Federal Trucking Bailout

[greg334]

Yes, Ron Paul. Know of him? He has been the only candidate thus far that has any kind of a solution. Noone can predict the future so we speculate. Heck, we speculate on everything and anything. All the other candidates speak on things we already know, but notice none have really spoken on an economic plan to revive this economic woe we are in. The only person that can help cure the money system issue is someone with a background in it. I have said it before you cannot run a department efficiently and/or effectively without the proper background.

WE are suppose to learn from history. You know, so we don't repeat it. So it is necessary.

So Yes I know what Ron Paul is, ah who he is.... but I have not seen any real plan.

For the record, he never had a thing to do with economics, he was an OB/GYN before he became a congressman. I agree with him on term limits but he has been in congress for 10 terms, so I would have to ask him if he is for term limits, why did he run more than two terms?

Lead by example.

So here is from his website, his 4 point economic stimulus package (my notes are there in Red)

From Ron Paul for Pres - 2008

Introduction

America became the greatest, most prosperous nation in human history through low taxes, constitutionally limited government, personal freedom and a belief in sound money. We need to return to these principles so our economy can thrive again. When enacted, my plan will provide both short-term stimulus and lay the groundwork for long-term prosperity.

Other candidates talk a lot about stimulus packages, but my record stands alone. I have fought for these measures for years as a member of Congress and will make them a top priority as president.

Ron Paul, a 10-term Republican Congressman from Texas's 14th District, is currently the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology. He has been named "Taxpayers' Best Friend" for 10 consecutive years by the National Taxpayers' Union. Ron Paul is also the author of several books on monetary policy and economics.

The Four-Point Plan

1. Tax Reform: Reduce the tax burden and eliminate taxes that punish investment and savings, including job-killing corporate taxes.

2. Spending Reform: Eliminate wasteful spending. Reduce overseas commitments. Freeze all non-defense, non-entitlement spending at current levels.

3. Monetary Policy Reform: Expand openness at the Federal Reserve and require the Fed to televise its meetings. Return value to our money.

4. Regulatory Reform: Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley regulations that push companies to seek capital outside of US markets. Stop restricting community banks from fostering local economic growth.

1. Tax Reform

* Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings. The basis of capitalism is savings, and Americans who do so should be rewarded.
o Pass HJ Res. 23 to encourage savings over consumption.

* Repeal the Death Tax. Attacking small businesses and breaking up family farms smothers growth and kills jobs.
o Pass H.R. 2734 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

* Cut Taxes for Working Seniors. Grandmothers and grandfathers working to make ends meet should keep all the fruits of their labor.
o Pass H.R. 191 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the inclusion in gross income of Social Security benefits.

* Eliminate Taxes on Social Security Benefits. That money belongs to seniors, not the government. They paid into the system for a lifetime, and they should be free to spend every penny as they see fit.
o Pass H.R. 192 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1993 increase in taxes on Social Security benefits.

* Accelerate Depreciation on Investment. We need to help companies grow and create jobs.
o Pass H.R. 4995 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce corporate marginal income tax rates.

* Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains. Investment should be embraced and rewarded.
o Pass H.J. Res 23 (The “Liberty Amendment”), proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.

* Eliminate Taxes on Tips.The single parents and working students who earn their income chiefly through tips deserve to keep all of their money. This tax on "estimated income" is unfair and should be ended.
o Pass H.R. 3664 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that tips shall not be subject to income or employment taxes.

* Support the Mortgage Cancellation Relief Act. Working families who lost their homes should not be punished a second time with a big IRS bill.
o Pass H.R. 1876 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from the gross income of individual taxpayers discharges of indebtedness attributable to certain forgiven residential mortgage obligations.

This all can be taken care of with one bill HR-25/ S-1025 The Fair tax. It elimination of the IRS at the same time allows us to keep what we earn without having the country fall in revenue collections. The tax falls on consumption of new items for personal use, so in keeping with the subject of the thread, us truckers would not pay a dime additional because we are using everything to provide services to other businesses. AND we already have most of the system in place to do this quickly.

In all honesty, he perfectly illustrates the point that we have too much complexity in our progressively punitive tax system, just look at how many proposals he is making.

2. Spending Reform

* Reduce Overseas Military Commitments. Our bases and troops should be on our soil.
o It's time to stop subsidizing our trading partners in Europe, Japan and South Korea.

* Freeze Non-Defense, Non-Entitlement Spending at Current Levels
o I vote against all bloated, pork laden spending bills and will veto them as president.

I agree in part to the first one, but it can’t work until we pull out of NATO, stop funding the UN and when we get attacked, bomb the p*ss out of who ever attacked us. We also have to close off immigration and build my idea of a border wall (300 foot wide 100 foot deep ditch with a 100 foot wall on the Mexican side and a wall that extends 500 feet below the surface), replace immigration with something that works for the country.

I would also think freezing entitlement programs would be needed too.

3. Monetary Policy Reform

* Televise Federal Open Market Committee Meetings. An institution as powerful as the Federal Reserve deserves full public scrutiny.

* Expand Transparency and Accountability at the Federal Reserve
o Pass H.R. 2754 to require the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to continue to make available to the public on a weekly basis information on the measure of the M3 monetary aggregate and its components.

* Return Value to Our Money. Legalize gold and silver as a competing currency.
o Level the long-term boom and bust business cycle by passing H.R. 4683, which would repeal provisions of the federal criminal code relating to issuing coins of gold, silver, or other metal for use as current money and making or possessing likenesses of such coins.

Here is the thing, we discussed metal based currency, the problem when you think about it, you have to have your trading partners on the same page.

