<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Income, tax, fairness, redistribution and response</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/</link>
	<description>Think - it ain&#039;t illegal yet...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:38:23 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jeff watson</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57779</link>
		<dc:creator>jeff watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 02:40:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57779</guid>
		<description>Savanster.

I thought I was going to get the last word...That is impossible with a guy like you, as you&#039;re obsessed with being a point prover.
The move up today was short covering in front of the weekend, nothing more. 

I will say this, you aren&#039;t just full of BS, you&#039;re so full of so many different kinds of BS, you&#039;re the one that&#039;s laughable.

The time you waste on this blog.........unbelievable.

Can you even quantify the loss in productivity, or are you bloviating from work, on the taxpayers dime.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Savanster.</p>
<p>I thought I was going to get the last word&#8230;That is impossible with a guy like you, as you&#8217;re obsessed with being a point prover.<br />
The move up today was short covering in front of the weekend, nothing more. </p>
<p>I will say this, you aren&#8217;t just full of BS, you&#8217;re so full of so many different kinds of BS, you&#8217;re the one that&#8217;s laughable.</p>
<p>The time you waste on this blog&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;unbelievable.</p>
<p>Can you even quantify the loss in productivity, or are you bloviating from work, on the taxpayers dime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Savantster</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57772</link>
		<dc:creator>Savantster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 01:59:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57772</guid>
		<description>Jeff, good thing we&#039;re blaming Obama for th e market, it regained almost 3% today.

And you really do have a problem with reading comprehension. I&#039;ve said it before, and I&#039;ll say it again. I have NO interest in making my money in the stock market. That&#039;s as bad as making my money in porn. See, both require the exploitation of people for riches to be made.. and I have more scruples than that.

&quot;Who knows, you might escape your crushing debt, stop the chronic job hopping, and contribute something to society.&quot;

My debt isn&#039;t crushing, but I understand how volitile debt is in this economy where the leeches are around every corner looking to make a buck, not giving a shit if they destroy thousands of families in the process.. MONEY MONEY MONEY!! that&#039;s all you can think about, and all you desire. I pity you. .. but knowing that debt is bad, and knowing I&#039;ve worked hard for a long time to have what I do, I chose to pay off that debt to form some security from my hard work. If you want to fault me for that, that&#039;s on you.

Chronic job hoping? 4 professional positions in 10 years? One for 6 years which I left by choice to deal with family matters (I know, how stupid,  huh? losing money over caring about your family? I must be a real schmuck!), one I had until I made some greedy prick [not unlike you] boss a program he could sell for $1 mil, so he tossed me aside like he&#039;d done dozens of other people that worked for him? .. I know, my fault.. I should have known he would never keep his word, do the right thing. right? I should have not taken that job and just lived in the woods some place. Then I&#039;d not be a &quot;chronic job hopper&quot;. And the only job I&#039;ve had in my profession that was left untimely was one I was driving 45 minutes each way to, and during the winter in Wisconsin on small highways in an economy under the Republicans that had fuel prices over $4.50 a gallon, and working for a company that might be put out of business in months.. what was I doing looking for a better paying job closer to home that offered more security, especially when I was trying to provide a home for my kid? 

Contribute to society? what do YOU contribute, besides sucking the fruits of other people&#039;s hard work off the top for doing pretty much nothing?

And I&#039;ve made plenty of bad decisions. The difference is, when I fuck up it&#039;s my time, my money, my problem. Sounds like you&#039;re fucking up with other people&#039;s money to learn your mistakes.

And my interpersonal skills are fine, as long as I&#039;m not dealing with complete morons. Interestingly, the most ignorant people I&#039;ve ever had to deal with are the right-wing fringe superstitious types.

you&#039;ve proved just about every stereotype there is about &quot;money first&quot; kinds of people. You don&#039;t mind making baseless attacks once you run out of points and facts have backed you in a corner. You brag about your money to people that find that laughable. You think it&#039;s super to shit on the masses for your own gain. You defend companies and policies that are destructive, mostly because you leech of both up and down sides.. 

I can&#039;t one up you. You&#039;re way to far up there in your castle in the sky.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, good thing we&#8217;re blaming Obama for th e market, it regained almost 3% today.</p>
<p>And you really do have a problem with reading comprehension. I&#8217;ve said it before, and I&#8217;ll say it again. I have NO interest in making my money in the stock market. That&#8217;s as bad as making my money in porn. See, both require the exploitation of people for riches to be made.. and I have more scruples than that.</p>
<p>&#8220;Who knows, you might escape your crushing debt, stop the chronic job hopping, and contribute something to society.&#8221;</p>
<p>My debt isn&#8217;t crushing, but I understand how volitile debt is in this economy where the leeches are around every corner looking to make a buck, not giving a shit if they destroy thousands of families in the process.. MONEY MONEY MONEY!! that&#8217;s all you can think about, and all you desire. I pity you. .. but knowing that debt is bad, and knowing I&#8217;ve worked hard for a long time to have what I do, I chose to pay off that debt to form some security from my hard work. If you want to fault me for that, that&#8217;s on you.</p>
<p>Chronic job hoping? 4 professional positions in 10 years? One for 6 years which I left by choice to deal with family matters (I know, how stupid,  huh? losing money over caring about your family? I must be a real schmuck!), one I had until I made some greedy prick [not unlike you] boss a program he could sell for $1 mil, so he tossed me aside like he&#8217;d done dozens of other people that worked for him? .. I know, my fault.. I should have known he would never keep his word, do the right thing. right? I should have not taken that job and just lived in the woods some place. Then I&#8217;d not be a &#8220;chronic job hopper&#8221;. And the only job I&#8217;ve had in my profession that was left untimely was one I was driving 45 minutes each way to, and during the winter in Wisconsin on small highways in an economy under the Republicans that had fuel prices over $4.50 a gallon, and working for a company that might be put out of business in months.. what was I doing looking for a better paying job closer to home that offered more security, especially when I was trying to provide a home for my kid? </p>
<p>Contribute to society? what do YOU contribute, besides sucking the fruits of other people&#8217;s hard work off the top for doing pretty much nothing?</p>
<p>And I&#8217;ve made plenty of bad decisions. The difference is, when I fuck up it&#8217;s my time, my money, my problem. Sounds like you&#8217;re fucking up with other people&#8217;s money to learn your mistakes.</p>
<p>And my interpersonal skills are fine, as long as I&#8217;m not dealing with complete morons. Interestingly, the most ignorant people I&#8217;ve ever had to deal with are the right-wing fringe superstitious types.</p>
<p>you&#8217;ve proved just about every stereotype there is about &#8220;money first&#8221; kinds of people. You don&#8217;t mind making baseless attacks once you run out of points and facts have backed you in a corner. You brag about your money to people that find that laughable. You think it&#8217;s super to shit on the masses for your own gain. You defend companies and policies that are destructive, mostly because you leech of both up and down sides.. </p>
<p>I can&#8217;t one up you. You&#8217;re way to far up there in your castle in the sky.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jeff watson</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57732</link>
		<dc:creator>jeff watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 22:11:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57732</guid>
		<description>Savanster pontificated:
&quot;Keep blaming everything but the source, that will get you far. You’re not only deluded, you’re in denial.&quot;

Hey, I&#039;m in denial, but I&#039;ve had the best money making year in 20 years.  How are you doing in the market.

