> Xeno wrote:

> Tradiitionally, unemployment rates only factor in those who have been actively seeking employment; don't factor in underemployment at all. The true extent of the problems we faced with is that MOST people - the MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WORLDWIDE - are underemployed.  This FACT is HIDDEN by the way in which statistics are traditionally constructed.  You have to deconstruct the stats, understand them for what they represent AND what they FAIL to represent, to come to a better understanding of the truth.

> The way I have deconstructed the stats is inductive reasoning; by personal observation while on-the-ground in different societies: how many old cars rather than new cars I notice in traffic in one society as opposed to another.  How many luxury cars are left in states of disrepair.  How many trucks, what kinds there are, and what times they are on the roads.  How many commercial small vehicles there are in traffic and what businesses small or large they represent.  How fast people tend to drive above the speed limit.  How prevalent is it that people jaywalk in one society as opposed to another.  How crowded are buses and subways.  How many drunks are in the streets and at what hours of the day / night.  How much litter there is in the streets.  How many products of new or old brand names there are in malls.  How busy the stores are int he malls.  How many invitations I get to restaurants as opposed to people's homes.  The demographics of people in casinos.  How full movie theaters are for what films.  How old the students and professors are in community college classrooms.  How frequent one hears sirens in the streets.  The length of queues in grocery stores and the sorts of products people buy.  The "made-in such and such country" labels on goods.  How different prices of goods are between different countries.  How drunk or doped up the homeless are.  How many buskers and the quality of their music.  The number of for lease signs or empty storefronts.  The amount and type of graffiti or lack there of.  It goes on and on...

> These numbers weren't recorded.  They were perceived as more or less than other societies or other times.  Additionally, I am not willing to share my perceptions for other personal reasons.

> To me, it indicates the extent of enforcement of speed limits in a given society; the extent of given the populace's general assessment of the risk of getting caught; or the general concern for the safety of others and themselves; the extent of a populace's willingness to pay speeding tickets.  A few more additional questions here and there, and one can learn a lot about a society: its justice system, method of enforcement, values towards human life, level of thrill-seeking in drivers, etc., etc., too much to express here, all simply had by unpacking the reasons why people speed or do not speed as much or as little as they do.

> Unlike speeding, the prevalence of jay walking and how people jaywalk, whether they run, dodge traffic, walk and wait for traffic to flow around them, or whether traffic will simply stop for jaywalking pedestrians, and the expectation of jaywalks of the likelihood of drivers stopping; the reaction of drivers - all of this indicates values towards human life in a given society.

> I don't have time to make power point presentations of my findings.  And, moreover, no one is paying me to do so.  I perceive and take mental note of what I perceive for my own understanding.  I then verify meaning or truths extrapolated from what I have perceived with other sources, and form a framework of coherent truths by which I formulate decisions on courses of action to take.

No numbers? Meh. I was expecting some since you specifically said stats and went on to say how they were used (deconstruction).

Never mind that you haven't addressed any of the concerns I raised in a previous post regarding the way you acquire data. Let's hypothetically say you have numbers. You can even make some up. The point I'm interested in is how you used speeding stats and jaywalking stats to arrive at a huge hidden unemployment/underemployment problem in society.

> Honestly, I haven't looked at it much.  For starters, the data only goes back to 1994;

Your original position is that unemployment stats do not capture hidden unemployment/underemployment currently (you meant currently, right?). Since it started in 1994 and posts results every month, it would sufficiently cover the "now" and the worst of the economic crisis.

http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp

^ sources US Bureau of Labor Statistics

> its a fairly safe bet to suggest it doesn't account for real unemployment much like all the other unemployment rates out there.

It is specifically mentioned on the government website that:

"U-6[:] Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force"

And a big note explaining "marginally attached" and its subset, "Discouraged workers":

"NOTE: Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data."

^ That sounds awfully like your unemployment/underemployment. So I ask again, by its definition, why is U6 insufficient in describing your unemployment/underemployment?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

You could afford a cab?

"We found that 98% of the drivers has exceeded the speed limit at some point in 2005. We found that 58% of the pedestrians jaywalked at some point in 1995. We found that 55% of the pedestrians jaywalked at some point in 2005. After feeding this data into our magic Xeno calculator, we found that real unemployment rate is 9% and 35% for 1995 and 2005 respectively."

You can't come up with a one or two liner to express any definitive fact on the state of an economy based on only on or even a few measures like speed, jaywalking.

