# The Recession and Layoffs Thread



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

Whether or not we're actually in a recession, people keep talking about the possibility (and it appears this is one of those things we actually nail down after the fact, whether we were in one at a given point or not). I've noticed a trickle of posters on various boards I belong to announcing that they have been laid off; of course, that could be true at any time, but still, I've noticed it. Apprehension is running high at my company as sales tail off -- in lockstep with the general retail economy, but the CEO is as apoplectic over it as if we were an isolated case.

So what I'm wondering, in a non-partisan, non-controversialist way, is whether any posters to this board are being affected by all this yet: whether that means being actually laid off, being nervous about being laid off, feeling that an elevated title and salary put you at greater risk in a downturn, working in an increasingly fraught and nerve-wracked environment, being wired to the Dow in a way that keeps you awake nights, and so on.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

For the last several years, my friends left of center have been telling me what a horrible economy we are in. Over the same last several years, both my wife and I have seen our incomes jump drastically, the demand for our respective skill sets continue to increase, and in my case, I have had problems hiring everyone from dishwashers to registered nurses. In fact, staffing vacancies and upward salary pressures continue to be one of the dominant issues I face running my organization.

There can be little doubt the stock market has been reeling, but remember, it has predicted 15 of the last three recessions


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I am always a bit amused and disheartened when people get laid off. First there is the shock, and then the distaste for standing in unemployment lines with all 'those people' and then the ignobility of competing for the jobs 'those people' live on and so many see as temporary insults.But then the economy turns around and they swim back to the ancestral river of class distinction.There is a permanent body of unemployed, underemployed or just plain exploited workers in this nation. I actually just secured a well paying, though part time job. My first samll paycheck I donated 25% to the local food bank.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

I wonder, given the members of this board, if most of us here are in a good position to feel the direct and dire effects of an economic downturn. I certainly haven't. In fact, I've earned double-digit raises nearly each of the past 6 years. (Mind you, I do indeed work for those.) 

I know several people who, largely through their own ambition, have got themselves into minor binds with respect to real estate. Don't know anyone who has been fired. Do see quite a number of workers in more menial roles who seem unhappy, although I can't say if this has to do with the nature of the work, the salary, both, or some other variable. 

The most significant deleterious impact from the larger market that I've felt has manifested itself in my investment portfolio. 

Of course there is a point when psychology spills over into the real world: If you think you can't afford to spend, then you perhaps won't, which will eventually have an actual impact on economic numbers, even if the recession fear is, currently, just that: a fear, not a reality. But, that's the market for you. 

If there was only some way to keep the /people/ out of it... (a la "The Player" and those pesky Hollywood writers.)


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

BertieW said:


> I wonder, given the members of this board, if most of us here are in a good position to feel the direct and dire effects of an economic downturn. I certainly haven't. In fact, I've earned double-digit raises nearly each of the past 6 years. (Mind you, I do indeed work for those.)


I think there's more economic diversity on the board than you might expect.


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

I quit work and went back to school. By the time I graduate we will either be in a full blown recession and I'll be screwed, or we'll be coming out of one and I'll be desirable


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I work in a small company in a 2 person accounting department. My assistant is being laid off Friday. Her work is the stuff that has to be done every day and I'll have to do that as well as my own duties.

I have never seen anyone handle such devastating news with as much dignity and poise as my assistant. I will miss her greatly and not just because of the undone work.


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

A lot of people are either being laid off or quitting at my wife's company (real estate escrow). My wife says the hot job now everyone is applying for now is being a parking attendant for AMPCO.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

BertieW said:


> Of course there is a point when psychology spills over into the real world: If you think you can't afford to spend, then you perhaps won't, which will eventually have an actual impact on economic numbers, even if the recession fear is, currently, just that: a fear, not a reality. But, that's the market for you.


I agree completely. I feel that convincing the susceptible, during the course of Dubya's reign, that the economy was at all times in the dumper, was a purposeful thing done by Dubya's enemies, which includes much of the mainstream media. Creating an uneasy disquiet among those open to such suggestions has paid off well now that some actual economic disturbances are occurring.


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> I agree completely. I feel that convincing the susceptible, during the course of Dubya's reign, that the economy was at all times in the dumper, was a purposeful thing done by Dubya's enemies, which includes much of the mainstream media. Creating an uneasy disquiet among those open to such suggestions has paid off well now that some actual economic disturbances are occurring.


The odd thing is that I, more liberal than not, don't exactly disagree with this. But I would go farther: all political camps are at all times trying to employ means of mass suggestion to create perceptions useful to their agenda. It's not as if Bush's camp lacks access to those same means of suggestion -- not in the era of CNBC and Fox News, it doesn't.