Brian,

You might want to revisit the effect of presidential elections on the market, especially during the 1800&#039;s.  Nothing changes.  Remember that although the markets perform better under Democrat presidents, the real number is the performance of the market under Republican Congress.  
However, I&#039;m not going to argue markets with y&#039;all, as you&#039;re non professionals, and what&#039;s the use.  I know the causes of declines, embrace them,  and I make a lot of money selling into the declines.  Frankly, I don&#039;t care if the market goes up or down, just so that it moves and I get a crack at the move.

Savanster,  You really have an opinion about everything.  You ought to put your money where your mouth is and step up to the big leagues and try to trade on your vast knowledge of everything under the sun.  Who knows, you might escape your crushing debt, stop the chronic job hopping, and contribute something to society.  Many traders have anti-social tendencies, and you might be a natural, provided that you&#039;re willing to admit you are capable of making a bad decision.

Good luck in the future, and keep your government job....your lack of  interpersonal skills don&#039;t translate very well to the private sector.

That&#039;s my last word.....until you feel the urge to one-up me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Savanster pontificated:<br />
&#8220;Keep blaming everything but the source, that will get you far. You’re not only deluded, you’re in denial.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hey, I&#8217;m in denial, but I&#8217;ve had the best money making year in 20 years.  How are you doing in the market.</p>
<p>Brian,</p>
<p>You might want to revisit the effect of presidential elections on the market, especially during the 1800&#8217;s.  Nothing changes.  Remember that although the markets perform better under Democrat presidents, the real number is the performance of the market under Republican Congress.<br />
However, I&#8217;m not going to argue markets with y&#8217;all, as you&#8217;re non professionals, and what&#8217;s the use.  I know the causes of declines, embrace them,  and I make a lot of money selling into the declines.  Frankly, I don&#8217;t care if the market goes up or down, just so that it moves and I get a crack at the move.</p>
<p>Savanster,  You really have an opinion about everything.  You ought to put your money where your mouth is and step up to the big leagues and try to trade on your vast knowledge of everything under the sun.  Who knows, you might escape your crushing debt, stop the chronic job hopping, and contribute something to society.  Many traders have anti-social tendencies, and you might be a natural, provided that you&#8217;re willing to admit you are capable of making a bad decision.</p>
<p>Good luck in the future, and keep your government job&#8230;.your lack of  interpersonal skills don&#8217;t translate very well to the private sector.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s my last word&#8230;..until you feel the urge to one-up me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Savantster</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57595</link>
		<dc:creator>Savantster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 04:05:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57595</guid>
		<description>Question for ya, Jeff.

On Oct. 27 the S&amp;P was at 848... 56 points below where it is today. What caused that?
On the 10th of Oct. it was at 899.. what caused that drop?
26 Sept. it was at 1200 or so, and has been falling since, until it started bobbling around the mid 800s and lower 900s. All before the election.

Was all of that Obama&#039;s fault, too?

And, if you look at the DOW, it&#039;s been tracking the S&amp;P pretty closely. Saying it&#039;s not a valid estimation of whats going on economically is laughable, and shows your elitism in this matter more than anything. You don&#039;t care to inform, you care to insult and fabricate faux blame.

I think it&#039;s time to let you have your last word. Gawd knows you&#039;re not saying anything worth listening to; might as well walk away from this tread all together.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Question for ya, Jeff.</p>
<p>On Oct. 27 the S&amp;P was at 848&#8230; 56 points below where it is today. What caused that?<br />
On the 10th of Oct. it was at 899.. what caused that drop?<br />
26 Sept. it was at 1200 or so, and has been falling since, until it started bobbling around the mid 800s and lower 900s. All before the election.</p>
<p>Was all of that Obama&#8217;s fault, too?</p>
<p>And, if you look at the DOW, it&#8217;s been tracking the S&amp;P pretty closely. Saying it&#8217;s not a valid estimation of whats going on economically is laughable, and shows your elitism in this matter more than anything. You don&#8217;t care to inform, you care to insult and fabricate faux blame.</p>
<p>I think it&#8217;s time to let you have your last word. Gawd knows you&#8217;re not saying anything worth listening to; might as well walk away from this tread all together.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Angliss</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57594</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Angliss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 04:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57594</guid>
		<description>Jeff, I believe that you, and your fellow traders, believe that.  And I&#039;ll grant you that some of the movement is probably because of the election.  But in 10 years of watching the market&#039;s long-term trends (not daily trends like you, though, I&#039;ll admit), I&#039;ve never seen significant, long-term movement based on the actions of a president.  Markets care more about what the Congress does than what the President, or president-elect, says.  Employment, sales figures, productivity, quarterly growth rates, inflation, interest rate changes by central banks, Treasury yields, subsidies and legislation, and a host of other factors I can&#039;t even remember right now matter far more over the long run than anything a President says or does with one notable exception - war.

You may well be right that the S&amp;P&#039;s fall is partly a result of the election.  Many big businesses are concerned about an Obama presidency.  Financial companies that are getting bailed out are concerned that the bailout money will evaporate.  Energy companies are worried that Obama will successfully push for carbon taxes or trading or will force the EPA to regulate CO2 emissions, or that Obama&#039;s EPA will get serious about New Source Review.  Mineral extraction companies are worried that Obama will push to boost separation fees and will prevent or roll back rules changes that let them ignore the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, etc.  And frankly, they should be concerned about these things.

But every new president that comes into office makes changes that create winners and losers in the market.  New regulations that could drive Xcel Energy or Peabody Energy out of business or off the S&amp;P500 could also create opportunities for smaller companies to move up into the vacated spots.

Frankly, I&#039;m surprised that you&#039;re blaming Obama&#039;s electoral win when it&#039;s actually more likely that the market is responding to Democratic gains in Congress.  They&#039;re linked this time around, but Congress has always had a significant day-to-day impact on markets due to their budgetary and taxation authority, control over subsidies, their ability to approve or reject treaties, and even pork spending to some degree.

Just saying that you and your fellow traders believe that it&#039;s Obama isn&#039;t enough for me, Jeff.  Show me the data, and prove to me that there weren&#039;t other effects like employment and productivity concerns acting at the same time, and then I&#039;ll believe you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, I believe that you, and your fellow traders, believe that.  And I&#8217;ll grant you that some of the movement is probably because of the election.  But in 10 years of watching the market&#8217;s long-term trends (not daily trends like you, though, I&#8217;ll admit), I&#8217;ve never seen significant, long-term movement based on the actions of a president.  Markets care more about what the Congress does than what the President, or president-elect, says.  Employment, sales figures, productivity, quarterly growth rates, inflation, interest rate changes by central banks, Treasury yields, subsidies and legislation, and a host of other factors I can&#8217;t even remember right now matter far more over the long run than anything a President says or does with one notable exception &#8211; war.</p>
<p>You may well be right that the S&amp;P&#8217;s fall is partly a result of the election.  Many big businesses are concerned about an Obama presidency.  Financial companies that are getting bailed out are concerned that the bailout money will evaporate.  Energy companies are worried that Obama will successfully push for carbon taxes or trading or will force the EPA to regulate CO2 emissions, or that Obama&#8217;s EPA will get serious about New Source Review.  Mineral extraction companies are worried that Obama will push to boost separation fees and will prevent or roll back rules changes that let them ignore the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, etc.  And frankly, they should be concerned about these things.</p>
<p>But every new president that comes into office makes changes that create winners and losers in the market.  New regulations that could drive Xcel Energy or Peabody Energy out of business or off the S&#038;P500 could also create opportunities for smaller companies to move up into the vacated spots.</p>
<p>Frankly, I&#8217;m surprised that you&#8217;re blaming Obama&#8217;s electoral win when it&#8217;s actually more likely that the market is responding to Democratic gains in Congress.  They&#8217;re linked this time around, but Congress has always had a significant day-to-day impact on markets due to their budgetary and taxation authority, control over subsidies, their ability to approve or reject treaties, and even pork spending to some degree.</p>
<p>Just saying that you and your fellow traders believe that it&#8217;s Obama isn&#8217;t enough for me, Jeff.  Show me the data, and prove to me that there weren&#8217;t other effects like employment and productivity concerns acting at the same time, and then I&#8217;ll believe you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Savantster</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57591</link>
		<dc:creator>Savantster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57591</guid>
		<description>Keep blaming everything but the source, that will get you far. You&#039;re not only deluded, you&#039;re in denial.

