Showing posts with label Economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Economics. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Secretary of Labor's Rose Colored Glasses

Well, the Secretary of Labor, Tom Perez, has put out a blog post calling on workers to form unions.

Tom cheers that we are in a great economic recovery but laments that wages are not up. He cites that union workers make about $200 more a week and so more people should form unions.

Of course there is no way that the ACA (Obamacare) has nothing to do with wages. Forcing employers to spend more money on employees or cut back on their hours to avoid this has absolutely nothing to do with wages. No. Not being in a union is to blame for low wages.

And yet, later in his blog post he writes:
At the same time, employers are recognizing the benefits of empowering their employees to build successful, profitable businesses founded on middle-class jobs. Across the country, we’ve seen company after company raise their minimum wage, offer sick and parental leave, and commit to fairer scheduling practices.

What is it Mr. Secretary? Do we need unions or are companies getting competitive by offering their employees more?

Let us not forget how well the unions have worked out for Chrysler and GM. Plus how unions have bankrupted cities.

But no. With all the bankruptcy that unions cause let us go ahead and promote them. There is plenty of bailout money. Maybe that extra $200 a week people will make can be used in bailouts to keep the businesses open so that they can pay an extra $200 a week.

Perez has a small distorted vision on wages and does not take into account of what the government has thrust upon businesses through regulations and laws, nor has he examined how unions have hurt businesses.

There is no economic growth unless you make the environment friendly to make a profit. The smaller a company's profits get, the smaller the salaries, hours, and size of the work force.


Monday, August 3, 2015

MoveOn.org tries to bailout Greece

This is just amusing and silly. MoveOn.org on their front page has a link to make donations to bail out Greece.



Does a non-profit organization think they have the support size to bail out a country? Are they so in the bag for socialism that they believe having a sound economic policy is a threat to their ideals?

This is just plain silliness.


1 2

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

Peddling the Ethanol Failure to the Philippines

The great ethanol experiment has been a great big failure. It reduces engine efficiency, creates more pollution than gas, and takes more energy to create than it saves. CO2 from the production of ethanol is even being pumped into geological storage potentially creating a deadly disaster in waiting. Even Al Gore said he made a mistake in backing ethanol subsidies.

Should we end the practice of using ethanol? No! Let's get other countries on board!

That's right. The Director of the Las Vegas U.S. Export Assistance Center, the U.S. Renewable Fuels Association, and six U.S. ethanol companies went to Manila to research the potential ethanol market. Presentations were given on different aspects of renewable fuels.

Yes. Let us expand ethanol and grow more corn for a poor fuel choice instead of food. It's not like there are starving people in the world, right?


Tuesday, January 7, 2014

Don't Extend Unemployment

Why shouldn't we extend unemployment? The economy has recovered! Remember? Obama said he fixed it! So there's no need for unemployment. If the economy is fixed then there should be jobs.

Obama is a liar you say?

Fair enough.

We still shouldn't extend unemployment. Why? You voted for Obama! This is the economy and job market you wanted!

Enjoy your repercussions.

Monday, December 30, 2013

Is income inequality a good thing?

Is income inequality a good thing?

Yes!

How can income inequality be a good thing? Because it is an obvious indicator of the right way and wrong way of going about making a living and living your life!

In relation to income inequality, once again the debate of raising the minimum wage has reared its ugly head. People working in minimum wage jobs want minimum wage to be raised to a "living wage."

What is a "living wage?" Does it mean you can afford an apartment in the slums or a house in the suburbs? You can afford to take the bus to work or buy a car and drive to work? You can pay for food for yourself or a family of four? Are we talking a no-skill job should pay the same as a skilled job?

If you want a better paying job you have to work for it; train for it; earn it. Raising the minimum wage is just trickle-up inflation. The cheapest stuff becomes more expensive and hence products up the cost ladder gradually become more expensive. And since the US dollar is no longer backed by gold, we can just print more to meet the demand of the devalued dollar, which ironically printing more will devalue it even more. ( Yes, it would be best to not print more to keep the dollar strong, but the Feds don't have the backbone to maintain a solid fiscal policy. )

Back to the main point, income inequality is an indicator of the right way and wrong way of going about making a living and living your life. Learn from your mistakes. If you are not making enough money you need to change what you are doing.

