Discussion: The Economy, National Debt, And Other Financial Issues II

[dnno1]

No. More efficiently means the same level of service, if not more, with less money.

Businesses do it all the time. They have to in order to remain competitive.

Government does it too, occasionally. But constituents and politicians get so freaked out because they think the way you do. So they don't even consider the possibility of running with less funding, much less even trying it.

But it presumes that you demise anything that. Is considered wastefull, which is another way of saying make cuts. Haven't you heard of the term "cut the fat"?

 

[Handsome Rob]

Yeah, but at what expense? The article also says that Texas is 26th in education and 35th in quality of life. Even though income taxes are low, their property and sales taxes are high, which makes them 28th in cost of doing business.



They are 41st in education and 48th in quality of life. Sure, they are friendly to businesses but who would want to live there and raise children?

According to the Census, California grew by 10.0% from 2000 to 2010. Tennessee by 11.5%. And Texas? 20.6%.

So, who would want to live here and raise children? I think Tennessee's and Texas' outpacing CA in population growth gives a pretty good answer.

But, if you want to switch from percentage to actual numbers, Tennessee loses among the three with our small population. But, Texas beats CA by having 4.3 million people move in vs. 3.4 million for CA.

 

[Handsome Rob]

I am taking a guess having tons of oil doesn't hurt, regulations or not

No, it certainly doesn't. But, neither does it automatically negate the role of lower regulations in spurring business growth and development.

Nine of the Top Ten, after all, are right-to-work states. But, less than half (23) of states are right to work. When 54% of the states are anti-choice (or, forced union), but they only have one state in the Top Ten . . . well . . .

 

[dnno1]

According to the Census, California grew by 10.0% from 2000 to 2010. Tennessee by 11.5%. And Texas? 20.6%.

So, who would want to live here and raise children? I think Tennessee's and Texas' outpacing CA in population growth gives a pretty good answer.

But, if you want to switch from percentage to actual numbers, Tennessee loses among the three with our small population. But, Texas beats CA by having 4.3 million people move in vs. 3.4 million for CA.

So what the Census Bureau is saying is that the population in California grew by more than 3.7 million people to Tennessee's close to 730,000 in the last 10 years right? No, not quite. Your numbers are misleading since the population data includes births and deaths as well as migrations. If you want to compare this correctly you want to look at migration data (remember my question was "who would want to go to Tennessee?"). Now this is a little busy, but if you look at the migration data from just 2005 to 2010 around 5.5 million people migrated to California from another state vs. a little over 993 thousand for Tennessee. The conclusion is that far more people want to go to California (more than 5 times more) than Tennessee. Texas has a little over 4.3 million over that same time frame, so California still has Texas beat.

 

[Franklin Richards]

That Texas growth is mostly Hispanic. If these trends continue, Texas might actually go back to Democratic.

 

[Kelly]

If they are eligible to vote...possibly, right now I don't think that is the case....most of my students parents are not eligible...and many of the kids won't be either when they turn 18...

I actually think the migration from Northeast, states like New York, to Texas will change the political look of Texas far more than the Hispanic vote...most of my friends here in Houston that are Hispanic are extremely conservative....or they don't vote. My students who are predominantly Hispanic, we just got new numbers out this year and we are about 82% Hispanic now.....they poll very conservative, especially fiscally....and I'm much more liberal than they are on social issues....I won't be able to really use these polls much longer, since I will be teaching 6th grade from now on....not High School....

 

[Handsome Rob]

So what the Census Bureau is saying is that the population in California grew by more than 3.7 million people to Tennessee's close to 730,000 in the last 10 years right? No, not quite. Your numbers are misleading since the population data includes births and deaths as well as migrations. If you want to compare this correctly you want to look at migration data (remember my question was "who would want to go to Tennessee?"). Now this is a little busy, but if you look at the migration data from just 2005 to 2010 around 5.5 million people migrated to California from another state vs. a little over 993 thousand for Tennessee. The conclusion is that far more people want to go to California (more than 5 times more) than Tennessee. Texas has a little over 4.3 million over that same time frame, so California still has Texas beat.

That wasn't your question. It was (bold and italics are mine):

but who would want to live there and raise children?

Migration only answers part of the question as to who wants to live there. It would also include people who were born there who choose to remain. So, the growth in population in Tennessee as a percentage and the growth in population in Texas as a percentage and in numbers beat California between 2000-2010.

If your question had been "who would want to go there," then solely focusing on migration data would be valid. But, since you actually asked who would want to live there, the change in population both as a percentage (for scale) and in actuality (for numbers) paints a more complete picture than focusing on mere migration.

