of my price range to own at the moment. so ill keep on getting better with the .357 revolver and my little plastic gun. as long as you have a trigger to pull things are good... im looking for the opportunity to shoot the 460es also from what ive heard its just plain unpleasant.....one guy i talked to said dropping back to the 454 casual was like dropping to the 45 lc in a 454 gun. now thats insane! a friend has a 460 that hes let me shoot a few times. while it gets your attention i didnt think it was all that bad. certainly not any worse than the 500.. what i think is unpleasant is when you drop a full power .357 in one of those little air weight five shot revolvers. that stings.. and as far as your daughter shooting.....................have you asked for lessons yet from what ive heard she could show you a thing or 2. dont believe everything ole roy spews out. retired old farts have to think of things to talk about. soon hell be saying how good white castles are. denny -- chris .

From : christopher d thompson

on sat 17 may 2008 221800 -0400 denny wrote well he could load some 9mm and .357 for me and ship it down here of course in my plan he foots the bill cause he enjoys loading ammo so much and then after an appropriate range trip ill send him some empty brass.... one of these days youll step up to a real handgun... the s&w 500... your pecker will never feel the same..... bg if my daughter will shoot it so can you...... denny ah yes the s&w 500 id love to touch one of those off. but its a bit out of my price range to own at the moment. so ill keep on getting better with the .357 revolver and my little plastic gun. im looking for the opportunity to shoot the 460es also from what ive heard its just plain unpleasant.....one guy i talked to said dropping back to the 454 casual was like dropping to the 45 lc in a 454 gun. now thats insane! and as far as your daughter shooting.....................have you asked for lessons yet from what ive heard she could show you a thing or 2. -- chris .

From : denny

on sat 17 may 2008 145118 -0400 roy wrote on sat 17 may 2008 115712 -0400 roy wrote wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. ah roy let miles and tom have their fun... they oughta get a room. well just start another thread and talk about jeeps and guns how bout that buddy i have the cj up for sale too much of a hassle. looking real hard at a hhr heck maybe we could even take a good jab at the bunny for something *cheezy grin* the friggin rabbit is loading ammo. probably gonna start a armed rabbit cult up there. actually he should have his fat ass out in the fields planting. chris well he could load some 9mm and .357 for me and ship it down here of course in my plan he foots the bill cause he enjoys loading ammo so much and then after an appropriate range trip ill send him some empty brass.... one of these days youll step up to a real handgun... the s&w 500... your pecker will never feel the same..... bg if my daughter will shoot it so can you...... denny .

From : miles

roy wrote heres a link that is interesting. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6097513/ interesting but the democrats will continue to tell us how bad everything is with their doom and gloom stories. .

From : miles

tbone wrote for the record how do i know you even have a source lol you ask for a source you still refuse to tell me what gov. sites you claimed to find that show unemployment stats are computed mostly from unemployment insurance claims. .

From : christopher d thompson

on sat 17 may 2008 185408 -0400 roy wrote i have the cj up for sale too much of a hassle. looking real hard at a hhr what is a hhr it is chevies retro toy. sorta on the idea of a pt crusier only bigger. 2 questions one why the hell you wanna sell a cj hassle you need to quit frettin about a jeep and just put the damn thing in the mud! remember jeeps are happiest with mud inside the cab swimming through water/mud and climbing over rocks. next have you had your head checked recently i mean seriously man a chebby i think your sick! gbmfg -- chris .

From : christopher d thompson

on sat 17 may 2008 145118 -0400 roy wrote on sat 17 may 2008 115712 -0400 roy wrote wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. ah roy let miles and tom have their fun... they oughta get a room. well just start another thread and talk about jeeps and guns how bout that buddy i have the cj up for sale too much of a hassle. looking real hard at a hhr heck maybe we could even take a good jab at the bunny for something *cheezy grin* the friggin rabbit is loading ammo. probably gonna start a armed rabbit cult up there. actually he should have his fat ass out in the fields planting. chris well he could load some 9mm and .357 for me and ship it down here of course in my plan he foots the bill cause he enjoys loading ammo so much and then after an appropriate range trip ill send him some empty brass.... sounds like one hell of a plan to me! -- chris .