Some people will continue to strive to improve, do what is theoretically the "right thing" and still end up poor. Why?

Life is not fair. Sorry, but if you have a problem with that take it up with your god.

Man can not make life fair. Man can, however, help his fellow man; clarification - man can help his fellow man, not government can help our fellow man. Why?

Government elimination of economic inequality requires doing horrible things to the best people. Government has to take money away from those that earned it. Government has to force price controls. Government has to try to make sure everything is distributed evenly. And the talented protest by not producing and we all lose.

For Pete's sake, right now in Venezuela people are producing toilet paper at gunpoint! Do you want that to happen here?

That is a brief on making a living; what of living you life?

In short, do not spend more than you make. Throw out your credit cards. Live in the black, not the red. Live below what you think you can afford.

From here you just need to figure out what to fix in your life equation - how to make a living - living your life.

It just might be that simple.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

What about the Sequester!?

Remember the Sequester?

Yeah. That's gone with the new budget deal.

Thanks Democrats and Republicans.

Thanks for removing any chance of moving towards a balanced budget.

Thanks for helping devalue the dollar even more.

Thanks for nothin'!



Thursday, December 5, 2013

True Value

"True value" is a pillar of capitalism and that pillar is being eroded by the deluded entitled masses and whacked out government laws, policies, and regulations of today.

What is true value?

That should be self evident. It is what "something" is worth. Something may be anything that is exchanged for money; in the most simple terms something will be a product or service.

What determines the true value of something?

Scarcity and demand.

That is mostly what one needs to know about economics except for the "poison" that government injects into the system. Poison screws everything up. Poison pollutes minds and markets. This poison makes conversations of economics difficult because most people become mired in the poison policies and arguments; those that try to even bring up the concept of true value do it so trying to frame it from the point of view of poison. This is impossible because seeing the big picture is hard from the bottom as opposed to the top; the top is from the pure view, true value, not the bottom view of poison, the branching down of something into what it was not intended to be.

So, what is this poison? Poison is government laws, policies, and regulations. It is forcing features onto a product that the consumer may not necessarily want. This means more work than necessary is put into a product than would otherwise be done. This makes the product more expensive since it takes more to produce it otherwise by default.

All of this should be obvious, but it is not. Poison has infected almost everything and we are blinded of true value. Only black markets come close to true value but the prices are poisoned and altered by legality.

Today we are in a crisis. Both workers and government are intent on skewing the market to what they think is fair.

Today we saw the strike of fast food workers because they want a living wage. Is that the true value of the service they perform? A young adult of fifteen or sixteen can do this job; is this not a common gateway into the workforce? A job that can be done by someone with no experience has very little value.

Regardless of how many adults trying to support a family or workers with a college education trying to repay student loans work these jobs it does not elevate the value of the service. They are replaceable by a young inexperienced individual.

Just for cruel amusement I would like to bring up the point that Henry Ford paid his workers well enough to buy the products they actually made. Fast food workers do make enough to buy the product they make.

I move on to Obamacare; mockingly it is officially named the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Obamacare is not Socialism, Communism, or Capitalism. I do not know what "ism" it is; I don't think there is an "ism" for it. It is a compulsory directive for people to buy something else be fined by the IRS else fail to pay the fine go to jail.

The concept is you buy something you don't need or can even possibly use to fund someone else that needs it. The government is forcing you to pay for a service you don't need.

Now someone gets a service at a lower cost than usual because you helped pay for it. Now they might use it more often. The more it is used, the more scarce the service becomes. Scarcity and demand drives up cost. This service you don't need becomes more expensive and now you need to pay more because it is the law that you buy it.

Can you see the poison now?

Let us backtrack to fast food workers with college degrees. They owe a lot of money because of student loans. Once the government got involved in student loans education became more expensive. That is because government student loans were subsidized by you, just like Obamacare makes people buy services they don't need. You funded student loans. Government loans are guaranteed by your tax dollars.

Once loans for college became more accessible and guaranteed by the government, hence your wages, more people went to college. Society urged the populace to go to college as opposed to trade schools. The social trend became college.

