While some may have been out of jobs in Houston, I recall Houston in the 70 as being a boom town with it being hard to hold on to good help by 1974. It very easy to find a job in the 70's in Houston. At least every one I knew that was looking for a job including engineers were tossing coins to decide which company to go with.
SNIP SOME MORE
What exactly are "excess profits". More than you get? More than you think someone should get? 1%, 10%, 500%, 5000% ??? If you sell an article or book, how do we determine how much of your profits are "excess" so we can take them all?
Collusion and price fixing are criminal acts and should be prosecuted. However, like any crime, you should be able to prove it and not punish someone simply because you are envious or because you covet something they have and don't want to pay their asking price.
Dave Hall
You're a Democrat, aren't you, Charlie?
I, for one, think we are already over-regulated. Sure, there are cases where some controls might be appropriate, but in general I feel that in terms of government "Less is More".
Mike
This is not directed at you, Mike, but the actual "less is more" crowd is currently in power and what they mean by "less is more" is more for them and less for you! ;~)
Kim
Well, I think the events of September 11th and the ensuing war on terrorism have definitely caused some approaches in financial terms to change dramatically, but in general I feel that President Bush's fiscal approach has been economically sound and I agree with it. In point of fact, the Presidential office has very little to do with actual economic trends and when people try to make that kind of argument it only shows how little they understand about economics.
I'm not real thrilled about the high billions of dollars being spent on Iraq, but that's the situation at this point. I'm not going to pretend to know what the best way to approach that is.
In general, I agree with most of the Republican platform - smaller government, stronger military, lower taxes. I felt like puking my guts up when Clinton downsized military bases and ballooned social programs. But, thankfully, we live in a free country where differing opinions are welcome. My Dad and I are the only Republicans in my family (that makes us 2 vs. about 40, counting aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, etc.), so I learned long ago that trying to convince a Republican of the virtues of being a Democrat and vice versa is an exercise in futility.
Mike
"Mike in Mystic"
The only problem with the Bush administration is that the smaller government has grown from nearly 4 million to well over 12 million people. Where has the Republican smaller government gone to? I realize that "smaller government" means more about less regulation but this is a lame way to decrease the unemployment figures. And the lower taxes will soon rise due to the rebuilding of Iraq (though somehow the Democrats will be blamed).
I personally loathe all politicians but I'm a disgruntled Republican at the moment. I'm still trying to figure out why our schools have cut out music programs, shop, teaching for advanced students, have three administrators for every one teacher, etc., and still want more money. Seems that 89 billion would help more here in the states instead of rebuilding a country that is supposed to have trillions of dollars in oil reserves.........
Gary
Mike in Mystic asks:
Actually, independent, with a slight--very slight--conservative tilt, which does not mean I bend over and grab my ankles every time big business and its political buddies cranks up another screwing for John Q.
Charlie Self
"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. " Adlai E. Stevenson
Anyone who believes the Remocrats or the Depublicans are for smaller government has not been paying attention. The uniparty that the GOP/DNC has become is always going to expand the government. They are all at the mercy of the "4th branch of government" the civil service union.
Interesting _fact_. In the first three years in office, Clinton increased govt spending by 3.5%. In the first three years of Bush jr's term, he increased spending by 13.5%.
Start puking.
Mike PS - your grandchildren will be spitting on your grave when they see the govt debts they've inherited. Debt-based government is the most immoral form of theft and fraud. I thas been a fact of life in all western countries, and all political parties (left, right or centre) for the last 35 years or so. Tax cuts? yeah, right...
comparing those two spending figures is ridiculous. Different situations entirely. Clinton was lucky enough to be President during a boom in the economy (which he had absolutely nothing to do with) and Bush is fighting wars all over the world. I'll grant you that even as a staunch Republican I'm a little tired of paying for freedom in far off lands, but you can't blame spending increases like that solely on the President. After 9/11 you can't have expected us to sit by and reduce spending.
And as far as my grandchildren being pissed at me for leaving them debt, that's the least of my worries. I honestly wonder if we'll make it through the baby boomers retiring. When the average age of the largest demographic group becomes older than retirement age, issues become ridiculously skewed. Old sick people seem to think they deserve medicine for free. They think everyone is out to get them and that everything costs too much. At least they'll vacate a lot of the workforce and we shouldn't have a job shortage. Well, as long as NAFTA get's revoked hehe.
These arguments are hilarious, neither of us can escape our ultimate doom at the hands of self-serving political machines. At least we have wood and tools and hopefully some time to use them to good effect.