Suggestions take hold when they jibe with people's experience to some extent. The "susceptible" you refer to therefore likely mean those whose personal experiences over the past decade don't suggest to them that "the economy" has been doing them any favors. It is possible that this is because, in fact, it hasn't. See Jacob Hacker's _The Great Risk Shift _for one argument along those lines.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

topbroker said:


> The odd thing is that I, more liberal than not, don't exactly disagree with this. But I would go farther: all political camps are at all times trying to employ means of mass suggestion to create perceptions useful to their agenda. It's not as if Bush's camp lacks access to those same means of suggestion -- not in the era of CNBC and Fox News, it doesn't.
> 
> Suggestions take hold when they jibe with people's experience to some extent. The "susceptible" you refer to therefore likely mean those whose personal experiences over the past decade don't suggest to them that "the economy" has been doing them any favors. It is possible that this is because, in fact, it hasn't. See Jacob Hacker's _The Great Risk Shift _for one argument along those lines.


Oddly enough, the people I have heard this from the most over the last several years, are all fairly well paid, well educated, professional people. People who live in nice houses, drive nice cars, and hold steady jobs. They just have an antipathy to Dubya and are thus easily swayed by what they want to believe.


----------



## MrRogers (Dec 10, 2005)

I'm going to put myself out there as completely ignorant on economic matters and ask a few simple questions. 

I understand that during a recession people can lose their jobs, etc. but what exactly happens? Does the public as a whole just spend less $$$? What causes a recession in the first place? What happens at the govt level?

I'm not a complete idiot but have had my head in a book (not econ obviously) preparing for my degree for the last 8 yrs so excuse my ignorance on the matter. It is just something I never learned about.

Thanks
MrR


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Oddly enough, the people I have heard this from the most over the last several years, are all fairly well paid, well educated, professional people. People who live in nice houses, drive nice cars, and hold steady jobs. They just have an antipathy to Dubya and are thus easily swayed by what they want to believe.


Ah, you've put your finger on something there. I don't have the exact figures in front of me, but I recall reading that in his second-term election in 1984, Reagan carried something like 17 of the 20 wealthiest counties in America; while in his second-term election in 2004, Bush only carried around 8 of the 20 wealthiest counties. Those figures imply volumes about changes in our politics, and volumes could and in fact have been written. But it is clear that the Republican message is not merely a plutocratic one anymore, and in fact has lost considerable sway among actual plutocrats. I'd venture to say that it's in part a class thing: Rockefeller Republicans and libertarians really disdain the frequently lower-in-social-class, frequently anti-intellectual evangelicals who gained considerable sway in the party. Have fun undoing *that *damage.

It's interesting that Bush 41 was perceived as completely establishment old-school Republican, a mannered New England gentleman, while Bush 43 is often perceived as an uninformed, declasse lout. How did *that *happen in one generation of the same family?

I should add that almost everyone is easily swayed by what they want to believe; it's kind of a human tendency, isn't it?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

topbroker said:


> I should add that almost everyone is easily swayed by what they want to believe; it's kind of a human tendency, isn't it?


Actually, I tend to differentiate people based on this. There are those that are led, and those that find out for themselves. Namely, an intelligent person goes where the facts lead him, not where someone is trying to lead them based on an emotional plea.


----------



## agnash (Jul 24, 2006)

*Regional Recession*

I believe that if there is a recession, it is by region, and/or by industry. The real estate meltdown has gotten a lot of press, but just how bad it is, or if it even exists, depends on where you live. The same goes for the unemployment rate. The worst in the country is Michigan at 7.4%. The best is Idaho, at 2.7%. Both as of late december 2007. Admittedly the Michigan rate is pretty high compared to the history of the U.S. as a whole for the last 60 years, but just across the border in Indiana and Ohio the rates are 4.7% and 5.6% respectively, which are both more inline with normal historical unemployment rates for the country.

I travel throughout Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia and Florida fairly regularly, and constantly see the desperation of businesses trying to find workers.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

agnash said:


> I believe that if there is a recession, it is by region, and/or by industry. The real estate meltdown has gotten a lot of press, but just how bad it is, or if it even exists, depends on where you live. The same goes for the unemployment rate. The worst in the country is Michigan at 7.4%. The best is Idaho, at 2.7%. Both as of late december 2007. Admittedly the Michigan rate is pretty high compared to the history of the U.S. as a whole for the last 60 years, but just across the border in Indiana and Ohio the rates are 4.7% and 5.6% respectively, which are both more inline with normal historical unemployment rates for the country.
> 
> I travel throughout Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia and Florida fairly regularly, and constantly see the desperation of businesses trying to find workers.


Exactly. Nationally, I think we might even escape the negatives for one quarter. I'm going with a prediction of 0.8% Annualized 1Q.

