Home > Balloon Track, Marina Center, Rob Arkley > Eureka economics

Eureka economics

It’s been almost five years and somehow this classic illustration has never appeared on the Humboldt Herald.  But in honor of tonight’s city council meeting, here it is.

Regular reader “tra” posted the below comment to a recent thread which fits perfectly with the image:

There’s an article in the Times-Standard comparing Arcata and Eureka’s finances.

Both cities have struggled in this recent recession, due to declining sales tax revenues. But Arcata’s revenues have been significantly more stable than Eureka’s, due to Arcata having a broader ecomomic base, with more small manufacturers and other businesses, as opposed to Eureka, which is heavily dependent on sales taxes.

And yet the Eureka City Council, through its love affair with the Marina Center, is still pinning its hopes on yet another low-wage retail strip mall with a big box anchor and the boom-and-bust sales tax revenues they hope it will provide, mostly by siphoning off some of the sales tax revenues that now go to other cities and to the county for purchases made in the unincorporated areas.

In other words, Eureka is doubling down on a losing strategy. Meanwhile, they seemed poised to turn down one source of revenue that seems to be relatively recession-proof: medical cannabis dispensaries.

Well at least Arcata and the County will benefit from the City of Eureka’s shortsighted actions. So it’s not all bad…as long as you’re not a resident or taxpayer in Eureka.

  1. Anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 12:37 am

    Eureka is again behind the times. Setting the standard of not seeing a good thing, even when it is under their own nose. Even Arkley knows money still does grow on trees.

  2. Joe Bro
    March 15, 2011 at 12:38 am

    Eureka is again behind the times. Setting the standard of not seeing a good thing, even when it is under their own nose. Even Arkley knows money still does grow on trees.

  3. kale estanoche
    March 15, 2011 at 1:15 am

    Well done Heraldo, C Macneil and tra – i approve of the synergistic approach here. Cheers!

    Onward in the fight against their short-sighted vision and their lust for short-term, self-motivated profit.

  4. tra
    March 15, 2011 at 1:52 am

    Thanks for highlighting that comment, H. And I like the cartoon. Lighthearted, but makes its point clearly.

    Now the good news is that the Marina Center may never be built, at least not as originally designed, due to the clean-up requirements that were included in the settlement of the Baykeeper lawsuit, the need for Coastal Commission approval, and market conditions.

    The bad news is that unless Eureka faces up to the need to diversify their tax base, the overall strategy of low-wage, boom-and-bust retail development will not change, and the city will continue to suffer more than necessary during economic downturns.

    For all the Arcata-hating among certain county residents, it turns out that the City of Arcata is doing pretty well, with it’s mix of light manufacturing, commercial, and non-big-box downtown retail, including the dreaded (but largely problem-free) medical cannabis dispensaries.

  5. Ponder z
    March 15, 2011 at 5:17 am

    So your whole formula for real success is weed? Like some red light Amsterdam, only a mecca for the terminal stoner with a fake prescription? Chronic dope smoking is not a good thing. We don’t want to encourage this behavior. Can you imagine what a society of stoners can achieve?
    Softer couches
    bigger TV
    more channels to watch on TV
    community forests
    government jobs
    lifelong education (free)
    everyone who wants to work has a
    government job
    rent control
    mass transit
    public housing
    free cannabis
    two day work week
    free healthcare
    free TV
    Free food

    That’s all great and everything, but who will take responsibility to run things? This scenario will quickly run into debt and falter as the users outnumber the real producers.

  6. Osprey
    March 15, 2011 at 7:50 am

    Surprise, surprise…the City of Arcata is doing well. This is because the city works with business, recognizes appropriate zoning for development and realizes that ‘light industrial’ are not swear words. Look at the West End industrial area and you will find more and more Eureka businesses. Good work Arcata, the monkeys on the Eureka CC could learn a thing a two…..oh, wait..Rob doesn’t allow that! oh well, onward Eureka in your fine fashion! Love the cartoon spot on!

  7. Osprey
    March 15, 2011 at 7:57 am

    Btw, very unlikely the Marina Center project will happen anyway. First there is the clean-up and all the Coastal Development permits they need, and then Coastal Commission will have a heyday with the ‘project’ itself, especially considering the recent tsunami scare. I don’t much significant development happening around the Bay in the near future.
    Rob shouldn’t piss off the Coastal Commission so much, lawsuits, operating his Fairhaven Industrial Park without permits and breaking the law, etc……must not be a coastal commission in Louisiana!

  8. Humboldt Politico
    March 15, 2011 at 8:04 am

    I predict the economic future of Eureka is…. More of the same.

    Not much has changed in the last five years except more long time businesses have failed, the mall is still quite empty, and city coffers are bare. Five years from now, nothing will have changed except maybe some of the Council members.

  9. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    March 15, 2011 at 8:13 am

    Tra,

    All the Arcata hating is an interesting discussion depending on the topic….let’s try panhandling shall we and by whom.

    Anyhow, Arcata IS better than it was even 5 years ago, but probably because Arcata politicos were forced to see their budgets go sour, that they partly “backed-off” bullying its citizens and let the free market flow less obstructed for business. Come to think of it, since Mr. Career Politician (Dan Hauser) has been quiet, Arcata seems to have advanced a bit, hmmmmmm. The people are cool and eclectic as well, so that is a huge part of success – BEING IN THE COMPANY OF GOOD PEOPLE.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  10. Bolithio
    March 15, 2011 at 8:24 am

    When I look at the arkley center, the Coop, and many of the other arkley sponsored projects – they have greatly improved the aesthetics of eureka.

    That cartoon is BS. As is your fear of ‘arkleyville’. It makes sense to me why people want to oppose a big box. But this obsession with arkley is ridiculous, boring, and not helpful.

  11. SNaFU
    March 15, 2011 at 8:33 am

    JL has nailed: Arcata has a oil drilling rig hidden in Mark Lovelace’s newly acquired Community Forrest, that’s where all the prosperity comes from.
    DRILL BABY, DRILL!

  12. Goldie
    March 15, 2011 at 8:46 am

    Diversity requires cooperation, intelligence and the ability to imagine something new. Last city council meeting a group came to the meeting and talked about an idea they had of creating an series of swimming pools, one would be an Olympic size one. It would be the only Olympic size pool between San Francisco and Oregon. They as the Westside School people had done had worked on the plan for a year. It was inspiring. The Coast Guard could use the pool for practice as well as bringing in tourist and providing local people with wholesome activity. They had penciled out the profit it would make. They asked for help from the city council to further their plan. No one on the council leaned forward. No one seemed interested. Meanwhile the otters at the zoo are getting press for possible grants and a new swimming habitat.

  13. Anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 8:50 am

    So Arkely, our biggest employer and provider of good paying jobs, is to blame for the fact that Arcata is better off than Eureka. Huh, I thought maybe it was because of the state university in Arcata, the relatively high level of education in Arcata, and the relatively low level of low-income housing.
    Thanks Tra and Heraldo. You have once again given a one-sided and simplified fox news view on something complicated.

  14. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 9:02 am

    Arkley is our biggest employer? HAHAHA!

  15. Anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 9:06 am

    who, other than the gov’t, is a bigger employer than arkley pj?

  16. High Finance
    March 15, 2011 at 9:12 am

    The article loses any credibility it might have had by the stupid statement “turn down one source of revenue that seems to be relatively recession proof: medical cannabis dispensaries”.

    Lets forget the damage the drug houses would do to Eureka and its reputation for a moment and look at just the revenue side. At 1% of sales, the revenue generated from the sales tax would be minor compared to the overall city budget.

    The article dismisses the millions of dollars of sales tax revenue the city would receive and the hundreds of thousands of dollars in property tax revenue the city would receive. But then it holds up the ten or twenty grand from the pot house’s sales tax as some kind of savior ?

  17. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 9:21 am

    Um, St. Joseph Hospital comes to mind immediately, 9:06; but none of Arkley’s businesses are even listed as major employers.

  18. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 9:28 am

    HiFi loses all credibility when he calls Medical Marijuana Dispensaries “drug houses.” Furthermore, his statement, “The article dismisses the millions of dollars of sales tax revenue the city would receive and the hundreds of thousands of dollars in property tax revenue the city would receive” ignores the fact that the retail jobs don’t pay enough to support the population needed to generate those sale taxes. But so long as he and his buddies in the COC are making a profit, they couldn’t care less about anyone else.

  19. low-income fact check
    March 15, 2011 at 9:35 am

    8:50am,
    Arcata has a fairly low-level of low-income housing? Check your facts. Unlike the County and City of Eureka, Arcata is meeting it’s affordable housing needs through policies such as inclusionary zoning. Take a walk around town with affordable housing in mind and you will see that there is a substantial concentration of apartments and other multi-family dwellings throughout the city – with no recognizable detriment to surrounding property values.

  20. dispensary fact check
    March 15, 2011 at 9:45 am

    HiFi,
    First off, dispensaries are not “drug houses”, and, in fact legitimate dispensaries could actually minimize the renegade indoor grows occurring in rental houses etc. by providing more access to a quality product to people who utilize it for medicinal purposes. Many of the dispensaries around Arcata are, in fact, safe, professionally run businesses that pay taxes and otherwise contribute to the local economy.

  21. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    March 15, 2011 at 9:45 am

    Plain Jane is correct to question the loss of sales tax revenues within Eureka City limits by not allowing the “free market” to flow for tax revenue collections…even though the whole wide world, less a few, KNOW that taxable collections flow in Northern California….and it grows from a plant, go figure that.

    How many MORE small businesses would lose out if it were not for the “LOCAL green economy”?

    Just think about how many elitists bought a new suit or dress, not to mention their house, with that “green generated profit”? Time to “pinpoint” the greed and shop elsewhere by putting the wealth into the pockets of the little guy/gal.

    Funny thing too – MJ is still trailing behind lemonaide when it comes to “sidewalk sales stands”. Go figure that one.

    JL

  22. Anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 10:07 am

    pj, you are so right. the hospital employs more people than arkley. other than the hospital, where will do good jobs come from around here? the point is, arkley is one of the few business owners who employs a large number of people at a liveable wage. eureka needs good jobs to attract good people and create a tax revenue. that’s the way it works.

  23. skippy
    March 15, 2011 at 10:08 am

    Tra is on the right track here. Thank you. Arcata is doing moderately well supporting and ‘incubating’ small businesses throughout the years while Eureka relies more heavily on its forlorn tax base.

    Eureka would do well to develop its own ‘small business incubator’ as Arcata has done with their Foodworks Center and Alder Grove Business Park models. Has our Eureka City Council even visited there? The Foodworks has a waiting list of tenants and operates 24 hours a day. Their products are carried throughout local stores and beyond sustaining a local economy. Arcata, with their intelligent planning and foresight in focus, has been moving in the right direction.

    Eureka could be well off with everything we have– yet we’re some of the poorest people in the County. Plenty of resources, labor, a transportation corridor, a lush area, as well as housing the County seat. Yet after 30+ years of the same-o, same-o, yours truly doesn’t think much will change. Past behavior is often indicative of future actions.