Social secret: trade skills have been socially devalued, but that does not create a scarcity of the need. Pushing people out of trade skills through social pressure increases scarcity of the skill thus increasing its true value through scarcity. Become a tradesman. How often do plumbers go broke?

I do think that this gives the basic illustration of cost and effect of poison on the system. If you disagree, ask a question.

Saturday, October 5, 2013

Why Business is Good

Glad to post a positive video.

Richard Branson explains a successful business is a business that benefits people. So cool to hear that business are not preying on consumers, tackling them to the ground, and eating out their wallets.




Sunday, September 22, 2013

Price Control from Obamacare to Toilet Paper

Oh the stupidity of people and government. People should have health care because it is a right. So to ensure people have health care it is illegal not to have health insurance. And the government defines what needs to be in that insurance. This way if people pay for stuff they don't even need. That pooled together money reduces costs, right? Plus government will limit what you can charge which again reduces costs, right?

One of the popular trends today to get projects of many different types off the ground is "crowd funding." That sort of sounds like Obamacare right? Get a lot people to pay for something. However the difference is "crowd funding" is voluntary and Obamacare is at the point of a gun. A popular project under "crowd funding" could get a lot of money if successful, otherwise the project fails.

Obamacare is like a tax, but not a tax. Are you listening douche bag Justice Roberts? (Someone pee in his morning coffee please.) The government taxes us and takes our money and spends it on what it thinks best. Obamacare tells us if we do not have health insurance we have to pay a fine, not a tax. We are charged for our existence.

Also, if the government limits how much can be charged for services then everything will be affordable, right? Maybe. Most probably it will be affordable but not necessarily available.

Just turn to Venezuela to see what price controls do. If you don't remember this I will refresh your memory. Venezuela suffered a toilet paper shortage because of price controls. It is now so bad that the Venezuelan government has "temporarily" taken control of the toilet paper factories to make sure that toilet paper is being produced for the people. That's right. Force is being used to make sure people make toilet paper.

That is the result of price control.

How steady will your doctor's hand be when he has to operate at gun point?


Monday, September 2, 2013

Happy EBT Day

Happy Labor Day! if you're working.

With the sad state and direction of our economy, how long till EBT card holders outnumber the employed? Will "Labor Day" become "EBT day?"

If we counted government workers with the unemployed, would that outnumber private sector workers?

I hope not!

Sunday, May 5, 2013

Yeah! Obamacare!

This is what progressivism does to people. There is no such thing as a free lunch. As progressives try to make it free, the lunches just start disappearing.



Tuesday, March 5, 2013

Why we don't like Obama

The scariest thing about Obama is his economic policies. He is awful! He believes in redistribution. He believes government spending drives the economy.

If his policies were so great then why aren't we doing great? or good? or even fair? No. This is what we fear --

Even worse, one Obama's wonderful policies, Obama Care or the Affordable Care Act, hasn't even taken full effect, but yet --



1 2

Monday, March 4, 2013

The FCC is Promoting Liberty

We are seeing a glimmer of hope and common sense coming from the FCC in regards to a consumer's ability to use a product they own the way they want. This is in regards to the Copyright Office of the Library of Congress interpreting the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to mean a consumer is not allowed to alter their phone without permission from the company that produced it, ever. Even out of contract.

This is a partial quote from a statement by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski:
From a communications policy perspective, this raises serious competition and innovation concerns, and for wireless consumers, it doesn't pass the common sense test. The FCC is examining this issue, looking into whether the agency, wireless providers, or others should take action to preserve consumers' ability to unlock their mobile phones. I also encourage Congress to take a close look and consider a legislative solution.


The Government Doesn't Create Jobs, It Destroys Them

Remember the Buckyballs' controversy from the summer? Remember how the Consumer Product Safety Commission was suing because a few kids swallowed magnets? Even though the product was not sold in toy stores and marketed to adults and came with warnings not to swallow?

Maxfield & Oberton Holdings, LLC, the Buckyballs company, mocked the lawsuit with some startling facts about beds, stairs, tube steaks, hippos, and coconuts. The blogosphere and conservative sites all bemoaned the lawsuit. And then ... ?

The issue has been closed, and it has been closed for a while and I missed it.