From : roy

roy wrote roy wrote heres a link that is interesting. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6097513/ interesting but the democrats will continue to tell us how bad everything is with their doom and gloom stories. wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. sorry roy but i get sick and tired of the dems telling me over and over how bad everything is with their doom and gloom. i prefer to look on the bright side of things and your article is spot on but is so seldom said or heard. wtf roy!! you continue to mention bush when he has nothing to do with any of this. your typical stereotyping of bush being some sorta standard bearer is noted. ive been saying for 4 years now i dont like the guy...but i can hear you and tbone chant...ya righttttttt. miles you introduced the political bs in this thread. .

From : miles

roy wrote roy wrote heres a link that is interesting. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6097513/ interesting but the democrats will continue to tell us how bad everything is with their doom and gloom stories. wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. sorry roy but i get sick and tired of the dems telling me over and over how bad everything is with their doom and gloom. i prefer to look on the bright side of things and your article is spot on but is so seldom said or heard. wtf roy!! you continue to mention bush when he has nothing to do with any of this. your typical stereotyping of bush being some sorta standard bearer is noted. ive been saying for 4 years now i dont like the guy...but i can hear you and tbone chant...ya righttttttt. .

From : roy

on sat 17 may 2008 115712 -0400 roy wrote wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. ah roy let miles and tom have their fun... they oughta get a room. well just start another thread and talk about jeeps and guns how bout that buddy i have the cj up for sale too much of a hassle. looking real hard at a hhr what is a hhr it is chevies retro toy. sorta on the idea of a pt crusier only bigger. heck maybe we could even take a good jab at the bunny for something *cheezy grin* the friggin rabbit is loading ammo. probably gonna start a armed rabbit cult up there. actually he should have his fat ass out in the fields planting. you are being watched. behave!! vbg okay!! bfg denny .

From : denny

on sat 17 may 2008 115712 -0400 roy wrote wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. ah roy let miles and tom have their fun... they oughta get a room. well just start another thread and talk about jeeps and guns how bout that buddy i have the cj up for sale too much of a hassle. looking real hard at a hhr what is a hhr heck maybe we could even take a good jab at the bunny for something *cheezy grin* the friggin rabbit is loading ammo. probably gonna start a armed rabbit cult up there. actually he should have his fat ass out in the fields planting. you are being watched. behave!! vbg denny .

From : roy

on sat 17 may 2008 115712 -0400 roy wrote wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. ah roy let miles and tom have their fun... they oughta get a room. well just start another thread and talk about jeeps and guns how bout that buddy i have the cj up for sale too much of a hassle. looking real hard at a hhr heck maybe we could even take a good jab at the bunny for something *cheezy grin* the friggin rabbit is loading ammo. probably gonna start a armed rabbit cult up there. actually he should have his fat ass out in the fields planting. chris .

From : christopher d thompson

on sat 17 may 2008 115712 -0400 roy wrote wtf miles!!!! you continue to attempt to turn every friggin thread into a political debate. with bush and his policies as your standard bearer id think youd give it a rest. ah roy let miles and tom have their fun... well just start another thread and talk about jeeps and guns how bout that buddy heck maybe we could even take a good jab at the bunny for something *cheezy grin* -- chris .

From : max dodge

if all this comes to pass as hoped the big remaining factor will be getting the dollar back in line with the euro and gaining value. hopefully the money made available in the fourth quarter of last year will start to be returned to the fed and there will be a shift away from oil speculation. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york heres a link that is interesting. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6097513/ roy roy wrote peterd wrote decent return in todays depression that may be a dream. g much of that is a myth. my 401k gained 9.5% in the past year. while thats considerably lower than its been in a few years its certainly not bad at all. what percentages is it made up of i move things around a bit as market shifts. right now im at the following 50% domestic stocks 15% foreign stocks 21% bonds 14% short term my portfolio is currently inline with the wilshire 5000 index. .

