conservation of Euros

Bill Sloman · May 21, 2010

On May 20, 9:19 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:

BS > Marx was a genius, when it came to economics.
BS > As a politician, he was a dud. I do critical
BS > commentary, not fanatical support. Since you
BS > don't seem to be up to critical commentary,
BS > you may not appreciate the difference. And
BS > this is reiterating a point I made later in the
BS > post to which you are responding - you
BS > might go to the trouble of reading the whole
BS > post before you respond to particular parts
BS > of it, if you don't want to be accused of
BS > text-chopping.

You are a NON-PRODUCER living off your wife
and promoting socialism.

How critical can you be?

Marx was a non-producer who lived off Engels, and managed to produce a
large volume of useful critical work. There are other examples who
make it equally clear that your point is entirely fatuous.

Wait, you mean as in the academic term
"critical thinking", right?

What else would I mean?

You hope everybody gets past the idea
that you're a a NON-PRODUCER, living
off your wife and fanatically supporting socialism.

Most people don't share either your stupidity or your bizarre
preconceptions.

You bemoan the distrust and hostility with
which outright socialism and the political
thoughts of Marx are received by Americans.

Do pay attention - I don't think much of the political thoughts of
Marx, and wouldn't recommend them to anybody (except perhaps as a bad
example). Marx's thoughts about economics were revolutionary, and
still deserve some attention, though I'd no more recommend reading his
output as economic textbooks than I'd recommend Darwin's output as
biological textbooks.

After that you try to say you're
not trying to ""sell"" socialism??

Not really. Americans ignore the way the rest of the world does
things, despite the fact that some ways of running a country are
better managed outside the USA. Health care is the the classic example
- US health care cost half as much again per head as the best foreign
systems (in France and Germany) while providing no better health care
for prosperous employed Americans than the French and German systems
provide for everybody, while providng much worse health care for the
less well-off part of the US population.

Obama's rather timid attempt to inprove the US health care system is
widely objected to as "socialist" as if this was valid objection in
itself, which is remarkably stupid, reflecting many years of
irrational anti-socialist propaganda in the US media, which does seem
to have taken root in the kind of brains that can't do critical
thinking (such as yours).

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Bill Sloman · May 21, 2010

On May 20, 8:56 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-
Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 May 2010 11:51:17 -0700 (PDT), Greegor

greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
JA > You don't have the first idea what's in Obama's mandatory
insurance
JA > purchase and regulation bill--you're simply regurgitating--and
neither
JA > do you know anything about American health care, so there's
really no
JA > point in debating you on this.

Slowman's such an inexperienced idealogue that
it's like arguing religion with a Moonie.

Come on! An over 50 NON-PRODUCER who
argues for socialism?

It's a LOT like the old wimpy burger gag.
"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

Sloman is just so plain ignorant he doesn't know what ignorant means.

Jim Thompson is just so plain ignorant that he thinks that you can get
mange on the tongue. Hell - he's so dim he reacts to Greegor's posts.

Don't mind me interjecting, I'm just tweaking my filter system to make
sure I get _anyone_ who "plays" with BS.

Jim dislikes being reminded that he is an ignoramus who doesn't
appreciate just how very little he actually knows.

--
Bill Sloman

Bill Sloman · May 21, 2010

On May 20, 9:49 pm, dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com wrote:

On May 20, 1:51 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:

JA > You don't have the first idea what's in Obama's mandatory insurance
JA > purchase and regulation bill--you're simply regurgitating--and neither
JA > do you know anything about American health care, so there's really no
JA > point in debating you on this.

Hey, that makes a nice acronym: MAN-datory I-nsurance PU-rchase and
regu-LATION Bill.

Slowman's such an inexperienced idealogue that
it's like arguing religion with a Moonie.

Come on! An over 50 NON-PRODUCER who
argues for socialism?

Bill's 67, in the Netherlands, and an expert on all things American.
As a mere American living in America, I'm glad to have such a reliable
source to redoublethink all the things I know directly and confirm
daily with experience into politically correct context:

James Arthur does see America from a peculiarly right-wing
perspective. I've been particularly impressed by his claims that
American bankers weren't responsible the sub-prime mortgage crisis -
on the basis that the politicans made them do it. As doublethink goes,
that takes some beating.

Obama's a
centrist, not the ultra farthest most radical left-voting member of
Congress, and a brilliant Constitutional lawyer, not a former
associate professor and sometime ACORN subprime-pushing counsel.

I see no conflict between these statements. The US congress is a
collection of pretty right-wing
representative, most of them elected by virtue of televison
advertising campaigns paid for by the richer members of their
electorates. And the brilliance of a constitutional lawyer isn't
defined by the jobs he's had.

Bill's said his nanny state host makes it impossible for oldsters like
him to get a job--no one wants to hire 'cause then they're
responsible.

It's not the nanny state but social attitudes that make it difficult
for people over 60 to get work in the Netherlands. Some of the fine
detail of the industry agreements can make it difficult for an elderly
person to keep a job but that's another story.

Plus the state bribes companies to hire younger workers,
who'd really rather take welfare anywho[sic]. Or something like
that. If I've mischaracterized him I'm sure Bill will correct me.

Why should I bother? James Arthur sees world through his special set
of right-seeing spectacles, and gets it wrong so reliably that his
output should be ignored - correcting it might suggest that he could
learn form his mistakes.

