Say Anything Blog

Where are the buyers of said possessions getting the money in this “terrible” economy?

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

I remember during the Carter economy(far worse than anything happening today) every business failure was blamed on “the economy” rather than “bad management”, which is always the cause of business failure.  It’s just another excuse.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

BTW, the price of oil has declined $9/barrel since last Friday; anything in the news about this?

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

I’ve seen a few.

"The nation has been hypnotized by the swaying and the gesturing of the Watusi and the Frug.”
*J. Helms*

Try this.

"The nation has been hypnotized by the swaying and the gesturing of the Watusi and the Frug.”
*J. Helms*

Mike: The first link was weird, but the second one shows that any US citizens reading Canadian papers would know; of course, that wasn’t my point, but thanks anyway.
We still have people trumpeting “soaring” energy prices, while prices are actually going down.  In my book, that’s lying.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

The first link was weird

That’s why I tried again. I’m not sure why that happens but I often have to do it twice.

but the second one shows that any US citizens reading Canadian papers would know

When I check the link, I have to read down to the 30th entry before I hit any Canadian media. No matter...the price of oil has been retreating the past few days and it has been climbing the past few years. What you see as “lying”, I see as “looking at different time frames.”

Nothing wrong with trumpeting good news of course...I’d do the same if I was you.

"The nation has been hypnotized by the swaying and the gesturing of the Watusi and the Frug.”
*J. Helms*

Here’s the deal, Mike: If the price of oil had increased by the same amount in the same time frame, how would it be reported?  It would be couched as “soaring” or “skyrocketing”, and would be accompanied by articles and opinions about how much Americans are “hurting” as a result.  By comparison, when the price goes down by that much, it is described in very mild terms, with no speculation about how that will improve the lot of the average citizen.  See the difference?
It’s a relentless tide of negative reporting, and very weak or non-existent reportage of positive economic news.  Essentially, the MSM is purporting that the “home mortgage crisis” describes our entire economy, and desperately want the population to believe that, when the fact is that less than one percent of US homes are in foreclosure.
You may insist that it isn’t lying, but it’s a concerted effort to convey a false image.  I’m not afraid to call that what it is:  lying.
The MSM wants people to believe what is not actually true.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Here’s a thought: If the economy is so horrible these people are having to sell stuff to get buy, who is buying it?

Certainly oil executives and hedge fund managers can’t be the only people on eBay.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

You mean that is how the marketplace works?  For every seller, there has to be a buyer or no transaction takes place?

That is complete bullshit Rob.  That is the kind of thinking that Adam Smith used that got us into this capitalistic pig society that thinks that people in foreign countries want our corporations to exploit them by giving them a way to earn a living other than subsistence farming and abject poverty.  You are probably going to tell us that the labor market sets wages the same way--that employers and employees settle on a clearing price for labor based on supply and demand.

Damned neocon economics.  Supply and Demand.  What a load of BS.  If the government simply allocated every single citizen Versace jeans according to their needs and took from the rest of society according to their ability, we would have a much better world.  That is why I am voting for Mar… Clinton… Obama…

An underlying question for me is “why are people such easy prey for salesmen who persuade them that the middle class needs to go into debt to buy Versace jeans, and those in trailer homes need multiple TVs and other electronic entertainment equipment?”

But that’s worth a post about the government schools, and how their real purpose is to train people to consume, so they’ll be willing to work in a factory.

...how their real purpose is to train people to consume, so they’ll be willing to work in a
factory.

Slightly disagree.  I think the govt schools teach a sense of entitlement, and use jealousy over possessions to instill a sense of class struggle.  The last thing they want is for people to be individually independent, and to live within their means, thus giving govt the chance to promise them things.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Dirty Hippies

The last thing they want is for people to be individually independent, and to live within their means,

Versace Shirt $735.00
Well it is 100% cotton.

Hippies are not buying Versace shirts or Hermes Birken bags,
$7250.00

Conspicuous consumption.
Can you have too much money?

Can you have too much money?

Only under Marxism or a Dem administration(if you’re not in a favored group).

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

r108

If the price of oil had increased by the same amount in the same time frame, how would it be reported?  It would be couched as “soaring” or “skyrocketing”, and would be accompanied by articles and opinions about how much Americans are “hurting” as a result.  By comparison, when the price goes down by that much, it is described in very mild terms, with no speculation about how that will improve the lot of the average citizen.  See the difference?

If you think we should cheer a 3 day pullback in the price of oil in the face of a multi-year advance then more power to you. I understand what you think is happening with the media but if I can google the oil price decline and find that the AP posted a story one hour previous to my search then what can I say?

On this occasion, your claim that the media wasn’t covering the story was disproved by my google search. Facts and evidence make the case I’m told and, this time, your claim was disproved.

FWIW, a price drop below $100 would breach the upward sloping trend line started in January 2007. When that psychologically important level is breached then we can talk but anything before that happens is just market noise IMO.

"The nation has been hypnotized by the swaying and the gesturing of the Watusi and the Frug.”
*J. Helms*

If you think we should cheer a 3 day pullback in the price of oil in the face of a multi-year advance then more power to you.

I see you didn’t deal with the obviously biased reportage.  You claim the media reported the price drop, but they didn’t give it the same attention and place of prominence that they have been giving their claims of “soaring” and “skyrocketing” prices, as well as using much milder language to describe a positive price move.  Deny it all you want, Mike, but the MSM is biased toward bad economic news during a Republican administration, and also is biased toward good economic news during a Dem administration.

Your remark about “psychologically important” is revealing.  It’s all about manipulating feelings with the Dem media, which is my point.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

BTW, Mike, I heard ABC News today describe oil prices as “soaring”.  What was that about “evidence”?

