fair market is subject to interpretation of what's fair.
Knabe, everything is subject to interpretation, that's why we are having this discussion. Everyone of us sees things through his own set of situations, experiences and values.
If you believe it's fair to compete with state subsidized products imported to this country, or currency manipulated values, that's fine.
i don't believe this, although this is negotiable, and we seem to be always doing it, and when it's ours that is subsidized, ie cotton, sugar etc. and we lose on WTO judgements which in my book isn't right as we give up our sovereignty to a world body.
But it's not true in my geographic location or experience. If you believe it's fair to place tariffs on raw materials needed for our manufacturing but not on competing finished goods, that's ok.
tariffs work when negotiations fail. the fail when there is no innovation or there is subsidized wages etc.
But it's not here. If you believe the correct thing to do is allow the executives from the oil companies to make an obscene amount money at the expense of working Americans who can't afford new automobiles, that's fine.
shareholders can vote differently, though i don't own oil shares, most 401's etc do, and they are making people money. if you split 4 oil companies and divided those at the top their salary, they wouldn't be so obscene. i haven't seen a cost comparison on this, but i don't think it would be too out of line.
But it's not by my values. If you want to vote for Alfred E. Newman that's fine by me.
not sure how i got mixed up with alfred.
But not in three of your lifetimes will there be enough "groundswell" support to elect him. Maybe in CA, there was "groundswell" support for gay marriage, but that's not how it happened. It has happened due to the decisions of a VERY few liberal judges, who are appointed, not elected.
3 of the 4 "liberal" judges were appointed by republicans, just like the supreme court today with kennedy souter etc. the vast majority of the country is moving towards gay marriage. i don't support it as to me it's the ultimate of discrimination and also adoption doesn't allow input from the children to discriminate about their parents.
The vast majority of the country does not support gay marriage. The "few" positions that the candidates differ in are dang important ones.
the vast majority of the country is moving towards gay marriage. i don't support it as to me it's the ultimate of discrimination as there is no diversity in the marriage and also adoption doesn't allow input from the children to discriminate about their parents.
But the most important issue is the type of judges that the next President will appoint. If that's not an important issue to you, I'm ok with that. But it is to me.
to me, this is the most important issue.
Perhaps innovation is taking place in CA at the rate that they just can't pay people enough in their jobs. But here, Delta just laid off 3,000 more employees. It is estimated it will take 10,000 jobs of the type currently available to have the same impact those Delta jobs had on the local economy.
what if they did something different like upgrade rail infrastructure with private ownership similar to burlington northern who ran his ship for less than the govt and made a profit that he had to be busted.
Maybe in CA fat people are a huge strain on the health care system. But here I live in a county of about 120,000 people. We have two large hospitals that serve a much larger geographical, mostly rural area. The cost of indigent care for illegal aliens and their new born American citizens for our county hospital in 2007 was 339 million dollars. This shortfall is paid by higher prices for goods and services charged to those who are insured as well as higher property taxes for all county land owners. Here, when the fat people have their by pass surgery, their insurance companies and employers pay for it as well as for others who are breaking the law by being in this country. Certainly, all of the ills that beset us will pass and a new set will occur. But when?
my point on this was not the aggregate cost, but the cost per individual, which i admit is a poor comparison, but still relevant because both users could change and lower the cost for everyone.
The disproportionate cost of transportation of goods will not change in our lifetime. The credit crisis will not change in our lifetime. Even to begin drilling now will not change anything in the next ten years.
people said the same thing in the late 70's. it got cheap again.
It's fine with me that you are prosperous enough that none of that matters, as a matter of fact, I am glad you are. Fortunately I am prosperous enough that I can get by. But here, I am in the minority. There were those who prospered during the great depression. That doesn't mean it's ok with me from an ethical standpoint to go through another one just because some can prosper.
i don't consider myself prosperous. i can only afford 5 cows and that's pushing it. i have a few strategies to not incur expenses like most out here, and i would consider myself below average out here, and with my wife working about 15 hours/week, it's pretty rough. i did just refinance my house to save 500/mo and my new job pays about 10% less, couple with no contribution to 401, that's another 10%, but looking forward, the company seems to have a decent plan and if it goes public, i can make some of that up.
The point is we all see things through our own filter. Doesn't make it right or wrong for anyone else. But the apathy of the American public will have to change before government sets new policies that enable us all to prosper and then gets out of our way.
prosperity is not a right, it is earned. i agree the public is apathetic and will change, as proved in the depression, wwii etc. this is the only place to be in a climate like this.
what are specific impediments to job creation that don't involve the government? what are one's that do involve the government?
job creation is the key, not job protection. it should be obvious that the best job protection is government job protection and it makes sense to me to not look there for innovation and job creation other than to remove unnecessary impediments.
on a different note, there are very few people who are linebreeding their cattle, introgressing available markers and or epd's and putting this in a package other than waygu or waygu looking angus looking cattle that will perform on grass and reach a slaughter weight less than 18 months. that's my business plan, but i don't see hardly anyone doing it. my business plan, which is a joke since i only have 5 cows, is to create an animal for an option for commercial cattlemen in a 2 or 3 way cross to sell them hybrid vigor, homozygosity, etc. in a phenotype package that is probably not available today. i guess i don't need to make a profit, which is even more stupid, but i am doing this out of curiosity and because everyone says it can't be done. that's what america is about, testing out ideas. what's your ideas? here's another idea of mine, mufflers for generators at cattle shows so we don't all go deaf. anyone make that?