However, my Wife's company and their industry has almost completed two consecutive quarters of brutal contraction this fiscal that has them doing about 55% of the revenue of last year's quarters. Their fiscal is September 30th. They have a manufacturing plant and own national retail locations that sell their products and other products. Weekly sales are coming in 50-55% year over year.

They laid off about 100 people in the middle of their 1Q (4Q2007) once they had enough information to trend revenue projections. They are now past that point in 2Q and of course people are doing the calculations themselves and sorting on seniority and job tasks. My Wife is in an indispensable role which is good, but she had just taken this job within the last year. Her previous company was bought by a Canadian firm that brought in their own F&A people. The previous occupant lost track of $3M through incompetence so they slashed and burned the department. She spent the first year with 2 FTEs when revenue was still growing where the previous occupant of her job had 5 FTEs while trying to get through an annual audit, a sales tax audit, and a fraud investigation in addition to a system conversion in manufacturing that dumps data into their financial system that was all hosed up.

She finally got a third head count when sales started contracting. That person is just about completely trained through a steep learning curve and of course, they are telling her that they will not just lay off manufacturing in the next wave, but that each admin department will have to lay off at least one person "to be fair." My Wife and her #2 were working 3/4 day Saturday at the office and a 1/2 day Sunday via VPN before they got the 3rd person. Basically she had 1 FTE for manufacturing and 1 FTE for retail while she had to do everything else. The 3rd FTE was to help her do busy work like filing sales tax in the 20 states they do business. She's finally down to 10 hr days M-F and is probably going to lose that person 'for her' and go back to the other schedule.

The good news: they do pay both our healthcare premiums because of her position in the company.


----------



## stainless (Aug 27, 2007)

MrRogers said:


> I'm going to put myself out there as completely ignorant on economic matters and ask a few simple questions.
> 
> I understand that during a recession people can lose their jobs, etc. but what exactly happens? Does the public as a whole just spend less $$$? What causes a recession in the first place? What happens at the govt level?
> 
> ...


Technically defined, a recession is two straight quarters of negative economic growth. Which is why no one is actually sure if we're in a recession or not. As you said, overall spending goes down. I think it's safe to say there are many possible causes of recessions, but in this instance (if this is truly a recession) it would be tied in to the real estate bubble and the credit crunch coming from the subprime mortage mess.

Not that I understand the ins and outs of what is a very complicated situation, and I'm sure there are some investment types who have a better understanding of what going on in the financial arena than I do.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

The reduction in GDP can be caused by a reduction in consumer, corporate, or government spending. 

So, the sub-prime issue is causing an obvious reduction in consumer spending, but also by screwing up the commercial paper markets it is going to reduce corporate spending as well. Government spending continues defying the laws of God and man for the time being. Eventually, even that chimpanzee won't dance anymore.

One thing that is helping diminish the corporate spending decline is that some companies had a lot of cash and equivalents on their balance sheets. However, there are some that cannot weather even short term periods without access to financing. Take an area like M&A, for example. While largely equity financing, many of the equity investors use debt financing.

Encourage corporate spending is why the so-called stimulus package(s) includes accelerated depreciation for companies in addition to tax rebates for consumers. But, clearly that won't help in the M&A example above.

Obviously, I'm way over-generalizing and over-simplifying, but you should get the idea.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Government spending continues defying the laws of God and man for the time being. Eventually, even that chimpanzee won't dance anymore.


:icon_smile_big:

Well put.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> :icon_smile_big:
> 
> Well put.


Thanks! Being an unsympathetic, black-n-white bastage does sometimes pay off! 

Just wait 'til the 'anti-Christ' is elected in November - aka the 3rd day the music died.


----------



## thebot (Sep 11, 2007)

If interest rates continue to decline, they will probably start hiring in about six months..



Beresford said:


> A lot of people are either being laid off or quitting at my wife's company (real estate escrow). My wife says the hot job now everyone is applying for now is being a parking attendant for AMPCO.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Some related info:

https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7256316.stm


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

BertieW said:


> Some related info:
> 
> https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7256316.stm


Interesting article. The most money my family ever made while I was growing up was about 16k. I guess I am special.

I still think that, by and large (barring calamity), where you are at 40 is merely a summation of the choices you have made in your life. I think the best way we can influence social mobility is mentoring and modeling. If an idiot like me can succeed, anyone can. I had to come across someone to model to wake up to my potential (which I admittedly probably never met).


----------



## 16128 (Feb 8, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Some related info:
> 
> https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7256316.stm


I read that and am still not really sure how they define "mobility". In the last few paragraphs they seem to credit better welfare programs in Europe, but I don't think "getting more welfare" means "getting ahead" into a higher economic class... because you're still dependent.

I work for an internet company and business is very good right now. (I was laid off after the dot com crash, so I'm a little sensitive/paranoid about these things.)


