Friday, April 29, 2011
Meanwhile you will all be wondering why the US economy isn't growing and why China is trouncing us economically.
Jose, makes a good solid economic analysis here.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
As the market ebbs and flows 400 points here, 500 points there, I am often asked by friends:
"When is the market going to bottom?"
And I find it interesting that people are even buying right now, because as far as I'm concerned there's absolutely no reason to buy stocks until after the presidential election. When I tell my friends this, they say,
"Well why wait till then? Couldn't stock prices have gone up by then and you missed out of a great buying opportunity?"
Which indicates to me we all need a basic lesson in "Barack Economics."
You see, there are two things that drive the price of a stock; the profits the corporation makes and the capital gain one receives when they sell the stock.
First, let's start with profits. Profits are nothing more than what a company or corporation has left over when it pays for all of its expenses. Profits typically make people happy because that's how we not only enrich ourselves, but, frankly, live.
But hold on there now! You don't get to keep all of those profits. No no no. You see, since you own part of a corporation, the corporation has to pay on average a 40% tax rate in the US (though the effective rate for some is around 32%). This is taken out of your profits (pre-tax profits) before sending them along to you.
But with Obamanomuks this tax rate will go up. Nobody knows for sure how much, but 50%, 70%, maybe even 90%. Regardless, when it's all said and done, there won't be a lot of your profits left;
What profits do remain, however, can be passed along to you in the form of dividends.
But, UH OH!!! That was a transaction, and even though you own part of the corporation, since it is a separate legal entity, you get to pay taxes on the DIVIDENDS, typically between 5-15%. This is called "double taxation." It may not make you happy, but it makes lots of government freeloaders happy.
I know you may be upset that you get to pay taxes twice, but with the cutting edge of Barackian Economics, you will get to pay an even higher dividend tax! Don't worry, according to Joe Biden it's patriotic to pay more in taxes leaving you with even less.
Well how does this affect the stock market and stock prices? Well, it's very simple. Although if you go to any major corporation's web site and they make it seem like pursuing green policies is what gives them value, in reality they're just doing that so you are foolish enough to buy their products without guilt. No, the truth is what really gives stocks value is the underlying profits those firm generate. You see, if a firm doesn't make a profit, why would anybody forfeit their money to invest in it? I don't invest in stocks so they can sell green products or be socially responsible. I invest in a corporation so it makes money. And the less money I see after all the expenses and taxes are taken out, the less value that firm has to me and thus the lower the stock price.
But profits are not the only thing that drive the value of the stock (well, technically they are, but we won't go into that right now). There is also a "capital gains" ie-how much money you make when you sell the stock. Say you buy a stock for $10, and it goes up to $100. Why, that's an impressive profit of $90, and you are happy!
But hold on there little buckaroo! Uncle Sam wants some of that and you get to pay a capital gains "tax" on it. This tax can be anywhere from 0-35%.
But with Obamanomuks this rate will go up even more, leaving you with even less.
The relationship between the amount you get to keep and the value of the stock is the same. If you get to keep more, then the value of the stock is worth more and therefore prices go up. But if capital gains are increased, then the value of those stocks go down.
"But isn't it the rich that only own stock? And shouldn't we hate the rich by the fact they're rich, even though they may have actually worked for it and have never done anything to us?"
Although a common misconception, it's not just the rich that own stock in the US. Most everybody in the US, rich, poor, short or tall, own stock in one way or another. Most commonly this is done through our 401k, 403b and other retirement programs. We buy mutual funds which are nothing more than groups of stock which we hold in these retirement accounts. Also, pensions pay for your retirement by investing in stocks and mutual funds. So if you have a pension or you have a retirement program, YOU OWN STOCK!
Ergo, it is profits that drive the value of stocks which in turn determines the wealth of the people of the entire nation.
But with Obamanomuks there will be no profit, and therefore no stocks, and therefore no retirement.
All you'll be left with is;
And that's why the Captain is waiting to see if Barack Obama and the democrats take a supermajority in Washington before he invests his money in the stock market.
OH! AND REMEMBER TO BUY MY BOOK!
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Of course as an adult I don't donate to charity of any kind for these reasons three;
1. The government now confiscates 40% of production, 75% of which goes to income transfers. You are a fool to donate beyond what the government mandates you do.
2. I barely have enough money as it is.
3. Most of it goes to people I don't want it to go to, who really don't need help and are really just posing as a "charitable organization" when in reality they use the charity as a means of employment.
Enjoy the decline (by not donating to charity!)
Monday, April 25, 2011
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Regardless, I'm going to try anyway.
Given Obama's announcement to launch investigations into the price of oil, let me see if I can guess and plot the logic here so that even 2nd graders can understand;
Invasion of Libya + HUGE EFFING NATIONAL DEFICITS + growing 2nd and third world nations = increased risk of oil supply interruptions + increased demand for oil + weak dollar = increased gas prices.