One has to build frameworks of truth by cohesion to demonstrate the overall state of an economy (and other truths about a society).  You have to look at as many such measures as possible; it takes years of observation and analysis.

I know this isn't helpful, because my perceptions have been my own subjective perceptions, and my framework of understanding, although obvious to me, is not going to be obvious to others.

My intention is simply to present questions for further analysis; directions to pursue issues.  It is up to the reader to convince him or herself; not for me to convince them.

I contend that an internationally harmonized progressive corporate tax is needed.

Instead of trolling me to provide you objective facts to convince you, how about we discuss and work together to see whether I am right...

"We seem to have a very fundamental difference in understanding what a debate is..."

I am not looking for debate, but, rather, collaboration with truth-seekers.

"> My intention is simply to present questions for further analysis; directions to pursue issues.

Very well, then I won't pursue any further."

Well, this is discouraging.  Why don't you want to pursue matters further?  Isn't the fate of the free world worth pursuing the matter further?

"If your "theory" can survive under scrutiny then it will lend more weight to it being correct."
True, but simply directing me to provide you with everything needed to provide you the luxury of scrutinizing it isn't fair.  We should work together.

"Otherwise it is no different than Flint posting a crap load of links in a climate change thread saying those articles/links prove climate change wrong when they say nothing of the sort."

True.  I don't intend to sink to Flint's level.  I intend to bring the issue to light in the hope that the IC Politics community will work WITH me instead of constantly working AGAINST me, or demanding I do all of the work to convince them, when what is really needed is for people to work together, regardless of their partisanship, to find the truth; find what's best for all of us - individuals, families, nations, humanity as a whole, ecosystems - present and future.

"Think of any 'great' leaders in history."

I'm not trying to be a leader.  I am simply trying to have constructive discussions.

"The only way to fix an issue is to fix the root cause. Kind of hard when the only thing we agree on is "yea we got a problem"

Well, I think we agree on more than just there being a problem.  There are two topics which I think have come these discussions:

1.  The free market capitalism and our systems of governance aren't functioning as they were intended: to provide for the sort of competitive global economy in which the invisible hand of the free market would make it impossible for unscrupulous individuals from garnering disproportionate political power and wealth.

2.  There should be a way to determine the percentage of human potential being demonstrated by an economy; what percentage of an economy's potential is not being used.  We know we don't use more than 10% of our brain's potential.  I find it strange there is no stat out there (at least none that I have found) showing what percentage of our economic and human potential we do not use.

> V.Kemp wrote:

> The free market is functioning fine. Our problems are the result of communists like you getting in the way of free markets.

Like what evil imbeciles do with faulty measures meant to "determine the percentage of human potential..." as if this is possible or somehow useful.

The control you desire over others is evil. Now I don't want to bend any forum rules, but imagine if you were stupid too! Oh God, the harm you'd do.

Kemp,

This is my last post to you ever.  I am going to ignore you permanently now.  My last words to you are going to be indicative of my restraint, tolerance, and respect of your opinions, in spite of them being false.  I will present a few facts in response to your claims which will make this clear:

"The free market is functioning fine".

The total bailouts, etc. by the US government to date to prop up the financial system: $9 trillion dollars; source:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/02/04/business/20090205-bailout-totals-graphic.html

"Our problems are the result of communists like you getting in the way of free markets."
I am not a communist.  I am anti-communist.  Communism, in its real-world form (China, Soviet Union, etc.) was top-heavy, corrupt, militaristic governments, state-owned / state-run monopolies.  The level of intervention in the markets that we have seen recently (the $9 trillion dollars worth by the US alone) is to the sort of intervention such governments as the Soviet Union and China might make.  Your support of this sort of intervention, makes you the communist, not I.  You need to turn inward with your Mccarthistic paranoia, and take a long hard look at yourself.