I don't recall that I've complained about the Dutch state bribing
companies to hire younger workers, and if they do I don't know
anything about it. There may be special provisions for hiring students
into intern positions - I ran into a few of them while I worked in
Venlo - but that's not something I'd complain about.

But he still likes it. What the hell, the money's still free-living
off other people is easy. Problem is, they don't work nearly hard
enough, and they whine.

They work hard enough to have a positive national balance of trade,
which the US hasn't had since Regan was president, and I haven't
noticed them whining.

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

Perhaps you could find an example of such a "whine"? I could do with
another chance to show you up as an ignorant bigot.

Wimps. Probably racists and Nazis, too. You
know, reactionaries.

Every population has its racists and Nazi's. I can't stand Geert
Wilders but his anti-Muslim rhetoric sells well in the US. Somebody as
dim and right-wing biased as James Arthur could be stupid enough to
see him as a representative Dutchman, rather than an isolated right-
wing nitwit.

<snip>

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

John Larkin · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 02:26:11 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On May 20, 3:41 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 02:01:52 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On May 20, 12:50 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010 14:35:20 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On May 19, 3:43 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Bill Slomanwrote:
On May 18, 5:19 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 01:20:40 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:

[...]

The alternative do-nothing approach, as practiced by Hoover in 1929,
leads to vast tracts of industry standing idle with 25% unemployment,
dramatically reducing production and consumption.
The argument isn't about "producing as much as you consume" - it's
about maintaining consumption and production under circumstances where
both would otherwise collapse.
Managing the transition back to balanced budgets without crimping the
level of economic activity too much isn't a trivial job, and the banks
don't help by bleating about financial responsiblity as if their US
colleagues hadn't created the problem in the first place by being
totally irresponsible.
With your understanding of dynamics, it's a good thing you don't
design electronics.

With your understanding of dynamics, it is a miracle that you can.

As you should know, I can use the Ziegler-Nichols step response test
to tune a PID controller. This is tolerably primitive (Ziegler and
Nichols published their test in 1942, the year I was born) but
adequate in a lot of practical situations. I know about more
sophisticated schemes - such as state variable control - but happily
I've yet to run into a situation where I needed to use one. And my
Ph.D. thesis was on the reaction dynamics of the thermal decompostion
of nitrosyl bromide, which involved simulating a non-linear process (a
second order rate law, perturbed by self-cooling). Your own background
is probably less sophisticated.

Here goes the bragging again.

Not exactly. The half-wit claims that because I don't share his
economic opinions, I don't have enough understanding of dynamics to
design electronics. It's very much an apples and pears comparison, but
it's also flat-out wrong, as I've gone to the trouble of pointing out.
If using objective facts to point out that John has made an idot of
himself again is "bragging", then I am stuck with bragging - I did get
the Ph.D. in that area, and I'm not going to lie about it in a effort
tp project a modest persona.

How come that John, probably not that much different in age from you,
makes tons of money designing and building electronics, right now, has
created tons of jobs, and you don't?

He's more interested in making money than I am, and his expertise does
seem to lend itself to lower value systems than I worked on.

Systems that don't sell have no value. Systems that sell thousands of
copies at 4:1 margins have value.

IBM and HP could get away with a 6:1 margin.

Quite a lot of the gear that I worked on did get sold. The electron
beam microfabricator project got canned before we'd started a single
printed circuit layout - and managements relutance to let us send out
the first circuit for layout was a clear indictator that they were
contemplating canning the project.

The electron beam tester prototype was never demonstrated to a
potential customer - the departing boss who should have been chasing
customers hid in his office and worked on his next job, while the
people who took over the task of selling the machine after he finally
resigned decided that there weren't enough potential customers without
going to the trouble of letting one of them see the machine in action,
which was probably a mistake, since the machine collected its data
impressively faster (as it has been designed to do - the whole massive
investment in digitising the data collection was justified on that
basis).

If the machine had been actively sold, it would have been worth a
bundle.

Setting
up your own company to make electron microscope or phased array
ultrasound machines probably takes more capital than even John could
have got his hands on, and was never one of my ambitions.

I started with essentially no capital. I've never believed in raising
a lot of money and then developing a complex product; that path has
about a 90% failure rate. I developed modest products, sold them, and
worked my way up. But designing megabuck instruments doesn't appeal to
me; each one will take years of development and support, and I don't
have that sort of attention span. Six or eight designs a year is more
fun.

Inadequate attention-span. Did you have ADHD as a kid? I happen to be
particularly good with complex systems, and that influences what I do
and what my employers have wanted me to do.

snip

Not trusting in reincarnation, I plan to do as many things in life as
I can. Doing things includes finishing them properly and moving on...
ideally leaving documentation for production to make copies for a
decade or two. That's not called "inadequate attention span", it's
called "productivity." Try it some time.

Nobody has ever complained about my documentation - except perhaps to
complain that I've given more detail than was absolutely necessary,
which I justify by pointing out that keeping documents intelligible
after ten or twenty years does require making explicit the thinking
behind some of the choices. I can't say I particularly enjoy writing
up stuff, but it's part of the job, and I've done more than enough of
it know that I'm good at it.

The sort of "attention span" that you might be seen as lacking isn't
so much temporal as spatial. You don't seem to have the inclination to
get your head around all the aspects of a complex system - either
elaborate scientific instruments or complex social questions.

