a-train
-
Posts
2474 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by a-train
-
-
It's a great book, but when you can show me a CEO that is as moral as Wyatt, and an industrialist that values real talent as much as Hank Reardon, instead of the "look-dad-I-got-an-Ivy-league-degree-and-now-I-run-my-own-company" folks that we have running our major corporations, then we can have this discussion.
The only reason the madness is able to go on (think AIG), is because corporations no longer need the market to survive, they simply live on political favoritism. Instead of the government trying to convince the productive entities to give their means to the state, it simply robs them and gives assets to wealth destroying "look-dad-I-lost-$15-billion-and-I'm-still-CEO" companies.
-a-train
-
I liked this article for this statement alone:
The point is not to condemn President Bush, but to illustrate that party labels have meant very little in recent federal expansions.
I may align myself closer to Republicans, but I find even they are drifting further from what I think is right (pun intended).
Republicans should have listened to Ron Paul.
-a-train
-
Unfortunately, the "business with an idea and a credit card in about 1 hour" is simply speculation. Not only that, but it is the worst kind: speculation with someone else's money. The vast majority of those endeavors simply result in quick failure. America used to be a country that saved and put those savings to capitalization. We were the biggest lender and producer in the world. That was way way back in 1980. Today, we are the world's largest consumer and debtor.The US is different. Although we do tend to diversify, there is a significant investment that goes into generating intellectual capital and to created business and services right here. Capital and wealth creation is the hallmark of the US. To this day, the US is the place where you can create a business with an idea and a credit card in about 1 hour. Other countries? From one month (if you are lucky) to one year.
Let's hope it remains so.
Also unfortunate is that we have long forgotten about "a significant investment that goes into generating intellectual capital and to created business and services right here". We have to get back to savings and production. The national savings rate went negative in 2007 (Americans were spending more than they were saving and even if everything was liquidated the proceeds would not cover the debt outstanding). We are now up over a 4% savings rate, but we need to be in the teens to really get anywhere and we have a long way to go to bring debt balances safely under asset values.
Families in the far east have been saving over 20% for a generation, the result is that they have become the biggest producers and lenders. The effects of this imbalance cannot be avoided. The far east will ultimately have an enhanced purchasing power while the west will have a diminished purchasing power. Although many are claiming "decoupling" is a myth and the world is "too innerconnected", they are simply and sadly wrong.
Put in lay terms? Chinese stuff won't seem cheap anymore. Toshiba and Sony products will seem outrageously expensive. Oil will cost more than ever. Far Easterners will suddenly be able to afford more than ever. To them, prices will seem low. This is not all bad, local products will be more competitive again and domestic production will benefit. The trouble is that it will take a long time (decades perhaps) to build American manufacturing up to where it needs to be.
Americans will either willfully start living within their means, or they will be compelled to. We each can individually make the decision, but the time to decide is getting short. It won't matter what our credit score is or how much we can borrow when the payments are simply out of our league. It is now more important than ever that we save.
Americans need to rediscover capitalism. Silly stock speculation won't do. Ridiculous housing speculation won't do. We need to put our savings into real capitalization. We need to be investing in activities that produce real earnings, that actually produce. Whether the business is local or not doesn't matter. Whether it employs our friends or not doesn't matter. What matters is productivity. That is all that has ever mattered.
We need to capitalize with our own savings. "Leverage" is just a term that sounds cooler than "debt", but it nonetheless describes the same thing. Real, sustainable prosperity will come from hard work, savings, and real capital improvements with those savings.
-a-train
-
It doesn't matter one lick whether the money went to bonuses at all. The real problem is that AIG is an entity that destroys wealth. It does NOT create it. It is a black hole and the more we throw into it, the more we lose. I don't care if they give it all to charity, every penny we give AIG is straight waste-100%.
We desperately need the assets controlled by AIG to be redistributed to entities that will produce wealth. "Bailing out" AIG is simply preventing this redistribution and expanding the economic damage being inflicted by AIG. Bankruptcy and liquidation is necessary to put resources into productive use.
-a-train
-
It at least appears that Americans are converting back toward freedom in a big way. I think they are, but we have a long way to go. There are still a great many who want to kill the geese the lay all the golden eggs, but a great many are starting to wonder if we should spare a few just in case the meat doesn't last forever.
-a-train
-
As a shareholder, I vote to shut it down. Second for that motion?