From : roy

heres a link that is interesting. http//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6097513/ roy roy wrote peterd wrote decent return in todays depression that may be a dream. g much of that is a myth. my 401k gained 9.5% in the past year. while thats considerably lower than its been in a few years its certainly not bad at all. what percentages is it made up of i move things around a bit as market shifts. right now im at the following 50% domestic stocks 15% foreign stocks 21% bonds 14% short term my portfolio is currently inline with the wilshire 5000 index. .

From : miles

tbone wrote once again miles you resort to fuzzy math and are the one who is both bogus and clueless but you do make me laugh. you are comparing a specific area to a national average lol! 20% growth means few like it here huh good grief! talk about fuzzy math! the area has sustained a very high growth rate for decades and yet you continue to argue about what you are clueless on. well you do that a lot! .

From : max dodge

according to http//inflationdata.com/inflation/inflationrate/currentinflation.asp inflation is down from 3.98% in march to 3.94% in april. january was at 4.28% and february was at 4.03%. this proves that tbones claim of stagflation is false and his claim that inflation is rising is also false. according to http//www.bls.gov/.release/empsit.nr0.htm unemployment is down a tenth of a percent despite the first quarters loss of 250000 jobs. even at that number of jobs lost the first quarter of 2008 saw only a tenth of a percent rise in unemployment over the fourth quarter of 2007. according to http//www.npr.org/templates/story/story.phpstoryid=18943622 home forclosures in the worst metropolitan area were 5% in detroit in 2007. this was 4.8 times the national average. this means the national average is just over 1%. thus 99% of homeowners according to http//money.cnn.com/2008/03/06/realestate/defaultscontinueclimb/index.htm home foreclosures in march reached 900000 or 2.04% of all mortgages. another 0.83% saw the process inititated. as such less than 3% of mortgaged properties are in foreclosure. according to tbone none of the above is true and all the sources are biased. your turn tbone. post the real numbers. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : max dodge

less than one fifth of 1% are in foreclosure. its a very good number. the exact definition of this number is... one in fivehundred nineteen houses is in foreclosure proceedings. given that the process takes at least three months it probably covers all of the first quarter as well. lol get real. do you really think that all of the foreclosures started in the first quarter i hate to burst your bubble but an uncontested foreclosure can happen much faster than that. now the bank or whatever financial may still be going after the homeowner for fines or other compensation and that could take months or even years but the foreclosure itself could be completed within a month. ok so if the percentage in april was 0.2% and we allow for an average of twice that say 0.5% each month from august of last year we get 5% total through may or nine months total. you say 5% is far less than it really is. so far ap says you are wrong. its time for you to present real numbers instead of refusing to look at the reported numbers. you can close your eyes as tight as you want to max it still has no effect on reality. the reality is ap reported the numbers you have reported nothing. ill take aps report. dropped to what dunno dont care it dropped. this proves your claim about stagflation is wrong. since you cannot back up your claim it proves nothing at all. all you need do is look at the reports available on yahoo. on the other hand you who refuses all offered numbers have also refused to offer any of your own. what a whiner you are. anything to claim that numbers gathered by people with far more expertise than you are wrong. for the record my source wouldnt fudge the numbers. for the record how do i know you even have a source. for all i know your source could be fox . any way that you want to spin it max people will do whatever they can to make themselves look good and figures are fudged all of the time. not all the time just when you look at them. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : tbone

lets hear it for bias since that is the only way tbone will have of making these numbers go away.... ap says that the number of houses in foreclosure in april was 1 in 519. and you think that this is a good number i would also like to know what the exact definition of this number is. are the houses that have already been foreclosed in this nunber or just the ones in the process of foreclosure what about the houses that have already changed owners due to foreclosures less than one fifth of 1% are in foreclosure. its a very good number. the exact definition of this number is... one in fivehundred nineteen houses is in foreclosure proceedings. given that the process takes at least three months it probably covers all of the first quarter as well. lol get real. do you really think that all of the foreclosures started in the first quarter i hate to burst your bubble but an uncontested foreclosure can happen much faster than that. now the bank or whatever financial may still be going after the homeowner for f