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

When oil prices increase, the MSM sees it as a trend, extending infinitely into the future, but when prices go down, it’s only temporary; or “a three day pullback” as you would say.  When real estate is increasing in value, it’s a “bubble”, but when oil is increasing in value, it’s a “trend”.  Can you explain the double standard?

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

I see you didn’t deal with the obviously biased reportage.

I’m trying to avoid discussions which lead nowhere.

Your remark about “psychologically important” is revealing.  It’s all about manipulating feelings with the Dem media, which is my point.

I was referring to round numbers...it’s human nature to attach significance to such things.

I heard ABC News today describe oil prices as “soaring”.  What was that about “evidence”?

Was there any context to the remark? If they were talking about price changes today then the description would be dead wrong. If they’re talking about the price of oil today as compared to five years ago then the description is accurate. Do you see the difference?

When real estate is increasing in value, it’s a “bubble”, but when oil is increasing in value, it’s a “trend”.  Can you explain the double standard?

I can try. When prices increase over time then we say that the trend is up. There may be corrections when prices retreat temporarily but corrections don’t mean that the trend has ended. Price bubbles are generally high prices which are not supported by the fundamentals, such as the great tulip bulb craze, the stock market in 2000 and yes, housing prices in the past few years. Housing prices rose due to low interest rates and certain peculiarities in the mortgage industry and not because the houses were so much better or more desirable or because more people wanted to buy them. The demand grew for artificial reasons and not for reasons of fundamentals.

Many believe that current oil prices are in fact symptomatic of a price bubble. I’m not so sure although speculative interest in commodities generally is surely having a major impact on asset prices. I suppose that just as we don’t really know if we’re in a recession until after it’s started, so too we won’t really know if oil prices are in a bubble until the bubble pops. I think that oil prices will retreat but certainly not to the days of $30 or $40 oil. There’s insignificant new production coming on stream as some major fields slowly wind down and the increased Asian demand for oil should mean that higher prices are here to stay. That said, I don’t consider somebody who believes that oil prices are in bubble territory necessarily wrong but I would consider somebody who believes that housing prices weren’t to be very wrong.

That’s why the apparent double standard isn’t really a double standard...hope this helped.

"The nation has been hypnotized by the swaying and the gesturing of the Watusi and the Frug.”
*J. Helms*

I was referring to round numbers...it’s human nature to attach significance to such things.

Only when they receive constant messages about such “importance”.  They don’t simply report numbers; they attach commentary to them, which is my point, and always will be until they stop doing it.
Emphasizing only one side of an issue, while either minimizing or not even mentioning the other side is a well-known propaganda tactic.

It’s interesting how you characterize one thing that went on for years as a bubble, but call something else which has been going on for less time a trend.
Real estate vs oil prices.
Maybe you don’t realize how biased you are, but it’s very clear to me.
It’s also very clear, especially on economic matters, that downtalking has its own effect; it biases the market all on its own.  Economic scareology increases the price of gold, for one thing.  Creating economic fear increases expenditures for so-called “hedges” to deal with that fear, just like the hedge price for oil is a byproduct of all the fearmongering about the world economy.  People tend to buy commodities when they are fearful, and eschew more risky-seeming investments, which suppresses economic growth.
As a parting shot, it has been pointed out that the recent drop in our oil prices is due to a stronger dollar; I find it interesting that the scaremongers used a weak dollar to downtalk our economic situation, but now that it’s getting stronger, it’s no big deal; in fact, it is used as an excuse to ignore or downplay the lower oil price.  Another double standard.
The MSM formula: Republican bad, Democrat good.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Only when they receive constant messages about such “importance”.

I think you’re mistaken. When we talk temperatures or distances we more often than not say 20 miles and 30 degrees rather than 18 miles or 21 degrees...I’m really not sure why you’re objecting as it seems quite obvious.

It’s interesting how you characterize one thing that went on for years as a bubble, but call something else which has been going on for less time a trend.

Rising house prices were in an uptrend until they reached the bubble point and then popped. If oil keeps climbing then maybe the point is reached when its price can’t be rationally explained and it pops too.

People tend to buy commodities when they are fearful, and eschew more risky-seeming investments, which suppresses economic growth.

I think that viewpoint is outdated. People buy commodities when the fundamentals support the purchase and there’s no denying that China and other emerging economies are really using a lot of commodities. OTOH, there is a lot of speculative money in commodities right now so the potential for a bubble forming is real IMO...I just don’t happen to think that we’ve reached that point but it’s JMO.

The MSM formula: Republican bad, Democrat good.

I find it unfortunate that your grasp of economics is too often exceeded by your political point of view. The rising price of oil and the falling American dollar have little to do with Republicans vs. Democrats IMO. It’s just some weird artifice that you construct as it bears no resemblance to reality that I can see.

"The nation has been hypnotized by the swaying and the gesturing of the Watusi and the Frug.”
*J. Helms*

I think that viewpoint is outdated.

Every now and then, Mike, you get off a real funny one.

I have observed press coverage of the economy over many administrations, and my observations are accurate, no matter how they may conflict with your opinions.

I notice, once again, that you give no factual argument; you rely on some stock personal invalidation stuff instead.  How sad.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Do you have any inkling of which viewpoint I think is outdated? You’re stuck on your media crusade while I am responding to specific comments that you make. If you’re not going to read then why should I bother?

As for facts, I’ve tried responding with facts earlier on this thread...that’s probably what set you off.

"The nation has been hypnotized by the swaying and the gesturing of the Watusi and the Frug.”
*J. Helms*