    Our problems are due to a lack of foresight, planning, and a catastrophic failure of our leadership and governance looking for new directions and ideas. There’s no other explanation: too many do-nothng politicians, autocrats, robber barons, thieves, slumlords, and a complacent populace who’ve siphoned and bled this City dry for personal and family interests over the many years with little insight for the future or what’s best for the community.

    We’re not very good at manufacturing or supporting small business anymore in Eureka, just plundering what’s left.

  24. Anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 10:15 am

    This illustration assigns odd proportions to Rob;s crotchal area.

  25. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 10:16 am

    But Arkley isn’t creating good jobs, only minimum wage retail jobs now, 10:07. Putting retail on lands better suited for manufacturing is shooting our local economy in the foot.

  26. Anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 10:41 am

    pj, you are either misinformerd or, like Heraldo, intentionally distorting the truth to make your point. i have friends and family who make good livings working for rob. he pays them well, provides good benefits, and for the people he’s laid off, he gives extremely generous severance packages. on a personal level, he’s a bit of an egotistical dick. however, as an employer, he’s one of the best in the community. my only point is, an economy needs rob arkleys in order to sustain things like st. joe’s. without employers, we won’t be able to afford the hospitals. arcata is an exception due to the different demographics and a state college. eureka is better compared to crescent city and fortuna which suffer from the same problems and have similar demographics.

  27. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 10:51 am

    10:41, you are either functionally illiterate or dishonest. I didn’t say Rob doesn’t employ people at good wages. I said “he isn’t creating,” not that he hasn’t created. The jobs he is “creating” with his MC will be minimum wage and will only transfer consumer dollars from existing businesses and ship more money out of the local economy back to headquarters. That isn’t a net plus in either tax dollars or wages and, in fact, if HD charges less for items that Piersons and other local hardware stores, it will mean a net loss in sales tax for the city.

  28. Goldie
    March 15, 2011 at 10:55 am

    The benevolent king requires a high price for the glue that is holding this town in a holding pattern.
    Much like the Carson Mansion that invites people from all over the world to see it from behind an iron fence, the people with all their inspiration and resources are not allowed within the conversation of creating our future. Tyson and his slanted reviews of plans seems to hold the keys, while the Times-Standard voices the ‘concerns’ of Arkley’s belt buddies. The current city council is undoing the work of the last four years. They are changing the direction of our future from nowhere to backwards.
    Thank God Abate is here to reminisce.

  29. High Finance
    March 15, 2011 at 10:58 am

    PJ, if your knee will stop jerking long enough to think, you are making the false assumption that the only jobs in the Marina Center will be Home Depot.

    It won’t. There are other retail and office spaces in the plans.

    You have already told us you don’t live in Eureka. So obviously your top concern is not Eureka. But we do live here and even if some of the additional retail sales tax dollars come from other places in Humboldt County, Eureka remains a winner in this.

    And BTW, your last comment is interesting. “if HD charges less for items that Pierson’s and other local hardware stores, it will mean anet loss in sales tax for the city. HELLO, it will mean a NET GAIN for our citizens !!!!!!

  30. the hat
    March 15, 2011 at 11:04 am

    No local media will take on Arkley because he could buy and dismantle them quickly. Hank Sims took on Rob sometimes. Judy Hodgeson and Cherie Arkley are friends, so he got axed. James Faulk take a few stands in print. He’s gone too. Eureka needs a voice that isn’t paid for.

  31. Anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 11:06 am

    pj, you don’t understand economics when you say he isn’t creating jobs. here is how he does it indirectly. he employs hundreds of people. those people, buy things like new houses, cars, clothes, etc. that creates jobs and spurs the economy.
    directly, aside from hiring people to run his business, he hires people to do things like re-roof his cabin or remodel his house in eureka. these people make thousands of dollars for a months work. rob employs several carpentars throughout the year and pays them handsomely. also, rob buys materials from almquist and the mill yard and that helps them make money. that is how an economy works.
    when rob leaves, we lose the revenue from those he employed and subsequently all the people who benefitted from the money being infused into the local economy. how do we replace that?

  32. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 11:07 am

    The loss of money in “other places” means their FORMER employees will have less money to spend in Eureka, HiFi. If people have to pay higher taxes because of decreased sales tax revenue, and they will, there is no gain for anyone but Home Depot and Arkley. With all the empty storefronts in Eureka and the Bayshore Mall, its ludicrous to claim that the Marina Center will produce a net gain in jobs because they provide a space for more businesses. For someone who claims to be in “high finance” you certainly don’t demonstrate a very good grasp of economics. You’re playing a shell game and you’re not very good at it.

  33. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 11:12 am

    All hail our economic savior, Arkley, 11:06. Now get up off your knees and go spend some money so he can afford yet another home somewhere else.

  34. Anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 11:30 am

    typical argument pj. rip arkley and offer no solutions. you spend all day on this site. why don’t you go outside and help the community realize your ideas for positive change. arkley is not the problem with eureka. it’s pretty sad that is the only thing you and heraldo can dwell on.

    p.s. i heard arkley makes most of the meth going around old town and he’s pulling in millions dealing it to the hundreds of tweaks ruining my hometown. don’t call the cops because they’re on his payroll too.

  35. Random Guy
    March 15, 2011 at 11:38 am

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…”they” don’t think big box strip malls and dense residential fancy-brand “communities” are going to do anything for Humboldt that those types of development haven’t done everywhere else they exist in the US. It’s like a cantankerous crust on the landscape that clusters anywhere it’s allowed to take hold.

    Look at the means through which “they” scored the last election…they care about money, not community.

  36. High Finance
    March 15, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    PJ, I know you’ve heard this before and I don’t know why I bother because your mind has long been closed, but – we are in a recession. Recessions are temporary (despite Obama’s many mistakes) and our economy will recover. When it does, those empty storefronts will fill up again.

    Your limited grasp of economics and the business world does not allow your opinion of other people’s skills in those fields any merit.

  37. Random Guy
    March 15, 2011 at 12:41 pm

    “Recessions are temporary (despite Obama’s many mistakes) and our economy will recover. ”

    Where do you exist in time and space? Rewrite to quote “Prosperity is temporary (despite claims that time isn’t being measured linearly) and our economy will continue to decline as always.”

  38. Sam Spade
    March 15, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    High Finance says:
    March 15, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    “PJ…Your limited grasp of economics.”

    This from the guy who thinks the tax system does “NOT concentrate wealth at the top of society, it does the EXACT OPPOSITE”

    ROTFLMAO

  39. Reinventing The Wheel
    March 15, 2011 at 1:04 pm

    Opposing dispensaries has two benefits:

    1) It’s an excellent distraction from the FAR more offensive poverty, crime, drug abuse, and homelessness our existing economic policies have manufactured to date.

    2) It eliminates the political threat of more left-leaning businesses with financial resources.

    Despite a world of successful growth alternatives, as close as Arcata, the city of Eureka has voluntarily trashed its reputation. For the last generation, the development community has successfully funded and won council-majorities Hellbent for McMansions and big boxes.

    Tonight, the Eureka council will authorize the issuance of bonds totaling an entire year’s budget, a fraction of what is required to fully update its waste water system….a system paid for by ALL citizens to serve the big homes they can’t afford and the big businesses that underpay them; delivered by politicians bought and paid for by the development community.

    And still, there are idiots stuck on $100/month food stamp cheaters, and some overpaid public servants.

  40. tra
    March 15, 2011 at 1:27 pm

    Sam Spade,

    Our economic system has concentrated wealth at the top. Meanwhile our progressive income tax system redistributes some of that wealth in the other direction.

    Of course the wealth concentration at the top continues, which means that the downward redistribution of the income tax system is obviously not keeping up with the upward redistribution that the overall economic system continues to create.

  41. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 1:46 pm

    Contrary to your idiotic claims, 11:30, I don’t spend all day here. I happen to work at my computer and pop in and out to post my opinions. This is my cyber break room. Since you have no idea what my work is, your asinine assumptions that my work does not involve helping the community at large proves you have no interest in facts, you just want to cheer lead for your “betters” (in HiFi’s words) and smear anyone who doesn’t share your high opinion of greed.

  42. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    The recession started long before the financial crisis and is due to low taxes on the rich, outsourced jobs for more benefit to the rich, declining wages for the middle and working class (public and private) and no amount of retail is going to change that. Cutting already stagnated wages by 8% rather than raising taxes for the richest a measly 3% is backassward thinking. Laying off public workers rather than raising taxes on those at the top is another self-defeating tactic. The working classes are the fuel of the economy. Cutting their wages reduces the fuel. People who can’t understand such basic economics aren’t likely able to understand much of anything.

  43. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 2:02 pm

    Our tax system ALLOWS concentration of wealth at the top, Tra, because tax rates aren’t progressive enough. Tax policies are a fine balancing act which shouldn’t punish people for success, but which doesn’t allow concentration of wealth which destroys the social fabric necessary for a civilized country. That our concentration of wealth is at the level of third world dictatorships rather than first world democracies is alarming to anyone with a brain.

  44. March 15, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    RTW: Your first point is excellent. This makes a nice hot button issue that fires up the conservative base while carefully avoiding the fact that Eureka already has one operating dispensary. Sure, sure, it’s in Myrtletown, but that’s still accessible to anyone in town. Even if there wasn’t a dispensary, refusing to have more of these types of businesses simply send all that sales tax to Arcata, who will the real beneficiary of Eureka’s reluctant city council. If a few more sites open up in the unincorporated areas of town, we’ll have the dispensaries anyways, while all the tax revenue goes to the county. It’s already here, it’s not going away, so let’s make use of it.

    I’m not sure that I buy the idea that all marijuana agribusiness is necessarily left oriented. In general, business will play ball with whoever is in charge, as long as it means that they keep making money. As the industry grows (no pun intended), it will likely look quite favorably on lower business taxes and less business regulation. Throw in the local land use and planning department tussle and don’t be surprised in the future to find out that some marijuana agribusiness is getting in bed with conservatives who support lower taxes and less regulation.

  45. tra
    March 15, 2011 at 2:21 pm

    Our tax system ALLOWS concentration of wealth at the top, Tra, because tax rates aren’t progressive enough.

    Yes, I agree.

    It’s always good to keep in mind that a progressive tax system is essentially an attempted work-around to deal with an economic system that otherwise tends to distribute income and wealth ever-upward, which, without any counter-balancing downward redistribution, eventually would result in collapse.

    It seems pretty clear to me that the current trajectory of upward wealth distribution that is created by our mixed free-market / corporate welfare economic system, and which is not being effectively counterbalanced by a progressive enough tax system, is unsutainable.

    Eventually you get to the point where only the super-rich, the rich, and the upper-upper-middle classes (who serve the rich and super-rich) have any disposable income to spend in the economy. At that point all you have is a poverty/luxury economy, much like what we have seen in many third-world economies shortly before collapse and/or revolution. I should note, however, that such inequality, while unsustainable in the long run, can sometimes last for decades, especially when the power of the state is used to prevent workers from organizing and in general to keep the “rabble” in line.

    Some would say that we’re nearly at the breaking point in the U.S. right now, though honestly I think we’re not quite that close yet. But, yes, that’s the direction we’re headed in, unless either (1) wages and other income to the low-income and middle-income folks increase, or (2) higher taxes are levied on the wealthy and super-wealthy, or (3) some of each.