You're being an idiot, as usual. When we design electronics, we first
learn the user's technology. Jet engines, eximer lasers, tomographic
atom probes, electrical power systems, NMR/MRI, FTMS, ICCD cameras,
NIF fusion lasers, particle accelerators, gas pipelines, product
weighing machines [1]. It's a load of fun, and it impresses the hell
out of a customer when we understand his system at least as well as he
does. In a sense, the electronics is the easy part. We also have to
understand the customer's business and cultural needs to get and keep
the business; that can be a lot of fun too.

Your experience seems to be very narrow, and pretty much powerless,
and mostly failures, so you make up things as you'd like them to be.
Sorry, Charlie. There's nothing wrong with that, except you get
pompous about stuff you know esentially nothing about.

John

[1] Try this: get a good gram scale and buy 50 small bags of potato
chips. Note the specified net weight; say 3.5 grams. Weigh the
contents. You'll find weights like 3.52, 3.56, 3.54, rarely as much as
3.6. Weigh one chip; it might average, say, 0.2 grams. So how do they
manage to come so close when the quantization is so large?

Spehro Pefhany · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 06:54:22 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 02:26:11 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On May 20, 3:41 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 02:01:52 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On May 20, 12:50 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010 14:35:20 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On May 19, 3:43 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Bill Slomanwrote:
On May 18, 5:19 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 01:20:40 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:

[...]

The alternative do-nothing approach, as practiced by Hoover in 1929,
leads to vast tracts of industry standing idle with 25% unemployment,
dramatically reducing production and consumption.
The argument isn't about "producing as much as you consume" - it's
about maintaining consumption and production under circumstances where
both would otherwise collapse.
Managing the transition back to balanced budgets without crimping the
level of economic activity too much isn't a trivial job, and the banks
don't help by bleating about financial responsiblity as if their US
colleagues hadn't created the problem in the first place by being
totally irresponsible.
With your understanding of dynamics, it's a good thing you don't
design electronics.

With your understanding of dynamics, it is a miracle that you can.

As you should know, I can use the Ziegler-Nichols step response test
to tune a PID controller. This is tolerably primitive (Ziegler and
Nichols published their test in 1942, the year I was born) but
adequate in a lot of practical situations. I know about more
sophisticated schemes - such as state variable control - but happily
I've yet to run into a situation where I needed to use one. And my
Ph.D. thesis was on the reaction dynamics of the thermal decompostion
of nitrosyl bromide, which involved simulating a non-linear process (a
second order rate law, perturbed by self-cooling). Your own background
is probably less sophisticated.

Here goes the bragging again.

Not exactly. The half-wit claims that because I don't share his
economic opinions, I don't have enough understanding of dynamics to
design electronics. It's very much an apples and pears comparison, but
it's also flat-out wrong, as I've gone to the trouble of pointing out.
If using objective facts to point out that John has made an idot of
himself again is "bragging", then I am stuck with bragging - I did get
the Ph.D. in that area, and I'm not going to lie about it in a effort
tp project a modest persona.

How come that John, probably not that much different in age from you,
makes tons of money designing and building electronics, right now, has
created tons of jobs, and you don't?

He's more interested in making money than I am, and his expertise does
seem to lend itself to lower value systems than I worked on.

Systems that don't sell have no value. Systems that sell thousands of
copies at 4:1 margins have value.

IBM and HP could get away with a 6:1 margin.

Quite a lot of the gear that I worked on did get sold. The electron
beam microfabricator project got canned before we'd started a single
printed circuit layout - and managements relutance to let us send out
the first circuit for layout was a clear indictator that they were
contemplating canning the project.

The electron beam tester prototype was never demonstrated to a
potential customer - the departing boss who should have been chasing
customers hid in his office and worked on his next job, while the
people who took over the task of selling the machine after he finally
resigned decided that there weren't enough potential customers without
going to the trouble of letting one of them see the machine in action,
which was probably a mistake, since the machine collected its data
impressively faster (as it has been designed to do - the whole massive
investment in digitising the data collection was justified on that
basis).

If the machine had been actively sold, it would have been worth a
bundle.

Setting
up your own company to make electron microscope or phased array
ultrasound machines probably takes more capital than even John could
have got his hands on, and was never one of my ambitions.

I started with essentially no capital. I've never believed in raising
a lot of money and then developing a complex product; that path has
about a 90% failure rate. I developed modest products, sold them, and
worked my way up. But designing megabuck instruments doesn't appeal to
me; each one will take years of development and support, and I don't
have that sort of attention span. Six or eight designs a year is more
fun.

Inadequate attention-span. Did you have ADHD as a kid? I happen to be
particularly good with complex systems, and that influences what I do
and what my employers have wanted me to do.

snip

Not trusting in reincarnation, I plan to do as many things in life as
I can. Doing things includes finishing them properly and moving on...
ideally leaving documentation for production to make copies for a
decade or two. That's not called "inadequate attention span", it's
called "productivity." Try it some time.

Nobody has ever complained about my documentation - except perhaps to
complain that I've given more detail than was absolutely necessary,
which I justify by pointing out that keeping documents intelligible
after ten or twenty years does require making explicit the thinking
behind some of the choices. I can't say I particularly enjoy writing
up stuff, but it's part of the job, and I've done more than enough of
it know that I'm good at it.

The sort of "attention span" that you might be seen as lacking isn't
so much temporal as spatial. You don't seem to have the inclination to
get your head around all the aspects of a complex system - either
elaborate scientific instruments or complex social questions.

