Slashdot Mirror

To the AC, informed, yes: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/02/business/bank-of-america-drops-plan-for-debit-card-fee.html
" On Oct. 1, a new federal rule went into effect that limits the fees banks can levy on merchants every time a consumer swipes a debit card to make a purchase. The new limit is expected to cost the banks about $6.6 billion in revenue a year, beginning in 2012, according to Javelin Strategy and Research. That comes on top of another loss, of $5.6 billion, from new rules restricting overdraft fees, which were widely seen as onerous and went into effect in July 2010. "

The full report unfortunately is paywalled: https://www.javelinstrategy.com/brochure/219


However, if we ask what percentage of revenue this is: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-25/dodd-frank-cutting-9-billion-of-revenue-spurs-u-s-banks-to-invent-fees.html
" The 10 biggest banks’ estimated impact of the two rules accounts for less than 2 percent of the $514.6 billion net revenue they posted last year. "


I'm not sympathetic.

The data in that summary is cherry picked so it doesn't make bad PR for nuclear power.
For instance, they are careful not to mention evidence that rector one was damaged by the earthquake even before the tsunami struck:

http://www.asianewsnet.net/home/news.php?id=18975&sec=1

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-19/fukushima-may-have-leaked-radiation-before-quake.html

Many companies have what appears to be great years right up to the point they go bankrupt.

One reason being that they lay off employees in large batches - just as RIM are doing. 2000 headcount last quarter (10%). Lower salaries -> higher profits in the short term, but no long term strategy.

A significant bad sign is that their executives are running quickly for the exits.

It is almost irrelevant what the "cost per watt" is. Almost. You see, there is this thing called "energy storage" and "base load power", and solar is neither. I can pile up a coal heap. I can store gas and oil in tanks. I can't store electricity anywhere, except gravity, but then that is hydro and limited by geography. And please, don't even mention batteries, unless you simply want to be sarcastic.

Who cares what "cost per watt" is when I need power when it is dark, or cloudy or when the wind doesn't blow. What is my "cost per watt" then??

So yes, with "solar panels everywhere", all we will get is reverse peak demand. Peak power cost will come at night or when it is cloudy. When the sun is out, the spot price will be nil, and then ROI for solar will be non-existent without subsidies either.

Anyway, here's the reality of solar. After $500 billion wasted on solar, all we get is cheap natural gas from shale fracking.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-26/the-energy-revolution-that-keeps-carbon-on-top-nathan-myhrvold.html

There are about 14000 security bonds rated AAA like some subprime morgage bonds:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-31/subprime-mortgage-bonds-getting-aaa-rating-s-p-denies-to-u-s-treasuries.html

Meanwhile US treasury bonds is rated as AA+.

Technically speaking China would probably have the highest number of users or potential users based on population. However, I don't think people making $2 an hour have obtaining a smart phone at the top of their got to have list.

Oopsie (tl;dr China is Apple's second largest market, and climbing fast). Take a look at China, Inc. It's a very, very big place. It is much more complex than you seem to think.

It was much more more than careless chit-chat. He was having an affair with Danielle Chiesi and told her all sorts of insider details. She got 2.5 years in club fed for her part this - Moffat got 6 months.

Actually, Men can get throat cancer from this. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-03/oral-sex-may-cause-virus-linked-throat-cancer-in-men-study.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-03/oral-sex-may-cause-virus-linked-throat-cancer-in-men-study.html

Bank of America Corp. (BAC), hit by a credit downgrade last month, has moved derivatives from its Merrill Lynch unit to a subsidiary flush with insured deposits, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.

Bank of America’s holding company -- the parent of both the retail bank and the Merrill Lynch securities unit -- held almost $75 trillion of derivatives at the end of June, according to data compiled by the OCC. About $53 trillion, or 71 percent, were within Bank of America NA, according to the data, which represent the notional values of the trades.

That compares with JPMorgan’s deposit-taking entity, JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, which contained 99 percent of the New York-based firm’s $79 trillion of notional derivatives, the OCC data show.