&quot;Savanser (sic), you can cite every statistic in the world, and it will be a waste of time because you will never make money trading.&quot;

I have no interest in &quot;trading&quot;, or the market, or any other fabrication/bastardization created by the ruling elite to bring wealth to themselves. I&#039;m well beyond lying and manipulating to get money, and you&#039;re right.. I&#039;ll never be rich because of that. I pointed that out before, and you pretended like being a greedy selfish abusive prick wasn&#039;t required. You&#039;re wrong, but that&#039;s ok.

And you&#039;re right. I can cite reality all day long, and it won&#039;t matter to you because you have on thing on your mind. Making money. That&#039;s pretty sad, and I pity you.

I&#039;d be interested to hear what kind of logical reasoning goes into the assertion that it&#039;s &quot;because of Obama&quot;. You keep saying it, but have yet to offer one logical, sound, reality based reason for it. .... not to worry, I&#039;ll not hold my breath for anything sounding like sanity from you on the topic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep blaming everything but the source, that will get you far. You&#8217;re not only deluded, you&#8217;re in denial.</p>
<p>&#8220;Savanser (sic), you can cite every statistic in the world, and it will be a waste of time because you will never make money trading.&#8221;</p>
<p>I have no interest in &#8220;trading&#8221;, or the market, or any other fabrication/bastardization created by the ruling elite to bring wealth to themselves. I&#8217;m well beyond lying and manipulating to get money, and you&#8217;re right.. I&#8217;ll never be rich because of that. I pointed that out before, and you pretended like being a greedy selfish abusive prick wasn&#8217;t required. You&#8217;re wrong, but that&#8217;s ok.</p>
<p>And you&#8217;re right. I can cite reality all day long, and it won&#8217;t matter to you because you have on thing on your mind. Making money. That&#8217;s pretty sad, and I pity you.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d be interested to hear what kind of logical reasoning goes into the assertion that it&#8217;s &#8220;because of Obama&#8221;. You keep saying it, but have yet to offer one logical, sound, reality based reason for it. &#8230;. not to worry, I&#8217;ll not hold my breath for anything sounding like sanity from you on the topic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jeff watson</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57589</link>
		<dc:creator>jeff watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:30:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57589</guid>
		<description>Savanster;  Your quoting the dow is as an example of your market ignorance.  Market professionals use the S&amp;P as the benchmark.  I don&#039;t need a lecture from you on the how&#039;s and why&#039;s the market moves, because I&#039;m in the middle of those moves all day long.  Don&#039;t take second hand info from CNBC, WSJ,BLOOMBERG and try to get pertinent info, because it doesn&#039;t happen.  Everything happens across traders desks, and for the past two days, the Obama effect has been the prime mover.....remember, we&#039;re coming off a rally.  Savanser, you can cite every statistic in the world, and it will be a waste of time because you will never make money trading.  Probably would be a good time for you to find a new hobby like ornithology.  Here&#039;s a good deal, you stop pontificating about something that you know less than zero, the economic system and markets, and I won&#039;t talk about ornithology,  

Jeff

Brian,

Right now at this very minute, I&#039;m staring at 12 screens of real time data. The data is moving because of two main forces right now.  The big rate cut in England and Obama&#039;s election. I talk to traders all day and that&#039;s what everyone is talking about.  Things don&#039;t look good for equities right now, and I&#039;d give Obama 90% of the last 10% drop in the S%P.  Adding it up, about a trillion dollars erased because of Obama.

Jeff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Savanster;  Your quoting the dow is as an example of your market ignorance.  Market professionals use the S&amp;P as the benchmark.  I don&#8217;t need a lecture from you on the how&#8217;s and why&#8217;s the market moves, because I&#8217;m in the middle of those moves all day long.  Don&#8217;t take second hand info from CNBC, WSJ,BLOOMBERG and try to get pertinent info, because it doesn&#8217;t happen.  Everything happens across traders desks, and for the past two days, the Obama effect has been the prime mover&#8230;..remember, we&#8217;re coming off a rally.  Savanser, you can cite every statistic in the world, and it will be a waste of time because you will never make money trading.  Probably would be a good time for you to find a new hobby like ornithology.  Here&#8217;s a good deal, you stop pontificating about something that you know less than zero, the economic system and markets, and I won&#8217;t talk about ornithology,  </p>
<p>Jeff</p>
<p>Brian,</p>
<p>Right now at this very minute, I&#8217;m staring at 12 screens of real time data. The data is moving because of two main forces right now.  The big rate cut in England and Obama&#8217;s election. I talk to traders all day and that&#8217;s what everyone is talking about.  Things don&#8217;t look good for equities right now, and I&#8217;d give Obama 90% of the last 10% drop in the S%P.  Adding it up, about a trillion dollars erased because of Obama.</p>
<p>Jeff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Angliss</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57588</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Angliss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:06:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57588</guid>
		<description>Just because the market falls doesn&#039;t mean that it&#039;s because of the election, Jeff, as you of all people should know.

Just as an example, the price of oil fell the day after Bush eliminated the executive ban on drilling in the OCS - but if it had been Bush&#039;s comments that made the price of oil fall, how come oil opened flat that day and didn&#039;t fall until after 11 AM EST?  Maybe it&#039;s because Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke was testifying before Congress at 11 AM and said that he expected oil demand to fall as a result of high oil prices.

There are LOTS of things that drive the markets around.  The fact that the Bureau of Labor and Statistics saw manufacturing productivity fall for the second straight quarter and released that data today probably had something to do it.  So too does an expectation of bad news in tomorrow&#039;s unemployment figures, and the weakest October retail sales performance since Goldman Sachs started tracking performance in 1969 probably didn&#039;t help either.

I don&#039;t doubt that the election had some impact on stocks.  But the overall economy has a far, far greater impact than any election does.

For comparison, the day after the 2000 election, the Dow dropped 120 points.  The day after Bush II was reelected, it rose about 70.  It rose about 100 points after Clinton was reelected in 1996 and fell about 160 points after Clinton was elected the first time.  There was almost no change at all after Bush I was elected, or after Reagan was elected and reelected.  If anything, this suggests that the markets fall on transitions from one president to another, not because of a transition from a Republican to a Democrat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just because the market falls doesn&#8217;t mean that it&#8217;s because of the election, Jeff, as you of all people should know.</p>
<p>Just as an example, the price of oil fell the day after Bush eliminated the executive ban on drilling in the OCS &#8211; but if it had been Bush&#8217;s comments that made the price of oil fall, how come oil opened flat that day and didn&#8217;t fall until after 11 AM EST?  Maybe it&#8217;s because Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke was testifying before Congress at 11 AM and said that he expected oil demand to fall as a result of high oil prices.</p>
<p>There are LOTS of things that drive the markets around.  The fact that the Bureau of Labor and Statistics saw manufacturing productivity fall for the second straight quarter and released that data today probably had something to do it.  So too does an expectation of bad news in tomorrow&#8217;s unemployment figures, and the weakest October retail sales performance since Goldman Sachs started tracking performance in 1969 probably didn&#8217;t help either.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t doubt that the election had some impact on stocks.  But the overall economy has a far, far greater impact than any election does.</p>
<p>For comparison, the day after the 2000 election, the Dow dropped 120 points.  The day after Bush II was reelected, it rose about 70.  It rose about 100 points after Clinton was reelected in 1996 and fell about 160 points after Clinton was elected the first time.  There was almost no change at all after Bush I was elected, or after Reagan was elected and reelected.  If anything, this suggests that the markets fall on transitions from one president to another, not because of a transition from a Republican to a Democrat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Savantster</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57583</link>
		<dc:creator>Savantster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 02:48:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57583</guid>
		<description>Oh, and did we forget to mention that this current mess, this 40% drop in overall market value, this recession, this global calamity happened under a Republican White House and majorities in the Senate and House? The deregulation that allowed the crooks and liars to cook the books without oversight was passed by the right-wing? The &quot;free marketers&quot; who don&#039;t have the sense to understand that corrupt people might commit crimes and/or do bad things  if not watched?