4. Regulatory Reform

* Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. It has seriously wounded our capital markets and helped make the UK a financial center at our expense.
o Ending these misguided regulations would bring jobs flooding back to the United States
o Pass H.R. 1049 to reform Sarbanes-Oxley and reduce the burden it places on small businesses.

* Repeal or Remove Costly and Unnecessary Federal Regulations. Neighbors know best how to help their neighbors.
o We need to make it easier for community banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions to better serve their communities and to help people in these communities get access to credit and capital.
o Pass H.R. 1869 to enhance the ability of community banks to foster economic growth and serve their communities, boost small businesses, increase individual savings, and for other purposes.

I agree with part of this, Sarbanes/Oxley is a mess and isn’t even enforced most of the time. Contrary to Thib there, I know about that d*mn law too well.


But I don’t agree with just repealing some of the federal regulations but rather see the breakup of large banks and lending institutions returning back some power to the FTC to actually regulate mergers. We bailed out one, we should never have allowed the merger of a lot of companies and I don’t see where he is with that point. Just an FYI, today it was announced that Congress can't stop the merger of Delta and Northwest, it does not seem right that they can't, we empowered them to do so.

The other thing I don’t agree with is “Ending these misguided regulations would bring jobs flooding back to the United States”, the regulations are not forcing jobs off shore, taxes are.

 

[ratwell71]

Greg,

You are right he is a medical doctor, but he also has a background in economics. Read his bio.

The Economics of Ron Paul
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.



DIGG THIS

This is the foreword to the forthcoming Mises Institute book, The Economics of Freedom, by Ron Paul.

Congressman Ron Paul has been working for decades to bring economics to the forefront of political life. In doing so, he has raised topics that nearly everyone else in public life wants buried.

But isn't economics a dull topic, interesting only to Wall Street traders and government bureaucrats? Isn't it just about math and graphs?

Not in Ron's view. He has an intensity of passion for the discipline of economics that follows up on what Ludwig von Mises believed. Economics is the pith of material life. It is the core body of knowledge that seeks an explanation for all material phenomena as it is affected by human choice. Economics is as unavoidable in politics as gravity is in the natural world. It is a ubiquitous reality whether we speak about it openly or not.

Therefore everyone should be interested in economics. The choice we make about our economic system will determine whether we rise or fall as a people, whether our families will thrive or die, and whether the future itself has a future.

The cause-and-effect relationship between bad policy and bad economic outcomes, however, is not always obvious. We need teachers and public intellectuals to point out the connections between the money supply and inflation, between regulations and slow growth, between protectionism and lowered living standards, between public ownership and the decline of innovation.

The relationship is most clearly spelled out in the Austrian tradition represented by Carl Menger, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Hans Sennholz, and Murray Rothbard, for here we have a body of economic logic that refines and improves classical doctrines to permit us to understand cause and effect in economic life. Dr. Paul has read these authors in detail, and learned from them. He has gone further, in a pioneering way, to apply them to political life. In so doing, he has earned for himself a high place in the annals of history.

There are easier roads to political success than using every opportunity to speak on economic issues. Why did he choose this path? Not merely to spread knowledge for its own sake. He believes that public awareness and knowledge is the key to establishing and keeping freedom, which is the basis of civilization itself. Without a deep and abiding love of freedom in all spheres of life, the government can ravage the human population. But for a people who love liberty, no power is strong enough to finally take away the right to pursue happiness.

Others who came before Dr. Paul in this respect are people like Cobden and Bright in England, Frédéric Bastiat in France, and Thomas Jefferson in America. All of them spoke the great unspeakable truth that there are forces operating in the world more powerful than the whims of the political class. Every effort at centralized planning, and every attempt to legislate political dreams, bumps up against economic law. Economics is the great brick wall, a thousand feet thick, that limits the maniacal dreams, benevolent or malevolent, of the political imagination. We ignore these economic forces at our peril.

In Dr. Paul's view, if we seriously paid attention to the teaching of economics, and the population understood those truths, the central bank would be closed, the bureaucracies would be shut down, taxes would be repealed, spending programs would be abolished, and regulations would be stripped from the books – for all these efforts to manage society not only fail to achieve their stated objectives; they also reduce our living standard and artificially restrict the scope of freedom in our lives.

So there is a reason why politicians ignore the problem of economics, and why they prefer to characterize it as a narrow field dominated by number crunchers who care only tangentially about issues that impact the rest of society. Instead, officials speak vagaries about leading the country into the future and meeting human needs because this sort of language empowers the political class.

I have no doubt that the contents of this book will make even some of his supporters uncomfortable. The right imagines that it supports free enterprise, but even in the area of trade and money? Even to the point at which the state is denied permission to undertake tasks such as imposing sanctions on unfriendly foreign regimes? The left might like his antiwar positions, but what if giving up war mongering also requires rethinking the merit of the redistributionist welfare state?

Dr. Paul writes that freedom is all of a piece. You can't pick and choose. Moreover, it is impossible to speak of the future or of human needs without trusting economic freedom and disempowering the state to intervene in every area of life. Without sound money, there is no protection for savings and property, nor capital accumulation, nor long-term investment, nor entrepreneurship, nor social advance. Without the right to own and control property, we have no real say over our lives. Without the freedom to make contracts, to take risks, and to live in whatever peaceful way we choose, there is no hope for the future.