  46. Random Guy
    March 15, 2011 at 2:27 pm

    “I’m not sure that I buy the idea that all marijuana agribusiness is necessarily left oriented.”

    Who’s trying to convince you of that? Oaksterdam…texas tycoons frontin’ the new age no-party camouflage. There’s at least as much participation from and within “the right”. Money is money. I don’t play the party game, but stereotypical right wing conservatives smoke weed too…

  47. a non
    March 15, 2011 at 2:44 pm

    Light industry is what Eureka needs. More low paying retail jobs won’t help the economy.

    Eco-tourism would boost the economy. An extensive system of trails would bring more tourists than an Olympic-sized swimming pool. Amenities like trails and boating attract the kind of people who have money to spend. Studies have shown that educated people prefer to relocate to areas that have these features (ie Portland)

    Level of education is a big factor in Arcata’s economic success. The ability to think and act rationally is important. Willingness to learn from other communities and try new approaches has worked well for Arcata. Circular, stagnant views like HiFi puts out are the reason Eureka is in deep trouble.

    Anyone who thinks this recession will end soon is delusional.

  48. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 2:47 pm

    2) Higher taxes levied on the wealthy and super-wealthy mean higher income (or better social programs) for the poor because only by decreasing their own take-home pay can the rich reduce their taxes with steeply progressive tax rates. They then have a choice to pay higher taxes to subsidize the low (or no wages) or better pay for the working classes which is spent and creates more jobs and more profit for the owners as well.

    Case in point, when congress was considering an increase in the federal minimum wage, there were lots of claims that it would force employers to lay off their workers; but it was pointed out that Washington State had bucked the conventional wisdom and raised their minimum wage considerably over neighboring states. It turned out that not only did people have to be laid off, but small business owners increased their profits over pre-minimum wage increases and actually made 11% more than before without having to lay anyone off because, unlike the rich, working class people spend their money which creates more jobs than investing it does.

  49. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 2:49 pm

    Left out an important word, “It turned out that not only did people NOT have to be laid off,

  50. Not rich but comfortable enough
    March 15, 2011 at 3:22 pm

    Correction for PJ- the rich invest, yes, but they also spend lots of money. Why would you think otherwise? Who else is going to invest in businesses if people with some extra cash don’t?

  51. Reinventing The Wheel
    March 15, 2011 at 3:29 pm

    With few exceptions every minimum wage increase has been followed by decreases in unemployment.

  52. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 3:40 pm

    People who invest in business get write-offs, Not Rich. Buying stocks previously owned by another is not really investing in business. Rich people don’t spend the same percentage of their money as working class people do. For example, if you divided 1000 by 100 low income workers, every dime would be spent; but if you gave that 1000 to 1 rich person, chances are very little would be spent since they already have what they need and most of what they want. Did you miss the fact that the tax cuts didn’t trickle down?

  53. Sam Spade
    March 15, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    Reinventing The Wheel says:
    March 15, 2011 at 3:29 pm
    “With few exceptions every minimum wage increase has been followed by decreases in unemployment.”

    Those whinning wage-slave fast-cancer burger chains have been saying that for 30 years. Yet, there are more McDevil’s than ever and a burger is still $1 to $5. Same as it has been for years and years.

  54. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 4:17 pm

    This is an excellent article about the class warfare being waged:

    http://www.truth-out.org/class-warfare-final-chapter68146

  55. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 4:20 pm

    Did you misread RTW’s post, Sam? McFood franchise owners always claim raising the minimum wage will INcrease unemployment. RTW correctly stated that raising the minimum wage DEcreases unemployment.

  56. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    In 1933, the wealthiest one percent of the population held 33.3 percent of the wealth. In 1974, the wealthiest one percent held 19.9 percent of the wealth.
    In 2007, the wealthiest one percent held 65.4 percent of the wealth.

    In 1933, the bottom 90 percent held 66.7 percent of the wealth.
    In 1974, the bottom 90 percent held 80.1 percent of the wealth.
    In 2007, the bottom 90 percent held 34.6 percent of the wealth

    Federal Tax Rates (after custom-made individual deductions)

    1974 Capital gains tax rate: 35 percent
    1950 Highest marginal tax rate: 90 percent

    2005 Capital gains tax rate: 15 percent
    2005 Highest marginal tax rate: 34 percent

    Average Real Income Change 1973-2000

    Average real income of bottom 90 percent: -7 percent
    Average real income of top 1 percent: + 148 percent
    Average real income of top 0.1 percent: + 343 percent

    Who can spot the pattern and explain what it means?

  57. 69er
    March 15, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    One thing that I have been watching for and have not seen is the mention of the amount of merchandise that is brought into the area by our local residents. I know for a fact that many people go out of the area to shop due to the lack variety in merchandise availability. I have had many people brag about going to Oregon and saving bucks on sales tax. I have had people tell me they went to Redding or to Santa Rosa to purchase merchandise not available in Eureka. Some of these are big buyers, even contractors. I know of local business people who cry about how bad sales are and they go out of the area on business trips and come home with merchandise from out of the area. It costs less, more variety is available and/or no sales tax. So cry, cry for the local businesses, I think not!!!! On top of that the business man or woman can write the whole trip off as a business expense.

  58. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    So the answer is bringing big boxes here to destroy what’s left of local business and then the rest of us won’t have a choice, wages will continue to stagnate and pretty soon everyone will be demanding a Walmart because that’s the only place they can afford to shop, with consequently fewer choices. It’s a downward spiral from which it would be very hard to recover.

  59. 69er
    March 15, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    PJ, I was attempting to point out that people should ” practice what they preach”. I am not advocating big box. At least stock some sample merchandise and not expect us to buy what can be viewed in some catalog that has all the enhancements given to inferior merchandise. And quit the exhorbitant markups that are prevalent, that is not just on gasoline by the way!!!

  60. tra
    March 15, 2011 at 5:31 pm

    At current gas prices (and they’re only getting higher) you’d have to be making a pretty ginormous set of purchases to justify the drive all the way to Oregon and back just to save a few percentage points on sales tax. And that’s not even counting your time and wear and tear on your vehicle.

    The gas and wear & tear alone is something like 50 cents a mile. Nobody in their right mind is driving to Oregon to save money on sales tax. Of course if you were already going to be up there for some other purpose, that would be a different story.

  61. Random Guy
    March 15, 2011 at 6:11 pm

    There’s plans on Humboldt’s table to do things the cheap n’ easy way we see EVERY-FRICKING-WHERE. Strip malls, apartmento-plexes…ready-made franchise garbage…the soul-less symbols of society going NOWHERE. The evidence became proof twenty years ago at least.

    Humboldt is virgin territory for a lot of things it doesn’t need, but that would make the people who introduce them to the area a TON of money…

    It’s been said, keep saying it…follow the money. Who’s making money while everybody else is losing it? Who’s putting what on Humboldt’s table?

  62. Not rich but comfortable enough
    March 15, 2011 at 6:50 pm

    Jane, so what if they spend a lower percentage. They put more money back into the economy than most people. They spend a lot, buy a lot. You think a write-off is always a good thing? It’s still losing money. Losing stocks are not a happy thing.

  63. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    Losing jobs and declining wages isn’t either, Not Rich. That’s great that they put money back into the economy, but as can be seen at my 4:29 post, they are taking and keeping a larger and larger share and that isn’t good for our economy or our country. Raising their taxes is a good way to nudge them into paying better wages and / or giving more to charity rather than hoarding wealth.

  64. High Finance
    March 15, 2011 at 7:09 pm

    “Our current tax sytem ALLOWS wealth to concentrate at the top because tax rates aren’t progressive enough”

    This attitude is frightening Plain Jane and TRA. Where does it say in the Constitution or in the thinking of the founders of our country, that it is the business of government to rob from the rich to give to the poor?

    People get rich by providing society what it wants. Henry Ford provided cars that the middle class and the lower middle class could afford. The rich got that way by providing goods or services whether those services were finding a cure for polio or singing songs that thrilled listeners or hitting a baseball that thrilled fans or inventing a better CD player.

    Everybody benefits, everybody rich or poor. We exchange one unit of value for another unit of value. You exchange $8 for two hours of a movie. You would not have made the exchange but those two hours of entertainment was worth more to you than those $8 dollars. Brad Pitt is worth many tens of millions of dollars because his talent is valued much more by society than yours.

    When government gets involved it is taking money away from the productive and gives to the unproductive. Taken to the extreme it rewards failure and punishes success.

    Failing to understand that concept created the USSR and resulted in its collapse.

  65. High Finance
    March 15, 2011 at 7:15 pm

    Your every post reeks of class envy PJ.

    What do you think the evil rich do with all their wealth? Hide it in a mattress ? They invest it or spend it. If the spend it they are putting the workers who build yachts to work. They create jobs at the fancy restaurants for the cooks & bus boys & waitresses. Buying fancy cars puts the auto workers to work.

    If they invest it they are providing funds for businesses to start up or expand and provide more jobs for more people.

    And one more point, the success of the rich did not make you poorer. Why the frack are you so concerned that they have a better life than yours if yours does not suffer because of them ?

    Class envy makes you ugly.

  66. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 7:17 pm

    Congress is given the power to tax and set rates, HiFi. Do you complain when the Fed increases interest rates when unemployment is too low and inflation heats up? Or lowers rates when the economy slows down? Taxes are how the government pays for the services that most of us demand and should prevent massive accumulation of wealth for the same reason the fed regulates interest rates. It’s about what’s best for the economy and the country.

  67. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 7:21 pm

    HiFi just ignores inconvenient facts like those posted above at 4:29 which show the accumulation of wealth and the low tax rates which allowed it. Calling a defense against the class warfare being waged by the rich class envy is hilarious. There’s a great article at Truth Out today, link is in Quick Notes. It talks about this very tactic. HiFi just parrots the crap he hears from Rush, et al, and thinks everyone else is as stupid as he is.

  68. Plain Jane
  69. Random Guy
    March 15, 2011 at 7:54 pm

    On a local level, there’s no practical economic difference whatsoever between a wealthy person buying three plasma tv’s at costco and a poor person buying a candy bar at the gas station down the street.

    The rich spend far less, dollar value to cost of living, than the poor. And there are far fewer of them. This means money begets money, and the poor are way more philanthropic.

    The rich become blind to their own belief that money is some kind of resource, and that for whatever reason, poor people don’t acquire enough of it.

  70. Huh?
    March 15, 2011 at 8:04 pm

    Plain Jane = I also work for a living and am sometimes on the computer. I also have other shit to do and get ‘er done. Nobody is posting on this rather irrelevant blog as much as you. Nothing is accomplished here. I had higher hopes for a local blog where an acutual discussion of the facts could prevail. Well, its the high way or my way is the way it works here. Thanks for nothing.

  71. Bolithio
    March 15, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    Some of you make good points.

    Still, Arkley has developed plenty in eureka. Several old town renovations, the performing arts center, almost an entire block across from their SN office, the Coop, etc… Unless you count star bucks, I dont see big box’s, so-cal strip malls, or anything that people seem to rant on about. All of the developments appear relatively tasteful to me, or at least they do not take away from small town eureka but rather were deliberately planned to fit into the historical character.

