|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 27 2014 05:17 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2014 05:07 IgnE wrote:On March 27 2014 00:06 Wolfstan wrote:
Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area. Germany is super fiscally conservative. If they don't have enough work they actually make people work less so that everyone can continue working! Heavy restrictions on how and when companies can lay off workers! They have very generous unemployment benefits, including healthcare! Cheap to free education! So conservative. Germany's GDP actually went down last winter, and has been slowing in 2013. Germany has been sharply antagonistic towards the rest of Europe. It has been exploiting a trade imbalance between itself and the rest of the world, relying on its sturdy welfare system to pay workers less relative to its peers, to keep prices down. They guarantee their work and wages for their laborers in exchange for keeping wages low. This allows them to keep their prices from rising, allowing German products to edge out products from other European countries. But by displacing the economic chances of producers in other Euro countries, Germany is adopting a short term strategy that relies on selling cheap, high quality goods to others while cannibalizing the market, by destroying the economies of their buyers. Please not the "Germany doesn't pay it's workers" stuff again. Our export goods aren't cheap. Ironically people employed in the industrial, export based industries are among the best earning employees. Who's suffering from low wages is our domestic service sector.(Which is pretty big as in most developed countries).
Wages have gone up recently, and you even have a minimum wage increase coming. But back in 2010 Germany had the lowest wage growth rates in Europe. And Germany has grown a lot compared to the rest of Europe since 2008. We are looking at why Germany succeeded in the wake of the crisis while other countries floundered.
|
On March 27 2014 05:29 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2014 05:17 Nyxisto wrote:On March 27 2014 05:07 IgnE wrote:On March 27 2014 00:06 Wolfstan wrote:
Wow, you guys have it really bad down there, is entrepreneurship or moving to the midwest an option in America? I know here that you can go to the industrial park, throw a rock and have 5 job offers. I think reducing hiring and business startup barriers could help. I don't think inequality is the reason for this, tax the rich, go after their offshore net worth and give it to the long term unemployed either through a program or a cheque so they will get a job.
I'd be very interested in regions that have have long term fiscal conservative rule and their relative economic performance versus those with long term liberal rule. Because I've been propagandized to look at California vs. Texas, Alberta vs. Quebec, Germany vs. Greece etc. A quick google search doesn't reveal a study done in that area. Germany is super fiscally conservative. If they don't have enough work they actually make people work less so that everyone can continue working! Heavy restrictions on how and when companies can lay off workers! They have very generous unemployment benefits, including healthcare! Cheap to free education! So conservative. Germany's GDP actually went down last winter, and has been slowing in 2013. Germany has been sharply antagonistic towards the rest of Europe. It has been exploiting a trade imbalance between itself and the rest of the world, relying on its sturdy welfare system to pay workers less relative to its peers, to keep prices down. They guarantee their work and wages for their laborers in exchange for keeping wages low. This allows them to keep their prices from rising, allowing German products to edge out products from other European countries. But by displacing the economic chances of producers in other Euro countries, Germany is adopting a short term strategy that relies on selling cheap, high quality goods to others while cannibalizing the market, by destroying the economies of their buyers. Please not the "Germany doesn't pay it's workers" stuff again. Our export goods aren't cheap. Ironically people employed in the industrial, export based industries are among the best earning employees. Who's suffering from low wages is our domestic service sector.(Which is pretty big as in most developed countries). Wages have gone up recently, and you even have a minimum wage increase coming. But back in 2010 Germany had the lowest wage growth rates in Europe. And Germany has grown a lot compared to the rest of Europe since 2008. We are looking at why Germany succeeded in the wake of the crisis while other countries floundered.
Sounds to me like they let the employer and employee decide how much wages should grow and kept the government out of it. Then wages somehow went up when it made economic sense.
|
Or growth within Germany at the expense of Europe, and political pressure from an increasingly vocal labor force pushed through higher wages and a minimum wage. Who benefits from German-enforced austerity measures in other countries? Could it be German industries?
|
On March 27 2014 06:18 IgnE wrote:
Or growth within Germany at the expense of Europe, and political pressure from an increasingly vocal labor force pushed through higher wages and a minimum wage. Who benefits from German-enforced austerity measures in other countries? Could it be German industries?