A state strong enough to redistribute wealth at a whim will not hesitate to wage war, impose sanctions, take away privacy, and violate core human rights. A state strong enough to wage war will not think twice about redistributing wealth and running a cradle-to-grave welfare state. These are truths that the right and left need to deal with. Nor are half-way measures a permanent fix. Real Social Security reform returns the financial responsibility for old age to the institutions of a voluntary society. Real reform in foreign policy means eliminating all restrictions on trade.

We have to consider the courage it takes to speak this way in times when the common belief is that the government can and should do all things. Ron Paul dares to ask us to rethink the way the world works, to have confidence in the ability of society – meaning the millions of individuals of which it is constituted – to manage itself. He is uncompromising not because he is inflexible or unthoughtful, but because he has vision and faith to see the unseen benefits of freedom and to ask us to do the same.

In this volume are collected the wise statements from the nation's leading teacher of free-market economic principles. One is struck by his consistency and willingness to state the truth, even when it is unpopular to do so. He is right to believe that the most important step in this struggle is to state the truth, openly and without fear.

In many ways, these speeches and essays amount to a chronicle of incredible failure: for the state has failed in a million ways to protect and defend our material well-being, and its very attempt has come at great cost.

But it is also a chronicle of hope that if we are willing to listen and learn, we can choose a different future for ourselves, one that removes responsibility for economic well-being from the government and gives it back to those to whom it belongs: the people in their capacity as living, choosing, creative human beings. Now that is leadership, properly construed.

 

[ratwell71]

The Ron Paul File

Ron Paul Understands Economics

Ron Paul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

During his early days, Paul was influenced by Friedrich Hayek’s Road to Serfdom, which led him to read many works of Ayn Rand and Ludwig von Mises while still a medical resident in the 1960s. He came to know economists Hans Sennholz and Murray Rothbard well, and credits to them his interest in the "study" of "economics". He clearly remembers August 15, 1971, when President Richard Nixon closed the "gold window" by implementing the U.S. dollar's complete departure from the gold standard, as the day he realized what the Austrian school economists wrote was coming true.[32] That same day, the young physician decided to enter politics, saying later, "After that day, all money would be political money rather than money of real value. I was astounded."

Paul serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee (having been on the Western Hemisphere and the Asia and Pacific subcommittees); the Joint Economic Committee; and the Committee on Financial Services (as Ranking Member of the Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology subcommittee, and Vice-Chair of the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee).

Books authored:
(1981) Gold, Peace, and Prosperity: The Birth of a New Currency (PDF), Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education. OCLC 7877384. Retrieved on 2007-07-30.

Paul, Ron; Lehrman, Lewis; U.S. Gold Commission (September 1982). The Case for Gold: A Minority Report of the U.S. Gold Commission (PDF), Washington, DC: Cato Institute (2d ed. Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007). ISBN 0932790313. OCLC 8763972. Retrieved on 2007-07-30.

(1983) Abortion and Liberty. Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education. ISBN 0912453028. OCLC 9682249.

(1983) Ten Myths About Paper Money: And One Myth About Paper Gold. Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education. OCLC 11765863.

(1984) Mises and Austrian Economics: A Personal View (PDF), Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute (2d ed. 2004). OCLC 19968524. Retrieved on 2007-07-30.

(1987) Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution After 200 Years (PDF), Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (2d ed. Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007). OCLC 19697005. Retrieved on 2007-07-30.

(1990) Challenge to Liberty: Coming to Grips with the Abortion Issue. Lake Jackson, TX: Ron Paul Enterprises. OCLC 46960450.

(1991) The Ron Paul Money Book. Plantation Publishing.

(2000) A Republic, If You Can Keep It. Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education. OCLC 45414993. Retrieved on 2008-03-23.

(2002) The Case for Defending America. Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education. OCLC 49744552.

(2002) The Ron Paul – Liberty In Media Awards – 2001. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press. ISBN 1893958841.

(2003) The Ron Paul – Liberty In Media Awards – Vol. 2 – 2002. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press.

(2004) The Ron Paul – Liberty In Media Awards – Vol. 3 – 2003. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press. ISBN 1893958248.

Upton, Fred, and Paul, Ron (2005). Indecency in the Media: Rating and Restricting Entertainment Content: Should the House Pass H.R. 3717, the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act?. Washington, DC: Congressional Digest Corp. OCLC 81150568.

Rangel, Charles B., and Paul, Ron (2006). Compulsory National Service: 2006-2007 Policy Debate Topic: Should the All-Volunteer Force be Replaced by Universal, Mandatory National Service?. Bethesda, MD: Congressional Digest Corp. OCLC 84912971.

(2007) A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship. Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education. ISBN 0912453001. OCLC 145174995.

(2008) Pillars of Prosperity. Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Paul, Ron; Haddad, Philip; Marsh, Roger (April 2008). Ron Paul Speaks. Guilford, CT: Lyons Press. ISBN 1599214482. OCLC 199459258.

(2008) The Revolution: A Manifesto. New York, NY: Grand Central Publishing. ISBN 0446537519. OCLC 191881970.

And then some...

How many books have you published on economics? I cannot see how this man could write on something he knows nothing about.

I am a network administrator/truck driver/business owner/Army Vet./Parent/... I hold three degrees but I have never published a book yet.

Get where I am going with this?

 

[ratwell71]

Ron Paul 2008 › Issues

 

[ratwell71]

LewRockwell.com Blog: Ron Paul Is an Economist

Ron Paul Is an Economist
Posted by Lew Rockwell at January 5, 2008 07:35 PM

Great to hear Ron explain the increasing price of oil as being due to the depreciation of the dollar by the Federal Reserve, and a warmongering policy in the Middle East. He notes that oil was $27 a barrel when Bush went to war to protect "our" oil. He mentioned a WSJ chart that shows that oil is up 350% in terms of dollars, 200% in terms of the Euro, and flat in terms of gold. Funny to see Fred stunned by truth. A dollar as good as gold. It seems like science fiction, but it is possible. Indeed, it is essential, if we want to avoid banana republic standards.