From : tbonetbone

compensation and that could take months or even years but the foreclosure itself could be completed within a month. face it no matter what you want to do to explain this away youll have to come up with at least four more houses per 500 to hit 1% which is still well under the number you claimed was too low 5%. you can close your eyes as tight as you want to max it still has no effect on reality. ap also reports that inflation dropped in the first quarter. dropped to what dunno dont care it dropped. this proves your claim about stagflation is wrong. since you cannot back up your claim it proves nothing at all. and if yall would like ill see if my source at the pa dept of labor and industry will forward me a report. a report on what with the attitude of the people up there in pa during the democratic primary i would say that things are not as rosey as your report would make it look. unfortunantly many of these reports are based on surveys that are easy to fudge the results of. what a whiner you are. anything to claim that numbers gathered by people with far more expertise than you are wrong. for the record my source wouldnt fudge the numbers. for the record how do i know you even have a source. for all i know your source could be fox . any way that you want to spin it max people will do whatever they can to make themselves look good and figures are fudged all of the time. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving . 222 344185 482da074$0$30210$4c368faf@roadrunner.com tbone wrote i said that it does take a more specific desire to want to live there then many other places and that is true. so tell me why phoenix has had one of the highest growth rates in the country per the census.gov site phoenix grew 20.2% from 2000 to 2006. average for the nation was 6.4%. your statement is bogus and clueless! once again miles you resort to fuzzy math and are the one who is both bogus and clueless but you do make me laugh. you are comparing a specific area to a national average lol! -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : roy

roy wrote florida has incredible humidity that is why there is a/c. same as here in az but we dont have the 80%+ humidity to go with the heat. i also prefer not to stay indoors so much. plus the heat in florida is almost state wide. in phoenix i can go from 110f to 70f in an hour or two drive. ill take the phoenix heat any day over florida or other high humidity areas. being so close to the coast there is almost always a nice breeze so the heat isnt so bad. then again im not working in it.g and flat as a pancake. so you get super mpg. lol thats true but i gotta have variety! i love the mountains. beach is 3 hours away. a bit far but not bad. it is crowded in places. orlando sucks you couldnt pay me to live there. same for southern fl. but im on the coast in central fl. in a city with a population of about 7000. can your drive 3 hours in fl and see nothing more than a few ranches and maybe a gas station but no towns cities the entire way just wide open country kinda if you head west towards the panhandle. oh you left out the fire danger. they caught one guy setting the forest fires south of us. ya northern az had a 500000 acre forest fire a few years back that was arson. .

From : miles

roy wrote florida has incredible humidity that is why there is a/c. same as here in az but we dont have the 80%+ humidity to go with the heat. i also prefer not to stay indoors so much. plus the heat in florida is almost state wide. in phoenix i can go from 110f to 70f in an hour or two drive. ill take the phoenix heat any day over florida or other high humidity areas. and flat as a pancake. so you get super mpg. lol thats true but i gotta have variety! i love the mountains. beach is 3 hours away. a bit far but not bad. it is crowded in places. orlando sucks you couldnt pay me to live there. same for southern fl. but im on the coast in central fl. in a city with a population of about 7000. can your drive 3 hours in fl and see nothing more than a few ranches and maybe a gas station but no towns cities the entire way just wide open country oh you left out the fire danger. they caught one guy setting the forest fires south of us. ya northern az had a 500000 acre forest fire a few years back that was arson. .