At best Germany is benefiting relative to other Eurozone countries. They still aren't growing at anything resembling fast.
|
They had a few growth years around 2010 when their wages were lowest. But I totally agree with you jonny about their growth now.
|
The big idea with Germany is the counter-factual of what their wages would be if they still had the Deutchmark. Imagine what the Deutchmark would cost in Liras (Greek curency). Then think how hard it would be for a Spanish person to buy a Mercedes Benz in Spanish currency. The Euro kept German wages down RELATIVE TO EUROPE to a great degree compared with the counter-factual where they still had Deutchmarks.
|
On March 27 2014 08:18 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
The big idea with Germany is the counter-factual of what their wages would be if they still had the Deutchmark. Imagine what the Deutchmark would cost in Liras (Greek curency). Then think how hard it would be for a Spanish person to buy a Mercedes Benz in Spanish currency. The Euro kept German wages down RELATIVE TO EUROPE to a great degree compared with the counter-factual where they still had Deutchmarks.
The problem here is not the currency, it's the fact you need to stop selling/buying Mercedeses when the buyer finances it through debt.
|
Hong Kong9174 Posts
Federal prosecutors unsealed an indictment against state Sen. Leland Yee in court Wednesday, accusing him of conspiring to commit wire fraud and traffic firearms.
In all, 26 people, including former school board president Keith Jackson, were indicted on charges related to an extensive crime ring headed by well-known Chinatown figure Raymond Chow, who was also arrested and charged Wednesday.
The indictment alleges Yee and Jackson defrauded "citizens of honest services" and were involved in a scheme to traffic firearms in exchange for thousands in campaign donations to the senator.
Federal prosecutors also allege Yee agreed to perform official acts in exchange for the money, including one instance in which he introduced a businessman to state legislators who had significant influence over pending medical marijuana legislation. In exchange, the businessman -- who was actually an undercover FBI agent -- agreed to donate thousands to Yee's campaign fund, according to the indictment.
for those not familiar with CA politics, this is the guy who writes all the gun control bills in this state
today must be bizzaro world time
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sen-yee-indictment-unsealed-20140326,0,7238867.story
|
Hong Kong9174 Posts
SENATOR YEE explained he has known the arms dealer for a number of years and has developed a close relationship with him. SENATOR YEE told UCE 4599 that the arms dealer "Has things that you guys want." SENATOR YEE cautioned that doing business with people like the arms dealer was not easy and told UCE 4599 this was not a business for "the faint of heart." SENATOR YEE explained the arms dealer was very cautious about who he conducted business with. SENATOR YEE would tell the arms dealer to work with KEITH JACKSON because SENATOR YEE trusted KEITH JACKSON.
UCE 4599 explained he understood the complexity of trafficking weapons and the importance of remaining safe. While UCE 4599 had confidence in KEITH JACKSON, he wasn't sure KEITH JACKSON would able (sic) to address any of the arms dealer's issues without direct input from UCE 4599. The arms dealer was willing "to surface himself" at SENATOR YEE'S request. According to SENATOR YEE, the arms dealer advised YEE on how the weapons deal would unfold. According to SENATOR YEE the arms dealer is "low-key" and has been trafficking weapons for quite a while. According to SENATOR YEE, the arms dealer sourced the weapons from Russia. SENATOR YEE though the ability to traffic weapons with the arms dealer would be base don trust and would take time. SENATOR YEE said "We're interested" in arranging the weapons deal and thought the arms dealer would go back to "his folks." SENATOR YEE said of the arms dealer, "He's going to rely on me, because ultimately it's going to be me."
from the criminal complaint. the real juice starts on page 82.
http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/filelibrary/1385/Complaint_Affidavit_14-70421-NC.pdf
|
On March 27 2014 10:42 itsjustatank wrote:Show nested quote +Federal prosecutors unsealed an indictment against state Sen. Leland Yee in court Wednesday, accusing him of conspiring to commit wire fraud and traffic firearms.
In all, 26 people, including former school board president Keith Jackson, were indicted on charges related to an extensive crime ring headed by well-known Chinatown figure Raymond Chow, who was also arrested and charged Wednesday.