It&#039;s simply amazing to me just how deluded you have to be to blame Obama for this crisis and he&#039;s not even in office yet. I bet you&#039;re already signed up on several of the &quot;Impeach Obama&quot; facebook sites, aren&#039;t you, Jeff. The Shrub can lie us into an illegal TRILLION dollar war and kill over a million people, but you&#039;re already trying to pin the Shrub and the right-wing Congress&#039; failures on those &quot;evil socialist Dems!&quot;..

pathetic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, and did we forget to mention that this current mess, this 40% drop in overall market value, this recession, this global calamity happened under a Republican White House and majorities in the Senate and House? The deregulation that allowed the crooks and liars to cook the books without oversight was passed by the right-wing? The &#8220;free marketers&#8221; who don&#8217;t have the sense to understand that corrupt people might commit crimes and/or do bad things  if not watched?</p>
<p>It&#8217;s simply amazing to me just how deluded you have to be to blame Obama for this crisis and he&#8217;s not even in office yet. I bet you&#8217;re already signed up on several of the &#8220;Impeach Obama&#8221; facebook sites, aren&#8217;t you, Jeff. The Shrub can lie us into an illegal TRILLION dollar war and kill over a million people, but you&#8217;re already trying to pin the Shrub and the right-wing Congress&#8217; failures on those &#8220;evil socialist Dems!&#8221;..</p>
<p>pathetic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Savantster</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57581</link>
		<dc:creator>Savantster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 02:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57581</guid>
		<description>Jeff

The market uses the government figures you&#039;re claiming don&#039;t hold weight. The U3 is what everyone accepts as the &quot;unemployment rate&quot;. It&#039;s based strictly on the people of working age, the &quot;work force&quot;. You trying to distort and distract by including &quot;kids and babies&quot; is pretty ridiculous and sleazy.

As for the Stock Market in turmoil.. It&#039;s lost 40% over the past year, long before the election. In fact, it crashed because of how Republicans view the Market.. that is, they figured crooks and liars would never do anything nefarious. Turns out they were wrong.

So, the market (DOW) spiked down to a low of 7773 not all that long ago, and it&#039;s volatility has had it bouncing up 500 to 700 a day on occasion, and falling that much on other days as well. The DOW closed today at 8695, so we&#039;re still 900 points OVER what the recent historic low was BEFORE the election. Your allegation that the market is some how unstable or &quot;falling&quot; because of Obama is not rooted in REALITY. In fact, we&#039;ve shown over and over that your economic predispositions aren&#039;t reality based, but that doesn&#039;t stop you from making laughable assertions.

And I stand behind my LOGICAL and REASONABLE assertion that REAL unemployment (defined as &quot;people of typical working age that would like a job but can not find a job&quot;) is close to 12% based on reported statistics from the agencies that reports such things. Just because it wasn&#039;t spoon fed to you doesn&#039;t mean it&#039;s not real. And if you need everything spoon fed to you, it would explain a lot about where you get your misguided, incorrect, and counterproductive (from an overall bettering of the world standpoint) opinions from.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff</p>
<p>The market uses the government figures you&#8217;re claiming don&#8217;t hold weight. The U3 is what everyone accepts as the &#8220;unemployment rate&#8221;. It&#8217;s based strictly on the people of working age, the &#8220;work force&#8221;. You trying to distort and distract by including &#8220;kids and babies&#8221; is pretty ridiculous and sleazy.</p>
<p>As for the Stock Market in turmoil.. It&#8217;s lost 40% over the past year, long before the election. In fact, it crashed because of how Republicans view the Market.. that is, they figured crooks and liars would never do anything nefarious. Turns out they were wrong.</p>
<p>So, the market (DOW) spiked down to a low of 7773 not all that long ago, and it&#8217;s volatility has had it bouncing up 500 to 700 a day on occasion, and falling that much on other days as well. The DOW closed today at 8695, so we&#8217;re still 900 points OVER what the recent historic low was BEFORE the election. Your allegation that the market is some how unstable or &#8220;falling&#8221; because of Obama is not rooted in REALITY. In fact, we&#8217;ve shown over and over that your economic predispositions aren&#8217;t reality based, but that doesn&#8217;t stop you from making laughable assertions.</p>
<p>And I stand behind my LOGICAL and REASONABLE assertion that REAL unemployment (defined as &#8220;people of typical working age that would like a job but can not find a job&#8221;) is close to 12% based on reported statistics from the agencies that reports such things. Just because it wasn&#8217;t spoon fed to you doesn&#8217;t mean it&#8217;s not real. And if you need everything spoon fed to you, it would explain a lot about where you get your misguided, incorrect, and counterproductive (from an overall bettering of the world standpoint) opinions from.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jeff watson</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57551</link>
		<dc:creator>jeff watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:16:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57551</guid>
		<description>Freedom,

Then you should arbitrarily make unemployment around 50% because of all the babies, kids, and senior citizens.  Then you should add the people that work for the government and agencies, as they are paid by our tax dollars. Therefore, probably only 20% of us actually work as the result of profits.

You can spin whatever you want, but I&#039;ll stick with the official figures that the market watches, and they&#039;re nowhere near 12%.  Give it a few years with the new administration, and 12% will seem low. 

The S&amp;P has gone down 10% since Obama&#039;s election. The market has never had such a violent reaction to an election in the history of the country.

Jeff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Freedom,</p>
<p>Then you should arbitrarily make unemployment around 50% because of all the babies, kids, and senior citizens.  Then you should add the people that work for the government and agencies, as they are paid by our tax dollars. Therefore, probably only 20% of us actually work as the result of profits.</p>
<p>You can spin whatever you want, but I&#8217;ll stick with the official figures that the market watches, and they&#8217;re nowhere near 12%.  Give it a few years with the new administration, and 12% will seem low. </p>
<p>The S&amp;P has gone down 10% since Obama&#8217;s election. The market has never had such a violent reaction to an election in the history of the country.</p>
<p>Jeff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Freedem</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57496</link>
		<dc:creator>Freedem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:27:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57496</guid>
		<description>Btw I don&#039;t spend $6.00 for the quarter or 1/8 lbs of seed to sprout. I bought some once and tossed them in the ground to grow. Some are growing but it will be several months before I can think it a success (I saved most for spring as well). What I do buy from the  grocery are lentils and from the local Chinese store Adzuki and Mung beans all for a dollar a pound or less.