You're being an idiot, as usual. When we design electronics, we first
learn the user's technology. Jet engines, eximer lasers, tomographic
atom probes, electrical power systems, NMR/MRI, FTMS, ICCD cameras,
NIF fusion lasers, particle accelerators, gas pipelines, product
weighing machines [1]. It's a load of fun, and it impresses the hell
out of a customer when we understand his system at least as well as he
does. In a sense, the electronics is the easy part. We also have to
understand the customer's business and cultural needs to get and keep
the business; that can be a lot of fun too.

Your experience seems to be very narrow, and pretty much powerless,
and mostly failures, so you make up things as you'd like them to be.
Sorry, Charlie. There's nothing wrong with that, except you get
pompous about stuff you know esentially nothing about.

John

[1] Try this: get a good gram scale and buy 50 small bags of potato
chips. Note the specified net weight; say 3.5 grams. Weigh the
contents. You'll find weights like 3.52, 3.56, 3.54, rarely as much as
3.6. Weigh one chip; it might average, say, 0.2 grams. So how do they
manage to come so close when the quantization is so large?

I'm sure they have some kind of crumby solution...

John Larkin · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:21:49 +0100, Martin Brown
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

On 20/05/2010 22:53, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 22:14:05 +0100, Martin Brown
|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

On 20/05/2010 21:44, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 08:24:09 +0100, Martin Brown
|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

Equally the employer should treat employees fairly and not be entitled
to hire and fire on a whim in the way that seems so common in the USA.

Employees can walk out on zero notice, leaving projects in random
states. And they sometimes do. How about some symmetry?

I agree. Don't you have written contracts of employment?

Our Constitution abolished slavery. I can't compel anyone to work.

In UK law you can (at least in theory) if it is written in the contact.
Or alternatively if they refuse then sue for breach of contract. Usually
a bit of horse trading goes on to try and get projects handed over
reasonably cleanly to other workers.

The employment contract is open to negotiation on both sides. I have
refused some employment contract terms in the past and had alterations
accepted by the employer (although that is unusual). I wanted to exclude
specific unrelated IP rights. In the UK the employer by default owns the
IP rights of everything invented whilst you are employed.

Contract law is dynamite stuff it allowed the guy who wrecked Royal Bank
of Scotland (Fred the Shred) to obtain a Ł650k per year pension for
totally destroying a once proud financial institution.

And
if I could, I couldn't trust their quality.

Therein lies the problem. And as I said it was standard practice if
someone was going to a competitor that their pass revoked, desk emptied
that day and they were escorted off the premises by security.

Anyone worth their salt would have grabbed whatever information they
wanted long before announcing their intention to leave. These days with
tiny multi-GB memory sticks it is impossible to stop data leakage
without locking down PCs to an unacceptable level in most organisations.

In the UK that symmetry exists at least on paper in many contracts of
employment. When I worked for a corporate I was on 3 months notice (for
either side - it might have been 6 months for the company later on) and
my boss when he decided to leave was forced to work out his notice.

How do you force someone to work? What happens if they don't? What
happens if they work very, very badly?

You get to sue for breach of contract (and vice versa if fired without
notice). My boss didn't work anything like as hard after he handed in
his notice, but he still worked better at it than his successor ;-)

It is actually pretty rare to have problems. Most decent professionals
continue to work professionally though perhaps not quite so hard after
handing in their notice to quit. YMMV

It seems simpler to me if an employer can hire and fire at will (as we
can in California) and an employee can take a job or quit as he
chooses. Let people make deals.

Employment contracts are rare here.

What a strange world you live in. Most people in the UK - except those
working for cowboy outfits have a written contract of employment.

This is the Wild West, kemosabe. Go live in Switzerland and be an
accountant if you want an orderly life.

I don't understand what I have said here to get a vitriolic personal
attack from that senile old duffer with the anal fetish Thompson.

Being senile is like being young or being drunk. It's disinhibiting.
Without social constraints or manners, one's fundamental personality
emerges. He dislikes me, goodness knows why, and will do anything,
including insulting my wife, to offend me, even when it makes no
sense. He's a lot like Sloman, who at least doesn't insult my wife.

John

Bill Sloman · May 21, 2010

On May 20, 11:23 pm, dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com wrote:

On May 20, 3:11 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:

JA > The AFL-CIO can only be seen as
JA > monopolists. They'd have taken over
JA > the country, except that they killed
JA > all their hosts.

BS > Don't be silly. Unions are alive and
BS > tolerably healthy in Europe, and are
BS > quite sensible enough to function
BS > as benign symbiotes.

JA > That is, culturally, possible. In Japan
JA > unions actually press management to
JA > improve production. In the US they do
JA > the opposite. They create strife
JA > strictly to enrich the union bosses,
JA > create an artificially adversarial
JA > relationship with management, all
JA > so the union can fleece its members.
JA
JA > That's why unions should be restricted
JA > --they can get out of hand, and
JA > that should not be allowed.

When I was 18 years old, my first job after
high school was a summer job in a Printed
Circuit board plant. Having actually made
printed circuits myself for hobby circuits at
age 10, I was excited.

A few of the UNION women working there
were obese and sat on stools so much
that when they stood up they had a round
stool shaped impression in their butt.

I was troubling to them.

I was very productive, and quickly saw how
several people who blatantly should have
been fired were kept on because it was a
UNION shop and they had relatives with
long histories at the company.

One woman was the company slut who
routinely "comes on" to every new male
employee, her Mom had been an inspector
there for more than a decade.