    So then we have the MC. A big box is proposed. There is room for a discussion for and against, for sure. Ans there should be. But the cartoon picture above is utter BS. It is a complete mis-characterization of what he has actually done here.

    If you are trying to create a legitimate argument against a type of development – the anit-arkleyville tactic fails to reach the people who matter on this issue (e.g. not hi-fi, but moderate eurekans).

    If you are just having choir – well enjoy the circle jerk!

  72. March 15, 2011 at 8:07 pm

    8:04/Huh/Old Phart sure spends a lot of time on this here “irrelevant” blog.

  73. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 8:41 pm

    Did someone kick Huh to the curb?

    If you use a variety of pseudonyms, you aren’t on here nearly as much. I work AT a computer. You’d think OldFart was paying for the space I use here the way he whines about it. I suspect he just doesn’t like my views, can’t refute the information I post, and is trying to shame me into shutting up. FAT CHANCE!

  74. tra
    March 15, 2011 at 9:06 pm

    HiFi,

    Your ideologically dogmatic comment at 7:09 appears to contradict your earlier insistence that you aren’t advocating for lower taxes for the wealthy. If you’ve already admitted the necessity and/or desirability of the current progressive income tax system, then we’re really just arguing about whether that should go a little farther than it already does, or not.

    But according to the reasoning of your 7:09 comment, that whole system is destructive as it is funneling money from “productive” people (like Brad Pitt? LOL!) to those who are “unproductive” (like teachers, firefighters, and nurses?).

    You seem to be a bit confused as to what you are advocating…to say the least.

  75. Oldphart
    March 15, 2011 at 9:07 pm

    Sorry that I’m such an asshole.

  76. Oldphart
    March 15, 2011 at 9:08 pm

    Not much happening at Baykeepers? Not enough to keep you busy? Get a real job that contributes to the welfare of the community instead of enriching yourself.

  77. Oldphart
    March 15, 2011 at 9:15 pm

    I get it very much. If you don’t agree, don’t bother to post because you must just be an asshole who doesn’t know shit, can’t do shit and is full of shit. Got that. That is what this blog is all about. Kick to the curb? You have no idea of what life is all about. Do not share, do not care. Agree or fuck off. Got it.

  78. Oldphart
    March 15, 2011 at 9:16 pm

    And 9:07 isn’t me because my post was eliminated, proving my point. Get it?

  79. Oldphart
    March 15, 2011 at 9:17 pm

    Got it? Good. Or at least see if it does any good. And I am an asshole? Look in the mirror.

  80. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    To whom was that post directed, OldFart? If it was to me, I can assure you I don’t work for Baykeepers or even volunteer for them, although I do donate. I have a real job that provides a service that every community needs and most people use. Not getting rich but that was never my goal. I have enough. It’s a good feeling.

  81. Oldphart
    March 15, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    Now maybe I have posted one half of the times Plain Jane has posted on just this thread.

  82. Oldphart
    March 15, 2011 at 9:19 pm

    You must have a halo then.

  83. Plain Jane
    March 15, 2011 at 9:32 pm

    I post on threads that interest me and debate the issues, OldFart. How many of my posts were in direct response to comments directed to me? What part of a conversation don’t you get? How many posts did you make on the Hank thread? I didn’t find that at all interesting and didn’t post anything on it. This is one of the topics I am most interested in. If you don’t like reading my posts then don’t. It’s not my fault you can’t win on merit so have to stoop to whining.

  84. anonymous
    March 15, 2011 at 10:30 pm

    HiFi, Pretty amusing. You forget that one BIG thing the rich do with their money is wield power and buy influence. Along along with the money in their pockets they have lobbysists and politicians who pass laws that overwhelmingly favor them and their businesses (de-regulation and tax cuts ring a bell?) You can’t deny that and if you try I would say you definitely need a name change to “high financially challenged.”

  85. tra
    March 15, 2011 at 10:30 pm

    Whose work is more mportant and more valuable to their fellow human beings? The 50 workers battling to prevent meltdown(s) at the Japanese power plant, or Brad Pitt? According to HiFi’s logic, the answer would be Brad Pitt. Think about that for a minute.

  86. tra
    March 16, 2011 at 12:27 am

    Just when you thought they couldn’t get any crazier, look what those troglodytes are trying to pass in Missouri:

    SB 222 – This act modifies the child labor laws. It eliminates the prohibition on employment of children under age fourteen. Restrictions on the number of hours and restrictions on when a child may work during the day are also removed. It also repeals the requirement that a child ages fourteen or fifteen obtain a work certificate or work permit in order to be employed. Children under sixteen will also be allowed to work in any capacity in a motel, resort or hotel where sleeping accommodations are furnished. It also removes the authority of the director of the Division of Labor Standards to inspect employers who employ children and to require them to keep certain records for children they employ. It also repeals the presumption that the presence of a child in a workplace is evidence of employment.

    http://www.senate.mo.gov/11info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?BillID=4124271&SessionType=R

  87. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 5:18 am

    There must be a grave shortage of workers in MO if they need to put kids back in the sweat shops, right?

  88. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    March 16, 2011 at 5:21 am

    anonymous says:
    March 15, 2011 at 10:30 pm
    HiFi, Pretty amusing. You forget that one BIG thing the rich do with their money is wield power and buy influence. Along along with the money in their pockets they have lobbysists and politicians who pass laws that overwhelmingly favor them and their businesses (de-regulation and tax cuts ring a bell?) You can’t deny that and if you try I would say you definitely need a name change to “high financially challenged.”

    Response: Reads like those darned union mobster bosses.

    JL

  89. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    March 16, 2011 at 5:22 am

    Oldphart – Halo or TICK BITE?

    JL

  90. High Finance
    March 16, 2011 at 8:27 am

    No TRA 10.30am, Brad Pitt is not more valuable, just more valued by the public.

    He was more valued by even the Japanese people until last week.

    And yes TRA 9.06am, I am not advocating for more tax cuts at this time. The current orgy of spending in D.C. is going to ruin this country. We need huge spending cuts & getting our financial house in order or else.

  91. March 16, 2011 at 8:57 am

    You know it’s pretty easy to keep up with a couple of blogs and stay in the discussion when you work on a computer. I have mine with me all the time. I don’t smoke, so I don’t take cigarette breaks, plenty of time to check in on the ‘back-n-forth’ of the debates. I type around 50wpm so this post took about a minute and a half.
    It’s pretty ridiculous to attack someone who always has a computer at their fingertips, and enjoys the conversation.
    My biggest problem is how to keep it civil. I have a 15yr old son and a 22yr old daughter whose futures under the “Neo-Con” and “Tea-Party” looks damn bleak. and as a veteran and a patriotic American I see it as an attack on my country and ultimately an attack on my children. The [expletive deleted] that trumpet the rights of the wealthy over the rest of us, must not have kids, or friends who are suffering from these policies. We are a family of social workers, so they have ready-made attacks in place I’m sure. But what I’d like to see is High Fi, or Henchman, or any of them; explain to quietly starving elderly, or young drug and alcohol free, families who’ve lost their house back east and have come to California looking for work, why we should all just sit back and marvel at the industriousness of the wealthy, forgetting that most of those riches come directly from the rest of us through unfair advantage gained through our corrupt government. People are not ‘getting by’. One single set-back and it begins a cascading effect that destroys a person’s chance at getting back up. I see these people. they are not statistics. Men who’ve never before been without a job. Women escaping abusive relationships with nowhere to go. Kids whose only option in life is to go to war and hope they make it through so they can go to college.
    There is a reason those doing well are so inherently angry and vindictive; they know it’s not just. and they respond out of self-preservation. The poor, the abused, the handicapped, the old; are taking the fun out of their celebration. They’re making it harder and harder for them to enjoy their wealth just by existing in deprivation and hardship. The wealthy community’s response is for them to just: “pick themselves up by their own bootstraps!” As if their wealth came from that, and not from their unfair, unjust advantage.
    It’s not “Class Envy” it’s “Favoritism Envy.”
    Bring it.

  92. Cristina Bauss
    March 16, 2011 at 9:20 am

    Agreed, moviedad. To which I would add: difficult to pick yourself up by your bootstraps when you don’t have boots to begin with.

    More interesting wealth stats:
    http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

  93. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 9:20 am

    Well said, MD. I think those upper middle class people like HiFi are living in a state of denial. If people fail it MUST be their fault and couldn’t happen to a hard working person like ME! They can’t explain the fact that the top tiers increased their wealth by hundreds of percent while the vast majority saw a decline so they resort to attempting to shame people by calling them envious, not understanding in the slightest that some people realize how dangerous and inequitable the current division of income and wealth is to the country. But I guess Warren Buffet is guilty of class envy as well.

  94. High Finance
    March 16, 2011 at 9:22 am

    “unfair advantage” MovieDad ? It is so sad that you do not even try to understand their success.

    If you want your son & daughter to be successful in life you have to teach them by example. You have to ditch this loser victim way of thinking.

    It is the very “industriousness of the wealthy” that you disparage that allow them to provide good paying jobs for your children.

    The very WORST thing you can do is teach your children that there is nothing they can do, teaching them that they are victims of an unfair system is a sure way to assure their failure in life. It gives them an excuse to not even try or to give up when at first they don’t succeed.

    The very BEST thing you can do is teach them they are masters of their own lives. That when they do experience failure to learn from the mistakes, pick themselves up and try again.

    Teach them that preparing for the future is a gaurantee of eventual success. Stay in school, get that degree. Take short term sacrifices for the long term good. Teach them that success doesn’t come from winning the lottery, there is no windfall coming. Playing it safe and never taking a chance isn’t going to get you anywhere.

  95. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 9:24 am

    Those stats are old, Cristina. The wealth / income gap has widened even more since the recession.

  96. High Finance
    March 16, 2011 at 9:24 am

    PJ, please explain how Warren Buffet’s success caused your failure in life. You keep avoiding that question.

    Warren Buffet became a success for the very reason that he didn’t allow himself to think as a victim.

  97. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 9:35 am

    You are an idiot, HiFi, incapable of understanding anything. All you do is spout the lies you hear on rant radio. First of all, I haven’t failed in life and I don’t blame anyone for my success. However, when the people at the top hoard money rather than paying living wages to their employees, their hoarding IS hurting the people they employ. You can’t deny that income and wealth is increasingly concentrating at the top and declining at the bottom, but can’t make the connection that the increase in wealth at the top is because they are exploiting the people who do the work which makes the money for them. For example, the people who own shares in corporations which outsourced jobs hurt their former employees to make more profit. Employers who cut wages and benefits while increasing their profits hurt their employees. Your inability to understand such basic concepts, or unwillingness to admit that you understand them, makes you a huge waste of time. The only reason I respond at all is to counter your BS in the unlikely case there is someone besides yourself who thinks the way you do, but might be capable of understanding the truth.