By the way, why is "energy independence" (autarchy) desirable? It is economic primitivism, and more anti-Muslim hysteria. The Satanic Huckabee claims that everytime we swipe our credit card at the gas pump, we might as well be sending a check to the terrorists. What a demagogic monster.

 

[ratwell71]

LewRockwell.com Blog: Ron Paul Is an Economist

Ron Paul Is an Economist
Posted by Lew Rockwell at January 5, 2008 07:35 PM

Great to hear Ron explain the increasing price of oil as being due to the depreciation of the dollar by the Federal Reserve, and a warmongering policy in the Middle East. He notes that oil was $27 a barrel when Bush went to war to protect "our" oil. He mentioned a WSJ chart that shows that oil is up 350% in terms of dollars, 200% in terms of the Euro, and flat in terms of gold. Funny to see Fred stunned by truth. A dollar as good as gold. It seems like science fiction, but it is possible. Indeed, it is essential, if we want to avoid banana republic standards.

By the way, why is "energy independence" (autarchy) desirable? It is economic primitivism, and more anti-Muslim hysteria. The Satanic Huckabee claims that everytime we swipe our credit card at the gas pump, we might as well be sending a check to the terrorists. What a demagogic monster.

Ron Paul 2008 › Dr. Paul’s Writings

 

[greg334]

Ratwell,

My head hurts from Ron Paul...

I recommend that you do something, read two books - one is mentioned The Road to Serfdom and the other is the forgotten man by Stiles. Read them with an open mind and without thinking about today but put try to think about the times they were about.

Also I highly recommend reading the Forgotten Man by William Graham Sumner. It really is a good essay.

You have to be careful on pinning hopes on one man who may have written a lot but failed to bring to practice what was written. I caution you on that because we have had a lot of leaders, Wilson, Stevenson, and others who have done the same thing but never brought change to the scene.

 

[ThibodeauxBayou]

Hey my fan club is back.

. Sorry for this lengthy reply, I got a lot of time to kill today,:

you appear to have an unusuall amount of consisitant "kill time" = a not so great position to be in, for generation of revenue.

So what are you doing, maybe you’re in the basement?

We have no basements in southern Louisiana. Currently, wer'e deciding which POS equipment we plan to implement for
the deli counters. We are also deternining whether or not to rebuild one of the 42 footers Volvo outdrives which are a part of our shrimping trawler fleet. We also must make a detemination
on just how many acres will be leased to Cargil and agreeing on terms with the new program implemented by LSCPI.

You do know that there are people who worked as doctors and lawyers in trucking, are they just the same as I am

Are there really ? Hmmmm..... and the percentages are [ ?]
I'm willing to wager a rather large sum the actual numbers would be less than 1/1000th of 1% of all active drivers.


You know, I just ran into a guy who wears a tie while driving, he was a lawyer for some firm in Boston. He wanted to do something different and decided to drive a truck.

I'd like to see a photograph of this individual

I think you question me because you don’t get it and… well…. I see some jealousy here.

I get it. I'm not the one with an identity problem. You've not demonstrated any traits of consistancy in developing a sustainable income. Stories of past achievements don't pay current financial obligations. Jealousy? Good Lord man, I could possibly aspire to live in the world you've developed ?


Maybe you are having your midlife crisis? Maybe you are the one who regrets things, I don’t. I am starting to think that you would want to be like me, someone who did a lot of things in my life and enjoyed it.

Yes, i'm past what most would consider midlife. As a family unity, we employ aprox 32 men and women. Between the fishing fleet ,our two trucks and the retail deli stores..... I seriously doubt i'm interested in "being like you"

losing a job and not getting another for 2 years, but again… many don’t get that part and become jealous of others who have been climbing back up that ladder.

All that purpoted experience and it took 2 years to regain a employed position ? I'm quite certain there's a plausable explanation for your inabilities and i'm certain you were delt an honest hand. A deserving hand. To even suggest you're an enviable talent ?.......well, that's just absurd.


To set the record straight (and I don’t know why I even bother saying this, you should have read the fan club newsletter) I worked at two of the largest banks in the country, work meaning I worked as a contractor, not as an employee. You know I did actually work at a pharma company, I can’t mention who it is for a specific reason. I did actually do a lot of work at that pharma company and if you read the newsletter, it details the work I did.

Again, apparantly your tenure there was nothing of any consequence. Certainly, talented employees are absorbed and by word of mouth alone......you'd of been a sought after commodity. Someone saw your presence and contributions at a different level than you yourself assumed


See ThibodeauxBayou, what I could not do was complete my degree because I had to support my family instead of going to school. So I had to learn things quick and do proper research to have an edge over the people who had their degrees. When others were riding their success of that MBA (you know what that is?)

I did graduate. LSU - '72 - BS - Major in Marketing. I worked full time during my five years in Baton Rouge. I'm an active Alumni.

I had to work a lot harder to prove myself. In fact, when I didn’t have answers, I took it upon myself to find them – my standard was “I don’t know right now but I will by the end of the day (tomorrow)”. While others sat there with their distain for people like me, I did what I can to keep that edge. I took responsibly when others passed it on, I didn’t make friends at my level but that was because I tried hard to stay above the political BS, which forced me to learn about organizational behavior (you know what they is?). I had to learn who was who and how to talk to them with what mattered to them in the past, it worked well later on when I started to work on the business continuity planning for a number of companies.