The Chinese grocery also has dried shallots that I use in most cooking, but more important they come in plastic jars that are perfect for sprouting, I drill a batch of holes in the plastic lids smaller than the seed and have a foam cylinder around the hose head that seals against the lid making it easy to run a lot of water through the jar and then letting it drain.

In the summer twice a day would allow rot to set in so I wash them 3-5 times a day, but they will sprout full out in three days where now they take a week. At the moment that is the only thing making a reliable dent in the food budget by adding low cost bulk that is not all starch. and yes the volume from dried bean to sprout is over 20 fold and perhaps 10 in weight..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Btw I don&#8217;t spend $6.00 for the quarter or 1/8 lbs of seed to sprout. I bought some once and tossed them in the ground to grow. Some are growing but it will be several months before I can think it a success (I saved most for spring as well). What I do buy from the  grocery are lentils and from the local Chinese store Adzuki and Mung beans all for a dollar a pound or less.</p>
<p>The Chinese grocery also has dried shallots that I use in most cooking, but more important they come in plastic jars that are perfect for sprouting, I drill a batch of holes in the plastic lids smaller than the seed and have a foam cylinder around the hose head that seals against the lid making it easy to run a lot of water through the jar and then letting it drain.</p>
<p>In the summer twice a day would allow rot to set in so I wash them 3-5 times a day, but they will sprout full out in three days where now they take a week. At the moment that is the only thing making a reliable dent in the food budget by adding low cost bulk that is not all starch. and yes the volume from dried bean to sprout is over 20 fold and perhaps 10 in weight..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Freedem</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57448</link>
		<dc:creator>Freedem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:37:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57448</guid>
		<description>I actually have been growing as much of my food as I am able, but it is neither cost or labor effective as yet. The winged beans have been the most successful, and at the height of the season I get 5-8 bean pods a day for a couple of weeks

I have Lychees, longans, bananas, peaches, pear, sapote, and plums. The peach had a dozen fruit and died, the banana fruits every few years, and the Longan actually had two grocery bags of fruit one year and then rested.  Similarly the plum manages 1 to 8 fruit a year, The lychee, pear and sapote flower occasionally but there is not yet a fruit. There is also a mulberry that has enough fruit to graze for a couple weeks a year. A Natal Plum also kicks out a fruit now and again.

Cashew, Macadamia, dragonfruit, cinnamon, and Jabodacaba.are all too young yet to disappoint, but I might not live long enough to enjoy them. The allspice is doing well , but is male, and the one that the salesman swore was female has never flowered. I still use the leaves in soups , stews etc like bay leaves, but they are not edible beyond that.

I have a lot of herbs, though many types I cannot keep alive. Only Basil, Culantro, chives, and parsley are reliable enough to garnish every meal I would care to use them on for most of the year, and Ginger, Galanga, and Turmeric give a reliable annual crop but there is just so much to do with them.

If you add up what looks like a large number of plants, you can see that while there are treats and garnish in fair amount none of it is enough to make a dent in a food budget, and is not even a net positive cash flow, as I have to buy starter plants, potting soil etc and If I did not attend them for a week most would die. 

A highly knowledgeable subsistence farmer might survive on an acre or two, as many around the world do, with full time backbreaking labor, but despite my large 1/3 acre I am neither young enough, or knowledgeable enough to do that. While there are urban situations where folk have their act together enough to make a dent in their food bills, the idea that one is not at the mercy of their Supermarket chain, energy company, ISP, etc is for the most part totally bogus, and especially so if they are not already financially successful enough to even start to think about such things.

Meanwhile the local Supermarket chain bought off their competition and doubled the cost of what I am able to buy (4-10 times for what I am not) and the quality has nose dived. And on the energy front for $5 worth of natural gas there is $2.50 in taxes but a $10 fee for sending the bill and a $5 fee for paying it and a $60 fee if you are late. If the NGO taxes are not beyond outrageous I do not know what is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually have been growing as much of my food as I am able, but it is neither cost or labor effective as yet. The winged beans have been the most successful, and at the height of the season I get 5-8 bean pods a day for a couple of weeks</p>
<p>I have Lychees, longans, bananas, peaches, pear, sapote, and plums. The peach had a dozen fruit and died, the banana fruits every few years, and the Longan actually had two grocery bags of fruit one year and then rested.  Similarly the plum manages 1 to 8 fruit a year, The lychee, pear and sapote flower occasionally but there is not yet a fruit. There is also a mulberry that has enough fruit to graze for a couple weeks a year. A Natal Plum also kicks out a fruit now and again.</p>
<p>Cashew, Macadamia, dragonfruit, cinnamon, and Jabodacaba.are all too young yet to disappoint, but I might not live long enough to enjoy them. The allspice is doing well , but is male, and the one that the salesman swore was female has never flowered. I still use the leaves in soups , stews etc like bay leaves, but they are not edible beyond that.</p>
<p>I have a lot of herbs, though many types I cannot keep alive. Only Basil, Culantro, chives, and parsley are reliable enough to garnish every meal I would care to use them on for most of the year, and Ginger, Galanga, and Turmeric give a reliable annual crop but there is just so much to do with them.</p>
<p>If you add up what looks like a large number of plants, you can see that while there are treats and garnish in fair amount none of it is enough to make a dent in a food budget, and is not even a net positive cash flow, as I have to buy starter plants, potting soil etc and If I did not attend them for a week most would die. </p>
<p>A highly knowledgeable subsistence farmer might survive on an acre or two, as many around the world do, with full time backbreaking labor, but despite my large 1/3 acre I am neither young enough, or knowledgeable enough to do that. While there are urban situations where folk have their act together enough to make a dent in their food bills, the idea that one is not at the mercy of their Supermarket chain, energy company, ISP, etc is for the most part totally bogus, and especially so if they are not already financially successful enough to even start to think about such things.</p>
<p>Meanwhile the local Supermarket chain bought off their competition and doubled the cost of what I am able to buy (4-10 times for what I am not) and the quality has nose dived. And on the energy front for $5 worth of natural gas there is $2.50 in taxes but a $10 fee for sending the bill and a $5 fee for paying it and a $60 fee if you are late. If the NGO taxes are not beyond outrageous I do not know what is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Savantster</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57386</link>
		<dc:creator>Savantster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 02:18:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57386</guid>
		<description>Lex

I&#039;m glad to hear you enjoy growing your own food. That&#039;s not something I would enjoy at all. I tried growing Bonsai trees, from seed, about 12 varieties (tropical almond, balboa, ginkobaloba, star fruit, dragon&#039;s blood, several others). All I had to do was water them twice a week.. I had (have) grow lights set up for them on custom wood frames in a spare bedroom I had. I got to forgetting about them every now and again, and pretty soon I only had about 4 specimens left.

Could I manage to keep plants watered if my life depends on it? sure.. but, again, it&#039;s just not my thing. Couple that with a distinct lack of room at this house (unless I dispose of something.. my kid&#039;s room, my bedroom, my office that is shared by both me and my kid, my living room, or try to get it all set up in the basement, which kind of floods a little when it rains hard, and was under 5&#039; of water this summer when the river broke).

I also understand the drive for some to get involved with community gardens and the like. That&#039;s not for me either.

I like the conveniences of modern life. I understand that we have associated costs that go with that. The issue for me is, a lot of the costs we _have_ are costs we don&#039;t have to have if we would demand companies do business differently. Again, the government is supposed to be protecting us from those profiting if that means hurting in the process. The government is supposed to vet various chemicals and compounds to make SURE they are not a threat. But the system is broken, and it seems people that want to fix it are derided by those that benefit from it being broken.