  98. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 9:42 am

    Furthermore, the Bush / Obama tax cuts are forcing cuts in social programs and further enriching the rich while the people who need those programs are sinking further. They are forcing the layoffs and cuts in wages and benefits of public employees which will further decrease the revenue required for the increased need due to higher unemployment. Anyone who thinks cutting working class wages during a recession is a great idea, but raising taxes on the very rich a mistake can’t be taken seriously on any facet of economics.

  99. a reader
    March 16, 2011 at 10:11 am

    HiFi is getting his ass kicked in this thread. PJ gives many statistics and makes sound arguments. HiFi can only parrot the neo con nonsense. He has not convinced me. I doubt he has convinced anyone.

    Question: If the rich getting richer is good of all of us, because of this supposed trickle down effect, wouldn’t you expect to see a big upturn in our economy? Wouldn’t there be more jobs now, during the time of most inequality? The rich have more than they’ve ever had. Where is the trickle?

    The recession does not explain why trickle down has not created jobs. Trickle down NEVER worked. It is voodoo economics.

    I question Movie Dad’s term “industriousness of the wealthy”. Money begets money. The system is rigged to favor the few at the expense of everyone else. Please don’t flatter the greedy by calling them industrious.

  100. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 10:38 am

    This is a really interesting interactive map which shows income change between 1989 and 2010 for 12 population sectors across the country.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/misc/the-12-states-of-america/

  101. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 10:39 am

    That should say 1980, not 1989.

  102. Auntie Arkley
    March 16, 2011 at 12:00 pm

    Giving rich people more money DOESN’T create jobs. This is one right-wing myth about capitalism. We “gave” (they really stole it or got corporate welfare) these rich people almost all the money in the country and where are the jobs? They’re just fucking everywhere paying huge salaries! Right? Just like giving billions of dollars to the banks to loosen the credit market. That worked well, didn’t it? Just more right-wing bullshit to obfuscate the truth of their asset transfer to the rich from everyone else. That’s what “privatization” of everything from health care to retirement is all about. It’s quite obvious unless your head is buried in a pile of right-wing bullshit, like many of the responders to this site.

  103. Auntie Arkley
    March 16, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    The only reality to the trickle-down theory is that we get pissed on by the wealthy. Thanks Supreme Asshole and Idiot, Ronald Reagan, traitor and anti-American..

  104. Auntie Arkley
    March 16, 2011 at 12:09 pm

    Hi-Fi: Just stop your “I’m an asshole” way of thinking. If you would just concentrate on thinking that the down-and-out deserve respect and help because they are human and part of society, you might just become a successful possessor of empathy. You have to ditch this asshole fuckhead way of thinking. That is your downfall.

  105. Mitch
    March 16, 2011 at 12:14 pm

    “Take short term sacrifices for the long term good.”
    –High Finance

    High Finance has here presented the most important “secret” for an individual, a family, a country, or the world.

    Our first problem is that our society has chosen to apply this maxim only to those for whom sacrifice is hardest, and not at all to those for whom sacrifice would barely be noticed.

    Our second problem is that our economic system rewards not long term good or short term sacrifice, but quarterly results.

    Our third problem is that our economic system isn’t even using the right tools to measure long term good. What our economic tools mostly measure is the success of a corporation at externalizing its costs. This is a guaranteed path to long term economic disaster for the system as a whole.

  106. High Finance
    March 16, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    The only time you “give” money to rich people is when you voluntarily buy products that their companies make or buy tickets to their movies or buy their CD’s.

    There are fewer jobs today than a few years ago because we are in a recession. The recession will end. There are many millions more jobs today than there was in 1980.

    Auntie Arkley, please don’t ever change. We need nasty little morons like you to remind us to try & be civil. You show us the way by being the anti-example.

  107. E. Percival Ne'er-do-well Esquire III
    March 16, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    Keep showing us the way Auntie anti, watch it though, you’re treading into “class envy”.

  108. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    More BS from HiFi.

    There has been zero net job creation since December 1999. No previous decade going back to the 1940s had job growth of less than 20 percent. Economic output rose at its slowest rate of any decade since the 1930s as well.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/01/AR2010010101196.html?hpid=topnews

  109. Reinventing The Wheel
    March 16, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    Hilarious to read the duplicitous rants defending the rich and low tax rates from someone who already benefited from the era of 90% tax rates.

    Was it not the accumulation of wealth and centralization of political power that led to the formation of the USSR?

    They looted the U.S. Treasury, THEN, opened computer factories employing the children of Vietnam, they merged corporations and they purchased their own stocks.

    They’ve been doing this since Ronald Reagan offered America’s first bailout to GM, and GM opened its fist factory in Mexico.

    Corporation’s revolving door to D.C. enabled them to author the legislation to do this, to export jobs, to hide their taxable incomes, while benefiting 100% from U.S. military protection, U.S. courts defending their contracts, and a stable currency.

    The mother of all welfare cheats.

  110. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    So, on top of the failure of the tax cuts to create ANY new jobs, how many more people enter (or try to enter) the work force each year than retire?

  111. anonymous
    March 16, 2011 at 4:03 pm

    HiFi, don’t you agree also that there were far fewer jobs before the recession because a vast proportion had been outsourced to other countries by big corporations saving money on costs? Nike & Microsoft don’t make tennis shoes and computers here because they increase their profits by going to Third World countries.

    The playing field is different than it was when you or I were growing up. You simply cannot keep spouting that a college degree and hard work are automatically going to guarantee wealth. A college degree is not worth nearly what it used to be. Google it, you will see.

    That the majority of wealth in this country is held by a relative few is very problematic. Do you truly think an economy can thrive when it has a tiny rich class and a huge poor one? That doesn’t mean advocating socialism or redistributing the wealth. It means leveling the playing field so that laws, elections, taxes and regulations, or lack of them, don’t overwlelmingly favor the few who have wealth.
    I don’t know why you can’t get that. Pure capitalism doesn’t even exist in this country anymore , but we are even farther away from socialism.

  112. High Finance
    March 16, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    Yes, 4.03pm a lot of jobs have been outsourced and that is a problem.

    But the problem is not all black or white. If company A wants to make refrigerators in the US it cannot compete with company B which manufactures them in Korea. The labor cost in Korea is very low and its quality is as good as the US.

    Company A has two choices. It can go out of business and every last employee is out of work. Or it can offshore its production plant and succeed. When it offshores many of its US employees lose their jobs. But at least its administrative and sales staffs, for example, keep their jobs.

    Which is better, all the employees lose their jobs or just some ?

    And why do you keep overstating what I said ? Hard work and college doesn’t gaurantee you the billions that Gates or Buffet has. But you can still become very succesful. Not in your 20’s or 30’s but over time.

  113. High Finance
    March 16, 2011 at 6:03 pm

    You are pathetic Plain Jane, always repeating your anti rich rhetoric. Envy is only one step from hate.

    For one thing I said 1980 and not 1999. Since 1980 there has been approximately 40 MILLION US jobs created.

    And the reason there net job growth has been flat is because 3.05 million jobs have been lost since Obama took office.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms

  114. High Finance
    March 16, 2011 at 6:06 pm

    One thing that chart shows that is interesting is even though Pres Bush dealt with a recession caused by the dot.com bubble bursting at the very beginning of his term, he still had 1.1 million new jobs during his eight years.

  115. March 16, 2011 at 6:38 pm

    Yes HiFi, Bush was almost as talented in framing his economic policies as he was in responding to an act of terrorism.

  116. Mitch
    March 16, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    High Finance might recall that there was some opposition to NAFTA and the WTO from people worried about the world’s corporations creating exactly the situation he accurately describes.

    Meanwhile, in today’s world, many of us wonder why the American taxpayer should be subsidizing the removal of most of our production jobs in the name of corporate profits, rather than imposing high taxes on corporations which offshore our jobs and using those taxes to either help those corporations who choose to keep jobs here or to directly aid those communities for which the loss of production jobs is a total disaster.

  117. March 16, 2011 at 7:30 pm

    And now that we’ve lost so much of our industrial capacity, the only way we could ever hope to regain it (and the accompanying employment) is through massive government intervention — industrial policies that would favor domestic production, tariffs on imported goods, and other policies that would offend HiFi and send Fox News into an extended apoplectic shouting jag.

  118. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 7:42 pm

    The people whose jobs were outsourced should be satisfied with a part-time McJob without benefits and the people who profited by the outsourcing should get a tax cut on their increased profits because that’s what’s fair.

    When you count part-time jobs as full-time job, it’s easy to pretend there were job creations. But the fact is, the total number of hours worked has declined year after year.

  119. anonymous
    March 16, 2011 at 7:56 pm

    HiFi,
    I am not overstating what you said. You are accusing people of class envy (which is an overstatement on your part) but you won’t enter a discussion of whether or not you agree with, or even see the viewpoint of, some of the statements.
    For example, wealth in this country has done a major shift from the lower classes to a very,very small percentage of the upper class in the last few decades, true or no?
    Wealthy individuals and corporations increasingly wield more power and influence over legislators and the laws they create, the taxes they cut or don’t cut, the regulations they impose or don’t impose, true or not?
    Wealthy individuals have far more resources that allow them access to even more money than the rest of us, true or no?
    I am neither poor nor wealthy, have worked all my life, paid for my college education, bought and sold real estate several times over, have a few investments, am comfortable now and hope to be in retirement, loved Ayn Rand and the capitalist agenda, but even I can see that opportunities abound for those who have money in a way that they do not for those who don’t.
    If you don’t believe this, please show me how and where it is otherwise.

  120. a reader
    March 16, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    HiFi says today that… “the reason there net job growth has been flat is because 3.05 million jobs have been lost since Obama took office.”

    HiFi said on 3/14…”using “Facts” to prove some political point when the “facts” by itself are meaningless.

    It is the why behind the facts that are important to understand.

    Otherwise you misinterpret the data

    laying all blame or giving all credit to the President who happens to be in office at the time, indicates dishonesty or lack of knowledge”

    Hmmm…Accounting and reflecting time, HiFi.

  121. anonymous
    March 16, 2011 at 8:28 pm

    I am waiting for HiFi to say that the small percentage of super rich Americans got even richer in the last few decades because they worked harder than the rest of us.

  122. Anon1
    March 16, 2011 at 9:11 pm

    It’s nice to see Marc back in full force. Pj and Movie-dad are spot on..Sly is still getting promised a check from the furor. Remember the 3 lies in the world. One of them is the checks in the mail. The one about the mouth has already happened with robbie and sly I’m sure! and I cant remember number 3..

  123. March 16, 2011 at 9:30 pm

    Perhaps Anon1 should practice before posting.

  124. empires end
    March 16, 2011 at 10:10 pm

    as the population of have-nots grows and become more and more embittered by the false promises, swindles and cons of the blood-suckers like hi-fi (or his masters if he does not happen to be one of them), there will be a reckoning and it will be quite unpleasant for everyone, but the well off will certainly be obvious targets for the mob.

    this is not a recommendation, simply a prediction and one piece of advice for the rich parasites that rob the poor and working classes– be afraid scum bags, be very very afraid.

  125. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 10:19 pm

    An oldie but a goodie:

    As Jobs Leave US Shores…
    The New Face of Class War
    By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
    http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts09302006.html

    (Paul Craig Roberts was Asst Secretary of the Treasury in the 1st Reagan administration)

  126. anonymous
    March 16, 2011 at 10:29 pm

    HiFi, The 7:56 pm posting awaits. But I completely understand if you’re not up to the challenge.

