|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 12, 2016 20:21:02 GMT
One has to examine what is actually happening. 1. In the USA, folks demographics is one of aging. Us older folks just don't need as much as the younger folks. Our houses/dwelling areas are already full of junk. 2. Europe got on board with the AGW crap. Their economy is tanking faster than the anchor of the US Enterprise drops. When you raise the price of energy, there ARE negative consequences. The PEOPLE that drive an economy are NOT the super rich, but those that need to spend every dollar they make to survive. 3. Endless wars that are consuming large amounts of available resources. 4. China economy starting to mature from one of pure production to one of consumption. Bad thing is, they make the crap they consume. 5. Burdensome food supplies. This has allowed poor folks with low education to do what they do best......reproduce. When a body is starving, the reproductive cycle is put on hold. Scientific fact by the way. Not happening anymore. 6. Concentration of wealth into a few hands. Good or bad, this is terrible for the economies of all involved.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 12, 2016 20:48:20 GMT
www.businessinsider.com/credit-suisse-on-low-yields-2016-2Here's the upshot: After an initial multiyear recovery in stock and bond prices after a crisis (the rally we saw through last year) comes a long stretch of lousy returns. Wilmot said that would be "disastrous" for savers and posed a serious threat to the fund-management industry. Consider this part of the "easy money has been made" meme.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 12, 2016 20:48:35 GMT
6. Concentration of wealth into a few hands. Good or bad, this is terrible for the economies of all involved. You just named one of the main reasons Bernie is still on my list. Now it I could actually get him off that horribly regressive CO2 stance . . . . It is said he thinks of nothing more than income equalization, which must mean he hasn't thought about CO2.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 12, 2016 20:59:09 GMT
6. Concentration of wealth into a few hands. Good or bad, this is terrible for the economies of all involved. You just named one of the main reasons Bernie is still on my list. Now it I could actually get him off that horribly regressive CO2 stance . . . . It is said he thinks of nothing more than income equalization, which must mean he hasn't thought about CO2. I agree. I see the concentration of wealth playing out in Agriculture. I started farming 40 years ago on a shoe string. I was able to purchase land and equipment because of estate auctions etc. Now, that has all but dried up. For a young man/woman to start farming today, virtually impossible. Carnegie had it correct. He thought there should be a 100% inheritance tax. He fought the JP Morgans of life. He understood how great ideas would never see the light of day if wealth got concentrated.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 12, 2016 21:21:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Feb 13, 2016 3:58:24 GMT
We are in the beginning of a major cultural "dark age". From a cynical curmudgeon's perspective, this is intensely satisfying and interesting.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 13, 2016 4:40:29 GMT
For sure it is interesting. I am doing my best so that it doesn't get too dark.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Feb 13, 2016 4:58:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Feb 13, 2016 15:03:00 GMT
Cool! Thanks Walnut. I may become a regular.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 13, 2016 16:14:12 GMT
You just named one of the main reasons Bernie is still on my list. Now it I could actually get him off that horribly regressive CO2 stance . . . . It is said he thinks of nothing more than income equalization, which must mean he hasn't thought about CO2. I agree. I see the concentration of wealth playing out in Agriculture. I started farming 40 years ago on a shoe string. I was able to purchase land and equipment because of estate auctions etc. Now, that has all but dried up. For a young man/woman to start farming today, virtually impossible. Carnegie had it correct. He thought there should be a 100% inheritance tax. He fought the JP Morgans of life. He understood how great ideas would never see the light of day if wealth got concentrated. Inheritance tax should be 100% on liquid assets. Capital assets like farms should not be a focus for the taxman.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 13, 2016 16:17:57 GMT
We are in the beginning of a major cultural "dark age". From a cynical curmudgeon's perspective, this is intensely satisfying and interesting. It also seems we are witnessing the end of the age of enlightenment, a renaissance in reverse. The AGW fallacy is only supported because of the gullibility of the general public _and_ many scientists who trust what peer reviewed papers say without thought.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Feb 13, 2016 16:41:40 GMT
Group Think settles to the lowest common denominator, we are finding out quickly in this age of social media and Yahoo News. Something is not working.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Feb 13, 2016 16:44:49 GMT
Cool! Thanks Walnut. I may become a regular. Some of it is really great.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 13, 2016 17:06:19 GMT
It also seems we are witnessing the end of the age of enlightenment, a renaissance in reverse. The AGW fallacy is only supported because of the gullibility of the general public _and_ many scientists who trust what peer reviewed papers say without thought. As one of the gullible general public I agree with myself. Yes, I believe in AGW and a percentage of other people do too. Sure we have some people on this board that don't but taken as a whole anonymous posters tend not to sway me as much as individuals with names and titles and University's behind them. Am I skeptical? Yep, I think the models are poor to a fault but I haven't seen anything better to offer a counter view. I'm willing to listen. Would Dr. Richard Lindzen fall into the "Name, title, and university behind him?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 13, 2016 17:09:22 GMT
We are in the beginning of a major cultural "dark age". From a cynical curmudgeon's perspective, this is intensely satisfying and interesting. It also seems we are witnessing the end of the age of enlightenment, a renaissance in reverse. The AGW fallacy is only supported because of the gullibility of the general public _and_ many scientists who trust what peer reviewed papers say without thought. It is a fallacy to say we know it is a fallacy.
|
|