The indictment alleges Yee and Jackson defrauded "citizens of honest services" and were involved in a scheme to traffic firearms in exchange for thousands in campaign donations to the senator.
Federal prosecutors also allege Yee agreed to perform official acts in exchange for the money, including one instance in which he introduced a businessman to state legislators who had significant influence over pending medical marijuana legislation. In exchange, the businessman -- who was actually an undercover FBI agent -- agreed to donate thousands to Yee's campaign fund, according to the indictment. for those not familiar with CA politics, this is the guy who writes all the gun control bills in this state today must be bizzaro world time http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sen-yee-indictment-unsealed-20140326,0,7238867.story
Whatever happened to forgetting it, 'cuz its Chinatown...
|
On March 27 2014 09:41 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2014 08:18 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
The big idea with Germany is the counter-factual of what their wages would be if they still had the Deutchmark. Imagine what the Deutchmark would cost in Liras (Greek curency). Then think how hard it would be for a Spanish person to buy a Mercedes Benz in Spanish currency. The Euro kept German wages down RELATIVE TO EUROPE to a great degree compared with the counter-factual where they still had Deutchmarks. The problem here is not the currency, it's the fact you need to stop selling/buying Mercedeses when the buyer finances it through debt.
You need a car for job, you have a choice between a 14 000 euro renault or fiat and a 16 000 euro mercedes. What do you choose ?
I'll give you my insight : fiat only product girl cars.
|
(Reuters) - U.S. economic growth was a bit faster than previously estimated in the fourth quarter, displaying underlying strength that could bolster views that the slowdown in activity early in the year would be temporary.
The economic picture was also brightened by other data on Thursday showing new applications for unemployment benefits falling last week to their lowest level in nearly four months.
Gross domestic product expanded at a 2.6 percent annual rate, the Commerce Department said, up from the 2.4 percent pace it reported last month.
The revision, which was broadly in line with economists' expectations, reflected a stronger pace of consumer spending than previously estimated.
Although the revised pace of expansions was still significantly slower than the 4.1 percent rate logged in the July-September quarter, the composition of growth in the fourth quarter suggested underlying strength in the economy.
source
(Reuters) - A growing number of Americans quitting the labor force are likely gone for good, offering a cautionary note to the Federal Reserve as it tries to gauge how tight the jobs market is and how quickly to raise interest rates.
For a long time, data suggested a significant portion of the decrease in labor force participation was because many job seekers had grown frustrated with their search and had given up looking. If the job market tightened enough, the thinking went, these Americans would be lured back to hunt for work again.
But a different picture is now emerging. Data shows participation in the past few years has fallen mainly because Americans have retired or signed up for disability benefits.
"The data suggest that the recent exits from the labor force have been more voluntary in nature than was the case in 2009, when the economy was weak and job prospects were dire," said Omair Sharif, senior economist at RBS in Stamford, Connecticut.
According to economists who have analyzed Labor Department data, 6.6 million people exited the workforce from 2010 and 2013. About 61 percent of these dropouts were retirees, more than double the previous three years' share.
People dropping out because of disability accounted for 28 percent, also up significantly from 2007-2010. Of those remaining, 7 percent were heading to school, while the other 4 percent left for other reasons.
In contrast, between 2007 and 2010, retirees made up a quarter of the six million people who left the labor force, while 18 percent were classified as disabled. About 57 percent were either in school or otherwise on the sidelines.
"This suggests the current drop in the labor force is more structural in nature," said Sharif.
If so, there is less hope of luring people back to hunt for work as the jobs market tightens, as many Fed officials believed would be the case. And the U.S. central bank, which has held benchmark rates near zero since December 2008, will likely need to push them up sooner than they would have otherwise.
"It is not clear whether the overall participation rate will increase anytime soon, given that the underlying downward trend due to retirements is likely to continue," said Shigeru Fujita, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
source
Interesting article about the labour participation rate and the long term unemployment discussion a few pages back.
|
On March 28 2014 00:09 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +(Reuters) - U.S. economic growth was a bit faster than previously estimated in the fourth quarter, displaying underlying strength that could bolster views that the slowdown in activity early in the year would be temporary.