And when talking about food, you&#039;re talking about a small subset of what exists in modern society that comes from corporations. Your sprouting seeds come from a company, I&#039;m guessing. I know your bread maker does..as do the jars you use for canning. At SOME point, we have precious little choice but to interact with companies simply to have the things we do in modern society. .. like grow lights and timers (unless you use the switch by hand, but that switch was made in a factory, as was the heating vent you get to close in that room.. the vent that has air blown to it from a furnace that was built in a factory).

I grant you that people doing small things can make them feel better, but you will never get enough people doing enough small things to make a huge impact, nor will that remove the need for companies and factories in modern society. The next thing in line of things to do, from what I see, is to try and fix what amounts to the next point of failure. Companies and corporations. Clearly, those running the companies and corporations don&#039;t want to do anything just like &quot;most people&quot; aren&#039;t wanting to do those things you point out.

The difference is, we have a right and vehicle to make demands of companies, to force them to do the right thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lex</p>
<p>I&#8217;m glad to hear you enjoy growing your own food. That&#8217;s not something I would enjoy at all. I tried growing Bonsai trees, from seed, about 12 varieties (tropical almond, balboa, ginkobaloba, star fruit, dragon&#8217;s blood, several others). All I had to do was water them twice a week.. I had (have) grow lights set up for them on custom wood frames in a spare bedroom I had. I got to forgetting about them every now and again, and pretty soon I only had about 4 specimens left.</p>
<p>Could I manage to keep plants watered if my life depends on it? sure.. but, again, it&#8217;s just not my thing. Couple that with a distinct lack of room at this house (unless I dispose of something.. my kid&#8217;s room, my bedroom, my office that is shared by both me and my kid, my living room, or try to get it all set up in the basement, which kind of floods a little when it rains hard, and was under 5&#8242; of water this summer when the river broke).</p>
<p>I also understand the drive for some to get involved with community gardens and the like. That&#8217;s not for me either.</p>
<p>I like the conveniences of modern life. I understand that we have associated costs that go with that. The issue for me is, a lot of the costs we _have_ are costs we don&#8217;t have to have if we would demand companies do business differently. Again, the government is supposed to be protecting us from those profiting if that means hurting in the process. The government is supposed to vet various chemicals and compounds to make SURE they are not a threat. But the system is broken, and it seems people that want to fix it are derided by those that benefit from it being broken.</p>
<p>And when talking about food, you&#8217;re talking about a small subset of what exists in modern society that comes from corporations. Your sprouting seeds come from a company, I&#8217;m guessing. I know your bread maker does..as do the jars you use for canning. At SOME point, we have precious little choice but to interact with companies simply to have the things we do in modern society. .. like grow lights and timers (unless you use the switch by hand, but that switch was made in a factory, as was the heating vent you get to close in that room.. the vent that has air blown to it from a furnace that was built in a factory).</p>
<p>I grant you that people doing small things can make them feel better, but you will never get enough people doing enough small things to make a huge impact, nor will that remove the need for companies and factories in modern society. The next thing in line of things to do, from what I see, is to try and fix what amounts to the next point of failure. Companies and corporations. Clearly, those running the companies and corporations don&#8217;t want to do anything just like &#8220;most people&#8221; aren&#8217;t wanting to do those things you point out.</p>
<p>The difference is, we have a right and vehicle to make demands of companies, to force them to do the right thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Freedem</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57383</link>
		<dc:creator>Freedem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:55:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57383</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
jeff watson, November 5, 2008 at 4:22 pm : 
Savanster said:
“Oh, and never mind the near 12% unemployment we have now”

Could you give an accurate source for that figure. It doesn’t jibe with any unemployment figures in this country, and I’m a student of unemployment and productivity figures.
.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

As a student of unemployment figures you should be aware of&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;  the BLS data they call U-1 to U-6&lt;/a&gt;U-3 is the official unemployment data and U-6 includes a lot more but still misses folks in jail, &quot;retired&quot;, Military, under 18 teens, and many others not in the work force often counted in other countries, or other times in this one. But in any case U-6 is still at almost double U-3 and certainly a measure of those hurting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>
jeff watson, November 5, 2008 at 4:22 pm :<br />
Savanster said:<br />
“Oh, and never mind the near 12% unemployment we have now”</p>
<p>Could you give an accurate source for that figure. It doesn’t jibe with any unemployment figures in this country, and I’m a student of unemployment and productivity figures.<br />
.</p></blockquote>
<p>As a student of unemployment figures you should be aware of<a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm" rel="nofollow">  the BLS data they call U-1 to U-6</a>U-3 is the official unemployment data and U-6 includes a lot more but still misses folks in jail, &#8220;retired&#8221;, Military, under 18 teens, and many others not in the work force often counted in other countries, or other times in this one. But in any case U-6 is still at almost double U-3 and certainly a measure of those hurting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lex</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57381</link>
		<dc:creator>Lex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:28:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57381</guid>
		<description>So if i understand correctly, growing one&#039;s own food is &quot;regressing&quot;. Yet buying the processed packaged food of modern convenience and agriculture is is terrible too. In other words, somebody fix this mess for us...but fix it as we want it fixed.

Growing one&#039;s own food is hardly regressing...it is freedom at its highest form. And it is only a terrible toil if you&#039;re not good at it. It is hard work, but would you rather work hard for yourself or hard for someone else? And while one might end up &quot;wasting&quot; a weekend in late summer to put up tomatoes for the winter, that means all sorts of time during the winter when one doesn&#039;t have to waste time buying a jar of spaghetti sauce or read the label to find out what kind of food chemicals are in it. And it is a lot, lot cheaper.

And it hardly means withdrawing from society. It can, i suppose, but it certainly doesn&#039;t have to mean that. When my friend decides that the days of the chickens have come to an end, he invites a fair number of people over for the day. Everybody spends all day slaughtering, gutting, plucking, etc the 300 chickens in an act of community. There&#039;s a big dinner at the end...though generally not chicken. And all who helped out  get to take home some chickens.

Getting involved in a community garden will put food on the table in return for a few hours/week working the garden with friends and neighbors. Hardly seems like withdrawing from society to me.

And there are many ways to make a dent in a food budget or just get off a grid or two for the fun of it. After the convenience purchase of a breadmaker, i can eat better than bakery bread for like $1/loaf and it requires something like 15 minutes of my precious time to do the prep work. 

A $6 bag of sprouting seeds(1 lb)goes a long way when less than 2 Tbls fill up a big Mason jar with fresh nutrition for the whopping time investment of rinsing the sprouts twice per day.

At $.07/Kw, a 250W horticultural lamp costs about $10/month to operate running 16 hours per day (more than you really need). That lamp will illuminate a 3&#039;x3&#039; area with primary lighting and an extra foot all around with a lower level. Give the outside foot to lower light plants like greens and the interior to tomatoes, peppers and even cucumbers. Once the learning curve is taken care of, a set up like that requires probably 15 min/day...not counting picking fresh food to eat. If you&#039;re good, you can bring lettuce from seed to harvest in 16 days and tomatoes in under 50 - and they&#039;ll produce heavily for several months - which means you may find yourself giving food away to friends and neighbors. (And you&#039;ll be able to close the heat register to the room with the lamp in it.)

Even at grocery store prices you&#039;ll come out ahead. And that&#039;s not a fair comparison. The comparison should be to purchase high-end organic produce from your local food co-op, and even that doesn&#039;t compare because the stuff from home is actually fresh. Then there&#039;s the intangible benefit of having a place to read a book that smells like spring, is bathed in oxygen, and has light that will chase SAD away in no time.