"Like what evil imbeciles do with faulty measures meant to "determine the percentage of human potential..." as if this is possible or somehow useful."
Is it acceptable that the VAST MAJORITY of human beings, each of whom, when opportunity is available to them, has the capacity for such incredible creativity and cooperative accomplishment for such endeavors as this

http://www.hornexcerpts.org/excerpt_images/franckS_1_horn1f.gif

and

this

http://www.charlottesymphony.org/images/symphony_099_cropped.jpg

to be relegated to such drudgery of existences as this:
http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/0131-nike/9500669-1-eng-US/0131-nike_full_600.jpg
and this:
http://geographyblog.eu/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/mumbai-slums.jpg

and if they are "lucky"
this:
http://www.psdgraphics.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/push-button.jpg
in this sort of place:
http://littlepeach.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/opr-office-work-space.jpg
for this sort of existence here:
http://www.stockphotopro.com/photo-thumbs-2/ANE5AD.jpg
here:
http://www.spaceandculture.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/markham-suburbs.jpg
here:
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2009/7/6/1246894620780/Teenagers-watching-TV-001.jpg
and occasionally here:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/Typical_Crowded_Beach.jpg

I contend it is unacceptable that anyone who is capable of doing more than a push-button contribution to human civilization shouldn't have the opportunity to do so.

"The control you desire over others is evil. Now I don't want to bend any forum rules, but imagine if you were stupid too! Oh God, the harm you'd do."

I do not want control over others.  I want people to have control over their own destinies, which would require any of the elite who might be corrupt, excessively greedy, unscrupulous, wherever they might be, to change the ways they do things; to stop their bid to limit the opportunity of others to attain their potential for the sake of their continued self-interest; I want people to be empowered by ample opportunities to reach their potential.  I believe self-regulated, self-perpetuating social systems are capable of accomplishing this, systems that do not need much regulation or intervention or funding from governments.  (certainly not 9 trillion dollars worth).

I am not a communist, Kemp.  Give your head a shake.  If the status quo is communistic and you are for the status quo, YOU ARE A COMMUNIST.

The irony here is I would probably vote for Ron Paul if I were American.

Kemp, you are now permanently ignored.

Re. this post, Zarf, I didn't notice it as it was on the last of the previous page.  I will respond to it shortly...after I sort out a personal problem in real life.

"> Zarf BeebleBrix wrote:

> > xeno syndicated wrote:

> "2: Sub-prime mortgage exposure was occurring for about 5 years before the actual crisis occurred.  In fact, without the foreign financing of sub-prime mortgages, there probably wouldn't have been a housing boom in the first place."

"3: Outsourcing, meanwhile, had been happening for about 20 years before the financial crisis.  If outsourcing both triggered the bust in housing and triggered the boom (by encouraging people to invest in homes), we wouldn't be talking about the 2008 housing crisis.  We would be talking about the 1996 housing crisis.  If, however, outsourcing only explains the bust, you have a piece of your puzzle missing in explaining the boom."

Well, didn't you say it: foreign financing of sub-prime mortgages.

Yes, I did.  What about it?  How does that answer either of these issues?  Foreign financing en masse of bundled home mortgages didn't happen until the 2000's.  If outsourcing was the root cause, you would still have seen the same bubbles as before, or at least 40 years of absolutely no growth (neither of which in any way reflect the actual events in the past 40 years).  Outsourcing, as you said, was happening for 40 years.  There is no unique reason to cite outsourcing as the root cause when that requires it took 40 years of economic buildup to reach the collapse.

Even if outsourcing contributed, citing it as the cause, when you both see plenty of other enabling factors and alternative causes and at the same time recognize that for 40 years, the contributing factor did not create the exact type of crisis you are describing when it should have, is at best ignorant of the facts and at worst a disingenuous effort to use the crisis to achieve a political ends.

> "4: This brings me to another issue: In Las Vegas, the bust is strongly correlated to the boom (i.e., the people who were most likely to let their homes go into foreclosure were also the people who invested during the approximately 5 years of inflating home prices before the bust).  So unless your theory explains the boom, it doesn't explain the bust."

Again, didn't you say it already: foreign financing of sub-prime mortgages.

Okay... now you're very clearly modifying your theory.  Not that I disagree with this by any means.  The foreign financing was definitely an important part.

> "5: Remember that in the Las Vegas scenario, steps 1 and 3 do not apply because there is no outsourcing in Las Vegas, and thus the unemployment/underemployment you describe does not happen.  In fact, because the rich are playing in Las Vegas at this time, you should have an exact opposite effect."

Didn't gambling revenue start going down almost immediately as investors shifted their assets to safe-havens and people saw that the markets were taking a dip?  Business owners make decisions based on risk assessments.  They predict what they think will happen and make decisions in advance.  If casinos owners / ceos see the economy going into a dip, they'll lay-off employees, cut costs.

Las Vegas took a double hit: they took the hit in housing prices from the overall sub-prime mortgages, AND the hit from diminished gambling revenues which resulting in people getting laid-off and other businesses in town closing up shop / suffering lower profits.