The other newbie hired right aftter me, and
sometimes paired with me was hired
because of a relative also, and as for
work, he was worthless. Apathetic, no
eye for detail, no work ethic, etc.

I was dumped out but he was kept.
It was only a summer job.

I ran into him some time later at the
same University, but he was one of those
who didn't last more than a few quarters.

I have also worked at jobs that can only
be described as SWEAT SHOP jobs,
where a little bit of UNION activity could
improve things tremendously.

At one of the computer stores that I ran,
an older man lived next door who told me
of his experience at a UNION meat packing plant.

The UNION kept pressing for wages so high
that the older workers became alarmed that
they might break the company and ruin
their chances of collecting retirement.

The younger unionists said "To hell with
that, I want my MONEY" and the UNION
kept pushing until the company closed.

Because of such behavior, unions have turned
an amazing portion of LABOR against them.

UNIONS in the USA have easily become
just as much the enemy of labor as
any hard core capitalist management
who would make it a sweat shop.

I see UNIONS as beneficial in small doses,
but toxic in large doses. I see capitalism
as beneficial in large doses but toxic if
monopolistic abuses take place.
I see socialism in small doses as beneficial,
but toxic in large doses.

But that's just my REAL WORLD experience, Sloman!

The trap unions fall into is defending people who don't deserve it,
and pushing for wages their productivity can't pay for.

It's a potential weakness of the system. Few union organisers are that
stupid, but the one that are a gift to the right-wing propaganda
mills.

In fact they deliberately aim to maximize the number of workers (reduce
productivity), /and/ increase wages. The two are incompatible, and
kill the host. Then they collapse, company and union both.

The only unions that act that way have to have really stupid members
who elected really stupid officials. Stupidity is endemic, and people
like James Arthur who concentrate on the activities of short-sighted
idiots to the exclusion of the rest of the world demonstrate that it
isn't confined to the political left.

If unions were to simply push for safer working conditions, and
cooperate with management to /improve/ a company's productivity,
that'd be super. That grows the pie for everyone.

And that's what has been happening in Germany. Care to think about
what they might be doing right that you are doing wrong?

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Jim Thompson · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 07:04:16 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 09:21:49 +0100, Martin Brown
|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

[snip]

I don't understand what I have said here to get a vitriolic personal
attack from that senile old duffer with the anal fetish Thompson.

Anal fetish?? Martin clearly doesn't understand that American slang,
"Asshole", has nothing to do with the anal orifice

Being senile is like being young or being drunk. It's disinhibiting.
Without social constraints or manners, one's fundamental personality
emerges. He dislikes me, goodness knows why,

I don't dislike you. I just find you fun to poke holes into. You
post junk circuits, then swear by them to the death when I point out
the faults.

I have as much fun "playing" you as you do with Slowman.

and will do anything,
including insulting my wife, to offend me,

I didn't insult your wife. When you mentioned BU I just pointed out
the realities of the locations of the BU dorm (high rise) near Storrow
Drive and the MIT frat houses on the parallel (across the Charles)
Memorial Drive.

You stated your wife waited tables. I asked which restaurants. You
didn't reply. I think you made up that BS... sorry shouldn't use
Slowman's designator... bull-shit.

even when it makes no
sense. He's a lot like Sloman, who at least doesn't insult my wife.

John

John Larkin · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 10:01:04 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

Try this: get a good gram scale and buy 50 small bags of potato
chips. Note the specified net weight; say 3.5 grams. Weigh the
contents. You'll find weights like 3.52, 3.56, 3.54, rarely as much as
3.6. Weigh one chip; it might average, say, 0.2 grams. So how do they
manage to come so close when the quantization is so large?

I'm sure they have some kind of crumby solution...

You are partially right.

John

Joerg · May 21, 2010

Bill Sloman wrote:

On May 20, 5:25 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 02:37:16 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
Few countries are unlucky enough to have their economy depend on a
single product. Australia would have to tighten its belt a lot if the
market for iron ore declined signficantly. Carrying on as if the
absence of such a single product is a sign of economic malaise is
evidence that you don't know enough about economics to make a useful
contribution to this kind of discussion.
I wonder to what extent the collapse in shipping prices contributed to
the problems there. The cost of shipping a TEU (container) from Asia
to North America was approximately zero at the beginning of the year,
rather than the usual few thousand dollars. Compare with, say, oil,
which has been relatively stable despite the near collapse in the US
financial markets.
While Bill may think that the Greek shipping companies are a major GDP
contributor I am afraid I'll have to burst that bubble. It accounts for
a mere 5% of their already paltry GDP:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60R2P020100401

Quote: "Shipping is one of the top contributors to Greece's 240 billion
euro ($323.7 billion) economy along with tourism and construction. It
accounted for about 5 percent of GDP in 2009."

Tourism is a major source of income there. Or to some extent, was. Folks
from Europe tell me that Greece has become quite expensive and they
prefer other areas such as Turkey. Same type of climate, more bang for
the buck or Euro. So now shipping may account for a few more percentage
points but not because of growth ...

Joerg wants to be able to identify a big single contributor to a
countries GDP before he can believe that that country is viable, when
- in fact - countries that depend on a single industry are exceedingly
vulnerable to changes in the business or technical environment. Most
countries get their income from a wide range of activities, so a 5%
contribution to GDP is big, for a single industry .

The fact that Jeorg can't be bothered working out how Greece - almost
- supports itself doesn't make them the hopeless basket case that he
claims.