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

VS said:


> I read that and am still not really sure how they define "mobility". In the last few paragraphs they seem to credit better welfare programs in Europe, but I don't think "getting more welfare" means "getting ahead" into a higher economic class... because you're still dependent.
> 
> I work for an internet company and business is very good right now. (I was laid off after the dot com crash, so I'm a little sensitive/paranoid about these things.)


I have to agree (with both the statement and the paranoia).

My reading was that mobility in the article was measured as the ability of a non-college educated person to move up in class. This happened quite a bit in the past - with union pay in growth industries like auto-manu and the tech-workers of the dot com boom, but that ship has sailed IMHO.

There is no question that a very large percentage of the highly mobile workers that didn't have degrees were in fields related to dotcom like web-page designers and sysadmins.

I have a mentee that somehow talked his way into VP at a dotcom company without a degree. He's currently back to making ~$50k/yr as an Exchange sysadmin. His official title is something like Messaging Platform Specialist.  He spends his days helping users figure out why their mailbox is full when they haven't deleted any mail for 10 years and foward attachments back and forth through the company instead of using public-folders or Sharepoint. Last time I met with him he was telling me about an exciting new project he's involved in (but not leading) - upgrading Exchange to 64-bit and implementing the technology that strips and caches attachments for the enterprise messaging platform to reduce storage requirements. WOO HOO!


----------



## Good Old Sledge (Jun 13, 2006)

The hospital where I work is to be closed down for budgetary reasons by the end of June. We are a State hospital, in operation since 1853, we serve chronically ill psychiatric patients and have just over 100 beds (and we have been at over 90% capacity for at least the last 3 years).
It was easy for our Governor to close us - these patients have little voice or means of protecting themselves. The jails will have to expand to take up much of the slack and the private hospitals will take a lot more of these idigent folks in - further effecting the cost of health care for the rest of us. 
This will terminate 200 jobs in an already depressed community. The State will offer jobs in other hospitals (50 to 100 miles away) for many of our nurses and doctors, but lower-payed staff are on their own.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

This doesn't sound like one that the global markets are likely to solve. Too bad for those people. Money talk bullshite walk, as the old saying goes. 

Another puts it this way. A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members. 

Gandhi may have been talking about animals, but the sentiments seem relevant here too.


----------



## cdcro (Jan 23, 2008)

my wife is a teacher, and I work for the same school district, we've noticed many more people coming from the business world and entering public service. I don't know if it's in response to a poor job market or not.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Another puts it this way. A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members.
> 
> Gandhi may have been talking about animals, but the sentiments seem relevant here too.


" ... let me try to summarize the message of The Quest for Cosmic Justice in three propositions which may seem to be axiomatic, but whose implications are in fact politically controversial:

1. The impossible is not going to be achieved.
2. It is a waste of precious resources to try to achieve it.
3. The devastating costs and social dangers which go with these attempts to achieve the impossible should be taken into account."

" The argument here is not against real justice or real equality. Both of these things are desirable in themselves, just as immortality may be considered desirable in itself. The only arguments against any of these things is that they are impossible-- and the cost of pursuing impossible dreams are not negligible."

" Ironically, the quest for greater economic and social equality is promoted through a far greater inequality of political power. If rules cannot produce cosmic justice, only raw power is left as the way to produce the kinds of results being sought."

THE QUEST FOR COSMIC JUSTICE
by Thomas Sowell https://www.tsowell.com/spquestc.html


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

ksinc said:


> " ... let me try to summarize the message of The Quest for Cosmic Justice in three propositions which may seem to be axiomatic, but whose implications are in fact politically controversial:
> 
> 1. The impossible is not going to be achieved.
> 2. It is a waste of precious resources to try to achieve it.
> ...


You have your religion, I have mine.

What does he mean by "the impossible"?


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

*Where the hell's my rebate cheque?*

Where the hell's my tax rebate?

https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23349559/

Too little, too late I fear.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Where the hell's my tax rebate?
> 
> https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23349559/
> 
> Too little, too late I fear.


Huh? that's a non-sequitor. Wholesalers don't get rebates. If they did, they would be demagogued as tax cuts for the rich and subsidies.

Did you watch the video and listen to Diane Swonk's comments? That should fix you right up.

You could also read this


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> You have your religion, I have mine.
> 
> What does he mean by "the impossible"?


The invalidity of your first statement is proven by your second statement.



> Cosmic justice is one of the impossible dreams which has a very high cost and very dangerous potentialities.


https://www.tsowell.com/spquestc.html


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

ksinc said:


> The invalidity of your first statement is proven by your second statement.
> 
> https://www.tsowell.com/spquestc.html


Maybe if it were double-spaced, or if you explained what you think he means by "the impossible," I'd have a better chance of comprehending.