Maybe because they give away the encryption keys http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-31/rim-s-agreement-with-india-is-likely-to-foreshadow-wider-government-access.html

Google's probably got nothing to worry about. They've been doing this for a while. So has Microsoft. And Facebook. And probably most other large companies. Most of this falls under something called transfer pricing. Which is a global problem that you will find anywhere from China to Britain to Argentina.

It's not quite right for this article to make it sound like a solely Google problem. It's far far larger than that. In the end, Google's got enough of the highest paid lawyers and accountants that this audit should turn up just about nothing.

Hmmm, maybe I'll just transfer all my profits to Bermuda ... oh, right, I'm poor. We pay taxes. Corporations and people rich enough to afford shifty accountants don't. And, really, what motivation do my representatives have to change this situation? Their soft money doesn't come from me and my fellow citizens are too stupid, too easily misled and too illiterate to vote someone who would change this into office.

Normally, the country can count on conservatives to deal in facts.

News flash: neither party can be counted on to deal in facts. I will also say with utter confidence that your party line (of which there are only two) will not determine how factual you are. There are goddamn liars among all the ranks of any party.

We base policies on science, not sentiment, we insist on people being accountable for their actions, and we maintain that markets, not mandates, are the path to prosperity.

If you based your policies on science, then why isn't it a completely open process? Anonymize the names (if any) and release the numbers (especially who pays what in taxes from which areas) behind your policy making. Of course you don't and on top of that, paltry though it may be, we have to wait until Obama to get that ball started rolling.

Oh, yeah, accountable of their actions? Yeah, you rich bastards love to hold each other accountable for your actions -- especially your financiers.

You would expect conservatives to stand with 95 percent of the scientific community and to grow the 13 percent into a working majority.

Oh, wait a minute, I see what's going on here. You're not really a conservative. You're like Zell Miller who is a Democrat only by label and paperwork.

Your proposal, though noble, is a fool's errand. I believe this has been tackled before and the real problem is that you can always find more and more ties to pollution or non-renewable resources being used to make your product and get it to the consumer and then even after that you have the whole usage of it followed by proper disposal and returning the resources. That cheap Dell computer your secretary is playing Bejeweled on? Yeah, that's a nightmare.

What if we attached all of the costs -- especially the hidden costs -- to all fuels?

Once you lay out a comprehensive and complete list of what the costs are -- especially the hidden costs -- then I'll hop on board. For now you're basically scratching the surface of a very deep and complicated rabbit hole that is hard to trace backward for many reasons. Some of them supply line problems, some of them scientific problems, some of them statistical problems and some even privacy problems for the users.

Companies already try to regulate themselves by paying a so called 'carbon tax' by being 'carbon neutral' or by planting just an assload of trees so they can say X trees for Y products sold. But you know, that's all really neither exact nor assuredly truly undoing all that is done in their dealings. And while they might tell the public one thing, I don't think they believe it.

Could someone please enumerate every true cost of getting one gallon of gasoline into my car tank? What about what happens as I use it? What about what happens after I've used it?

And the best part is that at some point, as you noted, loss of life is going to be on that list of true costs. Whether you're buying an Apple iPhone that some worker committed suicide while making at the Foxconn plant or BP's little explosion killing 11 oil well workers, you're going to have to say at some point that 1 human life = X million dollars in cost. And that makes people really uncomfortable. It gets even more uncomfortable when whoever deciding that cost considers nationality in influencing that ratio.

they don't sell it commercially

But... that's likely to change imminently.

The moment Google has to make licensing deals on patents, Android will cease to be free... and by that, I don't mean to companies, but to small developers just wanting to use it on homebrew devices. It'll become the Unix of the mobile OS world. Open source, but huge license fees to use so as to pay for the lawyers to protect it.

Furthermore, deals like these have very similar effects to patent licensing for Google, though they seem potentially more protective of the small developers.

they don't sell it commercially

But... that's likely to change imminently.