And how that all work out for you ? Certainly your level of achievements were recognized and you were rewarded with a position with compensation to match. True assets are always rewarded for their level of contribution. Or possibly, the other side just didn't see the disalusional employee

End of life FL70?
What do you know about my truck?

Nothing, not a thing.


You make me laugh, look who is driving a ’99 or maybe earlier International that seems to be like my little Fl70 – too funny. I am wondering if you bought that ’97 international I saw in Dallas for $3000, it was a mess but it ran….

I don't drive a Int. We own one 04 and one 05 Columbia. The COE yer refering to is owned by E & C Transport and is driven by Ed Foust. You ***umed the pics I took were of mine, silly you. Just one more injection of your know it all mentality. And as many times before, you're once again wrong


How about you, you know a lot about your truck? I bet you don’t.

Got my chauffeurs licence in 1969. Learned on a twin stick. I couldn't possibly know anything about the mechanics of industrial equipment. Here we go again Gregory, that foot of yours should be quite comfortable lodged permantly in your mouth.

Let me give you a little advice, life is not about money –

You're in no position to be giving advice to me. You've not elevated your own own personal issues in a positive direction. You missed the boat along time ago. A man your age struggling at this time in your life should raise enough red flags to indicate somthing really simple: you're the one who should seeking an answer to why you've failed.


I had the good life, my hotel of choice was the Ritz (want to see the receipts?), I had a car service to and from the airport, flying first class or private most of the time and meeting with a lot of people,

Seriously, a sad commentary. HAD don't cut it, and cetainly don't pay bills. HAD ? dillusional,desperate,non-inspirational.


Must be jealousy

I lived 58 years. I've heard the cream-of-the-crop BS'ers. I really don't know if you truly believe what you say, or are in such a state of dispair , you're drowning in this ficticious world you've presented in this forum.

I do indeed, feel very sorry for you.

Sorry Greg, there's just no element to your life that any normal human being could possibly be jealous of.

 

[greg334]

58 years on this earth and nothing to do but to pick on me?

What are you? The type of person who will print off everything I say and read through it to find things wrong? Oh there he said this on July 15, 2005 and said something else on February 25, 2007, got him now.

Talk about me; look at you, forget that I want you to talk about something else to not to deflect anything away from me but to add to the quality of the site. If you can do that and throw in jabs at me, great but you can’t – I think it is beyond you.

I think, I maybe wrong about this, but I think that I bring something to EO. I feel everyone does for that matter, even you could and for that matter, I don’t complain about personal attacks like others do to shut them up.

You are just driven to make a point I am full of sh*t with my life experiences, somewhat of an indication of insecurity and maybe it seems because I threaten you in some respects.

Yes jealousy, maybe some envy.

You remind me of others who I have to deal with all my life. Always pointing out what is wrong with my point of view or my knowledge, but not examining what is wrong with you.

Sure I make mistakes, like thinking that you had a basement, sorry it was wrong and I admit to it, also the picture – I say assumptions are dangerous and there is proof why I say that. I make a lot of mistakes, and I do have some assumptions but a lot of what I say is from experience.

I got to tell you that you have no clue about subjects I mentioned. If you did, there are ways to see if I am full of sh*t, but I have not heard one legitimate question from you at all about any of the points posted. I stopped reading your posts, this last one is one I just picked over because you are saying the same thing. What difference does it make to you what I have done, you seem to be successful at what you are doing, owning shrimp boats, trying to impress us with some deal you are making, owning a deli and so on. I am glad you have come that far in your life time and had so much success, but don’t think for a moment those same opportunities apply to everyone, they don’t. And don’t think for a second that people are motivated to become someone like you, many are not.

I am a new comer to trucking, like others we come from other professions because we choose to. It is an easy profession when you compare it to others, it takes really nothing to get involved with, and just a little money but you seem to think that some can’t/won’t or otherwise don’t want to be here because they can make the big bucks doing something else, guess what…. you’re wrong. I choose to do something I enjoyed in the past, drive. I have done enough and wanted to do this. I also chose to do this because it was easy to get into, I didn’t have to do an interview with management teams, I didn’t have to have a review of my work or publications or have judgment passed on me to see if I can fit the needs of a company based on my past experiences. AND I didn’t have to compete with people who had little or no skill set who just got out of training or school or deal with people who the state provided incentives to hire them which tipped the scales in their favor. I didn’t go chasing work by using my friends either, could have but didn’t. This profession also eliminated any problems I had with my former employer at that time with being pulled into a lawsuit by them. Companies don’t hire people when their employer said to possible future employer that; 1 – you never worked there, 2 – you were only a contractor there, 3- you are deceased, 4 – you sort of worked there but there is no record of it. Yes all four were said to companies I applied to and I have the recordings to prove it but it don’t matter, you don’t get it.

By the way I stopped applying for jobs when I got into this and about 6 months later I started to get offers for work, I made the commitment not to return to that life and I am to this day still getting offers. To me it is far more important to enjoy what time I have left then to kill myself over work I no longer enjoy.

Asking for a picture? Why should I provide proof, give me proof that your statement is not true? Why is it so hard to believe that people don’t care about money? Why is it that is so hard to believe someone wants to give up a lucrative career to do something easy? I know of couple lawyers out here, one is Diane – married to Phil, you know Ateam? Ask her why she is here. The other may want to open him mouth but it is his choice to say something, not mine. You know there is a PhD running around EO? He is an expediter and an owner. Let him tell you his story why he left his profession, it is a lot like mine.