1: Actually, here's an idea: Care to provide some evidence or definition of the "safe-havens" so we know exactly what you're talking about?  Your explanation here is really vague, so when there is no identifiable event which you're citing, it's kind of a pain in the ass for us to set up a timeline.  Otherwise, I can't answer that question.
2: The layoffs still didn't happen until after the housing crisis... so the casinos, in turn, didn't experience the economic troubles strong enough to begin cutting into worker pay until after the housing crisis.  You're still not answering this inconsistency... why didn't layoffs happen until after the housing bust?

I'm not denying that Las Vegas took a hit... in fact, that's my argument.  The issue, however, is that the Las Vegas hit is framed in such a way to where it cannot be interwoven with the outsourcing debate.

> "So... because investors refuse to take on new loans... existing loans go into default?  Explain that."

Housing prices were influenced by scarcity of mortgages.  After the sub-prime bust fiasco, there were fewer mortgages to be had, and this depreciated the housing market.

That doesn't answer the question.  If I have a home mortgage, it's mine.  The bank already signed the contract with me where I pay them a monthly payment and I'll eventually get full ownership of the home.  If the housing market declines... how does that affect my individual choice as a consumer to pay or default on my loan?  Remember, in this context, we're talking about Las Vegas, where the workers have absolutely 0 direct harm as a result of outsourcing because the industries can't be outsourced.

> "construct a general rule,"

Hold on a second.  Am I constructing a general rule?  What rule?  All I am doing is showing that progressive corporate tax system that taxes corporations equitably to level the playing field for where they set up shop is necessary in order to prevent the economic crisis and bankruptcy of nation states from happening again.  I am simply identifying the root of the issue; the historical problem; I am not trying to come up with any universal fix-all solution.  For the moment, a progressive corporate tax system needs to be implemented BECAUSE the playing field isn't level at the moment.  This is not to say playing fields aren't ALWAYS in need of progressive corporate taxes.  Progressive taxes on corporations need to be used to level the already skewed playing field upon which entire nations' economies, small and large corporations compete.  A level playing field is a quintessential prerequisite for AUTHENTIC free market capitalism.

Does this mean, then, that you are conceding that your framing of the housing crisis is neither an attack on outsourcing nor a referendum on the effectiveness of free trade?  The "general rule" I am indicting here is your assertion that the entire US financial crisis was caused by outsourcing, a statement which you advanced very specifically in response to my correlation/causation joke.  If you are advocating that such was the case, then yes, you are constructing a general rule which, to be even considered as a possible explanation, but be able to explain all scenarios of the financial crisis, including Las Vegas, where there were absolutely 0 jobs outsourced.

If you're backing off on that statement, however (for example, noting that there were alternative causes), then we probably don't have an argument at all here.

> Zarf BeebleBrix = red

> xeno syndicated = blue

> "2: Sub-prime mortgage exposure was occurring for about 5 years before the actual crisis occurred.  In fact, without the foreign financing of sub-prime mortgages, there probably wouldn't have been a housing boom in the first place."

"3: Outsourcing, meanwhile, had been happening for about 20 years before the financial crisis.  If outsourcing both triggered the bust in housing and triggered the boom (by encouraging people to invest in homes), we wouldn't be talking about the 2008 housing crisis.  We would be talking about the 1996 housing crisis.  If, however, outsourcing only explains the bust, you have a piece of your puzzle missing in explaining the boom."

Well, didn't you say it: foreign financing of sub-prime mortgages.

Yes, I did.  What about it?  How does that answer either of these issues?  Foreign financing en masse of bundled home mortgages didn't happen until the 2000's.  If outsourcing was the root cause, you would still have seen the same bubbles as before, or at least 40 years of absolutely no growth (neither of which in any way reflect the actual events in the past 40 years).  Outsourcing, as you said, was happening for 40 years.  There is no unique reason to cite outsourcing as the root cause when that requires it took 40 years of economic buildup to reach the collapse.

Even if outsourcing contributed, citing it as the cause, when you both see plenty of other enabling factors and alternative causes and at the same time recognize that for 40 years, the contributing factor did not create the exact type of crisis you are describing when it should have, is at best ignorant of the facts and at worst a disingenuous effort to use the crisis to achieve a political ends.

I am not saying outsourcing was the only root cause.  I am not saying I even know exactly what the root cause is.  I suspect no one really does, and anyone who claims to know what it was is probably lying. 