The moment Google has to make licensing deals on patents, Android will cease to be free... and by that, I don't mean to companies, but to small developers just wanting to use it on homebrew devices. It'll become the Unix of the mobile OS world. Open source, but huge license fees to use so as to pay for the lawyers to protect it.

Furthermore, deals like these have very similar effects to patent licensing for Google, though they seem potentially more protective of the small developers.

Every app developer pays Apple 30%.

That's alot more than can be said about our federal tax laws which are more like a record of bribery and scams than a rational tax code.

Google dodges taxes using techniques known as the "Double Irish" and the "Dutch Sandwich" to reduce its tax rate to 2.4 percent.

citation provided

You are a little bit behind on the news. The Yuan hasn't been pegged to the dollar for a while. The US doesn't like this, but they can no longer stop it. Of course this never makes the mainstream "AMERICA FUCK YEAH" news channels.

You can find links on google's new page, like this one: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-27/wall-street-protesters-joined-by-susan-sarandon.html

The protesters are actually fairly well organized with planned events, a voting process for making immediate decisions, and a goal of getting Obama to acknowledge the wealth gap and appointing a commission to recommend actions for dealing with it.

The "traditional" media is indeed ignoring it. There's an on-going debate on twitter about whether or not the twitter admins are actively suppressing the #occupywallstreet hash-tag from trending.

Yes, this is correct. Wait a month and you'll see that we turned the corner about a week ago.

You made that statement on the 31st March 2011, which means you claim all these things were done by 24th March 2011. It's not my fault that you made a lazy and vague point to make your grandiose statement. Your bullshit is on the record as is you inability to define what you mean by your statement and your subsequent attempts to backpedal and massage some meaning into your statement as new information becomes available and then claim that you were right all along to satisfy your sense of self importance and attempt to recover some dignity. You took a gamble that I didn't have any facts to present and that I would back down like everyone else you have bludgeoned with your arrogance, that is so sickening to watch, and you turned out looking like a fool.

Why don't you shut up and do step one. Show that my statement was false? I can wait.

First, I've already done that here.

Second, looking back to June a sharp rise in radiation meant they couldn't even get near the plant. So almost three months after your claim it still hadn't "turned a corner"

Third, Spontaneous criticality is still occurring at the sites, disturbingly, it is suspected that this is also happening in the spent fuel cooling pools. That's not even under control. The evidence; the site is still outputting radiocesium. Source Tepco report (June 20 – June 28: approx. 1 billion Bq/hr (1.0 x 109)) Jul/Aug/Sep data not available

Fourth, Tepco's Official Plan for dealing with the accident has, ironically, has not achieved Step One "Maintain Stable Cooling" (So *you* can shut up now) Source; Japan Prime Ministers Office.

Fifth, Overall, the situation at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant remains very serious. Source IAEA

Sixth; Plant has not yet acheived a cold shut down - Source Japan Prime Minister report on Fukushima.

Bloomberg, Reuters, Summary of Reactor Status (2 June 2011) - Presentation Transcript etc etc

There is so much more that tells us the corner hasn't been turned yet, not even a cold shutdown has been achieved yet. The workers can't even get into the plant to assess the damage yet but you will likely come up with some word twist to justify your position. The worst thing about your position is you show no respect for the workers there who continue to risk their lives to bring the situation under control.

You are lost.

For example Google does a insane amount ($60 BILLION) of tax dodging.

That is not at all what that article says. The $60B quote is total for *all companies* per year. Google is lowering it's tax burden by an average of $1B per year. It is also only applying this to overseas income, not US income, on which it pays the full rate. From the article you linked:
"Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years..." (no where near $60B)
"...helped reduce its overseas tax rate to 2.4 percent..." (overseas=not USA)
"Such income shifting costs the U.S. government as much as $60 billion in annual revenue..." (generality with the weasel words "as much as")
"International income-shifting, which helped cut Google’s overall effective tax rate to 22.2 percent last year..." (22.2% >> 2.4%)

So if the overseas income rate is 2.4%, but the overall one is 22.2%, that means Google is paying quite a bit in US taxes on US income. At an average of $1B per year, you are also overstating the "problem" by 60x.