I will hand this to you that the percentages are small in the trucking industry but here is the thing, look around and you will see carriers reaching the bottom of the human food chain to put people in that driver’s seat, some barely read or write and an awful lot just don’t care – who would you rather have out on the road, the people who have some sort of pride and discipline in what they do or some idiot who does not care? I gather from what you are telling me is that you think this is a serous career, it is not. Trucking (not expediting) has become a dumb downed profession where anyone can really get a license and drive a truck, rather sad when you think about it but I blame the people in the trucking first, then the carriers. They are bringing the electronic on board logging to themselves, they are the ones who don’t get involved politically, the ones who do are far and few between. All of this adds up to a difference, it is not even about making money but how safe one is on the road. Expediting is different in many ways but the same. I don’t hold my fellow expediters in contempt, I feel most are very fine people but truckers is another story. The percentages of people who do act professional in that world are lower and they need professionals from others worlds to bring it up.

Why feel sorry for me?

Here is the thing, you are lucky to have people like me around who make things easier for you. You may look at us as something that you need when your computer breaks or something happens to your internet connection but you are clueless. We are the people who are living in the background of life to write the programs, who make sure things run when they need to run that allow businesses run. My chosen profession is now expediting, it was IT. IT has no experts, there are no Gurus and there it encompasses a wide variety of subjects some of which you can not comprehend. A lot of us didn’t go to college, many of us are now just getting degrees; we are the ones who made innovations in things that you enjoy, feel lucky not contempt. IT by the way crosses cultures and boarders and there is a common thread to most of why we do what we do, it feels good to accomplish the impossible at times. It often amazes me about the ignorance of people when it comes to other cultures, but what can I say.

Thinking about it I really feel sorry for you.

You come here, and focus on me – someone who neither affects your business or life - instead of focusing on the site and the theme of the site. You must have some experience that can be used to help others.

I can add one thing about my experiences, I was a moderator at other forums, it was not something I always enjoyed but the reason I became one was because I setup forums for free and asked to moderate the forums so others can get up to speed. As moderator I would not allow something like this to go on – an on going posting by one member about another that has nothing to do with the site ofrthe thread’s subject. Once or a couple times, maybe but not on going. Even then unless the person who the subject of the posts making claims that hurt others directly, like knowing a cure for Cancer or selling snake oil, I would be hard press not to say something directly to the member who is doing the posting. I only respond to you out of habit, nothing else, you can bring more to the table than the BS you post and I wonder what your 58 years of living actual has given you.

Oh what ever you post from now on I'll just going to ignore because you have other things to offer people, start talking about it. I wish you luck in your business and life, now start helping people.

 

[ratwell71]

You both bring good points to the table, but you guys cannot agree on any of it because you are too busy duelling.

Change is brought about by bringing facts not opinions to the table.

Anyone of us can bring our views into a conversation and create a disagreement, however, facts and truths cannot be disputed.

Let us not be sheep.

 

[ratwell71]

Greg,

A good book to read is "The Money Men" by H.W. Brands. Here is just a little taste of what the book is about.

The Greening of America - washingtonpost.com

The Greening of America

By Michael Grunwald,
a Washington Post national reporter and the author of "The Swamp: The Everglades, Florida, and the Politics of Paradise"
Wednesday, November 29, 2006; C02



THE MONEY MEN

Capitalism, Democracy, and the Hundred Years' War Over the American Dollar

By H.W. Brands

Atlas. 239 pp. $23.95

Americans are notoriously fascinated with money. We want to know who's got it, how they made it, how they're spending it -- and, of course, how we can get more of it for ourselves. We make celebrities out of moneymakers like Donald Trump. We get obsessed with money shows like "Mad Money," "For Love or Money," "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" and "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire." But we don't do much thinking about the money itself. It's just money. It comes in bills we shove in our wallets and coins we lose in our couches. It's held in banks that tend to change their names every few years but don't tend to run off with our savings. And it's controlled by the Federal Reserve, an institution that somehow seems boring and mysterious at the same time, and is generally ignored by those of us who don't have adjustable-rate mortgages.

It's actually a sign of great national progress that we don't have to think too deeply about our money. Because as the versatile historian H.W. Brands recounts in "The Money Men," the first five generations of Americans spent an inordinate amount of time and energy fighting over what would constitute money, how much money there would be and who would make the important decisions about money. Brands argues that "the money question" was the most persistent dilemma in U.S. politics from 1776 until 1913, when the creation of the Fed provided an answer. "No question," he writes, "touched more livelihoods and more lives more consistently, more intimately, more portentously."

Perhaps Brands overstates his case -- the race question was a pretty big deal, too -- but this breezy little book provides an elegant overview of America's early financial battles, and a strong argument that they drove the nation's development. It may sound vaguely Marxist or at least unromantic to view U.S. history through the lens of liquidity; disputes over public debt, the national bank and the gold standard don't sound as dramatic as Washington crossing the Delaware or Lincoln freeing the slaves. But Brands helps the medicine go down by weaving his narrative around five compelling characters: Alexander Hamilton, the treasury secretary who promoted national debt and a national bank; Nicholas Biddle, the national bank president who lost an epic battle to stop Andrew Jackson from killing his powerful institution; and three private financiers -- Jay Cooke, who financed the Union's Civil War effort with his innovative bond schemes; Jay Gould, who nearly ruined the economy by cornering the gold market; and J.P. Morgan, who encouraged collusion among the great industrial trusts and bailed out the treasury when it ran low on gold.

