[anabolicrhino]

Originally Posted by Bobo

Thats because you had the biggest real estate boom in modern history in the last 10 years and the crash of the sub prime market (which is a good thing IMO). Investor money shifted form real estate to the market. Mortgage criteria are more strict (which they should be) and people aren't buying houses they can't afford (which you had a lot of from 2002-2005).

This is more of a 5 steps forward, 1 step back scenario.

Wow, I think I agree with you almost!

The correction and subsequent elimination of the "sub primes" is a great thing for the market and the stability of the economy as well. It is similar to the elimination of the 80's "junk bond" market. There will always be speculative investments, but when deep speculation becomes an acceptable market strategy there will always be a correction.

The reality is that the people who were hurt the most by this shift were the mortgage brokers and specialized market traders who pushed the "sub primes" through the banks.

While some people lost their dreams of home ownership, most did not put down any real money, and at least they got to feel the American Dream was real for a few months !

[anabolicrhino]

Originally Posted by spunkles182

huh? its just common sence. basic economics

http://www.mises.org/story/877
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/02/105944.php
http://news.com.com/2008-1022-5142597.html

i could go on and on with articles.

Huh ? uh huh... I was not challenging the mechanism of the economic factor. I was stating that the major players are exploiting
that same factor.

While this current trend is good for corporations and the Market in general, it could lead to American having to go abroad to find work!

Lets face it Walmart is "the business model case study" in how to exploit this economic factor. Walmart is basically the distribution network for China!

China will become the most dominant economic force in the world because of the exploitation of the labor factor. 1.3 billion people with no laws to prevent their exploitation. This will eventually be the factor that leads to some Americans not finding jobs in America.

You are quite correct, Its basic economics !

[DougMan]

Originally Posted by anabolicrhino

Lets face it Walmart is "the business model case study" in how to exploit this economic factor. Walmart is basically the distribution network for China!

I don't think the major problem with Walmart is that sells cheap stuff, the major problem with Walmart is that they abuse the public health care system. I have read of stories describing how new employees are given forms to file for state sponsored health care at the same time they get their job offers. It is the manipulation of the system, and then subsequently the lower prices they can offer because of this manipulation that is unfair. Costco sells cheap stuff and no one complains because at least in the poll of public opinion Costco treats their employees well. A few years back I read an AP article that put starting salaries around 10-17/hr, compared to 7-10/hr for Wal-mart. Not sure if that applies to all Costco jobs though.

If we got rid of state sponsored health care then it would go away, good luck with that. Once the government starts handing money out to people it is hard to take it back. It is ironic that Walmart abuses a socialist program in the name of capitalism which is now leading people to cry for more socialist policies and state regulation.

Originally Posted by anabolicrhino

China will become the most dominant economic force in the world because of the exploitation of the labor factor. 1.3 billion people with no laws to prevent their exploitation. This will eventually be the factor that leads to some Americans not finding jobs in America.

Adapt, migrate or die. There are still tons of oppurtunities left for people with the right degrees in higher education. Companies will only treat their workers as well as they have to. This is nothing new. It is the responsibility of the worker to make themselves more valuable. You don't owe your company anything, and likewise your company doesn't owe you anything. At some level it is all just business.

IMO the factor that leads to Americans not finding jobs is likely going to be run away government spending. I think you mentioned that as a concern already.

If you are confident the market is going to tank soon then invest in it. You can make just as much money when the markets are heading down if you invest correctly.

[spunkles182]

Originally Posted by anabolicrhino

Huh ? uh huh... I was not challenging the mechanism of the economic factor. I was stating that the major players are exploiting
that same factor.

While this current trend is good for corporations and the Market in general, it could lead to American having to go abroad to find work!

Lets face it Walmart is "the business model case study" in how to exploit this economic factor. Walmart is basically the distribution network for China!

China will become the most dominant economic force in the world because of the exploitation of the labor factor. 1.3 billion people with no laws to prevent their exploitation. This will eventually be the factor that leads to some Americans not finding jobs in America.

You are quite correct, Its basic economics !

the evidence does not support your claim, free trade benefits both parties involved. the unemployment rate is currently 4.5% which is the lowest that it has been since sept 2001. Average weekly earnings rose by 4.1 percent, seasonally adjusted, from May 2006 to May 2007. After deflation by the CPI-W, average weekly earnings increased by 1.4 percent. where are these "lost jobs" where is the "lost income".