It&#039;s not about withdrawing, it&#039;s about being conscious and conscientious. It is all about finding pleasure in the small things, and i can tell you that biting into a tomato that tastes like August in the depths of February is not really a small thing.

but that&#039;s just me. I can afford to buy my food from the grocery store, i just prefer to grow it because i prefer to know what goes into it and on it...because i prefer that some poor Mexican isn&#039;t slaving away for pennies to feed me...because i prefer to not use a shit ton of energy to grow, transport and store food that i can do better for less environmental cost...because i prefer not to be dependent on other people.

Other people may prefer different things, so be it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So if i understand correctly, growing one&#8217;s own food is &#8220;regressing&#8221;. Yet buying the processed packaged food of modern convenience and agriculture is is terrible too. In other words, somebody fix this mess for us&#8230;but fix it as we want it fixed.</p>
<p>Growing one&#8217;s own food is hardly regressing&#8230;it is freedom at its highest form. And it is only a terrible toil if you&#8217;re not good at it. It is hard work, but would you rather work hard for yourself or hard for someone else? And while one might end up &#8220;wasting&#8221; a weekend in late summer to put up tomatoes for the winter, that means all sorts of time during the winter when one doesn&#8217;t have to waste time buying a jar of spaghetti sauce or read the label to find out what kind of food chemicals are in it. And it is a lot, lot cheaper.</p>
<p>And it hardly means withdrawing from society. It can, i suppose, but it certainly doesn&#8217;t have to mean that. When my friend decides that the days of the chickens have come to an end, he invites a fair number of people over for the day. Everybody spends all day slaughtering, gutting, plucking, etc the 300 chickens in an act of community. There&#8217;s a big dinner at the end&#8230;though generally not chicken. And all who helped out  get to take home some chickens.</p>
<p>Getting involved in a community garden will put food on the table in return for a few hours/week working the garden with friends and neighbors. Hardly seems like withdrawing from society to me.</p>
<p>And there are many ways to make a dent in a food budget or just get off a grid or two for the fun of it. After the convenience purchase of a breadmaker, i can eat better than bakery bread for like $1/loaf and it requires something like 15 minutes of my precious time to do the prep work. </p>
<p>A $6 bag of sprouting seeds(1 lb)goes a long way when less than 2 Tbls fill up a big Mason jar with fresh nutrition for the whopping time investment of rinsing the sprouts twice per day.</p>
<p>At $.07/Kw, a 250W horticultural lamp costs about $10/month to operate running 16 hours per day (more than you really need). That lamp will illuminate a 3&#8242;x3&#8242; area with primary lighting and an extra foot all around with a lower level. Give the outside foot to lower light plants like greens and the interior to tomatoes, peppers and even cucumbers. Once the learning curve is taken care of, a set up like that requires probably 15 min/day&#8230;not counting picking fresh food to eat. If you&#8217;re good, you can bring lettuce from seed to harvest in 16 days and tomatoes in under 50 &#8211; and they&#8217;ll produce heavily for several months &#8211; which means you may find yourself giving food away to friends and neighbors. (And you&#8217;ll be able to close the heat register to the room with the lamp in it.)</p>
<p>Even at grocery store prices you&#8217;ll come out ahead. And that&#8217;s not a fair comparison. The comparison should be to purchase high-end organic produce from your local food co-op, and even that doesn&#8217;t compare because the stuff from home is actually fresh. Then there&#8217;s the intangible benefit of having a place to read a book that smells like spring, is bathed in oxygen, and has light that will chase SAD away in no time.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not about withdrawing, it&#8217;s about being conscious and conscientious. It is all about finding pleasure in the small things, and i can tell you that biting into a tomato that tastes like August in the depths of February is not really a small thing.</p>
<p>but that&#8217;s just me. I can afford to buy my food from the grocery store, i just prefer to grow it because i prefer to know what goes into it and on it&#8230;because i prefer that some poor Mexican isn&#8217;t slaving away for pennies to feed me&#8230;because i prefer to not use a shit ton of energy to grow, transport and store food that i can do better for less environmental cost&#8230;because i prefer not to be dependent on other people.</p>
<p>Other people may prefer different things, so be it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Savantster</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-2/#comment-57371</link>
		<dc:creator>Savantster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:45:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57371</guid>
		<description>Jeff, you should watch &quot;Wal-Mart, the high cost of low prices&quot;.

I&#039;m not the only one that sees how many many many people must suffer so the corporation can prosper. Allowing that kind of thing to survive in America is a slap in the face to all those people who would love to go to work for a small American business, but can&#039;t because the mega-corps are allowed to shit on us while becoming enriched by globalization.

Oh, and watch &quot;The Corporation&quot; and tell me what you think when the CEO says that &quot;he&#039;s not responsible for the decisions he makes for the company, he&#039;s acting as the company, not a person&quot;.. when confronted with the fallout from the company&#039;s actions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, you should watch &#8220;Wal-Mart, the high cost of low prices&#8221;.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not the only one that sees how many many many people must suffer so the corporation can prosper. Allowing that kind of thing to survive in America is a slap in the face to all those people who would love to go to work for a small American business, but can&#8217;t because the mega-corps are allowed to shit on us while becoming enriched by globalization.</p>
<p>Oh, and watch &#8220;The Corporation&#8221; and tell me what you think when the CEO says that &#8220;he&#8217;s not responsible for the decisions he makes for the company, he&#8217;s acting as the company, not a person&#8221;.. when confronted with the fallout from the company&#8217;s actions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Savantster</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-1/#comment-57370</link>
		<dc:creator>Savantster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:41:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57370</guid>
		<description>Sure, I can give you an accurate source. The news.

When the stimulus packages were being handed out this past summer, unemployment was being listed at 5.9%. I read an article (can&#039;t find it now) that said the unemployment extension that was part of the stimulus package added another 4.1% (it was worded something like .. the extension of benefits accounts for an unemployment rate of 4.1% on it&#039;s own, or some such..) The numbers who had fallen off the back of the normal 26 week unemployment rolls (5.9%) but became eligible for the extension under the stimulus was &quot;another&quot; 4.1%. Adding 5.9% and another 4.1% and you have 10%.

The unemployment numbers that are published are those on the rolls. Once you fall off the back (i.e. no job but not receiving benefits), you&#039;re no longer reported in the unemployment rates.

So, if in June or July when that was in effect we had &quot;real&quot; unemployment of at least 10%, and we&#039;ve lost hundreds of thousands of jobs a month since then and reported unemployment is still at 6.1%, I have to figure the &quot;we&#039;ll just not report those since we can&#039;t be sure they don&#039;t have jobs&quot; unemployment rate is closer to 12%. 

I get the 12% from starting at 10% as what looked like &quot;real&quot; unemployment (defined as those wanting jobs but not being able to get them).. then reading an article that said we lost 160,000 jobs for the month, but unemployment didn&#039;t go up from 6.1%.. then we&#039;ve had another 160,000 jobs lost since then, and still unemployment is being reported as not really changing. With a net job loss each month and more people being born than dying and more people getting older each month, you have a need for a net gain of jobs to keep unemployment static. If we&#039;re losing, then we&#039;re not static as reported.

So, I estimate closer to 12% instead of the 6% who are &quot;on the rolls&quot;.