From : max dodge

lets hear it for bias since that is the only way tbone will have of making these numbers go away.... ap says that the number of houses in foreclosure in april was 1 in 519. and you think that this is a good number i would also like to know what the exact definition of this number is. are the houses that have already been foreclosed in this nunber or just the ones in the process of foreclosure what about the houses that have already changed owners due to foreclosures less than one fifth of 1% are in foreclosure. its a very good number. the exact definition of this number is... one in fivehundred nineteen houses is in foreclosure proceedings. given that the process takes at least three months it probably covers all of the first quarter as well. face it no matter what you want to do to explain this away youll have to come up with at least four more houses per 500 to hit 1% which is still well under the number you claimed was too low 5%. ap also reports that inflation dropped in the first quarter. dropped to what dunno dont care it dropped. this proves your claim about stagflation is wrong. and if yall would like ill see if my source at the pa dept of labor and industry will forward me a report. a report on what with the attitude of the people up there in pa during the democratic primary i would say that things are not as rosey as your report would make it look. unfortunantly many of these reports are based on surveys that are easy to fudge the results of. what a whiner you are. anything to claim that numbers gathered by people with far more expertise than you are wrong. for the record my source wouldnt fudge the numbers. -- max everyone is entitled to his own opinion he is not entitled to his own facts. sen. daniel patrick moynihan of new york .

From : milestbonetboneroy

florida has incredible humidity that is why there is a/c. hurricanes not bad last year. and flat as a pancake. so you get super mpg. sure it appeals to many. its a very crowded over populated state. it is crowded in places. orlando sucks you couldnt pay me to live there. same for southern fl. but im on the coast in central fl. in a city with a population of about 7000. oh you left out the fire danger. they caught one guy setting the forest fires south of us. since you referred to an entire state florida and not a particular city then you must be aware that arizona is far from all hot desert. much is thickly wooded and quite snowy and cold. ill take the wide open spaces of arizona and the southwest any day over the crowded polluted east coast cities. a person has to be somewhere.vbg and even then there were water issues and im sure that it isnt any better now and probably worse unless some serious restrictions have been put in place which would make it less desirable for many and perhaps more desirable for some. there were a few years where water levels in lakes were rather low. we had several years of little rain and snowfall in the state. levels are back to normal now. during the low times there were no restrictions in place. contrary to your beliefs there are far worse states with regards to water. california several of the southeast states etc. for instance. lol you are kidding right!!!! i doubt very much that you could live quite nice on $45000 there. thats not what i said but i know how you love to twist things! to correct you i stated the median income here was 45k and most at my company are well above that. you trying to say that entry level jobs should earn more than 45k they need and want more it is so right wing of you to come up with a deceptive number like the median income when that number is an unweighted combination of the richest of the rich and the poorest of the poor. do you understand the difference between median and average um it would appear you do not! if the true cost of living well was $45000 then you should have employees beating down your door to get the jobs you mentioned here as you are offering up to more than twice that amount. something tells me that to live a good lifestyle in the better areas of phoenix costs well upwards of $100000 in family income. phoenix is not among the more expensive cities to live in. .

From : steve hartmantboneroymilesmilesmilesmilesmilesmilesmax dodgetbonetbonemilestbonemilesmilesmax dodge

lets hear it for bias since that is the only way tbone will have of making these numbers go away.... ap says that the number of houses in foreclosure in april was 1 in 519. and you think that this is a good number i would also like to know what the exact definition of this number is. are the houses that have already been foreclosed in this nunber or just the ones in the process of foreclosure what about the houses that have already changed owners due to foreclosures ap also reports that inflation dropped in the first quarter. dropped to what and if yall would like ill see if my source at the pa dept of labor and industry will forward me a report. a report on what with the attitude of the people up there in pa during the democratic primary i would say that things are not as rosey as your report would make it look. unfortunantly many of these reports are based on surveys that are easy to fudge the results of. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : milesmilesmilestbonetbonetbonetbonetbonemilesmilesmilessteve hartmansteve hartmanmilesmilesmilesbob azdonalddonaldtbonetbonetbonetbonetbonetbonetbonek