To Brands, the story of America's first century is a relatively simple one of struggle between capitalists and democrats. The capitalists, originally led by Hamilton, favored a strong federal government with a strong executive branch; the democrats, led by Thomas Jefferson, favored the states and especially feared a strong executive. The capitalists, representing merchants from the cities of the Northeast, supported a strong currency and opposed inflation on behalf of the creditor class; the democrats, speaking for common farmers and pioneers from the rural South and West, wanted a weaker currency that made it cheaper to pay back loans. The capitalists tilted toward gold, tariffs, a national bank, a loose interpretation of the Constitution and a foreign policy that favored Great Britain at the expense of France; the democrats fought them on each point.

The result was an enduring philosophical debate over government and finance, a debate that galvanized the public for decades in ways that are now reserved for issues like war and presidential promiscuity. The first fight was over the Constitution itself, with Hamilton's Federalists pushing for federal control of money and taxes, and Jefferson's Anti-Federalists warning that the stage was being set for a new King George. Brands follows the debates through Biddle's struggle with Jackson over the vast power of the national bank, and the "free silver" fights that were sparked in part by Gould's gold corner. The problem was always how to mobilize capital to help investors and industrialists develop the country without allowing them to control the country. It was ultimately Morgan's outsize influence on the economy (as well as his haughty defiance of Congress) that helped persuade Americans of the dangers of financial concentration.

The story of early America is not really as simple and money-focused as Brands makes it sound. Take his shorthand account of the nation's origins: "The British frowned on the paper issues as inflationary and in the 1760s outlawed paper money entirely. The edgy colonials soon went over the edge into revolution." Those are both true statements, but shouldn't the words "taxation" and "representation" appear somewhere in between? And while Brands is shrewd to point out that some members of Congress supported the annexation of Texas in order to ensure the security of their bonds, that certainly wasn't the main explanation for the popularity of annexation in the era of Manifest Destiny.

Still, "The Money Men" is an easily readable introduction to long-buried issues that once defined America's political culture. Today most Americans consider themselves democrats and capitalists, and now that most of us work for wages, average Americans fear inflation as much as titans of industry. We still squabble about taxes, deficits and tariffs, but we no longer debate whether, say, states should be allowed to print their own money. The money question is now irrelevant. And that just proves how important it was that we answered it correctly.

 

[greg334]

Ratwell, thanks for pointing that book out to me, I may have it - I don't remember.

I would actually recommend a few other things for you to read, ready?

'A Monetary history of the United States' and 'capitalism' and freedom by Friedman

An Austrian perspective on the history of economic thought by Rothbard

Capitalism by Hessen

The modern world-system by Wallerstein

The servile state by Belloc

The essay ‘idea of a perfect commonwealth' by Hume

An Inquiry into the human mind on the principles of common sense (whew...) by Reid

Two treatises of government by Locke

Leviathan by Hobbs

‘Of liberty and necessity' and ‘vindication of true liberty’ by Bramhall

Das kapital by Marx

The national gain by Anders Chydenius

Traité (I am not going to type out the entire name in french) by Say

Political economy by de Sismondi (or de Simondi - don't remember)


‘Commerce defended’, ‘elements of political economy’ and ‘whether political economy is useful’ by Mill

I don’t have the binder near by that was made for me but there are a lot of essays and such floating around by followers of Salamanca school.


Oh and “Some Interpretations of Property Rights, Capital and Labor from Islamic Perspective” by Habibullah Peyman

Also I would read.....


‘Atlas shrugged’ and ‘Anthem’ by Rand

It can't happen here by Lewis

‘Brave new world’ and ‘Ape and essence’ by Huxley

WE by Zamyatin

These will give you more background info to help you it all out. The last group of books are really important to see where we are really heading.

 

[ratwell71]

Alexander Hamilton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Secretary of the Treasury
Hamilton is best known for his tenure as Secretary of the Treasury, for it is in that role that he made his most important and lasting contributions to the governance of the nation. His vision of a centralized economy provided the basic model for a system that has survived to the present day -- yet in the implementation of his ideas, Hamilton encountered ferocious attacks against his character and beliefs.

Following the Revolutionary War and the depression of the 1780s, the most critical problems confronting the young nation were financial, and of the four federal departments -- State, War, Attorney General, and Treasury -- the Treasury was considered the most important. The government's war debt totalled approximately $50 million, the nervousness of foreign investors in the United States was palpable, and with the severance of ties with England, American manufacturing lagged far behind Europe.

Hamilton's plan for centralizing and reinvigorating the national economy was integrally related to his political philosophy. He believed that an energetic American government should, in the interest of promoting the public good, actively encourage manufacturing, assume responsibility for the country's debts, standardize and control the currency system through a national bank, link the interests of wealthy citizens with the government's success, and, finally, maintain friendly ties with Britain in order not to provoke a disastrous trade or shooting war.

The components of the "Hamiltonian system" that he presented to Congress during 1790 and 1791 were not isolated responses to individual financial problems, but an interlocking set of solutions designed to put the nation on a firm economic footing. Hamilton and the Federalists had the votes and energy to carry the plan through, but not without being bloodied in the process by the fierce opposition of the Republicans, the nascent political party led by Jefferson and James Madison.

The complexity of the Hamiltonian system is demonstrated by the first two major victories of his career at the Treasury Department: the financing of the public credit and the federal assumption of the states' war debts.

During the war, the government had raised money by issuing public bonds, promising to repay them with interest later. Yet at the war's end, the government owed approximately $50 million, and could not repay the bonds. Hamilton's solution was to raise more cash by issuing a new series of 30-year bonds at six-percent interest, which would presumably sell (and in fact did sell) because of a high level of public confidence in the United States. The proposal, however, encountered the reasonable objection (raised by Madison) that since speculators were buying up Confederation bonds, the federal government would not end up repaying the original bond-holders who had patriotically risked their savings in the country's time of need.