Oh, I'm sorry, is that too complicated for you Obamaites out there? Would you prefer I mollify your little brains by telling you it's "big oil" and "oil speculators?" Hey, I know, let's do that stupid thing where we all decide to "boycott big oil" on ONE day! You know, that incredibly inane and stupid idea college kids come up with because of their galactically incomprehensible level of stupidity when it comes to economics.
Yeah, you go launch your investigation.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
International Currency Analyst.
Thought, "wow! Right up my alley!"
Of course if you go to the actual job board, you'll see it's just an office admin position where you do data entry and reconcile errors and mistakes in trades.
You don't analyze currencies.
You don't study foreign economies.
You don't use your brain, let alone your degree.
Swear when I am king I will make it a law the title must match the job duties.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Another one of my female friends is also a school teacher. She is only 3 years away from paying off her house. Has a lot of toys, motorcycles, but no husband nor children. She does however have a nice pension and has also never known unemployment.
A third of my female friends is actually a colleague of mine who unbeknownst to me recently had a 1960's muscle car. She works in the public sector and in the past 12 years of knowing her she has always had the same job. Never married, no children.
A fourth one, also public sector, never known unemployment, decent job, no husband.
Now I could go on, but in general what all of these ladies have in common are six things;
1. They work in the public sector.
2. They've never known unemployment.
3. Even though they don't make a TON of money they make it so consistently and without pause they are all in much stronger financial situations than I am.
4. They have nice things and toys and finances.
5. They have health care and pensions that I could only dream of having.
but the most interesting one is #6;
6. They're all looking for a boyfriend/husband.
Now, this is not going to be a tirade against the path women have chosen and blah blah blah and choices have consequences, blah blah blah, it's the career or the family blah blah blah type of BS.
It's actually quite the opposite and it does beget some pity for them.
Understand that because of what women major in, they typically are over-represented in the employment ranks of the public sector. Teachers, social workers, etc, attract more women than they do men. Again, not terribly high paying jobs, but really reliable employment and exceptional benefits. Additionally, because of the strength of public sector unions, they are more or less inoculated against the effects of the recession. No offense to them, but they really don't know what it's like having to worry about, "Geez, I hope I have enough money to afford gas." Or "geez, I have to find a job or else I'm going to be in real trouble in 3 months."
Now, over the decades, if they are slightly good stewards of their finances, they build up tidy little nest eggs and strong, stable finances. Their male counterparts however, have an uphill battle in this regard, especially given the disproportionate effects this particular recession has had on men. They have nowhere near the nest egg or retirement plans these ladies do. They have nowhere near the stable employment these ladies do. And they have nowhere near the strong, stable finances these ladies do. This presents a risk for the ladies, because as the economy fails to genuinely recover and the public sector continues to grow and crowd out the private sector, men are going to be forced or at least "tempted" to consider using some of these nice ladies for their finances. Worse still, because of pride, men are less likely (I'm guessing) to go on the public dole and may instead psychologically convince themselves of a compromise between pride and starvation, permitting themselves to some gold-digging.
My one friend in particular is very aware of this in that she is afraid (and I think justifiably so) of men once they find out her house is more or less bought and paid for, as well as all of her toys and she has a nice pension AND HER SPOUSE/PARTNER CAN GET FREE HEALTH INSURANCE.
It's like the Foghorn Leghorn cartoon where he shacks up with the widow hen because winter's coming.
Of course the irony of this is how the roles have been reversed. Previously on "An American Life" the men were the bread-winners and had to look out for the gold diggers. Now with much-celebrated growth in the public sector (and thus a crowding out of the evil and completely unnecessary private sector);
it's those nice, stably employed public sector women with their nice pensions, free health insurance, and tidy-summed bank accounts that have to look out for ulteriorly-motivated men.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Option 1 - Read the whole book which will take you at least 2 years and 4 months of your finite life.
Option 2 - Watch the movie and the successive sequels, which if you include transit time, will at most be 9 hours.
I just hated reading as a child and would always point out to my mother, "I'll just wait for them to make a movie."
Well, they did it with the Lord of the Rings trilogy.
And now they're doing it with Atlas Shrugged.
If for any other reason, even if the acting is horrible, you don't have to waste your youth on reading the entire tome of Atlas Shrugged.
Friday, April 15, 2011
For example, say you are ignorant. And I come up with a chart showing you that spending per pupil in the public schools has no correlation with performance. Physical proof right there that more spending does not equal better education. And you choose to disbelieve me or my figures and write it off as some statistical quirk and continue believing in your religious ideology. What was the point of showing you the chart, let alone doing the research to show it to you?
Or, say you are evil. You know full well more spending doesn't equal better education, but you don't care because you benefit from having more money spent on education. However, you can't acknowledge that fact, so you lie to everybody even though deep down inside you know you are lying just to extract more money from them. I could show you charts all day, prove to you time and time again, but since you are evil and have no problems denying reality so you can benefit from it, you will knowingly find excuses as to why the chart is the way it is.