-a-train
-
The founding fathers were right. All the religious priests of their day were false. False religion has been used for centuries to bring people into bondage, it is still hard at work today.
-a-train
-
And the current administration is trying to keep housing prices UP....
-a-train
-
Walmart spent about $18 billion with Chinese producers this year. While that is only about four tenths of one percent of the Chinese GDP, it is a fantastic contribution to the ability of Chinese people to work and lift themselves out of poverty. Suppose Walmart is able to accomplish such importation for two decades but without any increase. They would still spend $360 billion with China over that span. What would be better: a single injection of wealth wherein the Waltons dispense $200 billion, or a lifetime of mutually beneficial business for millions of people totalling many more billions?For example it is said that over 200 billions dollars are spread out amongst the Walton who own Wall mart. Whether this is true or not....Imagine how much can be accomplished with that...we could litterally wipe many of the diseases that are afflicting the third world.
We could also be asking ourselves why the Church doesn't simply "wipe many of the diseases that are afflicting the third world". The realities are that many billions, no matter how they are utilized, won't solve the trouble. The biggest issue is politics. Much of the governments of the third world (and in some cases our own) prevent such help from coming to people. In many cases, the prevention is unintentional, but nevertheless real.
That aside, the big issue here is sustainability. What we need is to produce more and trade more. This can NOT be accomplished without capitalization. Capitalization can NOT be accomplished without savings.
If it is good to simply get rid of our savings, to not have any investments, to not capitalize, then who will do it? Who will produce food? Clothing? Shelter? Transportation? Energy? Communications?
The anti-capitalist crowd hates Walmart. This hate is enough to show their folly. But if we truly got rid of capitalism, we would embrace world poverty, starvation, and total deprivation.
-a-train
-
What HBO doesn't realize is that while they may gain someone's attention for the span of a TV show out of all the free advertising, the LORD may gain someone for eternity who's curiousity peaked by this prompts them to learn of the Restoration.Nothing beats free advertising in these "tough economic times".
-a-train
-
I think the trouble here comes with the definition of prosperity. If making for yourself a life of accumulating material wealth at the expense of your spiritual wealth is the definition of 'prosperity', then certainly the LORD has not promoted it. But if by 'prosperity' we mean the physical and spiritual redemption of man, we can see that it is the focus of the gospel. The Word of Wisdom, for example, is designed to bring about physical prosperity, and we can see many examples (such as the late President Gordon B. Hinckley) of those blessed thereby. The avoidance of debt in keeping with the admonitions of the prophets is also unquestionably good advice.
The accumulation of material possessions at the expense of liberty through debt and slavery is not the definition of prosperity. The wealth that cannot go through the eye of the needle is not wealth at all. What prevents the camel from going through? It is captive.
We seem to so quickly remember that we cannot serve mammon and God, but we seem to forget that while we are not to serve earthly resources, we are to be served thereby. The Church has accumulated vast resources. With land, resources, capital, and labor the Church produces necessities of life. This is no sin, but it is righteousness.
If our eye is single to God's glory, all these things will be added to us. This does not mean that only the righteous will accumulate wealth. In fact, a great deal of the wicked system we live in transmits wealth to a wicked few. Further, there is no reason to believe that spiritual worthiness will bring monetary wealth. But we should not feel like we are doing sin in building a savings, no matter how large it gets, if it be that our purpose in building it is righteous.
If that purpose is to educate and raise up children to God and to send them on missions and to build meeting houses and do the work wherein we have been called, then it is certainly no sin.
-a-train
-
It only seems strange because it hasn't been the case in our lifetime, at least here in the U.S. But it is and has been in other countries. It was also perfectly legal in the U.S. at one time also. Back then there were no drug cartels, no drug wars.
-a-train
-
Nice! Now you just need to pay off the billions going to the corporations and it'll all even out!
-a-train
-
The LORD does want us to prosper financially and that is why He has warned us against debt and told us to have a savings and food storage. But we seem to keep forgetting that.
-a-train
-
Perhaps we should make "In Allah We Trust" out motto. I think the term 'God' is general. It can apply to Allah, or Jesus, or Nature's God, or whatever understanding one has of the Creator.Unfortunately, most Americans do not understand the distinction.
Elphaba
What is annoying is that so many seem to clamor for their own religious freedom while at the same time looking to limit the religious freedom of others.
Frankly, I thought Mitt's speech on religious freedom was meaningless, pointless, and bland. Religious freedom allows each individual to believe as they see fit and to act accordingly. This is not a secular notion. It is not a religious teaching. It is a natural human right. It is a God-given right.