Ah, now Bill has resorted to 3rd-person addressing ...

Then an interesting tidbit from the above link, quote: "Greek shipping
companies have to pay a tonnage tax but are exempt from income taxes on
profits from operating Greek registered vessels." Ahm, well ...

So the owners of the Greek shipping fleet had enough money to bribe a
few legislators - US residents shouldn't find that surprising.

Bill, you said the Greek shipping industry is a major source of GDP. I
have shown beyond reasonable doubt (_with_ links, you didn't provide
any) that that is not the case. Simple, really.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Joerg · May 21, 2010

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

On Thu, 20 May 2010 07:51:33 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 08:45:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Sun, 16 May 2010 21:11:54 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Sun, 16 May 2010 14:13:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Sat, 15 May 2010 00:18:43 -0500, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 21:26:28 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 22:55:23 -0500, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 10:08:36 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 09:17:15 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 14 May 2010 07:39:56 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

I like the sales tax, as opposed to income tax, because it puts
business on a better basis against imports, so saves jobs. And because
it would be enormously simpler and cheaper to comply with. No
accountants, no tax returns, no exemptions, no deductions, no
quarterly estimates, no loopholes... almost.

Tax consumption. Don't tax savings or investment or job creation. If a
person is rich but doesn't spend any money, nobody can reasonably be
jealous of his wealth.

A serious problem with that: It punishes frugal people who have saved
for their retirement and rewards those who squandered everything. The
money they saved _has_ already been taxed.
Simple fix: don't tax income.

Yeah, but how do you deal with income that _has_ already been taxed but
not spent yet because people saved it for their retirement? A flat
VAT-type tax is the same as confiscating xx% percent of that. Not fair
at all.
As I suggested, exempt basics, like food, reasonable rent, generic
medicines. If people can afford a yacht, they can afford to pay sales
tax on it.
The point is that that money has already been taxed. It shouldn't matter if
it is used to buy a yacht. Taxing it again is wrong (one reason I don't trust
Roth IRAs).
As I suggested, eliminate income taxes and go to sales tax. Then
things are only taxed once.
You're missing the point. Those millions of people who have saved all their
lives will be taxed a second time. They've *already* been taxed on that
money.
Not to bust your bubble, but i am already paying both taxes.
When income tax gets turned into a point-of-sale tax you'll have paid
even more (if you have saved after-tax money).
I only have a little of such, most is in other (post income tax) forms.
erp. ^^^^/pre
Don't know how old you are but if there ain't a big stash in those IRAs
and you don't have some plum pension coming your way I'd start saving
now
I figure i can only semi-retire. Maybe in 10 years. OK pension, medical
included. Not as much saving as paying off house. Well over $1000/mo
there. I have spreadsheets and can use them. The outlook is not grim
but not flush, so i go to about half time as a consultant. The
consulting pays for the cake, bread and butter will be taken care of
unless the Damnicrats deficit spend everything away.

If you can imagine comfortably making ends meet with a 50% consulting
workload then you are better off than most people. I know grown men who
are doing min-wage jobs right now just so they don't lose the family
home. And they might still lose it.

Hell, I can imagine retiring *well* on 25% consulting workload. In fact if I
thought it would last I'd still be "retired", contracting as I was doing two
years back. That would be my ideal retirement, AAMOF.

However, I assume you have a nice big pension coming towards you from
big blue. The vast majority of younger people have zilch in that domain
because companies have stopped that practice a long, long time ago.
Instead, the people now get to pay for super-fat plum pensions of state
workers, which is a powder keg that is going to go kablouie pretty soon
here in CA.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Joerg · May 21, 2010

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

On Wed, 19 May 2010 18:05:12 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010 16:34:59 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010 15:23:02 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 19 May 2010 07:50:39 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 11:42:26 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Mon, 17 May 2010 14:31:43 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On May 17, 4:05 pm, "keith...@gmail.com" <keith...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 17, 3:53 pm, dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com wrote:

On May 17, 3:41 pm, "keith...@gmail.com" <keith...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

Again, you're missing the point. With after-tax savings you're
*already* paying that tax. If the "Fair Tax" is implemented you get
to pay the "consumption tax" on the *AFTER-TAX* money.
I'm not missing the point, I just think you're mathematically wrong.
If the thing costs $1 today, or $0.77 plus $0.23 Fair Tax tomorrow,
what have you lost? Where have I gone wrong?
Because it cost me $1.40 yesterday (when I earned it) to have the
$1.00 today,
If you paid taxes already under the old system then you were screwed
*yesterday*. That can't be fixed-it's gone. Sorry. Me too.
No, I was playing the game by the rules yesterday. Today the government
change the rules after the game was in play. The winner is the one who spent
every dime he ever made, not the one who took care of his life.

Many of the ones who took care of their life will then move, to some
places outside the US, and escape such confiscatory "fair tax" should it
ever happen. Who knows, Baja, NZ, some island ... because then the
problem simply goes away. The consequences? Even more layoffs here.
That's fine if they don't want to take their money with them. They've already
plugged that hole.

Huh? It's just one big wire transfer.
You think you can just wire money out of the country without government
intervention? More than $10K requires all sorts of paperwork, and taxes paid.