The economic picture was also brightened by other data on Thursday showing new applications for unemployment benefits falling last week to their lowest level in nearly four months.
Gross domestic product expanded at a 2.6 percent annual rate, the Commerce Department said, up from the 2.4 percent pace it reported last month.
The revision, which was broadly in line with economists' expectations, reflected a stronger pace of consumer spending than previously estimated.
Although the revised pace of expansions was still significantly slower than the 4.1 percent rate logged in the July-September quarter, the composition of growth in the fourth quarter suggested underlying strength in the economy. sourceShow nested quote +(Reuters) - A growing number of Americans quitting the labor force are likely gone for good, offering a cautionary note to the Federal Reserve as it tries to gauge how tight the jobs market is and how quickly to raise interest rates.
For a long time, data suggested a significant portion of the decrease in labor force participation was because many job seekers had grown frustrated with their search and had given up looking. If the job market tightened enough, the thinking went, these Americans would be lured back to hunt for work again.
But a different picture is now emerging. Data shows participation in the past few years has fallen mainly because Americans have retired or signed up for disability benefits.
"The data suggest that the recent exits from the labor force have been more voluntary in nature than was the case in 2009, when the economy was weak and job prospects were dire," said Omair Sharif, senior economist at RBS in Stamford, Connecticut.
According to economists who have analyzed Labor Department data, 6.6 million people exited the workforce from 2010 and 2013. About 61 percent of these dropouts were retirees, more than double the previous three years' share.
People dropping out because of disability accounted for 28 percent, also up significantly from 2007-2010. Of those remaining, 7 percent were heading to school, while the other 4 percent left for other reasons.
In contrast, between 2007 and 2010, retirees made up a quarter of the six million people who left the labor force, while 18 percent were classified as disabled. About 57 percent were either in school or otherwise on the sidelines.
"This suggests the current drop in the labor force is more structural in nature," said Sharif.
If so, there is less hope of luring people back to hunt for work as the jobs market tightens, as many Fed officials believed would be the case. And the U.S. central bank, which has held benchmark rates near zero since December 2008, will likely need to push them up sooner than they would have otherwise.
"It is not clear whether the overall participation rate will increase anytime soon, given that the underlying downward trend due to retirements is likely to continue," said Shigeru Fujita, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. sourceInteresting article about the labour participation rate and the long term unemployment discussion a few pages back.
Indeed. There has been debate among economists in regards to the importance of the unemployment number and the labor force participation rate. There are certain measures of employment that hint that the Fed should increase rates soon, like labor market slack. There's a graph from Evan Soltas's blog:
![[image loading]](http://research.stlouisfed.org/fredgraph.png?g=tGZ)
Source
However, there's still a case for keeping the rates low or at ~0%. Krugman points out that the relationship between U3 and U6 has changed since the recession:
![[image loading]](http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2014/01/17/opinion/011714krugman1/011714krugman1-blog480.png)
That's claimed as evidence enough to keep interest rates low until that slack in U6 disappears. Yellen has, as well, mentioned the number of workers that are underemployed as being a factor in moving Fed rates.
|
NEW YORK (AP) — A law firm hired by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Thursday that the governor was not involved in a plot to create gridlock near a major bridge as part of a political retribution scheme.
The taxpayer-funded report released by former federal prosecutor Randy Mastro relies on interviews with Christie and other officials in his administration and 250,000 documents, many of them emails and text messages.
"We found that Gov. Christie had no knowledge beforehand of this George Washington Bridge realignment idea," Mastro said at a news conference.
His report comes out ahead of any results from independent investigations by federal prosecutors and a special committee of state lawmakers. Some of the key figures would not cooperate with Mastro's investigation, leading Democrats to question the credibility of the report and its thoroughness.
Defending the report at a news conference Thursday, Mastro said, "We believe we have gotten to the truth or we wouldn't be reporting it."
Source
|
I'm confused by the two bolded sections of the statements:
NEW YORK (AP) — A law firm hired by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Thursday that the governor was not involved in a plot to create gridlock near a major bridge as part of a political retribution scheme.
