Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

[c1ue]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

But what America needs right now is a "traitor to his class," a Roosevelt, Teddy, I'd prefer. But he was an accident of history. With today's media budget requirement, the game is pre-rigged by the biggest campaign contributors and soft money. And so, our choices for President are already well vetted by the elites. We really don't have a choice. The guy that becomes President answers to the moneyed interests first and foremost. If there's time and money left over, "pet projects" may follow.

Actually, Teddy was simply a very oppositional kind of guy with strong opinions.

You should note that Teddy rose to the Presidency via a gigantic raft of insurance company money, but he believed this to be wrong. Thus after attaining office, he changed the laws to prevent this from recurring.

Obama, on the other hand, has zero history of being opinionated and/or oppositional. He also rose to office on a gigantic raft of money.

Unfortunately there has been zero indication of any TR type behavior.

And I'm not holding my breath.

[raja]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

But what America needs right now is a "traitor to his class," a Roosevelt, Teddy, I'd prefer. But he was an accident of history. With today's media budget requirement, the game is pre-rigged by the biggest campaign contributors and soft money. And so, our choices for President are already well vetted by the elites. We really don't have a choice. The guy that becomes President answers to the moneyed interests first and foremost. If there's time and money left over, "pet projects" may follow.

How about Eliot Spitzer?
He's brave, got an amazing track record of challenging authority, and is a "traitor to his class".
I think the lessons he learned from the whore scandal chastened some of his impetuosity, which needed chastening.

I recommend the documentary Client 9.
You'll get to know him better . . . .

[Chris Coles]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

The video won't work in my location, Chris, so I took the link and read the entire transcript of the speech given by the Prince of Wales.

Raz, try this one, http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...re_15_02_2011/ but there are only three days left to see it.

Taking your point about another matter entirely, population growth; surely that also means the planet is going to see a severe collapse in numbers after we "oldies" all die out?

[harset]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

Thanks chris.....i will read both books....

[yernamehear]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

[QUOTE=FRED;190053]

EJ writes in:

The way I put it is that the difference between a 1st and a 3rd world country is that in a 1st world country you have to be accomplished in business before you have sufficient money and skills to run for office and win whereas in a 3rd world country you run for office in order to get rich. My observation is that in the US over the past 30 years, the latter case is becoming more frequently true than the former.

In a world run by me, to qualify to run for office you have to have run a company and made payroll for at least three years. The reason is that until you have, you don't understand how to abstract yourself as you must as a corporate leader, to be responsible for others before yourself, and to put the well-being of the company before your own interests, to put the investors, employees, and customers first, and that this is how you personally succeed.

What's bothering me is that the lack of ethics and competence is so deep that you can have the spectacle of an oil company having its CEO knighted for achievement, only to have the chief of the company's operations in a certain area take the 5th (due to lack of job performance in a regulated duty), the CEO resigns soon afterward in disgrace because of other issues, and have the next CEO preside over an environmental catastrophe. The latter CEO was not immediately fired and/or resigned.

Another anecdote is the CEO who lost >90% of his stock's value due to botched M&A activity, also sits on the board of a money center bank that had to be bailed. This individual still has both positions (note: CEO, President and chairman of a mega-cap company).

An executive who was in on the founding of a company might understand the issues you talk about, e.g. accountability to shareholders, employees, other stakeholders. A "corporate hack" CEO who rose up through a huge old company? Yet another technocrat who may not even know fundamentally how or why his corporation makes money (seriously).

I don't think there is much competent leadership in any particular area in the 1st world at the moment.

[chr5648]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

Here's another exception:

I am from New Jersey. Before and during the onset of the crisis, we had Jon Corzine, Goldman Alum that spent tens of millions of his own money to run for governor of NJ. A lot of good that did NJ... He was like Dick Cheney - deficits don't matter.

Now we have a cost-cutting Republican, that is well liked. His background? A Lawyer, Lobbyist, and former US Attorney.

If you think about it, Corzine's credentials seem Republican, and Governor Christie's credentials seem more Democrat. And the two are very different. But to be honest, Christie stepped in at a time when he had no choice but to take on the Unions and cut the budget.

Keep an eye on Christie - I think he's got a future.

But what America needs right now is a "traitor to his class," a Roosevelt, Teddy, I'd prefer. But he was an accident of history. With today's media budget requirement, the game is pre-rigged by the biggest campaign contributors and soft money. And so, our choices for President are already well vetted by the elites. We really don't have a choice. The guy that becomes President answers to the moneyed interests first and foremost. If there's time and money left over, "pet projects" may follow.

