My God, you are an idiot.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Indeed. But consider... We pump a shitload of dollars into govt projects. This causes a domestic increase for simple supply and demand reasons. That's the simple energy price inflation. The more complex one is, we pump a shitload of money into the system via QE. This gets funneled to emerging markets which provide the best returns. This creates inflation in emerging markets which inflates the price of oil there which, in a global market, causes our prices to rise. Add to that the speculation increased by policies feeding financial institutions looking for big returns cheap money with which to make bets... in a commodities bubble.

Yes. You cite contributors to energy price increases. I add the Fed to your list. How big a contributor is it? Not as big as Chinese growth, surely. But significant, I think (hence the emerging markets accusing of us of exporting inflation). And in combination with a stimulus that put few back to work while increasing energy prices a bit, I'd say the Fed easing and stimulus had a considerable impact on energy prices domestically.

I tend to doubt that conclusion, but would be interested to see on the question. When you look at the size of global markets, the Fed's actions just shouldn't be that influential.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Hey, now. Let's all be nice to each other.

If you are saying I can't tell him to go fuck himself after the repeated insults he has flung at me, then you can go fuck yourself too.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

If you are saying I can't tell him to go fuck himself after the repeated insults he has flung at me, then you can go fuck yourself too.

What's wrong with autoeroticism?

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Plus, of the four terms he's had, he's only gotten 50% of the state in two. First one he was appointed, third one he couldn't get over 40%. I'm not particularly concerned about him.

That's good, because I find him kind of worrisome.

S_A_M

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Yes, it was exactly that simple. I read about it on CorrelationIsEverything.com. That you'd ask me to explain how I reach that conclusion, in light of the approximately 3846483256 articles out there explaining how Fed policy did in fact impact energy prices, shows... and this will come as a huge shock (in fact some would say it's unpossible): You don't read enough blogs.

That I would ask you to explain, again, for the I don't know how manyth time, indicates that different people have different (generally stupid) theories about this and I want to know which one you subscribe to so I can respond to it.

That you have repeatedly declined to say anything about your theory tells me that you know that it's easily shot down so you aren't going to say anything.

It's a great tactic. I once had a client being deposed. He was a higher-ranking but still middle management sales guy. Came off like a middle school hockey coach (i.e., definitely not the brightest bulb on the tree). But the dude had no fear of looking stupid, and the DOJ lawyer could get absolutely zero admissions out of him ("yeah, I see where I wrote 'everyone in the industry is moving prices in coordination' in that email, but I don't know what that means). Congrats. You are him.

Oh God... Did you just argue that energy prices dropping recently disproves my point? Putting aside speed with which you contradict your initial point, might I ask... just for shits and giggles, How?

You honestly do not know what inflation is, do you?

You can't discuss the issues in any rubber-meeting-the-road terms because that's out of your depth (one would have to experience the business cycle to grasp that)

Move lazy poser bullshit. How surprising.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Since you are sympathetic to the observation that we are in global markets that we can't control, let me suggest that any increases in energy prices likely have much more to do with continued strong demand in places like China, India and Brazil than with government action in the United States. China is growing like nuts and all of the people moving into the middle class start using a lot more energy.

No, Ty, it's all the fed. Sebby's run a business, and he knows.

(In other words, I've told him that before, he doesn't care because it doesn't fit his story).

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Indeed. But consider... We pump a shitload of dollars into govt projects. This causes a domestic increase for simple supply and demand reasons. That's the simple energy price inflation. The more complex one is, we pump a shitload of money into the system via QE. This gets funneled to emerging markets which provide the best returns. This creates inflation in emerging markets which inflates the price of oil there which, in a global market, causes our prices to rise. Add to that the speculation increased by policies feeding financial institutions looking for big returns cheap money with which to make bets... in a commodities bubble.

Yes. You cite contributors to energy price increases. I add the Fed to your list. How big a contributor is it? Not as big as Chinese growth, surely. But significant, I think (hence the emerging markets accusing of us of exporting inflation). And in combination with a stimulus that put few back to work while increasing energy prices a bit, I'd say the Fed easing and stimulus had a considerable impact on energy prices, and the amount of pain they caused, domestically.

I'd say you have no sense of proportion at all. This is like arguing that my purchase of rice with my lunch is causing food shortages in India because of increased demand.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

http://calapp.blogspot.com/

39,000 * $56.00 (maximum FUTA tax per employee, per year) = $2,184,000.

How much they paying the lawyers to defend the scheme?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

39,000 * $56.00 (maximum FUTA tax per employee, per year) = $2,184,000.

How much they paying the lawyers to defend the scheme?