    PS Please don’t trot out the old argument that people like Meg Whitman spent millions and still didn’t win elections. There are plenty of bright, hard-working people who couldn’t afford to run at all and you and I both know that she still has a helluva lot of influence in Calif political circles.

  127. Plain Jane
    March 16, 2011 at 11:03 pm

    This is a very simple explanation of why corporate personhood and Citizen United are bad for our country:

  128. Anon1
    March 17, 2011 at 9:11 am

    The statement at 10:10 should be given consideration. who’s coming to their defense, ohhh I remember the third lie now, milky is smart. I’m sure John is proud?

  129. Auntie Arkley
    March 17, 2011 at 11:01 am

    empires end has it correct. Yes, it can, and will, happen in America.

  130. Auntie Arkley
    March 17, 2011 at 11:06 am

    Poor Hi-Fi. Stop the “I’m a loser victim” way of thinking and maybe you can see reality and learn think properly. A little empathy wouldn’t hurt, either.

  131. Auntie Arkley
    March 17, 2011 at 11:08 am

    oops, typo …learn TO think…

  132. Auntie Arkley
    March 17, 2011 at 11:18 am

    “The only time you “give” money to rich people is when you voluntarily buy products that their companies make or buy tickets to their movies or buy their CD’s.”

    Oh, really Hi-Fi? You must not know much about the government. Have you heard of Corporate Welfare, also known as subsidies? What about tax beaks for the rich? (These people should be willing to fund the country that allowed, and in many instances helped, these individuals and corporations become wealthy beyond need.) The government (us) ‘gives’ plenty of money to the rich. Your ignorance is showing.

  133. Plain Jane
    March 17, 2011 at 11:39 am

    Case in point: Phillips Lighting, which got $7 million in stimulus funds, closing their award-winning plant in Sparta, TN, despite it’s profitability to open one in Mexico for higher profitability and leaving 250 people without jobs.

    link

  134. a reader
    March 17, 2011 at 11:48 am

    Auntie, along with tax breaks for the rich, let us not forget outright tax evasion and fraud. The richest are the most guilty of cheating.

    http://www.cheatingculture.com/tax-evasion/

    Empires end is correct. If things don’t change, we are headed for a revolution. Unlike Egypt, ours will not be non-violent. We are a violent country — expect plenty of bloodshed.

    Given the fact that citizens (people) have lost control of our government to non-citizens (corporations), revolution will be the only way to take it back.

  135. High Finance
    March 17, 2011 at 12:19 pm

    7.56am You say the wealth is more concentrated at the top than before. I have read other articles that say the same thing. Global competition has caused more unskilled jobs to be sent overseas and there is not a lot we can do about it unless you’re advocating a global trade war. Installing new tariffs and trade barriers would result in instant retaliation that would hurt everybody and fast.

    Do the wealthy have too much influence in politics? Yes and if you’re honest you have to include the unions due to the hundreds of millions of dollars they spend on campaigns every election cycle.

    So why is that ? Why are politicians able to get such massive amounts of money ? Obama spent almost ONE BILLION dollars on his campaign !

    It is because politicians have to much power to tax and regulate. Reduce their power and people won’t be so eager to try and buy them.

    Opportunties abound for people with money ? Yes, but don’t be blind to see that opportunities abound for everybody with talent and desire. The same negativism was expressed when I was a kid. I was raised dirt poor and am very successful today.

  136. High Finance
    March 17, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    A Reader, 8.20 pm. Either you are lazy or you are careless. I did not blame Obama for the 3.05 million job loss. I merely said it started at the begining of his term.

    I have said countless times that the power of a president to create or lose jobs is exaggerated. Obama’s damage will be great because he is responsible (no not soley responsible) for the biggest deficits in world history. Deficits that will hurt the economy for decades, long after he is gone from office.

    Try harder next time.

  137. High Finance
    March 17, 2011 at 12:30 pm

    “Tax breaks for the rich” is not giving money away to the rich. That is the mind of a bank robber who robs the bank but lets the old man in line keep his money. The robber did not “give” the old man the money.

    Tax breaks are simply allowing people to keep more of their own money.

    There are some stupid business subsidies but some are reasonable. But in a budget with twelve zeros behind it, it is not much.

  138. High Finance
    March 17, 2011 at 12:32 pm

    A Reader, tax cheats are in every class strata. The total dollars lost to the US government are far higher in the lower brackets.

  139. Sam Spade
    March 17, 2011 at 12:34 pm

    High Finance says:
    March 17, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    “A Reader, 8.20 pm. Either you are lazy or you are careless.”

    Classic No Class Finance. When completely bankrupt of any logical arguments, resort to name calling.

  140. a reader
    March 17, 2011 at 1:37 pm

    HiFi, if you are not blaming Obama, why do you mention him at all? You could phrase your statement differently. You could say something like: “During the past 3 years, 3.5 million jobs have been lost”. Instead, you pair Obama with the job loss in the same sentence, implying, if not outright stating, that he is to blame.

    Your comment at 12:23 demonstrates classic double speak: “Obama’s damage will be great because he is responsible (no not soley responsible) for the biggest deficits in world history.”

    Not SOLELY responsible? You make no mention of Bush and the neo cons who are LARGELY responsible for the deficit. You only mention Obama.
    How disingenuous of you to accuse others of doing precisely what you do.

    In a similar way, you only mention how much Obama spent on his campaign. Why single him out? Isn’t it true that everyone is forced to up the ante — that every candidate these days has to raise and spend obscene amounts of money? Your statement implies that only Obama did so. May I remind you that you’re on record as opposing publicly financed campaigns.

    Interesting that your 12:30 post equates paying taxes to being robbed.

    Regarding total dollars lost due to tax cheats, please supply some data to prove your assertion.

  141. Plain Jane
    March 17, 2011 at 1:45 pm

    It’s funny how the right always claims that poor people don’t pay taxes until the subject of cheating comes up. Isn’t it hard to cheat on taxes when you don’t make enough to itemize, all your wages are reported by your employer and you have to supply a SS# for each dependent?

  142. Plain Jane
    March 17, 2011 at 1:49 pm

    Of course, it isn’t cheating when you have tax experts exploit every little loophole created by your legislator puppets.

  143. High Finance
    March 17, 2011 at 2:18 pm

    A Reader, did you even look at my link ? The graph had the statistics by the beginning of each president’s term (s).

    The Porkulus bill was passed by the Dems and signed by Obama (without a single Republican vote) AFTER Bush left office. That single bill is adding almost ONE TRILLION DOLLARS to the deficit !

    Why did I single out Obama’s BILLION dollar campaign? BECAUSE IT MADE AN ALL TIME RECORD YOU TWIT !

    Get your facts before you criticise next time.

  144. March 17, 2011 at 2:24 pm

    HiFi is sounding awfully goddamned nutty with his “taxes are comparable to bank robbery” metaphor.

  145. High Finance, Remixed
    March 17, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    I have said countless times that the power of a president to create or lose jobs is exaggerated…

    Obama’s damage will be great because he is responsible…

    tax cheats are in every class strata. The total dollars lost to the US government are far higher in the lower brackets…..

    But in a budget with twelve zeros behind it, it is not much.

    Global competition has caused more unskilled jobs to be sent overseas and there is not a lot we can do about it unless you’re advocating a global trade war. Installing new tariffs and trade barriers would result in instant retaliation that would hurt everybody and fast…

    but don’t be blind to see that opportunities abound for everybody with talent and desire

  146. March 17, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    You know Hi-Fi I endeavor to be civil, since I have to take responsibility for what I say, unlike you; I don’t want to insult anyone. So I’m going to pretend that you are not calling my children “Whiny Loser-Victims.” and pretend that you are only calling me those things.
    Because my kids know that they have to work to survive. and they’ll have to be very creative to gather any gain to themselves in this society. They won’t get even a hint of a break as far as going to college, or getting their first house, or (God forbid) they get sick or injured.
    What you and your kind have brought about in America can only be seen as an attack. It is bigger than 911, Pearl Harbor and the sinking of the Maine rolled into one. A tiny cabal has succeeded in doing what all the wealth and power of King George and his Corporations couldn’t hope to do; gut the power of the United States by eliminating the strength of its individual citizens. It’s the collective power of all the individuals that accomplish big things. It’s not the manipulations of the self serving Profiteers. And that really is all you’re campaigning for. It is in essence what you are supporting. The legitimacy of a few thieves stealing the resources of the nation and packaging it up as their private property. These are our minerals, fuels and forests, if they can belong to anyone. The oil in the Gulf is their oil. The people, should profit from it, not Connecticut bankers and handful of dictators. Same goes for the South Americans, the Asians. The Africans.
    It all comes down to this question: “By what right to individuals take the natural resources of the whole world as their personal property?”
    If each region on the planet controlled their own resources and traded on a fair basis(non-military involvement). Then all the people prosper and their is no motivation for war.
    World fixed. Problem solved. What’s for dinner?

  147. March 17, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    “there” is no motivation for war.

  148. a reader
    March 17, 2011 at 2:55 pm

    HiFi, why is campaign spending at an all-time high? Because of Citizens United — a decision made by your fellow neo cons on the Supreme Court.

    So Democrats and Republicans alike must play by the rules established by conservatives. The real problem for you is that the Democrat won. That is what makes it unacceptable to you. If McCain had won, I doubt you would be offended by the amount of money he spent.

    Do you see the hypocrisy of complaining about out-of-control campaign spending when you have stated, on this blog, that you oppose publicly financed campaigns?

    And HiFi, I will not take the needle out of your side until you deflate.

  149. anonymous
    March 17, 2011 at 3:04 pm

    HiFi, I do appreciate your reasoned response at 12:19. I see there are things we agree on. I still maintain that the rich have many more opportunities than the not-so-rich and I did not see the same negativism you speak of when I was younger. The attitude was mush more positive and I know people who proved it. Myself included. I think it is much much less possible now. Talent and desire can go a long way, but there are roadblocks now that weren’t there 30 years ago to someone who has no money.
    I agree that we have to reduce the power of politicians to tax and regulate unfairly, but that’s never gonna happen.
    And union membership has declined steadily since WW II. I don’t think your statement about their power & influence holds water, especially when compared to the superrich.

  150. a reader
    March 17, 2011 at 3:06 pm

    Oh, and btw, HiFi, you did not provide a link.

  151. a reader
    March 17, 2011 at 3:35 pm

    Excuse me, HiFi, I was looking for that link in a response from you to me. I see it was proved yesterday.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms

    The information presented at Wikipedia does not provide very strong support for your position. In fact, the disclaimer says: “The exact usefulness of these numbers is debated”

    I see a continuation of a downward trend in job creation. I also note that during Bush’s eight years in office, there was a paltry 0.1% increase in jobs.
    Seems pretty flaccid to me, although no doubt you would claim blaming Bush is stupid and dishonest because there are many factors to consider in economics besides who is president.

    But when it comes to what has occurred during the last three years, you do not hesitate to lay the blame on Obama. You would not have given this link if that were not your intent.