Also, while I like revenue for my government, but why should overseas income come back to the US for a multi-national anyway, when they can spend it where they earned it, such as by building datacenters in the EU?

If anyone is getting "cheated" here, it is the EU since they are the source of this income and that is where the taxes should be paid. Of course the fix is simple, if the EU would like to, it can fix its own tax laws. The US can cry all it wants, but it was never "our" money in the first place, just money earned by a multi-national which happens to have started out as a US company, income that our government would like the company to repatriate for no particular reason other than to pay taxes on it. Paying extra taxes for no reason is something shareholders would rightfully be annoyed about.

GE on the other hand, is relocating US-earned income, which does bug me. Still, I fully expect them to do that (serving their shareholders) until the US closes the loopholes they are using via legislation. That is where the solution must come from -- after all, as individuals when was the last time you overpaid your takes purposely? No, we only pay the taxes that are legally required of us, and no more. Companies will do the same. So just like with the Buffet rule, you need to change the tax law to effect the change you want.

Because virtual money can't be laundered.

Ha ha ha! - do you have a gig at the Comedy club? Really? You're serious? You actually believe that shit?

Uncle Surgi runs a market garden, Uncle Bonnoventure runs a trucking company, Cousin Pascaly runs a restaurant, Brother Vincent runs a fishing boat, Mr Ibrahymen runs a night club... throw in a property developer/hotelier and the odd gold prospector and your virtual money plan craps out. I've changed the names (any resemblance to real people is intentional) - but if all the resources of CrimTrek, FinTrek, CasLoan, and the AKKK can't prove criminal enterprise when millions and millions of dollars electronically passes between these groups - then other forms of virtual currency won't work either (there are companies that ensure that). Cousin Pascaly just got convicted for 9 figures worth of product - only because his family turned him in for not sharing (daddy learnt the lesson after being knee-capped and losing the leg, by Mr Girls-hat). Once that money hits a till, it's gone - those accountants, investors, bankers, car yards, boat sellers, councillors, developers, newspapers, television stations, football team owners, Formula 1 promoters - aren't going to give up a good thing - it become the institution.

As for the value of gold - it's stable (doesn't burn or decompose easily), unless a lucky meteorite strikes it'll remain rare, it's easy to verify it's authenticity - it's industrial uses has little bearing on it's value. Governments come and go - but their printed currency is only worth the gold reserves it's backed against. That's the problem with bitcoins - they rely only on scarcity which is based on trust (of the algorithm). Trust is fine for small amounts...

Putting a value on debt is called "speculation" (didn't work so good for the International Bank did it?).... and using a story about criminals caught (shopped by a competing cartel - the leader broke out of a Mexican prison recently) moving cash into banks to somehow magically show that virtual money will stop money laundry is just dumb. The example I gave is where (is) groups launder lower in the chain (at the 1/4 oz level) - virtual money will stop that you think?

Known (busted twice) amphetamine producer runs a series of sweatshop enterprises and a motorcycle yard - his silk screeners, embroiders, sales staff, and mechanics get paid in speed.... it's a virtual currency too. That's small scale - the big scale "accounting service" (getting money to the till" is a big business, in Sydney it's dominated by the son of Mr BrightYellow (ex business partner of Ms. SunComesUp O'Irish) - but there are actual accounting companies that specialize in it, and plenty of accountants willing to try their hand (Nugan Hand ring a bell?).

Perhaps if you knew how much money moving through BOA and G&S is illegal drug money you'd appreciate that money laundry is business as usual.

Wake up and smell the shit.

stray further from real (tangible) value like actual physical commodities (gold, silver, etc.).

Why should gold have value? It doesn't have many uses, no way near to the point that justifies it's current price. Why should society waste effort mining something almost worthless to be passed around as "money"? Would it not be significantly more efficient to not waste time mining and instead use debt as money?

Google will move its operations overseas??? It's already done. Tax breaks and incentives for corporations and the wealthy such as those proposed by the Republican party have done little but further concentrate wealth at the top.

So all they did was give even larger incentive for rich people to start playing games with taxes. Remember that tax planning isn't illegal, nor is forming offshore companies. It's unlikely to change as well, because foreign companies are needed too. As long as you keep the money in the offshore company accounts and not your personal ones, you don't need to pay taxes from them. The people making over one million dollars a year have all the means to do this - normal working people don't.

You know what, maybe start looking if the huge companies pay taxes? For example Google does a insane amount ($60 BILLION) of tax dodging.

First, companies don't pay taxes. Their customers do. To put it simpler, when you tax a company, they raise prices to pay that tax. Customers pay those higher prices to cover that tax. Companies don't print money. They get paid by their customers.

Next, the best way to eliminate "creative accounting" in regard to taxes is to make the system simple. A national sales tax, for example, would eliminate any benefit from basing your companies off shore. The only way around a sales tax is to buy stuff off the black market or move yourself off shore.

I know that people don't like the idea of everyone having to pay taxes and they balk at the idea that rich people will get to spend all of the money they receive, but a sales tax is the only fair tax. Rich people spend more money, thus pay more in taxes. Poor people spend less money, thus less in taxes. Don't want to pay taxes, don't spend money. I understand that the wealthy can afford to save large sums of money to avoid taxation, but the money will get spent eventually, meaning it will get taxed eventually. All capital gains will be taxes. All bonuses will be taxed. All the money that those greedy fat cats will receive will get taxed. No amount of tax attorneys can get around a sales tax.

So all they did was give even larger incentive for rich people to start playing games with taxes. Remember that tax planning isn't illegal, nor is forming offshore companies. It's unlikely to change as well, because foreign companies are needed too. As long as you keep the money in the offshore company accounts and not your personal ones, you don't need to pay taxes from them. The people making over one million dollars a year have all the means to do this - normal working people don't.

You know what, maybe start looking if the huge companies pay taxes? For example Google does a insane amount ($60 BILLION) of tax dodging.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-20/french-power-exports-to-germany-rise-amid-record-low-dam-output.html

T-Mobile would be worse off without a merger since they are treading water as it is.

Rejection by regulators would leave AT&T liable to pay Deutsche Telekom $3 billion in cash, to give T-Mobile USA wireless spectrum, and to reduce charges for calls into AT&T’s network, a package valued at as much as $7 billion, Deutsche Telekom has said.

So actually T-Mobile will win a big concession if this falls through.

Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO) has cut its income taxes by $7 billion since 2005 by booking roughly half its worldwide profits at a subsidiary at the foot of the Swiss Alps that employs about 100 peopleâ¦

Ciscoâ(TM)s techniques cut the effective tax rate on its reported international income to about 5 percent since 2008 by moving profits from roughly $20 billion in annual global sales through the Netherlands, Switzerland and Bermuda, according to its records in four countries. (cite).

If Cisco wants to book their profits in Bermuda (to circumvent supporting the US justice system, among other things) then they should file their complaints against counterfeiters in Bermuda as well. I'm sick of these freeloaders. There's no legal team at the DOJ spending millions to defend my rights, that I can tell.

This is why anti-Apple sites only show you the front of the frame, to make you think the whole thing looked like an iPad. The patent does not just concern the front, but the whole design together, which must be copied in order to get an injunction.

Apparently, that's not the case according to the German judge (and apparently Apple):

According to Judge Johanna Brueckner-Hofmann, Samsung “didn’t keep enough distance from the Apple design.” While the back of the tablets are quite different, the front part of the Galaxy Tab is “nearly identical” to the iPad.

(Also quoted here and here.)

I remember reading it a while back but was having trouble using the right search terms just now. There appears to be an article describing this here.

Awesome that you went to the trouble to point this out, though. Thanks.

Let me add a little bit to what's going on here. Florian has spun this as a "this is bad for google". Yes, that retarded florian mueller. From http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-07/htc-sues-apple-alleging-infringement-of-four-u-s-patents.html . Of course they have to use patents in a lawsuit. How else will they defend themselves? Google isn't suing anyone with these patents, but they are handing them out to folks like HTC to defend themselves (and thus android). They aren't going after folks. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the agreement from google to lend these patents to HTC is something like exactly that.

Meanwhile, guess what? Look at the groklaw debunk carefully.

. It increases the likelihood that Apple will lose or at least wish it never started this stupid patent war. Don't you recall what Eric Schmidt said recently, that Google would make sure HTC didn't lose? You thought he was just talking? If Apple wanted to rumble with Google, it would have done it already. That's the last thing they want, and with good reason. If it happens, it won't be because they desired it. The thing about patent litigation is you usually go after folks who can't do much to you back. Google can do plenty. They had a remarkable record in patent litigation before they bought the patents from IBM and bought Motorola. Now they are more fully armed, they can do a great deal more.Trying to spin this as a threat to Google is absolutely upside down

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-08/deutsche-telekom-is-said-to-discuss-sale-of-t-mobile-usa-to-sprint-nextel.html

Most do it as a shell game, using cut outs and having all paper work moved around as needed.
If anyone finds a person or tech, its emptied out, sold, lost in a take over ...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-22/torture-in-bahrain-becomes-routine-with-help-from-nokia-siemens-networking.html
e.g. "says he can’t comment because all documentation from the intelligence solutions unit had been transferred"
The big brand then only likes "ethical businesses"

oh absolutely, it's a mature industry, so why does this happen: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-31/solyndra-to-file-for-bankruptcy-mulls-sale-and-licensing-deals.html 500 million in SUBSIDIES and yet it's still bankrupt... yeah man! it's right around the corner!!! plus about what you said, it's ALWAYS "over the next 20 years" I mean, I think it speaks for itself really...

It makes sense. Think about all the business that T-Mobile lost while this thing was pending. People did not renew, some people did not switch to T-Mobile due to the uncertainty, etc. If it DOESN'T go through, T-Mobile needs to be compensated for that loss.

Copying a post of mine from earlier, yes, T-Mobile actually will be compensated quite well for this.

If this deal is blocked, it would not be bad news for T-Mobile as some here have claimed. According to Bloomberg,

"Should regulators reject the deal, which would create the biggest U.S. wireless carrier, AT&T would have to pay Deutsche Telekom $3 billion in cash. It would also provide T-Mobile USA with wireless spectrum in some regions and reduced charges for calls into AT&T’s network, for a total package valued at as much as $7 billion, Deutsche Telekom said this month."

So T-Mobile would get $3 billion in cash, more spectrum, and reduced fees for calls going through AT&T's network. This would seem to be good news for T-Mobile, as all of these things would make them more competitive.

"Should regulators reject the deal, which would create the biggest U.S. wireless carrier, AT&T would have to pay Deutsche Telekom $3 billion in cash. It would also provide T-Mobile USA with wireless spectrum in some regions and reduced charges for calls into AT&T’s network, for a total package valued at as much as $7 billion, Deutsche Telekom said this month."

So T-Mobile would get $3 billion in cash, more spectrum, and reduced fees for calls going through AT&T's network. This would seem to be good news for T-Mobile, as all of these things would make them more competitive.

if you count tablets iOS is still on top

Are you sure about this? According to this there will be about 90 million iOS devices sold in 2011, and about 180 million Androids. Even if we assume those numbers are strictly for phones, that leaves a gap of 90 million devices.

According to this, Apple's selling fewer than 30 million iPads per year. And that doesn't even account for any of the popular Android tablets out there, such as the Xoom, the Eee Transformer, and the Nook Color.

Yes, iOS rules in tablet space. But it does not bridge the gap in phone space.

Um, what is wrong with the FBI collecting data? How else are you going to have intelligence unless you collect it? It does not mean that anything untoward is going to happen, but society is better informed. I would think it is in the interest of any society to track groups in its society.

To say this is rhetorical is an understatement. Nothing collected has ever just sat in the corner. It will be used, it will be used against you, it will be used against you in ways that are not in evidence now, but when it's too late.
I am not a doom-sayer, however, just look at the past governmental promises to the native Americans. Everyone of them was broken, ignored, shuffled under the pile of bureaucratic bullshit, like we were just kidding. This government is out of control. No town hall meetings because they already know what proverbial shit is going to hit the fan. No reason to inflame the situation by lying to everybody, better to ignore it, maybe it will go away. YEAH RIGHT!
It's time to RECALL! Let these representatives lose THEIR jobs, homes, pensions, health care, luxury benefit packages on the taxpayer's hard work.
$1.2 trillion bailout is a long way from $600 million.

You honestly can't tell the difference between people making money and getting free money? Like this? http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-21/wall-street-aristocracy-got-1-2-trillion-in-fed-s-secret-loans.html. You're cute.

Actually there are only 5 major ones. The rest are tiny. Samsung has something like 34% of the market, with the top 3 owning 70 or 80%. And remember, Samsung corralled a bunch of LCD manufacturers into price-fixing and was fined $3 billion for it. In fact the DOJ began an anti-trust investigation into Samsung for NAND flash prices but dropped it: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aWgWSqhs_Jk0 If you read about the recent revelations at the SEC, it's not hard to see corruption occurring at the DOJ as well.

When GM was bailed out the bond holders got screwed, investors got screwed, they lost all of the money, so who won in that deal?

Union workers got their victory. It was a bail out to the union workers and all of the private debt of the failed company was put onto the shoulders of tax payers, because now they own this company, which is going to fail again.

Obama also appeals to GM drivers that their warranty will be made whole by the government, so now not only the unions got bailed out, but GM drivers are also bailed out, again, with more tax payer money.

Of-course GM drivers are also tax payers, but Honda drivers are not covered by this GM warranty.

Now Ford union is threatening to strike and they don't care if the company goes bankrupt now, that they saw GM and Chrysler bail outs (moral hazard).

Not only did Ford get the short end of the stick when its competitors - GM and Chrysler were bailed out, but now the moral hazard created by the bail outs can cause Ford to be destroyed if it gives the unions what they want or it can be destroyed by the union itself, which now believes that even if the company goes bankrupt, it will be bailed out.

--

This is how this game is played now if you are an investor: fuck you.

If you are in a large politically connected union, you are bailed out.

If you are American tax payer: fuck you too. You are now the proud owner of these failed businesses with all these insane obligations to the unions, whether you like it or not.

Of course, being downgraded by the ratings agency that famously whiffed on highly questionable real estate bonds might be considered a badge of honor in some circles.

That agency. Too bad they've got the entire financial industry by the balls, or their words might carry less weight.

So how much weight does S&P really carry if multiple outlets are shrugging off the downgrade?

Unless your company does web street maps.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-26/solar-may-be-cheaper-than-fossil-power-in-five-years-ge-says.html

Apple profit: $5.5 billion
Exxon profit: $US5.5bn in the second quarter.

Market essentially washed away what it gained back yesterday, and Apple did end up on top today, FWIW.

"Apple Overtakes Exxon to Become Most Valuable"

And Nokia still knows a thing or two about selling mobile phones.

Bullshit. Their phones are not selling, even here in Finland. Consumers no longer want anything to do with their products.

Uhm.. Nokia is still expected to be the top selling mobile phone brand in 2011 by a large margin, with 26% market share, ahead of Samsung in second place with 20% share. Nokia sold 16.7 millon smartphones in Q2 2011. Apple sold 20.3 million. So 16.7 million is hardly selling and 20.3 million is a run-away success? (source).

the U.S. is hurtling at full speed towards a deficit meltdown

Your beloved market thinks otherwise. That number is the interest the US has to pay to borrow money. That number was very small, reflecting the opinion of the market on risk of default. It actually fell further after the downgrade.

S&P's reasoning is not at all sound. That wasn't a "small math error", btw.

Federal income taxes are deducted from state income taxes.

Wrong. Backwards. State income taxes are a line item deduction from your federal income taxes. Increased state taxes result in less federal income. (See Schedule A).

Strange that states that charge a sales tax with no income tax are doing much better than those that rely in income taxes. Compare Florida to Michigan. Compare Texas to California.

Comparing anything to California is invalid because California has so many Constitutionally-mandated spending requirements and Constitutionally-prohibited tax sources that it's basically a given they're going to be broke year in and year out. What about Nevada? They have no income tax at all and are currently facing a $1.8 billion dollar deficit on a $3.6B budget; that's even worse than the federal government, as a percentage of money spent.

I drive on the local interstate much more than the top 1%. Sure, those interstates bring products to my local store, but I buy them from there, so I benefit from that as well.

Okay, let's look at that. That truck bringing groceries to your store can weigh (legally) up to 40 tons, but let's conservatively say it weighs 25 tons. That's 12.5 what a good-sized car weighs. Taking into account that road wear is proportional to the fourth power of weight, and one semi bringing groceries to the store causes as much wear and tear as 24,414 cars. Do you think that semi pay 24,000 times as much in taxes and fees on a per-mile basis as you do? If not, then business owners are getting a lot more out of their road and fuel taxes than you are.

My bank account is FDIC insured, just as the rich guy's, but I don't have over $250,000 in any account, so I'm 100% covered; rich people are not.

If you honestly think that anyone well-to-do keeps more than $250,000 in a single savings account then you'd make the world's worst financial advisor. Even the moderately wealthy have their money tied up in investments (not FDIC-protected) and their savings spread across multiple financial institutions in order to minimize risk. That's not even taking into account that the FDIC is broke, and the institutions where the rich keep their investments just get a direct federal bailout when they go under. So in summary:

• You were wrong about the tax deductions
• You mislead about the efficacy of income taxes versus sales taxes
• You used a misleading metric for "benefit" in a few cases, and
• You have no idea how to invest, and when banks go bust the working-class get screwed while the investing-class and upper-class get a bailout.

Would you like to be wrong about anything else today?

You'd be very popular in these places, all of which could produce more food on their own if government was not taxing and subsidizing and regulating food in the world:

Swaziland: HIV patients 'eat dung to make drugs work'

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/out_of_food_zimbabweans_eating_cow_dung/

Food Prices Fuel Egypt Unrest

Egypt and Tunisia usher in the new era of global food revolutions

Spike in global food prices contributes to Tunisian violence

Food price jumps protested in Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco

Egypt and Tunisia: rocked by the global food crisis

Hunger in Syria, Libya and Yemen

Ukraine to control food prices

Rising food prices increase squeeze on poor - Oxfam

As Food Prices Spike, Azerbaijanis Endure Border Chaos To Shop In Iran

For dummies: The impact of the global food crisis on Azerbaijan - in pictures

Estonia Raises Inflation Forecast on Global Food and Fuel Prices

Nigeria: food price up as inflationary rate drop

High food prices 'caused Niger hunger'

Mexico: Food prices reach record high

China's food price inflation hits 14.4% in June

Lithuania and Latvia catching up with Estonia

Food prices rise, wages donâ(TM)t

China food prices spike as floods ruin farmland

Brazil: Food Prices Surge and Head Toward Dangerous Levels

Rise in food prices causing major concerns in Russia

Stockpiling as Russian food prices soar

Food prices have soared most in Venezuela, Bolivia and Argentina

Thousands protest against high food prices in Delhi

India: A spike in food prices is especially painful for the poor