Got any links? That would completely squish international trade. I know
people who have bought rather pricey stuff overseas, and just wired the
payment. Plus they can't make you pay taxes on already taxed money.
No, but it's been in the news lately, with Obama's attack on the Swiss banks.
Apparently if you move cash out of the country you have to pay the equivalent
of the death tax.
This cannot be the case. I have clients who buy expensive machines
overseas because they have to. They don't pay a death tax.
Corporations "living" in the US.

And proprietors living in the US. So what's the (legal, in terms of
those taxes) difference between them and John Q.Public?

Because JQP is likely to skip on his taxes.

How can they make him pay death taxes if he ain't dead? Got a link?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

John Larkin · May 21, 2010

On Tue, 11 May 2010 06:47:21 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.hdgFGtPjbY

You can't fool Mother Nature. When a few hundred million people choose
to not work much, not breed much, and consume a lot, you just can't
spend your way out of the problem.

This is the leading edge of the European demographic crisis that's
been building for generations now. There's no quick fix.

John

Good one:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/7746806/Whatever-Germany-does-the-euro-as-we-know-it-is-dead.html

John

John Larkin · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 08:20:20 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 07:51:33 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 08:45:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Sun, 16 May 2010 21:11:54 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Sun, 16 May 2010 14:13:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Sat, 15 May 2010 00:18:43 -0500, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 21:26:28 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 22:55:23 -0500, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 10:08:36 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 09:17:15 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 14 May 2010 07:39:56 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

I like the sales tax, as opposed to income tax, because it puts
business on a better basis against imports, so saves jobs. And because
it would be enormously simpler and cheaper to comply with. No
accountants, no tax returns, no exemptions, no deductions, no
quarterly estimates, no loopholes... almost.

Tax consumption. Don't tax savings or investment or job creation. If a
person is rich but doesn't spend any money, nobody can reasonably be
jealous of his wealth.

A serious problem with that: It punishes frugal people who have saved
for their retirement and rewards those who squandered everything. The
money they saved _has_ already been taxed.
Simple fix: don't tax income.

Yeah, but how do you deal with income that _has_ already been taxed but
not spent yet because people saved it for their retirement? A flat
VAT-type tax is the same as confiscating xx% percent of that. Not fair
at all.
As I suggested, exempt basics, like food, reasonable rent, generic
medicines. If people can afford a yacht, they can afford to pay sales
tax on it.
The point is that that money has already been taxed. It shouldn't matter if
it is used to buy a yacht. Taxing it again is wrong (one reason I don't trust
Roth IRAs).
As I suggested, eliminate income taxes and go to sales tax. Then
things are only taxed once.
You're missing the point. Those millions of people who have saved all their
lives will be taxed a second time. They've *already* been taxed on that
money.
Not to bust your bubble, but i am already paying both taxes.
When income tax gets turned into a point-of-sale tax you'll have paid
even more (if you have saved after-tax money).
I only have a little of such, most is in other (post income tax) forms.
erp. ^^^^/pre
Don't know how old you are but if there ain't a big stash in those IRAs
and you don't have some plum pension coming your way I'd start saving
now
I figure i can only semi-retire. Maybe in 10 years. OK pension, medical
included. Not as much saving as paying off house. Well over $1000/mo
there. I have spreadsheets and can use them. The outlook is not grim
but not flush, so i go to about half time as a consultant. The
consulting pays for the cake, bread and butter will be taken care of
unless the Damnicrats deficit spend everything away.

If you can imagine comfortably making ends meet with a 50% consulting
workload then you are better off than most people. I know grown men who
are doing min-wage jobs right now just so they don't lose the family
home. And they might still lose it.

Hell, I can imagine retiring *well* on 25% consulting workload. In fact if I
thought it would last I'd still be "retired", contracting as I was doing two
years back. That would be my ideal retirement, AAMOF.

However, I assume you have a nice big pension coming towards you from
big blue. The vast majority of younger people have zilch in that domain
because companies have stopped that practice a long, long time ago.
Instead, the people now get to pay for super-fat plum pensions of state
workers, which is a powder keg that is going to go kablouie pretty soon
here in CA.

Not to mention about 30 other states. And europe.

John

Spehro Pefhany · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 08:24:16 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2010 06:47:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.hdgFGtPjbY

You can't fool Mother Nature. When a few hundred million people choose
to not work much, not breed much, and consume a lot, you just can't
spend your way out of the problem.

This is the leading edge of the European demographic crisis that's
been building for generations now. There's no quick fix.

John

Good one:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/7746806/Whatever-Germany-does-the-euro-as-we-know-it-is-dead.html

John

Paging Dr. Schadenfreude..

Martin Brown · May 21, 2010

On 21/05/2010 16:24, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2010 06:47:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.hdgFGtPjbY

You can't fool Mother Nature. When a few hundred million people choose
to not work much, not breed much, and consume a lot, you just can't
spend your way out of the problem.

This is the leading edge of the European demographic crisis that's
been building for generations now. There's no quick fix.

John

Good one:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/7746806/Whatever-Germany-does-the-euro-as-we-know-it-is-dead.html

It might amuse you to know that a suggested name for the replacement
currency after this one fails was suggested by a Reuters financial
commentator as the New Euro or Neuro for short.

Interview/sketch monologue online at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8693000/8693649.stm

Doomsday Scenario for the Euro - I think you will like it.

Regards,
Martin Brown

Jim Thompson · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 08:06:13 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 10:01:04 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

[1] Try this: get a good gram scale and buy 50 small bags of potato
chips. Note the specified net weight; say 3.5 grams. Weigh the
contents. You'll find weights like 3.52, 3.56, 3.54, rarely as much as
3.6. Weigh one chip; it might average, say, 0.2 grams. So how do they
manage to come so close when the quantization is so large?