    Interesting that by far the greatest increases in jobs have occurred under Democratic presidents: FDR, Johnson, Carter, Clinton. Yeah, sure, it wasn’t because of them, it was something else that made that happen.

  152. a reader
    March 17, 2011 at 4:17 pm

    Quoting HiFi again: “Global competition has caused more unskilled jobs to be sent overseas…

    Examples of types of jobs currently being outsourced:

    Information Technology
    Technical Support
    Customer Service
    Research
    Medical Transcription
    Medical Administration
    Tax Preparation
    Insurance Claims
    Manufacturing

    These are what HiFi considers unskilled jobs?

  153. a reader
    March 17, 2011 at 5:11 pm

    I meant to say the link you provided. Nothing is proved.

  154. deconstruction
    March 17, 2011 at 8:41 pm

    Here is the nut of it, ala High Finance, who sets up the question, “Why are politicians able to get such massive amounts of money ?”

    Then answers, “It is because politicians have to much power to tax and regulate. Reduce their power and people won’t be so eager to try and buy them.”

    Translation: Get the (constitutionally justified) regulations and taxes off the backs of the multinational corporations that have no loyalty to this country and let them regulate themselves and give back to the peons a pittance for what they have taken.

    Now THAT would solve all our problems.

  155. Reinventing The Wheel
    March 17, 2011 at 9:36 pm

    If team-tyranny is correct, then those 90% tax rates that provided his subsidized public university, job programs, job training and job placement, fully-funded K-12 (that stayed open!), police that walked a beat, good public transportation, housing programs, and sound infrastructure, etc, etc,

    Was THEFT!!??

    That makes benefactors like HiFi a criminal too!

    Time to pay your penalty!

    Non-deductible, of course, (that’s reserved for your betters to enjoy).

  156. hard core realist
    March 17, 2011 at 11:43 pm

    with a human population that is some 5 billion critters past any rational estimation of global carrying capacity the competition for the basics of life can only be expected to become more and more brutal.

    specifically, since that ecological based human surplusage is the direct result of a fossil fuel orgy that has produced both an immense quantity of food and a deadly cascading of negative externalities. more to the point, since the fossil fuels that have (literally) energized this population explosion of the last fifty years is running out, then so is the run of this geological/biological spasm.

    the last awful “gift” we bequeath to our descendants is a corrupted culture of exalted shallow materialism (often cynically dressed up in the guise of so-called family values and other conservative BS then delivered by the hypocrites of faux news and the republican party).

    our depleted planetary ecosystem will render our generation as ultimate pariah in future histories- if there are any.

    okay– time to drive to the mall.

  157. Been There
    March 18, 2011 at 11:39 am

    Hardcore and Moviedad 2:52 nailed it.

    Attempts to delay our extrication from unsustainable levels of consumption are traitorous. This is the largest inter-generational theft in human history!

    90% tax rates were an investment in a nation that once held it’s human resources above corporations.

    Thank you all for once again banishing the HiFi traitor.

  158. Anonymous
    March 18, 2011 at 11:54 am

    hard core realist, you make some good points. i completely agree that we are over-populated. how should we deal with that?

  159. High Finance
    March 18, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    Are we over-populated ?

    That is not a fact but an opinion. I went to Answers.com for the number of acres of land in the US and world.

    The US has 2.3 billion acres and that puts us at over 6.8 acres of land for every man, woman and child in the US.

    The world has over 36.7 billion acres and that puts the world at around 5.67 acres per man, woman and child.

  160. Plain Jane
    March 18, 2011 at 12:24 pm

    Things would be peachy if everyone ate dirt, didn’t need energy and didn’t leave their 5 acres, HiFi. It isn’t a matter of space but of resources required to sustain the population.

  161. Mitch
    March 18, 2011 at 12:36 pm

    A: “I’m sorry, your 5.7 acres are all sand.”

    B: “Well, why can’t I share some of the good acreage?”

    A: “Sorry, that would be socialism. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps; it’s all in a positive attitude.”

    B: “But I used to have good acreage until your great grandparents stole it.”

    A: “It’s terrible how people think whining is the best approach these days.”

    B: “I’m not whining — it’s the truth. How am I supposed to farm on 5.7 acres of sand?”

    A: “Officer?! This man is bothering me.”

  162. Auntie Arkley
    March 18, 2011 at 12:50 pm

    Hi-Fi: so you think one person per 6-7 acres of land is acceptable? What about a decade or two from now when there is only 4 acres or less per person? I imagine the acres that are good for food production will end up in the hands of ultra-rich money worshippers. The rest of us (probably including HiFi) will get dry rocks. I hope your corporate butt-buddies will share their food with you, Hiffy.

    Hard Core realist is correct. The right-wing is immersed in self-deception, ignorance, and denial.

  163. Auntie Arkley
    March 18, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    Oooh, answers.com and wikipedia! Unquestionable authorities on every subject in the universe! Now we know where the right-wing gets their knowledge.

  164. Auntie Arkley
    March 18, 2011 at 12:55 pm

    Mitch, I love it!

  165. Sam Spade
    March 18, 2011 at 12:57 pm

    High Finance says:
    March 18, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    Are we over-populated ?

    That is not a fact but an opinion. I went to Answers.com for the number of acres of land in the US and world.

    The US has 2.3 billion acres and that puts us at over 6.8 acres of land for every man, woman and child in the US.

    The world has over 36.7 billion acres and that puts the world at around 5.67 acres per man, woman and child.”

    Figures lie and liars figure. High School Finance, is this the way scientists would calculate the capacity of land mass? How about production per acre? Consumption per person? You can have the 5.67 acres inside St. Helen’s volcano vent, nice and cozy.

  166. Plain Jane
    March 18, 2011 at 12:57 pm

    Their minions are, Auntie. The right wing elites are steeped in willful deceit, greed and corruption.

  167. High Finance
    March 18, 2011 at 2:16 pm

    Sam Spade/Auntie Arkley, anyone as nasty as you are must be a small little shrimp in real life. Living afraid to talk back in real life and takes it out on the internet.

    I tried to put a little perspective on things and instead of intelligent comment I get the worthless posts above ? This isn’t a “right-wing vs left-wing” topic, is everything that to you people ?

    Is there not one intelligent response from anyone here ?

  168. Sam Spade
    March 18, 2011 at 2:37 pm

    High Finance says:
    March 18, 2011 at 2:16 pm
    “Sam Spade/Auntie Arkley, anyone as nasty as you are must be a small little shrimp in real life.”

    “That’s it?!? More name calling? The lady doth protest too much, me thinkst.

  169. intellegent response
    March 18, 2011 at 3:15 pm

    HiFi, how about if your acreage is at the bottom of Lake Superior. Good address, huh? Or maybe in the East River? Lots of good company for you there.

    As I’m sure you have heard, in the real estate game its all about location, location, location.

  170. LOL!!!
    March 18, 2011 at 3:23 pm

    “”That is not a fact but an opinion. I went to Answers.com…””

    >>>>>I went to Answers.com <<<>>>>I went to Answers.com <<<>>>>I went to Answers.com <<<>>>>I went to Answers.com <<<<

    ALL HAIL DOT COM.

  171. Not A Native
    March 18, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    Pretty funny Mitch !

    Its difficult for me to understand why traditional Republicans, who I think sincerely believe in conservation of resources, balanced budgets, and avoiding long term debt, have fallen in with wackos who would declare the US a Christian nation, outlaw abortion, and defund Planned Parenthood. How is it they can so clearly see the dangers posed by Muslim zealots, but are blind to even greater danger posed by US Christian zealots?

  172. Mitch
    March 18, 2011 at 3:56 pm

    I don’t know if it’s what you’d call an intelligent response, Hifi, but here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAP_statement_on_population_growth

  173. tra
    March 18, 2011 at 6:17 pm

    Here’s my own statement on population growth:

    It may be possible, with a somewhat less materialistic lifestyle combined with more efficient and appropriate technology, to sustain our current population, or maybe even a somewhat larger population, for many thousands of years to come.

    Or it might be possible to sustain, for a long time, a somewhat smaller population, even with less ideal cultural and technological factors.

    But one thing seems certain: We can’t sustain an endlessly-growing population and an ever-increasing appetite for material wealth, both at the same time, no matter how good our technology gets. At least not without a new planet to consume every so often…and good planets are exceedingly hard to find.

  174. High Finance
    March 18, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    The only fact in this loopy discussion thread is that whether we are currently overpopulated is based on your point of view.

    And no Mitch, that was not an intelligent response. It had nothing to do with my statement that got Sam Spade, Auntie Arkley, LOL, NAN slathering at the mouth.

    And Mouse, how many of those Avatars were you ?

  175. Plain Jane
    March 18, 2011 at 7:05 pm

    If your point of view is that people don’t need resources to survive, just space, then HiFi’s point of view might have merit. In reality though, his point was ridiculous and his huffing and puffing over the very funny responses to his ridiculous point of view were entirely appropriate.

  176. intellegent response
    March 18, 2011 at 7:07 pm

    HiFi, What do you think about that (bottom of the) East River property? It really is a great deal, at the price.

    In case you think I am Mouse, Sorry. And I guarantee you High Opinion of Yourself, I’ll be a thorn in your side as long as you continue to off gas your ditto head on this Blog.

  177. March 18, 2011 at 7:08 pm

    HiFi has little room to accuse others of mixing up their blogonyms.

  178. intellegent response
    March 18, 2011 at 7:11 pm

    Speaking of slathering at the mouth, Hi-FU, I’d say the beating you have sustained over the last few days on this tread must be affecting your memory.

  179. intellegent response
    March 18, 2011 at 7:16 pm

    My motto will be:

    Float like a butterfly,
    Sting like a bee.

    (Respects to Ali)

  180. Been There
    March 18, 2011 at 11:44 pm

    Behold the depths of HiFi’s buffoonery for all to see.

    He whines like a baby when his stupidity is called-out, followed by predictable crying over the “little-shrimp nastiness” of others…oblivious to his routine reliance on little-shrimp nastiness…

    His is the realm of pigs happily wallowing in shit, if only for their puny lifetime.

    Play in HiFi’s pen and enjoy the stench.

    Meanwhile, scientists are warning that we are living in the 6th largest extinction event in life’s history on Earth. Despite our “rural lifestyle”, our streams, rivers, and aquifers are rapidly diminishing, just as unbridled human encroachment accomplishes around the globe.

    Population density is a childish distraction from an unsustainable, toxic lifestyle endlessly propagandized as “our freedom”.

    TRAITORS AND LIARS ALL!

  181. Random Guy
    March 19, 2011 at 2:00 pm

    All hail whichever bible says I’m among the chosen!!! Until I can scrape together enough money to publish my own, that is…

    Digital bibles…digibles?…the dot coms…so true…google this, wiki that…”show me links or shut up”, as if US propaganda is a thing of the past. One’s own two eyes, a simple sense of remembrance and some common sense are big enough bullshit filters. Information society is FUGGED UP, YO.

  182. High Finance
    March 19, 2011 at 3:29 pm

    “Intellegent” (sic) reader, the only beating I have sustained here is the ear ache I have from listening to all this nincompoopery.