As a fellow new jerseyan, christie's spending cuts and brute realization of the reality of nj's fiscal state is a welcomed change. The problem is that even with his spending cuts, the state will still be bankrupt, the reforms that need to be done are too radical even for a so called revolutionary like christie.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

The people in "office" that constantly worry me are those that say nothing in public, never step forward to argue their case; but are quick as a flash to vote as a group.... to do whatever the executive want of them.

[gnk]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

Now, you don't want the rich bribing the government, as we have now. How do you prevent that? Elect rich people! This is exactly what turned around LA politics in the past 20 years. Louisiana finally got wealthy people into the governors mansion (Dem and Repub), and now the state is doing noticeably better.
.

Here's another exception:

I am from New Jersey. Before and during the onset of the crisis, we had Jon Corzine, Goldman Alum that spent tens of millions of his own money to run for governor of NJ. A lot of good that did NJ... He was like Dick Cheney - deficits don't matter.

Now we have a cost-cutting Republican, that is well liked. His background? A Lawyer, Lobbyist, and former US Attorney.

If you think about it, Corzine's credentials seem Republican, and Governor Christie's credentials seem more Democrat. And the two are very different. But to be honest, Christie stepped in at a time when he had no choice but to take on the Unions and cut the budget.

Keep an eye on Christie - I think he's got a future.

But what America needs right now is a "traitor to his class," a Roosevelt, Teddy, I'd prefer. But he was an accident of history. With today's media budget requirement, the game is pre-rigged by the biggest campaign contributors and soft money. And so, our choices for President are already well vetted by the elites. We really don't have a choice. The guy that becomes President answers to the moneyed interests first and foremost. If there's time and money left over, "pet projects" may follow.

[we_are_toast]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

i think you might want to refine your criteria. imo running a company is neither necessary nor sufficient for such learning. ready to support a presidential bid by angelo mozilo?

Thanks jk, I was biting my tongue pretty hard.

I don't think there is any specific employment, be it a CEO or a brain surgeon, that can make you a good elected official. If you empathize with all of your constituents, and you have an excellent ability to reason well, you've got as good a chance to do well whether you're a CEO or a plumber.

[EJ]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

i think you might want to refine your criteria. imo running a company is neither necessary nor sufficient for such learning. ready to support a presidential bid by angelo mozilo?

I didn't say that everyone who has run a business is qualified for elected office, or even that anyone who hasn't run a business isn't qualified. It's the experience of having run an organization that is critical. That's what happened to Lula. He learned the lesson of accountability, and that reshaped his thinking. If you have had the experience of being accountable for the well being of an organization, without necessarily having direct control over it, as in a military chain of command, you are have already received a major part of the training that you need to succeed in elected office.

Let me put it another way, who would you rather have perform brain surgery on you, a surgeon who has performed 1000 surgeries and never lost a patient, or a guy who has read a lot of books about brain surgery?

[WDCRob]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

Beat me to it JK, but then I saw EJ mention that business isn't the only place to learn the lessons below...slightly edited...

• abstract yourself
• be responsible for others before yourself
• put the well-being of the [organization] before your own interests
• put [stakeholders] first

[jk]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

In a world run by me, to qualify to run for office you have to have run a company and made payroll for at least three years. The reason is that until you have, you don't understand how to abstract yourself as you must as a corporate leader, to be responsible for others before yourself, and to put the well-being of the company before your own interests, to put the investors, employees, and customers first, and that this is how you personally succeed.

i think you might want to refine your criteria. imo running a company is neither necessary nor sufficient for such learning. ready to support a presidential bid by angelo mozilo?

[FRED]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

[QUOTE=yernamehear;190029]

as things get worse, formerly taboo utterances are being heard. e.g.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCPz2SzROFQ

definitely worth watching [even if only for the reactions of the hosts], not that what he says should surprise anyone around here, but he's saying things not usually said out loud in the msm. like, at 3:19, "both parties are financed by wealthy people." etc

============================
Sorry, this guy is an ignoramus. The hackery around the "rich run the country" is either complete ignorance or planned lies. Washington, Jefferson, et.al. were the Warren Buffets and Bill Gates of their day! This country has always been a plutocracy. Let's do a thought experiment. Do you want the rich people or the guy sleeping under the freeway running your government? Trust me, you want the rich running your country.

(Read the history of Andrew Jackson, the first populist president. He wasn't all good or all bad, as any real person. Until him, the country was perceived to be run by a small elite- otherwise known as the founding fathers. There was a lot of truth to that.)