Atheists are regular folks just like Muslims and Catholics. Nothing in the admonition of God we have received should cause us to feel otherwise. They are our brothers and sisters just the same and they have the same rights as we. Our goverment's role is to protect the freedom of conscience of each individual. Regardless of every attempt otherwise, the last 200 years have continued to see that freedom expand in the world.
-a-train
-
Once again, lets give a round of applause for all the mormons helping to promote HBO by being offended and venting on the internet. Good show!
-a-train
-
There is a perfectly constitutional, safe, and cost effective method to deal with the "drug war". Abolish federal drug laws.
Upon legalization, the drug cartels would be put out of business quite instantly. Even if they continued to supply drugs to the U.S., the distribution channels would be direct and transparent. Much of the violence would simply become unnecessary. Alcohol suppliers did not continue to find voilence a practical business activity when the prohibition was repealed in 1933, and it is just as likely that suppliers of other intoxicants would find the same.
The myriad of reasons people harbor for the statist control of what a man can possess and take into his body include statements like: "we must protect children". But the sad truth is that illegal drugs are as much if not more available to children than tobacco and alcohol because of the underground distribution system made possible only by the drug laws.
Others fear that legalization would mean that the whole nation would go into drug addiction. However, most of the people expressing this fear claim they themselves will continue to abstain from drugs if legalized.
I heard one claim that marijuana should remain illegal because they don't want to be exposed to second-hand marijuana smoke. Of course, a national trend banning public smoking has swept the country on the municipal level already and this sort of fear is quite unfounded therefore.
There is nothing in the Constitution granting the federal government the power to forbid the production and consumption of any intoxicants. This is why the prohibition required an amendment. The federal government gets around this by regulating the trade of drugs rather than their use. Possession and distribution are illegal, while being intoxicated itself is not.
The cost of the drug war is impressive. We spend over $18 million dollars a day holding people in prison for possession of drugs alone. These are not accused of any crime other than possession.
With taxpayers losing billions on it and lives being lost in it, the drug war seems mighty expensive in view of the fact that the multi-billion dollar drug industry survives quite well despite it. The UN estimates that the global illicit drug market is as much as 10% of the global retail GDP. Why so high? Mark-up. The profit margin is staggering. Estimated at $13 billion at production, the global illicit drug market has retail sales estimated at $322 billion. What a mark-up! The consumer pays 25 times the production cost! No wonder this business is alive and well.
The huge mark-up is directly the result of the illegal nature of the product. The vast fortunes being built are not going toward honest law-abiding citizens, but mafia-like cartels now able to afford private armies.
I want what is best for my family, my posterity, my neighbors, this nation. Freedom is what is best. An underground system of corruption, deceit, and murder is not in our best interests, such a system is the direct result of the federal war on drugs. We must let the states and localities make their own policies toward these things and keep the liberty crushing federal government out of local affairs.
Abolish federal drug laws.
-a-train
-
Fear mongering.
-a-train
-
Regardless of the intent of the makers of the show, it will not harm the work of the LORD nor deceive those who are not already deceiving themselves.
-a-train
-
I'm sorry, but I don't understand the point you are trying to make. This is exactly what I am saying and exactly what Locke said, that children are outside the law and unaccountable.I have to say that I do not agree with your or Mr. Lock's interpretations.
John Lock was a very intelligent man but I feel misguided in this outlook.
The child is outside the law and unaccountable.
-a-train
-
I'm minding my own business.
-a-train
-
Is it a coincidence that today I was asked to speak at a stake meeting on the importance or religious music in our lives? Guess I better not mention Slayer in my talk. Oops.
-
The complainer needs to follow his leadership, mellow out, kick back, and have a cold one.
-a-train
-
Selfishness is the basis of all evil works to be sure. The issue is whether man is predisposed to it. The question becomes "what is selfishness?" The young child who suddenly wants whatever toy is held by another is not selfish. Selfishness is knowingly harming others to satisfy personal lusts. The young child is not yet equipped to make such decisions. A person acts selfishly, they are not selfish themselves. One may be very selfish in one situation or to one person, but very self-sacrificing in another or to another. Neither selfishness nor self-sacrifice are predispositions from the womb. They are learned and chosen. To say otherwise is to say that man has no agency in the matter.
-a-train
Politics......an ugly buisiness
in Current Events
Posted
-a-train