By religion, I mean the reification of the market, something Thomas seems to embrace. Most economists I know, including those who admire Friedman, put the Roger Maris asterisk next to "free markets," recognising the truth of the matter, something hardcore libertarians seem unwilling to do.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Maybe if it were double-spaced, or if you explained what you think he means by "the impossible," I'd have a better chance of comprehending.


I'm sorry, I assumed if you are on the forum you can read plain english.

There is nothing to explain, "Cosmic justice is one of the impossible dreams which has a very high cost and very dangerous potentialities."

It=the impossible=The Quest for Cosmic Justice

I believe that's also the title of the article and the book being discussed in the article.

You really don't see the connection between your Ghandi quotation and an economist discusssing the Quest for Cosmic Justice? That has to be explained to you?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> By religion, I mean the reification of the market, something Thomas seems to embrace. Most economists I know, including those who admire Friedman, put the Roger Maris asterisk next to "free markets," recognising the truth of the matter, something hardcore libertarians seem unwilling to do.


Perhaps my search key is broken. I cannot find the term "free markets" in the article. Can you provide a quote that is the basis for your 2nd non-sequitor in as many posts?

Can you name a "hardcore libertarian", "economist", "who [doesn't] admire Friedman" or conversely doesn't "recongi[ze] the truth of the matter" about "free markets"?

Do you not realize Friedman was a "hardcore libertarian" economist?



> A Libertarian Champion
> As a libertarian, Mr. Friedman advocated legalizing drugs and generally opposed public education and the state's power to license doctors, automobile drivers and others. He was criticized for those views, but he stood by them, arguing that prohibiting, regulating or licensing human behavior either does not work or creates inefficient bureaucracies. Mr. Friedman insisted that unimpeded private competition produced better results than government systems.





> Flying the flag of economic conservatism, Mr. Friedman led the postwar challenge to the hallowed theories of Lord Keynes, the British economist who maintained that governments had a duty to help capitalistic economies through periods of recession and to prevent boom times from exploding into high inflation.
> 
> In Professor Friedman's view, government had the opposite obligation: to keep its hands off the economy, to let the free market do its work. He was a spiritual heir to Adam Smith, the 18th-century founder of the science of economics and proponent of laissez-faire: that government governs best which governs least.


How many economists do you actually know?

You do realize "reification" is a marxist term, right? You think Dr. Sowell might be embracing that? https://www.marxists.org/archive/lukacs/works/history/hcc05.htm


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Perhaps my search key is broken. I cannot find the term "free markets" in the article. Can you provide a quote that is the basis for your 2nd non-sequitor in as many posts?
> 
> Can you name a "hardcore libertarian", "economist", "who [doesn't] admire Friedman" or conversely doesn't "recongi[ze] the truth of the matter" about "free markets"?
> 
> ...


Are you saying that the author is not a libertarian free market advocate? While the free market reference did not occur in the article you cited, surely it matters as background given the author. That's the basis. Not a non-sequitor since the author's philosophical grounding colours his text.

Yes, of course I realise that. I didn't say he wasn't. I just don't agree with the hardcore libertarian approach, and apparently neither do most Americans, or else Ron Paul would have done better in the current political race.

A few. A dozen.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Perhaps my search key is broken. I cannot find the term "free markets" in the article. Can you provide a quote that is the basis for your 2nd non-sequitor in as many posts?
> 
> Can you name a "hardcore libertarian", "economist", "who [doesn't] admire Friedman" or conversely doesn't "recongi[ze] the truth of the matter" about "free markets"?
> 
> ...


Whether he embraces the term or not is secondary. I think when you attribute all-powerful magic to an abstraction like the market the problem remains. People are left out. It becomes an alien clockwork.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Are you saying that the author is not a libertarian free market advocate? While the free market reference did not occur in the article you cited, surely it matters as background given the author. That's the basis. Not a non-sequitor since the author's philosophical grounding colours his text.


I'm not saying anything about the author, I'm asking you to provide a contextual basis for your comment. Now you are claiming "that's the basis" for you comment is not anything in the article, but your personal incomplete knowledge of and assumption of the attitudes of the the author's free market advocacy, but that your statement was relevant to the discussion of a free society and the quest for cosmic justice? What do you think comes first free market advocacy or advocacy for a free society? Which one is based on the other?

I can tell you that I know Dr. Sowell believes in this


> L.1 Life Is a Gift from God
> 
> L.2 We hold from God the gift which includes all others. This gift is life-physical, intellectual, and moral life.
> 
> ...





BertieW said:


> Yes, of course I realise that. I didn't say he wasn't. I just don't agree with the hardcore libertarian approach, and apparently neither do most Americans, or else Ron Paul would have done better in the current political race.