Though, I&#039;ve poked around on google and with so many articles covering the &quot;stimulus package&quot;, first and the proposed, I can&#039;t find the critical article. it was on Raw Story&#039;s front page for about 6 hours a few months ago.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure, I can give you an accurate source. The news.</p>
<p>When the stimulus packages were being handed out this past summer, unemployment was being listed at 5.9%. I read an article (can&#8217;t find it now) that said the unemployment extension that was part of the stimulus package added another 4.1% (it was worded something like .. the extension of benefits accounts for an unemployment rate of 4.1% on it&#8217;s own, or some such..) The numbers who had fallen off the back of the normal 26 week unemployment rolls (5.9%) but became eligible for the extension under the stimulus was &#8220;another&#8221; 4.1%. Adding 5.9% and another 4.1% and you have 10%.</p>
<p>The unemployment numbers that are published are those on the rolls. Once you fall off the back (i.e. no job but not receiving benefits), you&#8217;re no longer reported in the unemployment rates.</p>
<p>So, if in June or July when that was in effect we had &#8220;real&#8221; unemployment of at least 10%, and we&#8217;ve lost hundreds of thousands of jobs a month since then and reported unemployment is still at 6.1%, I have to figure the &#8220;we&#8217;ll just not report those since we can&#8217;t be sure they don&#8217;t have jobs&#8221; unemployment rate is closer to 12%. </p>
<p>I get the 12% from starting at 10% as what looked like &#8220;real&#8221; unemployment (defined as those wanting jobs but not being able to get them).. then reading an article that said we lost 160,000 jobs for the month, but unemployment didn&#8217;t go up from 6.1%.. then we&#8217;ve had another 160,000 jobs lost since then, and still unemployment is being reported as not really changing. With a net job loss each month and more people being born than dying and more people getting older each month, you have a need for a net gain of jobs to keep unemployment static. If we&#8217;re losing, then we&#8217;re not static as reported.</p>
<p>So, I estimate closer to 12% instead of the 6% who are &#8220;on the rolls&#8221;.</p>
<p>Though, I&#8217;ve poked around on google and with so many articles covering the &#8220;stimulus package&#8221;, first and the proposed, I can&#8217;t find the critical article. it was on Raw Story&#8217;s front page for about 6 hours a few months ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Freedem</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-1/#comment-57368</link>
		<dc:creator>Freedem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:34:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57368</guid>
		<description>Wading in here again. I see four kinds of &quot;wealth&quot; in the terms it is created by commerce.
 
Firstly I can make a tool that makes stuff, thus becoming a fountain of stuff that each one  continues to provide service.

Secondly I can manufacture &quot;stuff&quot; that can save you time, make life better, etc. If the &quot;stuff&quot; is relatively non volatile, you can use it today, and then use it again tomorrow, and continue to gain from it for an indefinite period.

Thirdly I can offer a service. You gain the benefit but only the once. If you want it again you have to buy it again.
 
Fourth I can sell Financial service, you get the benefit but you have to continue to pay, sometimes many times the benefit. Renting money or stuff.


#1 is a fountain of stuff and thus the greatest (theoretical) value of all

#2 produces wealth in the society, creating (semi)permanent benefit, as the number of stuff grows. (there are issues of obsolesce, breakage, upkeep, etc but I am trying to simplify)

#3 Transfers wealth, and may maintain the value of wealth, but the next day has not accomplished anything beyond getting to the next day.

#4 Transfers wealth but ceases to provide benefit of any sort beyond putting off the day of reckoning returning the stuff.

Engage in the first thing and you are investing, creating the ability to create wealth but not useful wealth in itself. An economy focused here  is not benefiting its people yet but will eventually. Building a factory benefits the factory owner more than those actually building the factory.

Engage in the second and you build a better life as increasing stuff &quot;spreads the wealth around&quot; with this as the center creates so much wealth that even poor folk can get the &quot;trickle down&quot; castoffs of the rich.  Automobiles of the 50&#039;s and 60&#039;s are a classic example of this.

An economy focused on the third is coasting at best, and on a downward slope, more folk do more but receive less benefit over time. There is no &quot;trickle down&quot;.

An economy focused on the fourth pays an ever increasing amount just to stay neutral, and like a person in the grip of a loan shark, circling the toilet bowl.

That is largely why loan sharking used to be illegal, and ultimately the path to redemption for the US economy. I can only hope that Obama and the Democrats can find the smartest way to get there before we are completely flushed. That is the real difference between 30 years of Antisocialism, and actual Socialism. Not the Soviet model that claimed democracy as well as Socialism, but the Socialized Child model that folks work well together and nobody tries to run away with all the marbles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wading in here again. I see four kinds of &#8220;wealth&#8221; in the terms it is created by commerce.</p>
<p>Firstly I can make a tool that makes stuff, thus becoming a fountain of stuff that each one  continues to provide service.</p>
<p>Secondly I can manufacture &#8220;stuff&#8221; that can save you time, make life better, etc. If the &#8220;stuff&#8221; is relatively non volatile, you can use it today, and then use it again tomorrow, and continue to gain from it for an indefinite period.</p>
<p>Thirdly I can offer a service. You gain the benefit but only the once. If you want it again you have to buy it again.</p>
<p>Fourth I can sell Financial service, you get the benefit but you have to continue to pay, sometimes many times the benefit. Renting money or stuff.</p>
<p>#1 is a fountain of stuff and thus the greatest (theoretical) value of all</p>
<p>#2 produces wealth in the society, creating (semi)permanent benefit, as the number of stuff grows. (there are issues of obsolesce, breakage, upkeep, etc but I am trying to simplify)</p>
<p>#3 Transfers wealth, and may maintain the value of wealth, but the next day has not accomplished anything beyond getting to the next day.</p>
<p>#4 Transfers wealth but ceases to provide benefit of any sort beyond putting off the day of reckoning returning the stuff.</p>
<p>Engage in the first thing and you are investing, creating the ability to create wealth but not useful wealth in itself. An economy focused here  is not benefiting its people yet but will eventually. Building a factory benefits the factory owner more than those actually building the factory.</p>
<p>Engage in the second and you build a better life as increasing stuff &#8220;spreads the wealth around&#8221; with this as the center creates so much wealth that even poor folk can get the &#8220;trickle down&#8221; castoffs of the rich.  Automobiles of the 50&#8217;s and 60&#8217;s are a classic example of this.</p>
<p>An economy focused on the third is coasting at best, and on a downward slope, more folk do more but receive less benefit over time. There is no &#8220;trickle down&#8221;.</p>
<p>An economy focused on the fourth pays an ever increasing amount just to stay neutral, and like a person in the grip of a loan shark, circling the toilet bowl.</p>
<p>That is largely why loan sharking used to be illegal, and ultimately the path to redemption for the US economy. I can only hope that Obama and the Democrats can find the smartest way to get there before we are completely flushed. That is the real difference between 30 years of Antisocialism, and actual Socialism. Not the Soviet model that claimed democracy as well as Socialism, but the Socialized Child model that folks work well together and nobody tries to run away with all the marbles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jeff watson</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/11/03/income-tax-fairness-redistribution-and-response/comment-page-1/#comment-57363</link>
		<dc:creator>jeff watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:11:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=5227#comment-57363</guid>
		<description>Brian,

The way you worded it, I thought that you said you didn&#039;t give to charities.  Sorry.

I agree 100% about Wal-Mart, as I don&#039;t wish to support Chinese slave labor.  As much as I hate Wal-Mart(due to their poor treatment of their employees, etc.), one can only admire their near-perfect business plan.

Jeff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brian,</p>
<p>The way you worded it, I thought that you said you didn&#8217;t give to charities.  Sorry.</p>
<p>I agree 100% about Wal-Mart, as I don&#8217;t wish to support Chinese slave labor.  As much as I hate Wal-Mart(due to their poor treatment of their employees, etc.), one can only admire their near-perfect business plan.</p>
<p>Jeff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