max dodge wrote lets hear it for bias since that is the only way tbone will have of making these numbers go away.... ap says that the number of houses in foreclosure in april was 1 in 519. ap also reports that inflation dropped in the first quarter. hes also telling me phoenix is a place few want to live. yet april saw considerable growth in the housing industry despite the so called massive number of foreclosures. drive by media is the liberals best friend! lol where exactly did i say that phoenix is a place where few want to live i said that it does take a more specific desire to want to live there then many other places and that is true. as for the housing market we have hoses that have been sitting on the market for years and yet they are back to building more so i guess you could say that the housing indistry is growing here as well. funny how the house next door to me went into foreclosure. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : max dodgemax dodgemax dodgeroyroymilespeterdpeterdpeterdtboneroyroyberylberyltbonetbonemax dodgemax dodgemax dodgemac davismac davismilesmilesmilestbo

max dodge wrote lets hear it for bias since that is the only way tbone will have of making these numbers go away.... ap says that the number of houses in foreclosure in april was 1 in 519. ap also reports that inflation dropped in the first quarter. hes also telling me phoenix is a place few want to live. yet april saw considerable growth in the housing industry despite the so called massive number of foreclosures. drive by media is the liberals best friend! .

From : Annonymouschristopher d thompsondguydguymax dodgemax dodgemax dodgeroyroycarolina watercraft workscarolina watercraft workschristopher d thompson

tbone wrote why is it that you seen to think that a living wage is a high salary there is a big difference between the two. tbone you fail to realize that pay is and should be based on abilities and not based on need. now if you disagree with that then there are countries that believe in pay based on need. are they the better place to be they have happier workers once again nuthin but distortions and bullshit. who said anything should be handed out what exactly is you definition of rewards basing ones salaries on needs rather than abilities is handouts. and that is why your company is having the hard time that it is attracting talent. how so our wages are considerbly higher than the average along with above average benifits packages. we pay for high skills and pay well to keep such. if we didnt they would go to our competitors. however contrary to your belief our competitors are having a hard time finding skilled workers as well. and how much experience do they require to get hired within this salary range would a college grad with lets say a masters and little work experience qualify how about a ba a college degree isnt required nor a masters or ba. experience is. these jobs are not entry level. that still doesnt change the fact that the climate there is not for everyone. neither is the midwest east southeast etc. everyone has different tastes. however the fact still remains that the southwest continues to be the fastest growing. phoenix housing grew last month not declined like most of the country has. they had grass lawns and fruit trees it looked like a mini florida except for the smog that florida doesnt have. florida has incredible humidity hurricanes and flat as a pancake. sure it appeals to many. its a very crowded over populated state. since you referred to an entire state florida and not a particular city then you must be aware that arizona is far from all hot desert. much is thickly wooded and quite snowy and cold. ill take the wide open spaces of arizona and the southwest any day over the crowded polluted east coast cities. and even then there were water issues and im sure that it isnt any better now and probably worse unless some serious restrictions have been put in place which would make it less desirable for many and perhaps more desirable for some. there were a few years where water levels in lakes were rather low. we had several years of little rain and snowfall in the state. levels are back to normal now. during the low times there were no restrictions in place. contrary to your beliefs there are far worse states with regards to water. california several of the southeast states etc. for instance. lol you are kidding right!!!! i doubt very much that you could live quite nice on $45000 there. thats not what i said but i know how you love to twist things! to correct you i stated the median income here was 45k and most at my company are well above that. you trying to say that entry level jobs should earn more than 45k they need and want more it is so right wing of you to come up with a deceptive number like the median income when that number is an unweighted combination of the richest of the rich and the poorest of the poor. do you understand the difference between median and average um it would appear you do not! if the true cost of living well was $45000 then you should have employees beating down your door to get the jobs you mentioned here as you are offering up to more than twice that amount. something tells me that to live a good lifestyle in the better areas of phoenix costs well upwards of $100000 in family income. phoenix is not among the more expensive cities to live in. .