No, you didn't say that. You said said that "Most economists I know, including those who admire Friedman, put the Roger Maris asterisk next to "free markets," recognising the truth of the matter, something hardcore libertarians seem unwilling to do." Not most Americans.



BertieW said:


> A few. A dozen.


Great! So, it should be a simple thing to name one or even two economists you know that meet the criteria of your proposition.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Whether he embraces the term or not is secondary. I think when you attribute all-powerful magic to an abstraction like the market the problem remains. People are left out. It becomes an alien clockwork.


Obviously, the concept not the term. Give an example where he embraces that concept, please?


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Let's go back a few posts to get some clarity. 

Your initial reference to Prof. (let's call him that, since he's not an MD) Sowell was introduced as if to say that we can expect no better of our society than to accept that dozens of chronically ill psychiatric patients will get flung into the streets or jail. 

Is this a reality that Sowell would claim among the "impossible"? 

Your introduction of his remarks suggests that you, at least, believe so. 

I think we can do better, and that the challenge is hardly impossible to surmount.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Obviously, the concept not the term. Give an example where he embraces that concept, please?


His work is sold through Laissez Faire books. He advocates laissez-faire economics. That's fine and he may well be an honorable man. But I'm not alone in contending that strict laissez-faire approach regards the market as The Market. I think that's putting the economic cart before the human, if you will, horse.

But then I also think it's not an impossibility to keep chronically ill psychiatric patients off the street or out of jail.

It's clear we're not coming to any sort of middle ground. Doubtless we can both find better things to do with the remainder of the afternoon.

Maybe I'll read some Schumpeter.

Cheers.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

BertieW said:


> Yes, of course I realise that. I didn't say he wasn't.* I just don't agree with the hardcore libertarian approach, and apparently neither do most Americans,* or else Ron Paul would have done better in the current political race.
> 
> A few. A dozen.


Fifty percent of Americans are below average in intelligence. What possible proof could this statement provide?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> His work is sold through Laissez Faire books. He advocates laissez-faire economics. That's fine and he may well be an honorable man. But I'm not alone in contending that strict laissez-faire approach regards the market as The Market. I think that's putting the economic cart before the human, if you will, horse.
> 
> But then I also think it's not an impossibility to keep chronically ill psychiatric patients off the street or out of jail.
> 
> ...


You think that's an example of embracing reification by Dr. Thomas Sowell? Sorry, but no.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Let's go back a few posts to get some clarity.
> 
> Your initial reference to Prof. (let's call him that, since he's not an MD) Sowell was introduced as if to say that we can expect no better of our society than to accept that dozens of chronically ill psychiatric patients will get flung into the streets or jail.
> 
> ...


Clarity? I think you mean revision. I can see why you want that 

I'll give you a redo. Start with Post #29

https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showpost.php?p=713419&postcount=29

Concentrate on what is actually quoted and said not what you imagine and I know you can figure it out. Compare that to the Ghandi quotation about 'greatness'. You mixed up 'global markets' and 'nations' not me. They are not one and the same. Neither are free societies and free markets.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

"Are we, in fact, in a recession? If not, is one still headed our way? Economists John Taylor and Kenn Judd discuss not only the state of the current economic slowdown, but how the definition of recession is evolving."

Part 1 https://tv.nationalreview.com/uncommonknowledge/post/?q=ZWRiMzU3NDc2YWE5YzU1NjUzYjRhY2UxZmFlODhiNmY=

Part 2 https://tv.nationalreview.com/uncommonknowledge/post/?q=NTU5NTdiOTkyNDU2MDY4ZWI4MDU0ZThhZTMxYzUzNjM=

Part 3 https://tv.nationalreview.com/uncommonknowledge/post/?q=NDJiNDlkOWQxNTFiYjBiNmE5MDM4ZTU1YTZhYjJkZTI=

Part 4 https://tv.nationalreview.com/uncommonknowledge/post/?q=NGNhZjI4YjIyOWY1ZDFiNWY3MWI1NTBhZGM1NWFjMzc=

Part 5 https://tv.nationalreview.com/uncommonknowledge/post/?q=OTg2MThlNjRhYmY0N2VjZDBlMzc2NjQ5NzA3ZDA3NDQ=


----------



## NewYorkBuck (May 6, 2004)

Back to the original intent of the thread - yes it has hit me. No surpise - I work in the MBS industry. I had a great five years, but everyone was down huge this year. Had to layoff some people in my group a few months ago. Gonna have to do it again. It sux, but the market is just not there.


----------



## eg1 (Jan 17, 2007)

Back to the thread hijack: I submit that the man who seeks justice in this world will require a lamp more powerful and penetrating than any Diogenes ever carried ...