    I simply made the statement that overpopulation is an opinion and not a fact. Despite PJ’s hysterical observation to the contrary, the world is nowhere near running out of resources that will cause the extinction of mankind.

    Been There, you need a break dude. Get away from the computer & smell the roses. There is no “extinction event” about to spell the doom of mankind.

    And Heraldo, FU again liar. Unlike Mouse who posts here several times a day hiding other pseudoyms, I haven’t used one in weeks.

  183. Anonymush
    March 19, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    High Finance,

    In real life, do you go “harrumph?”

  184. Intelligent reader
    March 19, 2011 at 4:22 pm

    HiFi, the topics on this thread have included:

    the deficit
    tax rates
    concentration of wealth
    job growth and its relationship to the president
    job outsourcing

    In every case, you lost the debate.

    Get away from the computer & smell the roses is some of the best advice you have given on this blog, HiFi. Wading through the BS you put out has, in fact, made me tired.

    But HiFi — I will be back.

  185. Intelligent reader
    March 19, 2011 at 4:41 pm

    I just CAN’T help it — Before smelling the roses, I must, once again, refute HiFi: “the world is nowhere near running out of resources that will cause the extinction of mankind.”

    You have to be very clueless to live on this planet and not know there is a shortage of fresh water. BIG problem that much of the world already faces and for us, is looming.

    Don’t believe it HiFi? OK, let’s start with your favored source, Wikipedia: which has this to say:

    Water demand already exceeds supply in many parts of the world and as the world population continues to rise, so too does the water demand.

    Then Google fresh water supply, or something like that, and approach it with an open mind.

  186. Random Guy
    March 19, 2011 at 6:47 pm

    Very interesting digging through the archives and reading who-said-what. Security National/Marina Center posse keeps changing their strategy, but their goal remains the same: dense residential/big box development.

    http://www.northcoastjournal.com/092806/shortstories0928.html

    https://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2006/09/28/buhne-scoops-again/

    …and I’d never checked out Security National’s own website…

    http://www.snsc.com/

    Our local security national people, in and out of office, are all about forming a lasting community that’ll make Humboldt an envy of the world, right? Not just getting rich quick through as much rapid development as possible, like everybody else in their business, right? riiiiight.

  187. High Finance
    March 20, 2011 at 8:51 am

    “Intelligent” Reader, I am glad you finally learned to spell intelligent, LOL !!!

    Your silly hysteria aside, while there is a shortage of fresh water in SOME parts of the world, it is by no means an extinction of mankind crises.

  188. Plain Jane
    March 20, 2011 at 9:03 am

    Do you see how HiFi is spinning? Where did ANYONE say ANYTHING about “an extinction of mankind crises.” (Note to HiFi – you used the singular “an” and the plural “crises.”) Anyone who denies there is a water shortage (even in California) obviously isn’t paying attention. Multi-nationals must think water will be in much shorter supply in the future or they wouldn’t be investing so much effort and money trying to grab control of it.

  189. High Finance
    March 20, 2011 at 11:08 am

    (Note to PJ, the word “an” goes with the singular “extinction”)

    Do you read posts PJ ? Or are you one of those people who don’t listen because you are always formulating your next burst ?

    The very silly Been There brought the word “extinction” into this debate at 11.44am on the 18th. Hard Core Realist and others danced all around the word.

  190. Mitch
    March 20, 2011 at 11:19 am

    High Finance,

    If I may quote the esteemed John McLaughlin, “WRONG!”

  191. Mitch
    March 20, 2011 at 11:20 am

    That is, wrong about your grammar, superior though it must be.

  192. Plain Jane
    March 20, 2011 at 11:30 am

    The way you used extinction, as an adjective, does not make the use of “an” before a plural noun, “crises” correct. Leave the adjective out of the sentence and you will see how ridiculous it sounds – “an crises.” Really?

  193. Plain Jane
    March 20, 2011 at 11:42 am

    Wow HiFi, “Been There” didn’t mention human extinction. He was referring to the well known period of extinction of many species occurring now and his post was at 11:44 PM, not am as you posted.

    “Meanwhile, scientists are warning that we are living in the 6th largest extinction event in life’s history on Earth.”

    http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/eldredge2.html

  194. Auntie Arkley
    March 20, 2011 at 11:56 am

    Hi-Fi, you know absolutely nothing, and seem to be unaware of your own actions. You criticize people for doing exactly what you are doing! And what about this: “Living afraid to talk back in real life and takes it out on the internet.” Oh yeah? Well where the fuck are you talking back? You seem to take it out on the internet. Where are you talking back in “real life”? If you knew anything about me, you would know that I DO make my points in “real life” which I assume means “in public”. I’m sorry, but your statements and responses confirm your idiocy and lack of awareness of what’s going on around you. You have the brain of a small shrimp and the asshole arrogance of a head-in-the-sand Republican.

  195. Mitch
    March 20, 2011 at 12:01 pm

    Too much alcohol, prolly. Shame he wasn’t warned.

  196. Mitch (as Drunk Finance)
    March 20, 2011 at 12:08 pm

    Darwin said only the best would survive. That there’s not enough fresh water to go around is not an extinction crises. My inferiors may well die, but that’s just biology in action. I have used my wealth to procure an enormous supply of filtered water.

  197. High Finance
    March 20, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    Auntie Arkley, you seem to have anger issues. You’re right, I don’t know anything about you because you do all your nasty little attacks hiding behind annonymity. I can only assume you’re a coward who wouldn’t dare say those things to my face.

    And PJ, Mitch I guess you’re right. I did use the word “an” incorrectly. Excuse my initial doubt as you two have NEVER been right on anything you ever said here before. Chalk one up for you two.

  198. Mitch (as Drunk Finance)
    March 20, 2011 at 12:13 pm

    Said with all the graciousness which has always typified not just you, Mr. Finance, but our other betters in your class.

    Many thanks.

  199. Auntie Arkley
    March 20, 2011 at 12:17 pm

    Well Hi-Fi, if that’s your real name (or are you hiding behind anonymity?), I’d be glad to say all that and more to your face. Where would you like to meet and when?

    Oh, since you give people shit for spelling errors, try spelling “anonymity” correctly. What are you, illiterate?

  200. Intelligent reader
    March 20, 2011 at 12:21 pm

    HiFi is practicing the “debating” techniques he has learned from his mentor, Rush. In typical ditto head fashion, when his thesis lacks substance, he focuses on some trivial flaw in the opponent, such as a typo. That way, he hopes to deflect attention away from the substantial shortcomings of his own arguments.

    OK HiFi, you asked for it. Here is a list of comments YOU have made on this thread that contain spelling or grammatical errors. I think they demonstrate that you are not only incapable of defending your positions, you are an unskilled and sloppy writer.

    *** Begin Grade School Level Writing Lesson. All quotes are from HiFi, verbatim. ***

    Your limited grasp of economics and the business world does not allow your opinion of other people’s skills in those fields any merit.
    (Illogical sentence construction)

    You would not have made the exchange but those two hours of entertainment was worth more to you than those $8 dollars.
    (Subject Verb agreement “Two hour” is plural and requires the plural form of the verb “to be”.)

    When government gets involved it is taking money away from the productive and gives to the unproductive.
    (Faulty sentence construction, pairs “is taking” and “gives” – Should be “takes and gives”, or “taking and giving”.)

    They invest it or spend it. If the spend it they are putting the workers who build yachts to work. (Spelling error – If “the” spend it)

    It is the very “industriousness of the wealthy” that you disparage that allow them to provide good paying jobs for your children. (Subject/Verb agreement – you find it)

    The very WORST thing you can do is teach your children that there is nothing they can do, teaching them that they are victims of an unfair system is a sure way to assure their failure in life. (Run on sentence)

    Teach them that preparing for the future is a gaurantee of eventual success. (Spelling error – see if you can find it.)

    There are many millions more jobs today than there was in 1980. (Subject Verb agreement.)

    Hard work and college doesn’t gaurantee you the billions that Gates or Buffet has. (Subject Verb agreement AND spelling error.)

    Since 1980 there has been approximately 40 MILLION US jobs created.
    (Subject Verb agreement)

    And the reason there net job growth has been flat is because 3.05 million jobs have been lost since Obama took office. (Wrong use of word “there”.)

    It is because politicians have to much power to tax and regulate. (Wrong word. Should be “too”, not “to”.)

    “Tax breaks for the rich” is not giving money away to the rich. (Subject Verb agreement)

    Get your facts before you criticise next time. (Spelling error – you find it.)

    Living afraid to talk back in real life and takes it out on the internet.
    (Faulty Sentence construction.)

    Unlike Mouse who posts here several times a day hiding other pseudoyms, I haven’t used one in weeks. (Spelling error – you find it.)

    Also, HiFi, you consistently misuse punctuation. Many of your sentences need commas, and there should be no space between the end of a sentence and the punctuation.

  201. Mitch
    March 20, 2011 at 12:22 pm

    In fairness, Auntie, Mr. Finance has always had assistants to handle spelling and grammar. And I might add that those assistants are quite well paid.

    Not to mention that people like Mitch overuse commas painfully.

    Mr. Finance has more important things to attend to right now than blog conversations. He’s off now to develop life saving drugs by investing in his latest stock tip, and to invest in democracy by noting which arms manufacturers will soon be getting refill orders.

  202. tra
    March 20, 2011 at 1:45 pm

    It’s amazing to see how the conversation expanded all the way from “Eureka economics” to global overpopulation and mass extinction events, and then devolved all the way down into a dispute over whether “a” or “an” was the proper word to use in a particular sentence!

    But as long as that’s where we’re at, I’ll point out that sticking in “a” where HiFi used “an” — “… is by no means a extinction of mankind crises” — well, that doesn’t really work either. Of course the sentence could easily be re-written as “…is by no means a crisis that is threatening to bring about the extinction of mankind.”

    (“Nits picked…get yuh nits picked heeyah! Picked nits, a dime a dozen…get yuh picked nits right heeyah!”)

  203. Plain Jane
    March 20, 2011 at 1:52 pm

    HiFi’s actual error was using the plural of crisis. …”not an extinction crisis” is perfectly fine. I mean, how many mankind extinctions can there be?

  204. Intelligent reader
    March 20, 2011 at 2:40 pm

    tra, the conversation devolved to nit picking because HiFi attempted to avoid defending his positions by turning his attention to a typo. As if that alone discredited the statements he was not prepared to debate.

    In the future, I will focus on trying to get HiFi to think and engage in legitimate, intelligent debates. It is a mode of communication that used to be more common, before the era of Rush and FOX.

    But I admit, it will be hard to teach critical thinking skills to such an unwilling student.

  205. Been There
    March 20, 2011 at 4:32 pm

    Thanks to all of you again for banishing team-tyranny, aka High-Liar!

    Interesting how his (sadistic) insults give way so eagerly to (masochistic) flap doodle.

    After he reads about chronic shortages of clean water and contemporary mass-extinction events, maybe he can look up the word “economics” and explain to us what remains “conservative” about its evolution to planned (profitable) obsolescence, and the wasteful and toxic externalities from which this planet’s inhabitants are suffering.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s