The taxpayer-funded report released by former federal prosecutor Randy Mastro relies on interviews with Christie and other officials in his administration and 250,000 documents, many of them emails and text messages.
NJ governors can hire law firms to defend them at the dime of the people?
|
It gets even better:
The former Port Authority of New York and New Jersey executive who orchestrated the September lane closures on the George Washington Bridge claims to have told Gov. Chris Christie (R) about the closures while they were happening, according to a report released Thursday by a legal team representing the governor's office.
The report, which concluded that Christie "did not know of the lane realignment beforehand and had no involvement in the decision to realign the lanes," indicates that as the scandal began to escalate in December, former Port Authority David Wildstein began "feeling vulnerable, knew he would have to resign, and then did." At the time Wildstein was still telling the Governor's Office that the lane had been closed as the result of a traffic study, an explanation that has since been abandoned by the Port Authority and the Christie administration.
"While [Wildstein] continued to insist to the Governor’s Office that this was a legitimate traffic study, even if flawed in its execution, and admitted that this was his 'idea,' he tried to deflect blame, telling [Christie spokesperson Michael] Drewniak that he had not acted alone, identifying [former Christie deputy chief of staff Bridget] Kelly and [former Christie campaign manager Bill] Stepien as others who knew, and claiming he had emails to prove it," the report states.
The report then states that Wildstein told Christie about the "traffic issue in Fort Lee" at a public event that occurred while the lane closures were happening, but that Christie could not recall the interaction.
Source
|
NJ tax dollars hard at work.
|
On March 28 2014 02:07 JinDesu wrote:I'm confused by the two bolded sections of the statements: Show nested quote +NEW YORK (AP) — A law firm hired by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Thursday that the governor was not involved in a plot to create gridlock near a major bridge as part of a political retribution scheme.
The taxpayer-funded report released by former federal prosecutor Randy Mastro relies on interviews with Christie and other officials in his administration and 250,000 documents, many of them emails and text messages. NJ governors can hire law firms to defend them at the dime of the people?
If it worked the other way, then only the very rich would run for political office because the common man couldnt afford to defend themselves against potential law suits. Personally I dont have the problem with it, although I wouldnt mind there also being clawbacks if the accused is actually found guilty.
|
On March 28 2014 05:27 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2014 02:07 JinDesu wrote:I'm confused by the two bolded sections of the statements: NEW YORK (AP) — A law firm hired by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Thursday that the governor was not involved in a plot to create gridlock near a major bridge as part of a political retribution scheme.
The taxpayer-funded report released by former federal prosecutor Randy Mastro relies on interviews with Christie and other officials in his administration and 250,000 documents, many of them emails and text messages. NJ governors can hire law firms to defend them at the dime of the people? If it worked the other way, then only the very rich would run for political office because the common man couldnt afford to defend themselves against potential law suits. Personally I dont have the problem with it, although I wouldnt mind there also being clawbacks if the accused is actually found guilty.
Well I sorta meant two things. First, is he even legally obligated to defend himself at this point? If he's not required to, then wouldn't this be a waste of taxpayer money? It's sort of like a political ad in the opposite direction, if that makes sense. Second, I don't think his wealth is on the same level as the common man, is he?
It just seems that, given that he isn't in court and the actual investigators are still performing their investigations, his use taxpayer money to hire his law firm to write a report defending him is not a good use of tax money.
|
On March 28 2014 05:27 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2014 02:07 JinDesu wrote:I'm confused by the two bolded sections of the statements: NEW YORK (AP) — A law firm hired by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Thursday that the governor was not involved in a plot to create gridlock near a major bridge as part of a political retribution scheme.
The taxpayer-funded report released by former federal prosecutor Randy Mastro relies on interviews with Christie and other officials in his administration and 250,000 documents, many of them emails and text messages. NJ governors can hire law firms to defend them at the dime of the people? If it worked the other way, then only the very rich would run for political office because the common man couldnt afford to defend themselves against potential law suits. Personally I dont have the problem with it, although I wouldnt mind there also being clawbacks if the accused is actually found guilty.
I am more confused with how much these legal fees have cost on just this issue alone when he isn't even formally charged with anything yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