The congressional bill of discrimination (discriminating between different bond-holders) sought to remedy the conflict by paying present holders of the bonds the current market value and reserving the difference for the original holders. Hamilton countered, first, that the logistics of tracking down and sorting out competing claims were prohibitively difficult and would discourage nervous foreign investors, and, second, that the bonds needed to be readily transferrable in order to compensate for the lack of hard cash. In the end, the bill for discrimation was defeated by a vote of 36 to 13.

Hamilton's second major success stemmed from his proposal that the national government assume responsibility for the debts that states had incurred during the war. He argued that since the war was fought for the union, the union should pick up the tab, and that "A national debt attaches many citizens to the government who, by their numbers, wealth, and influence, contribute more perhaps to its preservation than a body of soldiers." Assumption would strengthen the federal government by giving creditors -- who tended to be citizens of relative power and wealth -- an interest in preserving the entity that owed them money.

As with discrimination, the proposal for assumption raised the hackles of many critics. States like Virginia which had paid off much of their debt already saw it as unfair that they would be paid less by the federal government than states which had not canceled much of their debt, like Massachusetts. Also, opponents of assumption contended that it overly restricted the power of the states, and that the internal taxation required by assumption would place an undue burden on the citizenry.

The opposition at first remained adamant, and the threatened defeat of assumption gave rise to serious talk of the failure of the whole financial system and even of the disintegration of the union. Many historians agree that at this point Hamilton and Madison, at an informal dinner arranged by Jefferson, struck a deal: in exchange for passing assumption, the Federalists would agree to locate the national capitol on the Potomac. Whether or not the story is a canard, the bill of assumption passed and Congress adjourned having implemented the central elements of Hamiton's plan.

At the time, the Hamiltonian system carried great emotional significance and immediate political importance to all lawmakers and to much of the public. Moreover, the proposals determined critical aspects of American government that undoubtedly aided the country in weathering the turbulence and insecurity of the late 18th century. However, the Hamilton plan's daunting complexity and specificity to a unique era suggest its perishability as an achievement capturing the public's imagination. It lacks the accessibility and evanescent, timeless appeal of a work like the Declaration of Independence. His accomplishment speaks to the mind, but not to the heart.

At the same time, Hamilton's restructuring of the American economy exposed him to attacks from various quarters, attacks ranging from sober critiques of the merits of his policies to hyperbolic and personal assaults on his character.

Relative. If you need a cure to a problem you must know how it all began. It is like a disease. You cannot treat the disease without knowing the cause.

 

[ratwell71]

American Experience | Alexander Hamilton | PBS

 

[greg334]

Dude, you don't have to post whole articles, the link it good enough.

I read Hamilton, I read Jefferson, I read Jackson, I know had to know the federalist papers inside and out. I know that Jefferson's reasoning behind the small government ideals and know about Hamilton's reasoning behind large centralised government.

Look at the list I posted. Look at it carefully because the books of Jefferson's time and before were what they were reading to come up with what they thought were a reasonable way to govern. In particular Hume and Locke.

I side on the Jeffersonian and Jacksonian points of view on most points but not Hamilton's.

 

[garman351]

The US is the number 2 exporter of trade goods in the world. in many types of goods we are number one.

as far as value added goods go we are still number one.(these are fully assembled or intrically machined parts)

the trade deficit you hear talked about is cuased by US citizens having the lowest savings rate and highest personal debt rate in the world.

If the savings rate in the US was equal to the
savings rate in China there would be no trade deficit at all.

the loss in manurfactuing jobs has more to do with automation than importation. But even with all the automation skilled manurfacturing jobs in the US have been steadilly rising since WWII(machinists,robotics mechnics,etc)
We currently have a shortage in this country of skilled craftsmen - welders, electrician, cnc operators, Journey trademan.

automation has replaced the guy at GM who used to bolt tires on chevys robots now do that.

Most of what you hear on the news about what's going on in the economy is just bunk. Which is sad.

but an ill informed public is easy to sway.

Easytrader:
We lost most of our American jobs to greed (plain & simple) Company's like GM (Generious Motors) as they use to be called is fed-up paying uneducated workers $25 an hour to sweep the floor and get another $30 an hour in long term benny's. Mexican workers make almost nothing per hour and like it. Also never forget our Government has sold (US) out to big Corporations, they run this no good Government we all have to put up with. It's time for a revolution in this Country! The working man needs to run this Country not some rich no-good Corprate controlled rat who gets elected into office.

Garman

 

[ratwell71]

Garman,

Bravo. I agree with you on all points.

 

[Vinnie T]

Good stuff

Back on topic

Government bailout?

The government is sinking the ship..NAFTA! Get ready to speak Spanish and eat poutine the rest of your lives!!!

The government policies already destroyed a lot of the manufacturing in this country..now they are worjking on the tranpostation industry!

 

[dieseldiva]

Good stuff

Back on topic

Government bailout?

The government is sinking the ship..NAFTA! Get ready to speak Spanish and eat poutine the rest of your lives!!!

The government policies already destroyed a lot of the manufacturing in this country..now they are worjking on the tranpostation industry!

Kinda goes along with my thinking that maybe this doesn't stop until WE are the third world country!

 

[Vinnie T]

Kinda goes along with my thinking that maybe this doesn't stop until WE are the third world country!

Ya think?

The North American Union maybe???