[CDB]

Originally Posted by zbtboy

While I dont argue your point,the instance I was referring to (the company i work for) is different. Two major companies in this city sent manu jobs to either mexico and/or china. Once this happened, the area went down the toilet.

And? Not to be heartless, but where is it written you're guaranteed a job, a house, a life, or anything? Our lives ar ein flux, I've lost jobs before and had to deal with major **** because of it. That's life.

Both companies had very good unions and these people were making very good money with great benefits and as a result, the middle class here was very strong. Now the jobs are gone; replaced with retail, fast food, or non-union manu jobs that pay crap. The population is shrinking every year. College grads are going elsewhere for employment and these two companies where were doing great when the union jobs were here are now struggling.

Your confusing causes here though. Those companies that outsourced do not have the power to suck up and destroy other opportunities for those they fired. No company does. The key question is where is the opportunity? The answer is the government has flushed it down the drain.

[CDB]

Originally Posted by spunkles182

efficent valuation hypothosis asserts that financial markets are "informationally efficient", or that prices on traded assets, e.g., stocks, bonds, or property, already reflect all known information and therefore are unbiased in the sense that they reflect the collective beliefs of all investors about future prospects.

Efficient valuation hypothesis is contingent on no one ****ing with the indicators and means of transferring information, ie. prices. When the government inflates the money supply that is exactly what it does. The choices people make are only as good as the information that informs them.

[anabolicrhino]

Originally Posted by spunkles182

the evidence does not support your claim, free trade benefits both parties involved. the unemployment rate is currently 4.5% which is the lowest that it has been since sept 2001. Average weekly earnings rose by 4.1 percent, seasonally adjusted, from May 2006 to May 2007. After deflation by the CPI-W, average weekly earnings increased by 1.4 percent. where are these "lost jobs" where is the "lost income".

No, not lost jobs or lost income, but...lost job opportunities, yes you can have a job, hell Walmart is always hiring

but it will become more difficult to find jobs outside the retail distribution networks, which Walmart dominates.

...the income is there but what about actual buying power.

The average worker could afford to own more things 30 years ago than todays worker.

There are more workers and more jobs and more money in the economy, but inflation and interest have devalued lifestyles.

The ability to outsource labor increases production, profits and
directly leads to inflated prices for devalued goods.

So again the outsouring of labor is great for ownership but not so much for Americas working class.

Which brings us complete to a complete circle and once again proves that it is better to own than to be owned!

[spunkles182]

Originally Posted by anabolicrhino

The ability to outsource labor increases production, profits and
directly leads to inflated prices for devalued goods.

So again the outsouring of labor is great for ownership but not so much for Americas working class.

absolutely not. it leads to lower prices for higher valued goods.


Imagine yourself an entrepreneur planning a new business. After extensive market research, you decide to manufacture some sort of bodybuilding suppliement in pill form. You begin selling them for five cents each. Your accountants have determined that it costs you two cents to cap each pill—40 percent of your selling price. Another firm can cap each pill for you for only one cent each (a 50 percent savings on caping). Do you continue to cap them yourself or do you farm out this operation?

now imagine that you sell 500 pills per bottle and cap them inhouse for a selling price of $25 per bottle and your competitor outsoruces the caping process and and with the savings can sell the suppliments for $20 bottle while making the same profit as you can off 1 bottle. you would go out of business. Outsourcing makes good sense. By outsourcing, companies can achieve improved levels of efficiency. More efficent companies have lower production costs. Lower production costs lead to a decreased price for the consumer in a competitive market. That frees up more of the consumer’s income to purchase other goods and services. its win-win.

[spunkles182]

Originally Posted by CDB

Efficient valuation hypothesis is contingent on no one ****ing with the indicators and means of transferring information, ie. prices. When the government inflates the money supply that is exactly what it does. The choices people make are only as good as the information that informs them.

but expected inflation is built in to their earnings estimates. there is nothing unexpected when the gov says that it will increase the money supply. from the latest reports the current "upswing" in the market is just from companies becoming more efficient by some restructuring.

[spunkles182]

Originally Posted by zbtboy

While I dont argue your point,the instance I was referring to (the company i work for) is different. Two major companies in this city sent manu jobs to either mexico and/or china.

the reality is that workers have to compete against each other from all over the world. there was just someone with the same skill set in Mexico/china and was willing perform the same job for less pay. and you cant really blame the company becuase if they didnt take advantage of the low cost labor another company would have and would have put your company at a disadvantage. If they didnt outsource those jobs, you would have had a greater chance of losing yours as well.