The message you get when you go to the official BuckyBalls' site is as follows:
On December 27, 2012 Maxfield & Oberton Holdings, LLC (the "Company") stopped doing business and filed a Certificate of Cancellation with the Secretary of State of Delaware, thereby ceasing to exist pursuant to applicable Delaware law. The MOH Liquidating Trust has been established to deal with and, to the extent they are valid, pay, to the extent assets are available, certain claims which have been, and may later be, asserted against the Company. If you believe you have a claim against the Company, please click on link below to obtain the Proof of Claim form which you must complete and submit to the Trustee of the MOH Liquidating Trust. If the Trustee determines that a claim is valid, the Trustee will pay that claim, to the extent assets are available, in accordance with the terms of the MOH Liquidating Trust.

Yes. Buckyballs is officially out of business.

How did we miss this? They were gone in December! A Christmas gift going away! Well, they closed in December but the announcement was early November. That means in the final throws of an American election the press were silent on the closing of an American company due to the government frivolously pursuing them in the middle of an American recession, or is it a depression now?

So this means that we can no longer get Buckyballs, right?

Wrong!

There is a place to get them online: Buckyballs Club. Cool! The government didn't win, right? Well, go to the about page and look at the bottom and see the prominent shipment carrier: China Post.

This means I checked the site and got a "WhoIs" from network-tools.com. The result is the site is owned by a Chinese company.
3/F.,HiChina Mansion,No.27 Gulouwai Avenue
Dongcheng District,Beijing 100120,China
Basically we can not buy Buckyballs in stores now, but can get them online. We will no longer buy them from an American company but a Chinese company.

And this administration has been complaining about the sequester and how it would cost jobs? Federal jobs, yes. But do they care about private sector jobs?

I don't know. Maybe it is just too dangerous for Americans to sell magnets. It is much safer to buy them online from China. Tax day is coming up. Pay your taxes so they can make jobs.


1 2 1 2

Monday, February 25, 2013

Oh No! The Sequester! Shhh! We're Spending.

Oh no! The sequester would cut $1.325 billion to the Department of Education! It would hurt Head Start, which doesn't work. Teachers, aids, and other staff could lose their jobs. Why? Why is the federal government spending money on teachers? The states pay their salary. Didn't we learn from the collapse of the Soviet Union that centralized planning doesn't work?

Obviously not because Obama and other politicians want to stop the sequester and keep this centralized spending.

But do you know what is really interesting? The post before this story on the Department of Education's site talks about spending money in a NEW GRANT!
Yes. Amidst the tragic sequester there is still yet a NEW GRANT! Are you kidding me!?

What is it for?
$15 million in public funds over three years to reinforce and accelerate intervention efforts in the nation’s lowest-performing schools.
But we have already spent a lot of money on low performing schools. In fact, again from the post, here is what we have done:
Since 2009, the Department has invested $4.5 billion at more than 1,300 of the country’s lowest-performing schools.
So why are there still low performing schools?

But $15 million across 3 years is small compared to $1.325 billion in one year. However, the point is that while the left hand cuts the right hand spends. How many more instances are there of this happening?

But let's run with the number of $1.325 billion. How does that stack up with numbers from 2012? We will look at the financial details document.

Page 3 (numbered as 41) the total assets are $796.927 billion. $673.488 is Net Credit Program Receivables. That is money owed to the DoE. See page 12 (numbered as 50).

Page 4 (numbered as 42) the total costs for special programs is $63.773 billion. Not regular operations, but special programs.

Page 6 (numbered as 44) has "Budgetary" and "Non-Budgetary Credit Reform Financing Accounts." Respectively the total budgetary resources are $104.710 billion $270.274 billion for a combined total $374.984 billion.

That $1.3 billion is looking pretty insignificant.

Page 17 (numbered as 55) what was the end balance with the Treasury? $121.993 billion.

Page 34 (numbered as 72) is the debt. Total for 2012 was $715.303 billion.

We have $715.303 billion in debt with the DoE and the politicians don't want to cut less than 1% of the spending?

I do not fully understand all the numbers that are in the document because accounting and the terms are confusing if you are not an accountant or well versed in the subject. However, it is easy too see that the numbers dealt with in the DoE's budget are huge. So huge that the sequester's effect is minuscule. So what's all the fuss!?


1 2 3 4 5