The tribe pays the maximum state unemployment tax? If there's no state unemployment tax, the max is $434 for a total of $16.9 mil a year.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

No, but if you're going to argue the headline is a better measure, than you should be fucking talking about deflation right now. And you should be talking about price levels and not individual prices. And, as I said, you shouldn't confuse wage stagnation with inflation if you are talking about monetary policy (i.e. you can't fix wage stagnation by keeping unemployment high with tight money).

They should be discussed in concert. One's a lot worse when you have the other working with it. Selective inflation, as I noted before. Pernicious.

So your understanding of what I've been saying is that I expect those who have no money are going to be influenced by monetary policy???? Again, you aren't this stupid. Why do you keep pretending to be.

But lots of people (i.e. banks, corporations, you and me) have lots of money. Those people, you know, the ones with the money, are the ones we are talking about influencing with incentives.

Lots of those people won't be incentivized to hire anyone until they see the classes below them buying goods and services. You can incentivize me all day long with cheap credit. I am not hiring people until I see the guy below me demonstarting an ability consume what I make.

You know, like you suggested with the "businesses are just waiting for Obama to go" bullshit.

These aren't contrary points, unless you have shit for bra-- Let me try this differently... Businesses want Obama gone because they don't want to be regulated, and they don't like HCR. Banks, in particular, want Dodd/Frank eviscerated far beyond its present emasculation.

You know, I don't know that much about banking regulations, but you know what I do know? There aren't any like this. There are no federal bank regulations that set credit standards. I learned that by, you know, doing work for banks and hanging out with people who represent them.

Of course it's not a direct regulation on credit standards. You knew I didn't mean that. You knew I meant the general tightening that comes with regulators monitoring banks portfolios more aggressively. Perhaps you should hang out with some people who actually worked IN banks, as opposed to representing them. I'll let you in on a secret: they think a little different than lawyers.

Newflash: yes, and we are talking about ways to make it less of an anal cavity search, by increasing the banks' incentives to lend.

On one hand, "Please lend!" On the other, "Hi, these men in the black suits are Bob, Tom & Larry. Don't mind them. They're just looking over your loan portfolios. Some looked a bit dicey to us."

Again, I don't think you have any understanding of corporate finance. Multinationals do not ever fully pay back their borrowing, at least not until they are being wound up. Just as no, the federal debt will never be paid back in full, nor should we ever want it to be.

Of course they don't. Eventually, however, when revenues stay flat or have anemic growth while costs are a juggernaut, the carry becomes a bit tricky. The sixty five billion isn't cited as something scary in the moment. It's cited as something so enormous, and growing, that under any circumstances, we will hit a point where we will be unable to service it.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

39,000 * $56.00 (maximum FUTA tax per employee, per year) = $2,184,000.

How much they paying the lawyers to defend the scheme?

Given that it is Holland & Knight ...

I also found this debunking of Fox News' chief climate change denier amusing - http://legalplanet.wordpress.com/201...tupid-or-evil/ .

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

If you are saying I can't tell him to go fuck himself after the repeated insults he has flung at me, then you can go fuck yourself too.

You can certainly tell him that. I was just hoping you'd do it nicely.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

That I would ask you to explain, again, for the I don't know how manyth time, indicates that different people have different (generally stupid) theories about this and I want to know which one you subscribe to so I can respond to it.

I need to cite a source saying QE contributed to energy price increases? The problem is where to start.

That you have repeatedly declined to say anything about your theory tells me that you know that it's easily shot down so you aren't going to say anything.

See above.

It's a great tactic. I once had a client being deposed. He was a higher-ranking but still middle management sales guy. Came off like a middle school hockey coach (i.e., definitely not the brightest bulb on the tree). But the dude had no fear of looking stupid, and the DOJ lawyer could get absolutely zero admissions out of him ("yeah, I see where I wrote 'everyone in the industry is moving prices in coordination' in that email, but I don't know what that means). Congrats. You are him.

And you, the autistic Trekkie who speaks his own unique language. I could cross you for hours and non one in the room would have a clue what the fuck you were saying. And I have a fucking English degree. It is really quite amazing. In this, on the FB, anywhere we talk, you are dense in a fashion I have never encountered anywhere else. And this is high compliment in that regard, as I have hung out with some seriously strange people.

You honestly do not know what inflation is, do you?

Not a clue. I just enjoy sparing with your unceasing wit.

Move lazy poser bullshit. How surprising.

Which is it? Am I pretending, or a know nothing? You're a little tangled there.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I'd say you have no sense of proportion at all. This is like arguing that my purchase of rice with my lunch is causing food shortages in India because of increased demand.

I said the Fed was a contributing factor. I did not say it was the only factor. This does not, of course, fit with your narrative.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You can certainly tell him that. I was just hoping you'd do it nicely.

If you think I give a flying fuck about criticism, you don't know me.