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

So, with the Bear Stearns debacle in progress, other investment banks looking precarious, etc, etc, is any of this looking likely to affect any of you in New York and/or the financial sector? Are you nervous about the coming week? For that matter, do we have any Bear Stearns guys out there?


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

topbroker said:


> So, with the Bear Stearns debacle in progress, other investment banks looking precarious, etc, etc, is any of this looking likely to affect any of you in New York and/or the financial sector? Are you nervous about the coming week? For that matter, do we have any Bear Stearns guys out there?


I work for FINRA (Financial Industry Regulation Authority, formerly NYSE Regulation) so I have some job security.


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

KenR said:


> I work for FINRA (Financial Industry Regulation Authority, formerly NYSE Regulation) so I have some job security.


I'll say!


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

Which was a nice switch from the Wall Street roller coaster ride that I was on for over 25 years before I made the jump.


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

KenR said:


> Which was I nice switch from the Wall Street roller coaster ride that I was on for over 25 years _before I made the jump_.


Given the times that are in it, perhaps you could use more delicate phrasing Let's not give anyone any ideas. :icon_pale::icon_smile:


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

It's tougher to open an office window today than it was in the late 1920's.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

KenR said:


> It's tougher to open an office window today than it was in the late 1920's.


How is it tougher?


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

KenR said:


> It's tougher to open an office window today than it was in the late 1920's.


Very true. Lots of broken noses in the offing then. :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Neal Shields (Mar 11, 2007)

*Not what but "where are you wearing"*

We see "what are you wearing" posts all the time. Maybe there should be "where are you wearing" posts. Where were the things you have on made?

The problem with money is it makes people forget that we live in a barter society. You make stuff, I make stuff, we trade. The more stuff we make the richer we get.

Sometime a while back American decided to quit getting her hands dirty and let other people make all the stuff.

We now have less tangable wealth to trade so we arn't so rich. The politishions tell give us all sorts of reasons to make sure we don't realize that it is a result of policies that they voted for.

There wouldn't be any problem at all if the Chineese would just concent to trade stuff for legal services.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

topbroker said:


> So, with the Bear Stearns debacle in progress, other investment banks looking precarious, etc, etc, is any of this looking likely to affect any of you in New York and/or the financial sector? Are you nervous about the coming week? For that matter, do we have any Bear Stearns guys out there?


Two years ago brokers were making runs on the Ferrari dealers with their bonuses off derivative trades when BS was at $120/s while calling Warren Buffet past his prime for sitting on a 35% cash position and shorting the dollar.

The last week reported Buffet's NW jumped from $52B to $62B in the last six months and BS is sold at $2/s.

For the last few years I used the words debacle, precarious, and nervous. Now I'm just confident and opportunistic.

LET'S GO SHOPPING! 

I do have sympathy for people that worked at BS that were not in the bonus pools - like receptionists and clerks. Where are they going to go?

I think any BS-types we have here probably know the score and hopefully were prepared for the music to stop ...


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

*Stuck with it again*

Taxpayer bailout coming.

And I didn't even get my $5 million bonus this year.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

BertieW said:


> Taxpayer bailout coming.
> 
> And I didn't even get my $5 million bonus this year.


Nah, they will raise the 5% cap on DFI of the banks. With the dollar so low it's crazy to have the taxpayer pay for what the SWF want to buy. JPMChase will get another $5-$10B each from Dubai and about 5 others in the next few weeks or something to offset the $30B in Fed Cash. The fed window is usually 28/30-day loans.

Kudlow was crying about nationalizing the banks, but we won't do that. We will sell them to foreign governments though 

It was funny! They actually had that Independent-Socialist Senator Sanders sounding like Ron Paul denouncing the Fed intervention. Of course, when he was in the House in 2002 he was one of the primary sponsors of the law that allowed the creation of sub-prime MBSs that he now blames the Bush Admin for and started this mess ...

I think it's a felony offense to say outloud what I really think of Sen. Sanders - which is an odd implementation of the 1st Amendment, isn't it? So I will C-and-D! 

Maybe someday he'll be "just another Commie" and we can discuss him openly and without fear of black helicopters and JBTs? McCain hates Commies - maybe he will run someone in VT and get Sanders out of the Senate.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Rossini said:


> Very true. Lots of broken noses in the offing then. :icon_smile_big:


How were the windows made at that time?


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

*Mad Money getting madder*

Did anyone see the clip that Jon Stewart played about Jim Cramer's advice last week to hold Bear Stearns?

"No! No! No! Bear Stearns is not in trouble. ... Don't move your money from Bear."

Now that's priceless.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

BertieW said:


> Did anyone see the clip that Jon Stewart played about Jim Cramer's advice last week to hold Bear Stearns?
> 
> "No! No! No! Bear Stearns is not in trouble. ... Don't move your money from Bear."
> 
> Now that's priceless.