 

[dnno1]

That wasn't your question. It was (bold and italics are mine):

Migration only answers part of the question as to who wants to live there. It would also include people who were born there who choose to remain. So, the growth in population in Tennessee as a percentage and the growth in population in Texas as a percentage and in numbers beat California between 2000-2010.

If your question had been "who would want to go there," then solely focusing on migration data would be valid. But, since you actually asked who would want to live there, the change in population both as a percentage (for scale) and in actuality (for numbers) paints a more complete picture than focusing on mere migration.

Still, raw population data includes mortality and natality which are not relevant to the question. Only migration data excludes those factors. Furthermore, percentage growth is a misleading indicator due to the sensitivity of the population size (if a single person took on a roommate, for example, the population growth as a percentage would be 50%, but that can not compare to a factory of 2000 employees that hires 1000 more employees). Just face it I was giving you a break by giving you larger numbers with the migration data, and even then more people are coming to California than both Tennessee and Texas (in spite of what the growth percentage is).

 

[Handsome Rob]

Still, raw population data includes mortality and natality which are not relevant to the question. Only migration data excludes those factors. Furthermore, percentage growth is a misleading indicator due to the sensitivity of the population size (if a single person took on a roommate, for example, the population growth as a percentage would be 50%, but that can not compare to a factory of 2000 employees that hires 1000 more employees). Just face it I was giving you a break by giving you larger numbers with the migration data, and even then more people are coming to California than both Tennessee and Texas (in spite of what the growth percentage is).

Giving me a break? Migration data excludes those who were born and continue to live here, so you're presenting misleading and incomplete information when you're asking who would choose to live here (and not go here, as you claim to have asked). I know several native Tennesseans who still live here, and you can't exclude them from who chooses to live in Tennessee.

Well, I know this is only going to go around in circles from here on out, so the last word on the matter is yours.

 

[dnno1]

Giving me a break? Migration data excludes those who were born and continue to live here, so you're presenting misleading and incomplete information when you're asking who would choose to live here (and not go here, as you claim to have asked). I know several native Tennesseans who still live here, and you can't exclude them from who chooses to live in Tennessee.

Well, I know this is only going to go around in circles from here on out, so the last word on the matter is yours.

People who were born their didn't have a choice now did they? My question was who would want to live there and raise children, not who didn't have a choice but to be born there. People who die don't get counted either. Like I said before percentage population growth is not a good metric, and in any case, more people choose to go to California.

 

[Kelly]

I think people choosing to stay in a state, make a life there, raise a family there.....says a lot about what that state offers.

 

[Paradoxium]

Dear François Hollande,

It's called

CAPITAL FLIGHT

You may return to your magical unicorn rainbow farting fantasy land.

Dox,

 

[Kelly]

I call it, the future...

 

[Paradoxium]

Dear François Hollande,

Remember that time you said you would make it harder to fire people. **** getting real now, with companies preparing to fire as many as possible before it kicks in. You know this famous french auto company? Now you haz a temper tantrum over this?

It's called

SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

You can't keep increasing production and supply when there is no demand. Much less keep the company sustainable. So in temporarily saving some jobs for political capital, you are going to cost everyone at that company their jobs.

Math is a *****.

Dox,

 

[Venom'sDad]

It's called

SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

You can't keep increasing production and supply when there is no demand.

Exactly what happen with the Housing Bubble....the exact same thing.

 

[8wid]

^Or just like American's need to keep increasing it's military budget over other domestic expenses.

The best example of creating something when there is no real demand for it in during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. $3 billion given to the Mujahadeen to fight the Russians, to train and arm them too. Just because they took our money and training doesn't mean they are our friends. The Soviets would have been defeated without the US intervention. Instead it helped the Taliban take Kabul, Al-Qaida rise to power, and Osama Bin Laden to cause the 9/11 attacks because of blowback from so much military intervention in the Middle East that killed civilians and armed the wrong people for the politician agenda of America. This is why I assert 9/11 is really America's legacy during the Cold War coming to bite it in the butt, 9/11 was the first time Americans had to question directly whether or not their military foreign policy had something wrong with it.

 

[Kelly]

^Or just like American's need to keep increasing it's military budget over other domestic expenses.

The best example of creating something when there is no real demand for it in during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. $3 billion given to the Mujahadeen to fight the Russians, to train and arm them too. Just because they took our money and training doesn't mean they are our friends. The Soviets would have been defeated without the US intervention. Instead it helped the Taliban take Kabul, Al-Qaida rise to power, and Osama Bin Laden to cause the 9/11 attacks because of blowback from so much military intervention in the Middle East that killed civilians and armed the wrong people for the politician agenda of America. This is why I assert 9/11 is really America's legacy during the Cold War coming to bite it in the butt, 9/11 was the first time Americans had to question directly whether or not their military foreign policy had something wrong with it.