This is, ultimately, as close as we could ever come to pinpointing the root of the problem: no one was in a position to understand what was happening let alone prevent it from happening.   It wasn't anyone's job to understand the root causes.  Their jobs were just to keep track of what various computer models were saying, computers which were responsible for analyzing economic indicators and expressing risk assessments.  It wasn't anyone's job to care why the economy was going down the toilet; it was their job to garner profits by whichever way the markets were heading according to computer model risk assessments.  In short, your accusation that I am ignorant of the facts of the matter is correct, but then so was (and perhaps still is) everyone else.  At least I care about what happened and what is happening.  At least I want to figure out what happened and what is still happening. 

And because I have taken the time and effort to try and understand what happened, one of my conclusions is that outsourcing was a significant contributing factor.  Also, a progressive corporate tax is necessary to, for one, pay the government debt in having to bail out the financial system, and 2, spur on the sort of competition that free market capitalism requires for it to be successful.  In fact, I don't believe there should be any regressive taxes at all, including sales taxes, carbon taxes, etc - all taxes should be progressive.  This would provide for the economic opportunity for the poor and middle class to compete with big business.  This brings me to another contributing factor: monopolies and oligopolies virtual and real, hidden and transparent - these also contributed to the situation, for anti-trust activities are detrimental to free-market capitalism, and when such activities go on long enough without being properly deterred by justice systems, something eventually has got to give.  And it did.  And it will again if something isn't done to remedy the systemic deficiencies of our civilization conducts business.

Am I using the crisis to achieve political ends?  What ends?  Overthrowing the establishment?  Changing the balance of power in the world?  What are you suggesting is my hidden agenda, Zarf?

I have no hidden agenda.  I'm just a guy who is pissed off about what he has seen happening in the world and writing it out on a forum; pissed off about how governments and businesses conduct themselves; and what really pisses me off is how judicial systems permit to conduct themselves such.  It is unsustainable; it is unethical; it is antithetical to the survival of the human species over the long term; systemic inconsistencies, lead to systemic deficiencies, which lead to systemic injustices, which lead to systemic crimes, which are, ultimately, crimes against all of us, against all humanity everywhere.  <--- somewhere in that process are economic downturns, and even outright economic collapse.  Therefore, the only political agenda I might have is to do my small part in helping to remedy systemic deficiencies, expose and work against systemic injustices, and fight against systemic crimes.

I will respond to the rest of your post shortly, Zarf.  I hope the BBCode works...

Edit: it doesn't.  Why not, Zarf?  Consider if you will, the reason it doesn't work as a metaphor for a systemic inconsistency / deficiency - that the forum itself is designed in such a way as to not only limit the depth of our discussions but also prevent us from coming up with innovative ways to cope with deficiencies in the design of our forum.

"entire US financial crisis was caused by outsourcing"

As I said in a previous post, by no means am I saying it was this simple.  Outsourcing was simply one contributing factor of many.  Monopolies and oligopolies both virtual and real, anti-trust activity both hidden and transparent, permitted and illicit, global and domestic, were also a main contributing factor.  Ultimately, it was a lack of competition, subversion of free market principles, which also contributed. 

Don't get me started on "Free trade", Zarf.  All it is a geopolitical popularity contest.  Fair trade for all nations should be the objective - a level playing field.

Since I have answered all your points, Zarf, answer me this:

What will happen when the poor and middle class of the WORLD wake up to the fact that they are getting taxed to bankruptcy (either individual bankruptcy or national bankruptcy or both).

I don't see any other solution but to implement an internationally harmonized progressive tax on corporate and individual total NET WORTH and at the same time abolish all regressive taxes including income taxes.

Although this warrants a new thread, I'll just keep it in this one:

"Eduardo Saverin, the billionaire co- founder of Facebook Inc. (FB), renounced his U.S. citizenship before an initial public offering that values the social network at as much as $96 billion, a move that may reduce his tax bill."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-11/facebook-co-founder-saverin-gives-up-u-s-citizenship-before-ipo.html

All I can say is lol. 

When are people going to realize that the wealth of the rich have got to get taxed, and that it needs to be harmonized internationally.  Countries sell their citizenship like commodities to the highest bidder, and, for this guy, there are literally hundreds of bids for him to pick and choose from.

Maybe this is where this guy is going to live out the rest of his days:
http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=19728