I'm sure they have some kind of crumby solution...

You are partially right.

John

Small chips ?

Joerg · May 21, 2010

John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 08:20:20 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 20 May 2010 07:51:33 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2010 08:45:14 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Sun, 16 May 2010 21:11:54 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Sun, 16 May 2010 14:13:24 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Sat, 15 May 2010 00:18:43 -0500, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 21:26:28 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 22:55:23 -0500, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 10:08:36 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 14 May 2010 09:17:15 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 14 May 2010 07:39:56 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid
wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
[...]

I like the sales tax, as opposed to income tax, because it puts
business on a better basis against imports, so saves jobs. And because
it would be enormously simpler and cheaper to comply with. No
accountants, no tax returns, no exemptions, no deductions, no
quarterly estimates, no loopholes... almost.

Tax consumption. Don't tax savings or investment or job creation. If a
person is rich but doesn't spend any money, nobody can reasonably be
jealous of his wealth.

A serious problem with that: It punishes frugal people who have saved
for their retirement and rewards those who squandered everything. The
money they saved _has_ already been taxed.
Simple fix: don't tax income.

Yeah, but how do you deal with income that _has_ already been taxed but
not spent yet because people saved it for their retirement? A flat
VAT-type tax is the same as confiscating xx% percent of that. Not fair
at all.
As I suggested, exempt basics, like food, reasonable rent, generic
medicines. If people can afford a yacht, they can afford to pay sales
tax on it.
The point is that that money has already been taxed. It shouldn't matter if
it is used to buy a yacht. Taxing it again is wrong (one reason I don't trust
Roth IRAs).
As I suggested, eliminate income taxes and go to sales tax. Then
things are only taxed once.
You're missing the point. Those millions of people who have saved all their
lives will be taxed a second time. They've *already* been taxed on that
money.
Not to bust your bubble, but i am already paying both taxes.
When income tax gets turned into a point-of-sale tax you'll have paid
even more (if you have saved after-tax money).
I only have a little of such, most is in other (post income tax) forms.
erp. ^^^^/pre
Don't know how old you are but if there ain't a big stash in those IRAs
and you don't have some plum pension coming your way I'd start saving
now
I figure i can only semi-retire. Maybe in 10 years. OK pension, medical
included. Not as much saving as paying off house. Well over $1000/mo
there. I have spreadsheets and can use them. The outlook is not grim
but not flush, so i go to about half time as a consultant. The
consulting pays for the cake, bread and butter will be taken care of
unless the Damnicrats deficit spend everything away.
If you can imagine comfortably making ends meet with a 50% consulting
workload then you are better off than most people. I know grown men who
are doing min-wage jobs right now just so they don't lose the family
home. And they might still lose it.
Hell, I can imagine retiring *well* on 25% consulting workload. In fact if I
thought it would last I'd still be "retired", contracting as I was doing two
years back. That would be my ideal retirement, AAMOF.

However, I assume you have a nice big pension coming towards you from
big blue. The vast majority of younger people have zilch in that domain
because companies have stopped that practice a long, long time ago.
Instead, the people now get to pay for super-fat plum pensions of state
workers, which is a powder keg that is going to go kablouie pretty soon
here in CA.

Not to mention about 30 other states. And europe.

But they don't have regular folks pulling in well north of $200k just in
pension payments per year (!) on the taxpayer nickel, or pension spiking.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

John Larkin · May 21, 2010

On Fri, 21 May 2010 11:30:08 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 08:24:16 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 11 May 2010 06:47:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.hdgFGtPjbY

You can't fool Mother Nature. When a few hundred million people choose
to not work much, not breed much, and consume a lot, you just can't
spend your way out of the problem.

This is the leading edge of the European demographic crisis that's
been building for generations now. There's no quick fix.

John

Good one:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/7746806/Whatever-Germany-does-the-euro-as-we-know-it-is-dead.html

John

Paging Dr. Schadenfreude..

Oh, the US is facing similar problems. But at least we have kids and
immigrants that we can exploit.

I'm not so much happy that europe is falling apart as I am satisfied
that I have some understanding of how economic systems actually work.
I did predict stuff like this, based on the simple concept that you
can't longterm consume more than you produce, unless you steal it.
This sort of thinking is apparently beyond what learned
macroeconomists and finance ministers can handle.

The US and Canada have, I think, better longterm prospects than
europe.

John

Joerg · May 21, 2010

Martin Brown wrote:

On 21/05/2010 16:24, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2010 06:47:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.hdgFGtPjbY

You can't fool Mother Nature. When a few hundred million people choose
to not work much, not breed much, and consume a lot, you just can't
spend your way out of the problem.

This is the leading edge of the European demographic crisis that's
been building for generations now. There's no quick fix.

John

Good one:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/7746806/Whatever-Germany-does-the-euro-as-we-know-it-is-dead.html

It might amuse you to know that a suggested name for the replacement
currency after this one fails was suggested by a Reuters financial
commentator as the New Euro or Neuro for short.

Neuro for "Northern Euro" and Souro for "Soured Euro"?

[...]

--
SCNR, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

conservation of Euros

Bill Sloman

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Spehro Pefhany

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Joerg

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Spehro Pefhany

Guest

Martin Brown

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Joerg

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor