• Member Statistics

    16,026
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Bobby Orr
    Newest Member
    Bobby Orr
    Joined

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Inverted_Trough said:

Well, consolidation and monopolization that has occurred since the 1970s has created businesses that are "too big to fail".  You can thank the University of Chicago "intellectual" economists for instilling the belief that business consolidation is good because it's "efficient".  Make no mistake:  The system we have today is by design.  

Bailouts are sometimes necessary but the problem is that there should be conditions placed upon the acceptance of that money.  For example, if you accept a bailout, then for the next five years you are not allowed to spend a single penny buying back your own stock.  If you don't like those conditions, then don't accept the bailout.  

Agreed 100% with the bolded.

As far as the first paragraph, Americans have voted for the type of government that has allowed for consolidation and monopolization since the 70s. So collectively as a nation, we're getting what we deserve as the chickens come home to roost. The only way to change the situation is for Americans to vote for the type of government that is willing to change the system, and they've proven yet again they're not willing to do so. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nwohweather said:

Nah the hospitality & airline industry was doing just fine until March. Honestly the bigger issue with this is that a lot of those jobs are "unskilled" and were typical fall back positions during previous downturns. Sure you lost your job but you can now go be a waitress or something. But goodness people in things like hotels & restaurants and their owners are being killed here. That's where this gets bad, you can't fall back onto service industry jobs because they don't exist due to this. That's where this becomes a pit of doom truly. 

Over the past ten years, the big six airlines have spent 96% of their profits on stock buybacks.  Sorry, but I'm not that sympathetic to the airlines.  They are especially vulnerable to natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, pandemics, etc.  So of all industries you would think they would have a long-term, strategic view towards things.  But nope. I say let them fend for themselves.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/airlines-and-boeing-want-a-bailout-but-look-how-much-theyve-spent-on-stock-buybacks-2020-03-18

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailout culture is bad. Its especially bad to white people who thanks to the banks, have excess debt and wealth. They have lost the way how to behave as Patriots. This decadent anti-nationalism I have seem from them during the pandemic is embarrassing.

The fact is the US could use a good ole fashioned liquidation. Supply lines at Walmart, rationing food, which was all typical up through the great depression will make a comeback. America can regain independence again with a debt free currency. Social Nationalism will replace Progressives in the future and identity politics will die out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Inverted_Trough said:

Over the past ten years, the big six airlines have spent 96% of their profits on stock buybacks.  Sorry, but I'm not that sympathetic to the airlines.  They are especially vulnerable to natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, pandemics, etc.  So of all industries you would think they would have a long-term, strategic view towards things.  But nope. I say let them fend for themselves.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/airlines-and-boeing-want-a-bailout-but-look-how-much-theyve-spent-on-stock-buybacks-2020-03-18

Well, we could make the airlines publicly owned.

It wouldn't save us any money after the pillaging and waste is factored in though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Inverted_Trough said:

Over the past ten years, the big six airlines have spent 96% of their profits on stock buybacks.  Sorry, but I'm not that sympathetic to the airlines.  They are especially vulnerable to natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, pandemics, etc.  So of all industries you would think they would have a long-term, strategic view towards things.  But nope. I say let them fend for themselves.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/airlines-and-boeing-want-a-bailout-but-look-how-much-theyve-spent-on-stock-buybacks-2020-03-18

One of the few times Donald Trump is right, Boeing is probably the most important manufacturer in America toIt's a debate for sure in business as stock buybacks just boost your earnings and are  be honest so it's a bit of a pickle. This why Berkshire Hathaway Holdings are the big dog on the block, they value cash over cash flow. In your personal life would you rather buy a $30,000 F150 for 6 years, or do 7 years at $34,000? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should add, there's also the national security aspect too with protecting the aerospace industry. 

Many of the companies that support Commercial Aerospace also support the Military. However, military expenditures often exceed their costs and depending on the contract, the government doesn't reimburse companies for these costs until the product is delivered. In the mean time, they're having to spend a ton of their own money on equipment, material and labor upfront.

The commercial side of the industry is what many of the major aerospace companies supplying the US government rely on to fund their expenditures, and if they're not bringing in the money to fund those expenditures, then they can't afford to deliver products to the government (thus creating a security risk).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should see the stock buybacks and ceo bonuses from the 2008 buyouts. We personally paid for millions of bonuses for failed greedy management teams in sub prime lending. Completely mind blowing how that is legal. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just how bad is the US economy and how bad will it get? Rubenstein didn't mince his words when speaking with Gillian Tetthair, Editorial Board, and Editor-at-large; "I think nobody in Washington, or in New York or any part of the United States, really knows how bad the economy is, because we don't know when we're going to come back out of the shutdown and people are going to go back to work, go back to school. Right now, the economy is as bad as anything I've seen in my lifetime of course and not since the Great Depression have we had numbers as bad."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paularmstrongtech/2020/05/12/billionaire-david-rubenstein-says-nobody-in-us-knows-how-bad-the-economy-is/#38d641f81836

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nwohweather said:

I don't make policy decisions, I just explain the economic ramifications of what is happening. Lol other people can make those decisions accordingly. 

You have to realize money has no eyes, has no heart, has no soul. You're right though, it is profit over anything. You're taking this personally, and business isn't about emotion, it's about being good. I don't really care about what unions did previously, I care how I can beat their high labor costs & hard protections of employees. Luckily for our company, customers and shareholders I almost always win

Dude you are the one beating the drum of people must work and the economy must go on. If anyone is taking anything personally, its you. Funny how me wanting people to be safe is somehow looked at as being a negative thing. Then again you are in a state with exploding cases but you could careless about taking precautions

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jonger said:

But a recent study of 100 recovered coronavirus patients reveals 78 of them now have lasting cardiovascular damage even though a vast majority of them had mild cases of COVID-19 in the first place.

If you have looked into the typical symptomatic patient, it would shock me to find they aren't already walking around with cardiovascular damage as it is.

That's the thing with diabetes. It's not the diabetes itself that raises your risk of dying or having symptoms, it's the DAMAGE inflicted from the diabetes over the years that causes susceptibility.  Heightened blood sugar causes inflammation in your blood vessels and that damages nerves. My sister-in-law has RAGING type 2 diabetes.... commonly walking around with 450 mg/dl every day of her life. She spends the majority of her life recovering or weathering infections. She's 450 lbs and 5' 6''. She would probably perish from COVID-19.

You honestly believe that people already had heart problems before this? I mean that is quite an uneducated leap of faith that isn't remotely based in truth. The cases here were post-covid with cardiovascular damage, and none pre-covid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jonger said:

And the other thing, any illness can/does affect the heart. My grandmother died after getting a cold in 2007. That "cold" was almost certainly a virus or bacterial infection with a proper scientific name. Nobody cared back in 2007 about pathogen specifics, but in 2020 you better bet your butt they would/

 

When I had a severe case of bacterial pneumonia (brought on by a lingering viral infection) back in 2004, I was knocked on my butt for two months, but not sure if my heart suffered any long-term damage. I do know 4.5 months after the pneumonia I was back to running a half-marathon at my normal pace and felt fine. My lung and heart capacity felt normal. Several years later I had an echocardiogram done and it was normal.

The bottom line again is that it’s way too soon to be determining that Covid is permanently damaging the heart and other organs as some news reports have indicated. That will require extensive research over thousands of Covid patients.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ovweather said:

When I had a severe case of bacterial pneumonia (brought on by a lingering viral infection) back in 2004, I was knocked on my butt for two months, but not sure if my heart suffered any long-term damage. I do know 4.5 months after the pneumonia I was back to running a half-marathon at my normal pace and felt fine. My lung and heart capacity felt normal. Several years later I had an echocardiogram done and it was normal.

The bottom line again is that it’s way too soon to be determining that Covid is permanently damaging the heart and other organs as some news reports have indicated.

That study had 78% who had some impact that didn't previously have that damage... Maybe they recover and heal but right off the bat there is damage post-covid which immediately endangers those who get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stebo said:

That study had 78% who had some impact that didn't previously have that damage... Maybe they recover and heal but right off the bat there is damage post-covid which immediately endangers those who get it.

True, but how do they know the person didn’t have some damage / inflammation before contracting Covid without having tested them prior? Frankly, I won’t be surprised if it is learned without doubt that Covid can damage the heart to some extent. That’s why being cautious is so important right now until we learn all we can about the virus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ovweather said:

True, but how do they know the person didn’t have some damage / inflammation before contracting Covid without having tested them prior? Frankly, I won’t be surprised if it is learned without doubt that Covid can damage the heart to some extent. That’s why being cautious is so important right now until we learn all we can about the virus.

It is 78%, It would take a great assumption to think most of 78 out of 100 had some sort of damage beforehand. Mind you this is a German study, not an American where our lifestyle is such that it could be possible though still very highly unlikely. Fact is covid can have a lasting impact on the cardiovascular. Just look at Eduardo Rodriguez for the Red Sox, he 100% didn't have any cardiovascular issues before covid and you know that because MLB does physicals on their players regularly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s a need to downplay covid in a lot of people, I think part of it is a coping mechanism. This was never going to be deadly like Ebola, if it was it would’ve killed itself out already. Its a perfect storm of asymptomatic and mild symptom people spreading it rapidly and it finding those who who are more vulnerable or just unlucky and ends up being serious/deadly then. This is why it’s a dangerous pandemic, it’s not making some sick enough to stay home or not be out, while it’s killing others.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Stebo said:

It is 78%, It would take a great assumption to think most of 78 out of 100 had some sort of damage beforehand. Mind you this is a German study, not an American where our lifestyle is such that it could be possible though still very highly unlikely. Fact is covid can have a lasting impact on the cardiovascular. Just look at Eduardo Rodriguez for the Red Sox, he 100% didn't have any cardiovascular issues before covid and you know that because MLB does physicals on their players regularly.

Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing right now about lasting impact since the virus is so new. It will take years before any thorough and conclusive research can be achieved.

Is it possible some of the 78% had some damage / inflammation beforehand? Sure it is. Allergies, for example, can cause severe inflammation in the body, including the heart. Were all 78% non-smokers, too? I’m not trying to minimize Covid because I’m on your side about taking it seriously and mask wearing, etc  But some of these reports seem to be jumping the gun and playing into the hands of those wanting to create mass hysteria over the virus.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ovweather said:

Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing right now about lasting impact since the virus is so new. It will take years before any thorough and conclusive research can be achieved.

Is it possible some of the 78% had some damage / inflammation beforehand? Sure it is. Allergies, for example, can cause severe inflammation in the body, including the heart. Were all 78% non-smokers, too? I’m not trying to minimize Covid because I’m on your side about taking it seriously and mask wearing, etc  But some of these reports seem to be jumping the gun and playing into the hands of those wanting to create mass hysteria over the virus.

Some but not all any probably no where near a majority, and even short term cardiovascular issues can be serious as can be. I don't get how some of you can be so cavalier about this.

Also how is this report false, it was a direct study of 100 people who had covid, how is that playing into the hands of those wanting mass hysteria if it is completely valid. You guys are doing everything possible to take away the validity of something that should be wholly concerning to everyone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jonger said:

But a recent study of 100 recovered coronavirus patients reveals 78 of them now have lasting cardiovascular damage even though a vast majority of them had mild cases of COVID-19 in the first place.

If you have looked into the typical symptomatic patient, it would shock me to find they aren't already walking around with cardiovascular damage as it is.

That's the thing with diabetes. It's not the diabetes itself that raises your risk of dying or having symptoms, it's the DAMAGE inflicted from the diabetes over the years that causes susceptibility.  Heightened blood sugar causes inflammation in your blood vessels and that damages nerves. My sister-in-law has RAGING type 2 diabetes.... commonly walking around with 450 mg/dl every day of her life. She spends the majority of her life recovering or weathering infections. She's 450 lbs and 5' 6''. She would probably perish from COVID-19.

 

1 hour ago, Stebo said:

You honestly believe that people already had heart problems before this? I mean that is quite an uneducated leap of faith that isn't remotely based in truth. The cases here were post-covid with cardiovascular damage, and none pre-covid.

MD here, this information is readily available in table 1 of the study. There were two control groups to compare against the covid patients. Of 50 healthy controls, 3% had evidence of myocardial changes, of 57 risk factor matched controls, 40% had evidence of myocardial changes at baseline.

Active inflammation is measured by T2 signal, 60% of Covid patients had active inflammation, 9% of risk factor matched controls.

Also important to note, these MRIs were done approximately 2-3 months after infection.

Reasonable conclusion would be that covid causes a significant increase in myocardial inflammation that persists for at least 2 months after infection.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mattb65 said:

 

MD here, this information is readily available in table 1 of the study. There were two control groups to compare against the covid patients. Of 50 healthy controls, 3% had evidence of myocardial inflammation, of 57 risk factor matched controls, 40% had evidence of myocardial inflammation at baseline.

Also important to note, these MRIs were done approximately 2-3 months after infection.

Reasonable conclusion would be that covid causes a significant increase in myocardial inflammation that persists for at least 2 months after infection.

Yep, and this is short term which is bad, we don't even know long term but odds are it won't be good especially with this many having issues.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stebo said:

Yep, and this is short term which is bad, we don't even know long term but odds are it won't be good especially with this many having issues.

From the articles discussion "Our findings may provide an indication of potentially considerable burden of inflammatory disease in large and growing parts of the population and urgently
require confirmation in a larger cohort. Although the long-term health effects of these findings cannot yet be determined, several of the abnormalities described have been
previously related to worse outcome in inflammatory cardiomyopathies.2"

 

It's definitely a concern and all the more reason to do whatever is feasible to put measures in place to contain the virus like every other developed country in the world. With vaccine data continuing to be promising it is incredibly  foolish to continue to fail as a country at following the successful playbook we've seen done time and again around the world by the other developed countries.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully the heart affects are temporary.  It's a big problem if they aren't, or even if they fade away after some years go by because in the meantime you'd have people who survived the acute phase of covid but die prematurely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mattb65 said:

 

MD here, this information is readily available in table 1 of the study. There were two control groups to compare against the covid patients. Of 50 healthy controls, 3% had evidence of myocardial changes, of 57 risk factor matched controls, 40% had evidence of myocardial changes at baseline.

Active inflammation is measured by T2 signal, 60% of Covid patients had active inflammation, 9% of risk factor matched controls.

Also important to note, these MRIs were done approximately 2-3 months after infection.

Reasonable conclusion would be that covid causes a significant increase in myocardial inflammation that persists for at least 2 months after infection.

I guess another question is how does this result compare against other coronaviruses and influenza viruses, as well as viral and bacterial pneumonias? Do some people experience a short-term heart inflammation with these other viruses? Does is damage the heart long-term? Surely there is well-documented research here? Also, why do some people experience myocardial inflammation with Covid and others don't despite both groups having only mild symptoms?

Again, I'm not at all trying to minimize the potential impact of Covid. The virus is just so new and we have such limited research into any long-term effects.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jonger said:

We're selling lobster and crab like it's going out of style lately.

Not the kind of purchase that's responsible for people on a fixed budget. 

But... that's not going to stop me from selling it to them.

i sell items that would be considered luxury and definitely not essential. I'll just say it's absolutely insane the kind of money people are throwing out right now. it's all gonna come crashing down hard in the next couple months though unless the benefits get extended. been preparing since march so 'm ready for when it inevitably happens

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, chances14 said:

i sell items that would be considered luxury and definitely not essential. I'll just say it's absolutely insane the kind of money people are throwing out right now. it's all gonna come crashing down hard in the next couple months though unless the benefits get extended. been preparing since march so 'm ready for when it inevitably happens

It could just be people who were working all along and now have extra cash as they aren't going anywhere or on vacation. I mean most people actually didn't get those unemployment benefits, so this could actually just be normal consumption.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Stebo said:

It could just be people who were working all along and now have extra cash as they aren't going anywhere or on vacation. I mean most people actually didn't get those unemployment benefits, so this could actually just be normal consumption.

Curious why you say that?  Though there was some delay,  everyone I've encountered part time or full time got the extra unemployment.  Maybe it's depending on the state. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, dta1984 said:

Curious why you say that?  Though there was some delay,  everyone I've encountered part time or full time got the extra unemployment.  Maybe it's depending on the state. 

I think what he meant was that only around 20% of people actually got furloughed/laid off and collected Unemployment. The rest of us continued to work and not much has changed as of yet. We have actually received more money with the $1200 checks. Many people including me had designated funds set aside for vacations. Mine were New Zealand/Norway this year. I am using that money to make home improvements instead. Many others are likely doing the same. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Stebo said:

It could just be people who were working all along and now have extra cash as they aren't going anywhere or on vacation. I mean most people actually didn't get those unemployment benefits, so this could actually just be normal consumption.

We'll find out when the $600 ends.

  • Weenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BuffaloWeather said:

I think what he meant was that only around 20% of people actually got furloughed/laid off and collected Unemployment. The rest of us continued to work and not much has changed as of yet. We have actually received more money with the $1200 checks. Many people including me had designated funds set aside for vacations. Mine were New Zealand/Norway this year. I am using that money to make home improvements instead. Many others are likely doing the same. 

When the layoffs first started I believe those affected were working across a more broad spectrum of fields, wages averaged around $75,000 for those out of work. Now, we're looking at lower paid industries still not back to work. As that link I posted earlier was showing, 2/3rds of those elgible for the increased unemployment are making more than they were previously. 

Not exactly the prime big spending vacation type. I think the majority of what we are seeing with spending is coming from people making upwards of $2,500 a month more now than previously.

  • Like 1
  • Weenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Stebo said:

It could just be people who were working all along and now have extra cash as they aren't going anywhere or on vacation. I mean most people actually didn't get those unemployment benefits, so this could actually just be normal consumption.

that could be a contributing factor but my customer base is generally those in the lower middle class

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.