Well...anyone taking his advice in the first place...it is akin to seeing Rush Limbaugh for family planning.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Well...anyone taking his advice in the first place...it is akin to seeing Rush Limbaugh for family planning.


Ain't it the truth, but I've heard he does get an audience, as amazing as that seems. I've flipped past his show a few times and always am sucked in for a couple minutes by the sheer absurdity of the spectacle. But I surely would never regard Cramer as anyone whose financial opinion I should take seriously.

I understand he does have his defenders though. Nutty.


----------



## laufer (Feb 20, 2008)

BertieW said:


> I understand he does have his defenders though. Nutty.


Some of hif defenders are fanatics.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Well...anyone taking his advice in the first place...it is akin to seeing Rush Limbaugh for family planning.


In my last stock course we played 'Beat the Professor' I simply sold everything JC said to buy. I beat the professor with about $10M after the 15 week course. At least the professor came in second with like $300k.

Rather than admit he lost, he tried to DQ me ...


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

ksinc said:


> In my last stock course we played 'Beat the Professor' I simply sold everything JC said to buy. I beat the professor with about $10M after the 15 week course. At least the professor came in second with like $300k.
> 
> Rather than admit he lost, he tried to DQ me ...


LOL :aportnoy:


----------



## fruityoaty (Jan 18, 2008)

As a PhD scientist, I'm fairly immune to cyclical job markets, since I usually work for the government is some form, but federal funding to the sciences has been getting much harder to get in the last two years. This makes it harder for young scientists to get that first job and establish a research career. I suspect we may feel a significant brain drain over the next decade.


----------



## fruityoaty (Jan 18, 2008)

ksinc said:


> In my last stock course we played 'Beat the Professor' I simply sold everything JC said to buy. I beat the professor with about $10M after the 15 week course. At least the professor came in second with like $300k.


This is actually a very sound strategy. Cramer is a master of the "short squeeze". He looks for stocks that large players are shorting and tells his audience to buy. His audience is large enough that their buying scares some of the shorts into covering and fuels a tiny rush. Once the dust settles, the (well-researched) negative sentiment prevails and the stock goes down. So by selling Cramer's recommendations, you are letting him find short opportunities for you.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

fruityoaty said:


> As a PhD scientist, I'm fairly immune to cyclical job markets, since I usually work for the government is some form, but federal funding to the sciences has been getting much harder to get in the last two years. This makes it harder for young scientists to get that first job and establish a research career. I suspect we may feel a significant brain drain over the next decade.


You should have gone into investment banking. I hear that you don't even need to know what you're doing to get loads of cash.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

ksinc said:


> Nah, they will raise the 5% cap on DFI of the banks. With the dollar so low it's crazy to have the taxpayer pay for what the SWF want to buy. JPMChase will get another $5-$10B each from Dubai and about 5 others in the next few weeks or something to offset the $30B in Fed Cash. The fed window is usually 28/30-day loans.
> 
> Kudlow was crying about nationalizing the banks, but we won't do that. We will sell them to foreign governments though


https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080320200032.wipwso9w&show_article=1

https://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080320/us_foreign_investment.html?.v=4


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Good Grief! You'd think news that we are NOT in recession would be greeted a little better than this!

https://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080430/economy.html?.v=4

Economy grows at only 0.6 percentage point rate


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

Time to revive this thread, I think. I am curious to know from those who are willing to share:

1) Have you lost your job, or are you in danger of doing so?
2) Have your friends, profession, and community been noticeably affected by the downturn?
3) Have you lost significant value in your investments and retirement plans? Has your home dropped significantly in value, or are you having a hard time selling it?
4) Have you cut back on spending, including clothing?

My answers are:

1) I still have my job, but my company was just acquired by a European company (another sign of the times; America doesn't own America anymore), so who knows moving forward.
2) Starting to see it and feel it, yes. Sales in my industry are tacking downward; local mass layoffs are accelerating; I just had a call from a "well off" friend asking for money I borrowed some years ago (which we had both forgotten up till now).
3) For once I am glad not to be in the markets.  I rent rather than own, and my car is paid off; I'm living close to the ground.
4) No, I haven't cut back, but that is a side benefit of living close to the ground (and being single and without family dependents in any direction); if I want that suit, I'll darn well buy it.

I suspect that both here and on other menswear boards, some folks who abruptly disappear or fade out these days may be affected by these matters and may just no longer be in the mood to post about suits and such. (I can only imagine the loss of face in admitting such things at the _dinero_-obsessed Style Forum; I believe we are more mature here at AAAC.)

I always wonder about how it would be to lose a truly high salary. On the one hand, one would be likely to have more in reserve; on the other hand, the fall to earth from a great height must be horrifying, and what does one do about one's family's lifestyle, one's commitments? Ouch.


----------