In either case, I simply waste my breath and finite life because it's only going to be a disastrous collapse of the system that will convince you otherwise. But for posterity's sake I am going to document one small issue here so for those of us who do have intellectual honesty, we can KNOW for a FACT what the reality is.
In short I wanted to know who was to blame for the deficits we have now that ARE going to destroy this country. I knew intuitively by looking the general deficit figures who is to blame, but you know liars and ignorants, they'll come up with whatever they want to believe. I want to KNOW.
So even if you go with the premise Bush is to blame for the economy and dropping revenues, how far did revenues drop? Well, going from the PEAK of federal revenues to the absolute trough, Bush can only be blamed for a drop of $480 billion (and that is ignoring the FACT that revenues still dropped under Obama's watch, but I'll just give that one to the left).
And what are the current deficits today?
Eh, $1.4 trillion.
This leaves roughly $900 billion SQUARELY in the hands of Obama (per year I might add).
Now, this ought to tell you who is to blame for our current fiscal crisis. And it should provide context to when he spews his unicorns and ponies blather about actually going about solving the deficit problem.
The only question is if he's evil or ignorant.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
It is also a mush mouth of non-sensical words politicians use to talk over lesser minds in order to trick these lesser minds to vote for them. Don't believe me?
Go to youtube and listen to any of Barack Obama's speeches.
If you find ONE concrete action he advocates taking, then I must have been bombed out of my mind because the man, despite speaking voluminously has never said ONE thing.
If you find every word he says to be genius, then you are one of those lesser minds lacking genuine critical thinking skills and independent thought.
Regardless, what I always found interesting in my talk radio days was when I would get a liberal caller. They would NEVER make any sense. They would NEVER get to the point. They would just BLATHER.
I always wondered where they learned to talk for so long, yet say ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
Without going into detail, you must understand, career academians, leftist, politicians (of all stripes) and other such ilk, make a living by promising the unpromisable to the masses. When the reality comes crashing down, and the masses are about to get wise to the scam these scumbags perpetrated on the masses, these scumbags' careers are threatened. Thus a VITAL part of their job security is to be able to make themselves sound intelligent, but say nothing and promise nothing, YET make it sound like they're promising SOMETHING so that lesser minds keep voting for them.
Of course, we don't need curt, blunt, truthful talk.
We need to "win the future."
Have a "Sputnik moment."
Or "achieve a new greatness."
Only the most idiotic and purified extract of moron could ever believe such words have ANY meaning.
Saturday, April 09, 2011
The reasons are thus;
1. I'm lazy and really don't like writing that much.
2. Most people's attention spans today is too short to appreciate lengthier writings.
So, assuming you are of the average Cappy Cap reader, permit me this quick, brief observation:
If a society has managed to pool financial resources by taking trust funds granted from the past, and combine them with proceeds from mortgaging the future, how long can the present society last on inherited and borrowed finances?
Anybody do the fruit fly experiment?
Thus concludes your short, succinct (yet super awesome brilliant) economic insight of the day.
Enjoy the decline!
Friday, April 08, 2011
I couldn't have said it better myself.
I do hope to make an aside that is relevant.
The UN, and the people who work for the UN, have no intention of actually helping poor or desperate people.
They first and foremost are looking for a means of employment under the "noble" and "altruistic" guise of charity.
Thursday, April 07, 2011
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
We recently published an article that you may be interested in entitled, "10 Ways to Promote Your Liberal Arts Major on the Job Market".
I thought perhaps you'd be interested in sharing this article with your readers? After having followed your blog for a while, I feel that this one article would align well with your blog's subject matter.
If interested, here's the link for your convenience: (http://www.bestuniversities.com/blog/2011/10-ways-to-promote-your-liberal-arts-major-on-the-job-market/)
Thanks for your time,Tina Sans
Obviously a e-mail generating program that searches blogs with certain text strings.
Regardless, you have to click on the article because it is just hilarious.
Highlight your diversity?
And of course, the always available;
Critical thinking skills!
Heh, enjoy the decline.
Saturday, April 02, 2011
But don't worry. This is totally sustainable.
You see, we'll all major in political science, we'll all work for the government and then that will create jobs because of all the government spending will cause a multiplier effect. And then we'll all have more money and we can buy Ipods made in China.
Worthless degrees people. They are key to the demise of this nation.
Friday, April 01, 2011
U.S. employment recorded a second straight month of solid gains in March and the jobless rate fell to a two-year low of 8.8 percent, marking a decisive shift in the labor market that should help to underpin the economic recovery.
God has saved a special place in hell for all the MSM employees who over the decades have misled the American people into spectacular levels of ignorance.
Filed under "The cancer is spreading less slowly."