Now, you don't want the rich bribing the government, as we have now. How do you prevent that? Elect rich people! This is exactly what turned around LA politics in the past 20 years. Louisiana finally got wealthy people into the governors mansion (Dem and Repub), and now the state is doing noticeably better.

Part of the problem has to do with the quote that iTulip had up for a long time about the depression almost being worth it to see how idiotic our smart people are. That happens every 30-50 years. We have developed such a specialized economy that the elite/rich have little real world skills, unlike 200 years ago. Do you think TurboTax Timmy or The Bernank could really run a bank? They can't even figure out how to buy and finance their own personal residences! (do a search on the subject). These guys are highly specialized technocrat/bureaucrat politicians. They'll try to ride out this storm with bureaucratic responses. I hope they get it mostly right, but their ilk certainly screwed it up in 2007-2008, didn't they.

Taxes are indeed probably too low, and spending too high. The numbers show it.

Ideologues who think the gubmint has to solve all our problems are too ridiculous to waste time on.

EJ writes in:

The way I put it is that the difference between a 1st and a 3rd world country is that in a 1st world country you have to be accomplished in business before you have sufficient money and skills to run for office and win whereas in a 3rd world country you run for office in order to get rich. My observation is that in the US over the past 30 years, the latter case is becoming more frequently true than the former.

In a world run by me, to qualify to run for office you have to have run a company and made payroll for at least three years. The reason is that until you have, you don't understand how to abstract yourself as you must as a corporate leader, to be responsible for others before yourself, and to put the well-being of the company before your own interests, to put the investors, employees, and customers first, and that this is how you personally succeed.

There are other ways to learn this lesson, however, as in the peculiar case of Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

His reputation as a socialist caused a major correction in the Brazilian Real and bond market after he was elected. But once in office he proved to be anything but a hard line socialist, and Brazil's economy boomed.

"Not long after the start of his second term, Lula, alongside his cabinet, announced the new Growth Acceleration Program (the Programa de Aceleração de Crescimento, or PAC, in Portuguese), an investment program to solve many of the problems that prevent the Brazilian economy from expanding more rapidly. The measures include investment in the creation and repair of roads and railways, simplification and reduction of taxation, and modernization on the country's energy production to avoid further shortages. The money promised to be spent in this Program is considered to be around R$ 500 billion (more than 250 billion dollars) over four years. Part of the measures still depend on approval by Congress. Prior to taking office, Lula had been a critic of privatization policies. In his government, however, his administration has created public-private partnership concessions for seven federal roadways."

What happened to Lula? He learned. He improved over time.

Can that happen here in the US? You never know. I would not discount the possibility.

[Raz]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

If we are going to bring children into the discussion; try this from last weekend here in the UK.

Children's author and campaigner Michael Morpurgo gives the 35th Dimbleby Lecture.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006ptbl

The video won't work in my location, Chris, so I took the link and read the entire transcript of the speech given by the Prince of Wales.

Although he made some good points, perhaps he should give the problem a bit more analysis before he pontificates.


"The World Faces a Population Bomb."

Yes, but of old people. Not so long ago, we were warned that rising global population would inevitably bring world famine. As Paul Ehrlich wrote apocalyptically in his 1968 worldwide bestseller, The Population Bomb, "In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date, nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate." Obviously, Ehrlich's predicted holocaust, which assumed that the 1960s global baby boom would continue until the world faced mass famine, didn't happen. Instead, the global growth rate dropped from 2 percent in the mid-1960s to roughly half that today, with many countries no longer producing enough babies to avoid falling populations. Having too many people on the planet is no longer demographers' chief worry; now, having too few is.

It's true that the world's population overall will increase by roughly one-third over the next 40 years, from 6.9 to 9.1 billion, according to the U.N. Population Division. But this will be a very different kind of population growth than ever before -- driven not by birth rates, which have plummeted around the world, but primarily by an increase in the number of elderly people. Indeed, the global population of children under 5 is expected to fall by 49 million as of midcentury, ...

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...ging?page=full

[c1ue]

Re: Next Bubble or Last Hurrah? - Part I: Stocks and houses - Eric Janszen

Washington, Jefferson, et.al. were the Warren Buffets and Bill Gates of their day!

Can you provide some proof of this statement?

Because I don't believe it is correct.

Jefferson and Washington were wealthy, but neither of them owned companies which literally touch every single American. They were more on the order of a car dealership owner.