[anabolicrhino]

Originally Posted by spunkles182

absolutely not. it leads to lower prices for higher valued goods.


More efficent companies have lower production costs. Lower production costs lead to a decreased price for the consumer in a competitive market. That frees up more of the consumer’s income to purchase other goods and services. its win-win.

Way back in the old days, pre-global market economies, a nation's economy could control inflation by manipulating their import / export ratios.

Todays global multinational corporations are immune to this factor so when these companies introduce cheap goods into a national economy the result is more income directed toward the retail market and more money in the system, which you know causes inflation and devalues the money system.

When products were produced domestically by domestic workers and purchased by the same pool of domestic workers inflation was held in check.

Domestic products were less profitable for the owners, but the workers got more for their money specifically when not buying in the manufacturing sector.

The had more money to buy property and other non disposable goods.

They had more savings and less debt

Now all of this is easily dismissed if you just forget about the USA as a sovereign economy and think in terms of the domestic US worker as part of a worldwide labor pool !

Which is what the multinational corporations want to accomplish.

The whole Global economic movement is in reality a socialization of the world politic and will completely eliminate competition from the market,....which any good "free trader" will tell you is not a good thing !!!

You can ponder the futures market or you can ponder the reality of a one world corporate dictatorship

[spunkles182]

[quote=anabolicrhino;907763]

Way back in the old days, pre-global market economies, a nation's economy could control inflation by manipulating their import / export ratios.

Todays global multinational corporations are immune to this factor so when these companies introduce cheap goods into a national economy the result is more income directed toward the retail market and more money in the system, which you know causes inflation and devalues the money system.

When products were produced domestically by domestic workers and purchased by the same pool of domestic workers inflation was held in check.

Domestic products were less profitable for the owners, but the workers got more for their money specifically when not buying in the manufacturing sector.

The had more money to buy property and other non disposable goods.

They had more savings and less debt

absolutely not. when the united states outsources its an outflow of american cash which decreases the total supply in the us and helps keep inflation down. you couldnt be more wrong.

The whole Global economic movement is in reality a socialization of the world politic and will completely eliminate competition from the market,....which any good "free trader" will tell you is not a good thing !!!

You can ponder the futures market or you can ponder the reality of a one world corporate dictatorship

again you could not be more wrong. its common sence. when you open up to other markets you open up to other sellers, ie competition.

[anabolicrhino]

[quote=spunkles182;907829]

Originally Posted by anabolicrhino

absolutely not. when the united states outsources its an outflow of american cash which decreases the total supply in the us and helps keep inflation down. you couldnt be more wrong.





again you could not be more wrong. its common sence. when you open up to other markets you open up to other sellers, ie competition.

I bet that I could be more wrong if I just had the chance !

The point I was trying to express is that it is not the United States who is outsourcing the labor costs, but it is in fact the multinational corporations who are outsourcing the labor costs!

These corporations interact with each other on a global market but do not deffer to the US national economic cycles.

These corporation will trade dollars just to clip our domestic markets, so while there may be a competitive advantage to outsourcing labor for the multinationals, that competition does not help the American worker / consumer.

Capitalism and free trade are two different things!

The global market is anything but free or open !

[CDB]

Originally Posted by spunkles182

but expected inflation is built in to their earnings estimates. there is nothing unexpected when the gov says that it will increase the money supply. from the latest reports the current "upswing" in the market is just from companies becoming more efficient by some restructuring.

The problem with that is that it is demonstrably false. If people were able to factor government meddling into prices there would never be shortages or surpluses due to price controls or other types of meddling which affect prices. It's even harder to predict in terms of inflation because the control is not direct or uniform.

In theory knowledge should flow. In practice the price is the embodiment of all the available knowledge. Messing with it, while it doesn't destroy the availability of information and make everyone's decisions incorrect, it does seriously hinder the flow of information and basically amplifies what would be normal market 'noise' or minor errors into a wave of errors. Those errors occur, as with everything else, on the margins.

I have to admit I have not looked at the current trends and, to be blunt, I don't want to. What I can say is everyone should have a massive mistrust of macro economic indicators and stats. They are subjective in the extreme and can be cast in a majorly different light given who is doing the analysis.

[spunkles182]