I agree somewhat with your post, we have always seemed to not figure out our true enemies until its too late....that has always been our history, but we don't know for sure that the Soviet Union would have been defeated....I think they would have pulled out years later after not being able to solidify a win there.....much like we have done in our 2 wars there....I guess you could say that capturing Saddam Hussein and killing Bin Laden are both wins...but neither will do much in the true sense of "freedom" as we know it in Iraq and Afghanistan....the Sunni and Shia will continue to fight for power in Iraq, and the tribal leaders will continue to fight for power in Afghanistan....not much has changed. Except that Saddam was a secular dictator....so the Sunni and Shia had to keep it quiet.

 

[8wid]

Tax havens: Super-rich 'hiding' at least $21tn

 

[Hobgoblin]

Greece's Great Depression

http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/bre86l07l-us-greece-clinton-depression/

Posted 2012/07/22 at 8:34 am EDT

ATHENS, July 22, 2012 (Reuters) — Greece is in a "Great Depression" similar to the American one in the 1930s, the country's Prime Minister Antonis Samaras told former U.S. President Bill Clinton on Sunday.



Samaras's comments come two days before a team of Greece's international lenders arrive in Athens to push for further austerity measures if the debt-laden country wants to qualify for further rescue payments and avoid a chaotic default.

Athens wants to soften the terms of a 130-billion euro bailout agreed last March with the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, to soften their impact on an economy going through its worst post-war recession.

Greek GDP is expected by the end of this to have shrunk by about a fifth in five consecutive years of recession since 2008, hammered by tax hikes, spending cuts and wage reductions required by two EU/IMF bailouts. Unemployment climbed to a record 22.6 percent in the first quarter.

"You had the Great Depression in the United States," Samaras told Clinton, who was visiting Greece as part of a delegation of Greek-American businessmen. "This is exactly what we're going through in Greece - it's our version of the Great Depression."

Athens must reduce its budget deficit below 3 percent of GDP by the end of 2014, from 9.3 percent of GDP in 2011 - requiring almost another 12 billion euros in cuts and higher taxes on top of the 17 billion successive governments have cut from the budget shortfall.

Greece wants its lenders to give it two more years to achieve the budget goal to avoid an even deeper economic slump but its lenders have opposed the idea because it would imply an even bigger financial aid to the country.

Highlighting growing frustration with Athens, German magazine "Der Spiegel" reported on Sunday, without citing sources, that the IMF may not take part in any additional financing for Greece.

The German and Greek finance ministries declined to comment on the report, which suggested additional support required for Athens could range from 10-50 billion euros.

Officials have already indicated there would be a shortfall on the current bailout. How much is likely to depend on the extent by much Greece misses its fiscal targets and the extent of support needed to keep its major banks afloat.

The inspection team of the international "troika" of the EU, the IMF and the ECB will focus on the 11.7 billion euros of spending cuts Athens needs to take in 2013 and 2014.

Clinton criticized Greece's lenders for focusing excessively on austerity, saying Athens will be more likely to repay its debt if its manages economic recovery first.

"(It) is self-defeating... if every day people are saying this may or may not work to give us back a 100 cents on the dollar, so give us more austerity today," he told Samaras.

"People need something to look forward to when they get up in the morning -- young Greeks need something to believe in so they can stake their future out here," Clinton said.

(Reporting by Harry Papachristou in Athens and Georg Merziger in Berlin; editing by Patrick Graham)

 

[Kelly]

Greece's Great Depression

http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/bre86l07l-us-greece-clinton-depression/

Yeah, right....don't hold your breath on all of this.

 

[The Question]

[YT]64eI831eKY8[/YT]

 

[8wid]

Germany's AAA credit rating on 'negative outlook'

 

[enterthemadness]

Greece is wrecked, and USA is looking to go next if it keeps up with this corrupt two-party system. Printing money, borrowing money, the dollar is already wrecked...only thing starving off a monetary collapse short term is printing money and China and Japan not selling their US debt? Just 100% screwed...

 

[Matt]

The House has passed an audit the fed bill. Let the Senate filibuster begin.

 

[Tao43]

The House has passed an audit the fed bill. Let the Senate filibuster begin.

There won't be a need for the Senate to fillibuster. Harry Reid already stated he won't bring it to the floor for a vote.