Mike
Mike
Mike in Mystic responds:
Yeah, you could. He could have spent the money protecting the U.S.
I do love this bit though: Clinton had nothing to do with the good times on his watch, but all the crap that's falling on Bush is Clinton's fault.
Not all old people are sick. Not all need free medicine. But it would help if pharmaceutical companies didn't put the screws to consumers. As the boomers vacate the workforce, something that will happen in a big rush starting very, very soon, you won't have to worry about NAFTA or anything else taking jobs away. There will be openings everywhere.
Charlie Self
"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. " Adlai E. Stevenson
Sort of like Mobile/Exxon and Shell/Texaco. But who's in the catbird seat?
Charlie Self
"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. " Adlai E. Stevenson
Dave Hall asks:
Dave, c'mon. That's nonsense. The windfall profits tax hit profits that exceeded those in a normal year by something like 1000%. It did stop the kind of at-the-pump-gouging we're getting now. Maybe it was unfair to business--pardon me while I choke at the total unfairness to bidness in this country over the past couple decades.
I'm not exactly sure how you get covetessness out of a windfall profits tax, nor do I much care, but it does seem that you might have some form to your argument other than an insult. Otherwise, your argument doesn't stand up at all well.
Charlie Self
"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. " Adlai E. Stevenson
How? If you have a better plan, call or write your congress critter.
The concept of fighting wars, even broad ones against terrorism, away from these shores if possible, is a good one. Sure, it cost's money, lots of it, and lives ... but a damn sight fewer of _our_ women and children are lost that way. How soon you forget.
As if the previous administration's inaction on terrorism had no impact whatsoever on what you are seeing now.
I have tax returns from two businesses, along with a kid's dwindling college fund, that prove inarguably the economy was faltering months _before_ Bush took office. Then 9/11.
This is real easy to document for those who shy away from the knee jerk, blame the other party, reactions to every issue that crops up.
Look into it. Bush has been expanding the cilly service without any reference to war, terrorism or much of anything else. Iraq is budgeted outside of the regular budget process. He and his cabinet have been expanding govt and spending willy nilly to do it. Never give any idiot in govt the benefit of the doubt.
Mike
Swingman responds:
Bush ain't "the other party." He's an opportunistic clown who has bankrupted every business he ever ran. As someone once said, he "was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple."
None of that makes him Mr. Republican.
Charlie Self
"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. " Adlai E. Stevenson
$1500 +/-
$40 / month for an outside tie down w/ key card access.
Nor do they own boats, R/V's, race cars, vacation homes, custom motorcycles, horses, or really nice in ground swimming pools, but many "average" folks I know do.
You payz your money...
Barry
That's exactly my point, the good times weren't due to Clinton, but the bad times aren't due to Bush and vice versa. Economic trends of the magnitude of the 90's boom and the current downturn are way beyond the influence of the President, regardless of what brand of idiot they are.
Pharmaceutical companies do nothing of the sort, at least not in general and in actuality not even very often. They spend billions of dollars a year funding research to find medicines. They don't HAVE to do that, you know. It's a business, though, which it seems to me that most people forget, particularly the individuals who think everything should be controlled or damn near free. Just because John Doe from Somewhereville, USA happens to have a need for a particular drug that the big bad pharma company makes and can't afford it doesn't entitle him to get it for free. In the end, any price controls and other various forms of government intervention will simply result in fewer drugs being developed, plain and simple. Why would businesses choose to remain in an industry that won't allow them to grow and compete? personally, the socialistic approach to health care that several European nations and Canda utilize is horrid. So, basically, the elderly "give me my drugs for free" crowd is likely going to have an impact on my grandchildren maybe having a disease that they have no treatment for. Thanks a lot.
rush starting very,
That's the only good thing I can think of resulting from the aging of the over bred generation.
"Opportunistic clown"? ... sounds more fitting for someone who got his knob polished in the Oval Office.
Mike in Mystic warbles:
Sure they do. Where do they get their new drugs if they don't?
Ah, but if he's able to drive to Canada he gets it for less than half price.
Why is that? Because our marvelous pharmaceutical companies think the U.S. is the font of drug research blessings for the entire world, that's why.
Nonsense. Profits may drop if drug prices are stabilized throughout the world, but the drug companies are NOT about to stop developing their only source of income.
How?
WTF does that mean? Over-bred? Compared to the whining ninnies of younger generations, or what? Or are they like German shepherds and we can expect hip displacia at a young age and in many?
Charlie Self
"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. " Adlai E. Stevenson
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.