From : Annonymousmax dodgemax dodgemax dodgethe reverend natural lightthe reverend natural lightgeorge orwellroyroyroy

tbone wrote you seem to think that someone starting should have to work up to a living wage not start at one and work up to a comfortable living. you seem to think a company should pay a high salary to someone who has no skills and ignore the high costs a company endures to train them. why is it that you seen to think that a living wage is a high salary there is a big difference between the two. yes tbone work your way up and quit expecting handouts and something for nothing. hard work earns rewards in life. its not given out freely as you want. once again nuthin but distortions and bullshit. who said anything should be handed out what exactly is you definition of rewards and thats probably another problem because when i was looking for work it seemed that the ones not putting a salary range in job posting usually were on the low side. not all of the time but most of it. low end jobs post salaries. high end jobs post no such thing or at most a possible wide range. guess i know what jobs you were looking for! then you would be once again wrong as usual. i did not say that an exact salary would or even should be posted but in many cases a range is listed. iow get them in for the lowest cost possible. lol nah pay them as much as possible way over what they are worth. some peoples kids! once again a idiotic right wing responce how typical. you should always get the best deal and anyone but an idiot knows that the best deal does not always mean the lowest price. i guess that we know where you stand. the fact is miles that there are many people out there but they want or need more than people like you are willing to pay them. they want and need huh there is an economic system where people are paid based on need. why dont you move there i prefer one where pay is based on abilities and not wants and needs. you want it then learn and work for it. and that is why your company is having the hard time that it is attracting talent. i agree on the wants side to a point but needs are what they are and if you refuse to meet them then they cannot come to you for work. what is your general salary range for the positions you are looking to fill miles 75k-100k+ for mechanical engineers depending on specific job and skills an applicant holds. and how much experience do they require to get hired within this salary range would a college grad with lets say a masters and little work experience qualify how about a ba either way phoenix is a somewhat expensive area to live in and that climate pulls in a very specific type of person and maybe not the type of people that you need lol you have no clue about phoenix!! the southwest has been steadily out pacing growth compared to almost all areas of the usa. major corporations have all moved here banner target raytheon wells fargo motorola and many more. lol which is probably why you are having a difficult time finding employees as these companies know what real talent is worth. that still doesnt change the fact that the climate there is not for everyone. the last time i was there and it has been a few years going down some of the streets made me laugh. they had grass lawns and fruit trees it looked like a mini florida except for the smog that florida doesnt have. and even then there were water issues and im sure that it isnt any better now and probably worse unless some serious restrictions have been put in place which would make it less desirable for many and perhaps more desirable for some. ill tell you what miles if you are uncomfortable listing salary ranges here tell me what kind of lifestyle could a married employee with 2 kids living in the phoenix area talking one of these jobs that you are offering have on the low end of the benefits package you are offering. they could live quite nice considering the median income in phoenix is $45000 and most at my company make over that. keep it up tbone with your assumptions that my company must pay sub par wages. youre barking up the wrong tree. lol you are kidding right!!!! i doubt very much that you could live quite nice on $45000 there. it is so right wing of you to come up with a deceptive number like the median income when that number is an unweighted combination of the richest of the rich and the poorest of the poor. if the true cost of living well was $45000 then you should have employees beating down your door to get the jobs you mentioned here as you are offering up to more than twice that amount. something tells me that to live a good lifestyle in the better areas of phoenix costs well upwards of $100000 in family income. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : dennyroymac davismac davistboneroyroypeterdmilesmilesmilestbonetbonetbonetbonetbonetbonedetailing dudedetailing dudetbonetbonetbonetbone

tbone wrote tbone wrote and dont believe everything you see on fox either. nor cnn cbs abc nbc etc. none are the truth. theyre what they want you to believe. the weak minded buy it. lol get real miles. oh ya fox is lies cnn cbs abc and nbc are all the truth huh too funny! its not a matter of truth or lies miles its a matter of bias. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .