For me it suffers from trying to be too simple but requiring too many steps to get to where I want to go.
I don't have an answer or a solution, but I think there is more "AI" style interface designs out there to be discovered. I love T9 on my cell phone, I'd love to find something not really similar but in the same vein for getting to a song, album or whatever quicker.
If I had the solution, I'd make the product. I don't, but I know there is still the killer app interface waiting to be found.
I guess I'm a Samsung fanboi, but it was without realizing it. I used to be a big Sony guy, but over the past decade I've lost all faith in the company. Now I slowly replace all my products with what I consider the best (through a lot of research and actual testing of customer service and warranty support).
Last year my Sony television finally died. I replaced it with a Samsung unit, and couldn't be happier. My cell phone needed replacement, and my Samsung t809 has to be the best cell phone I've ever used (I believe it earns me at least $300 a month more just through added efficiency in my life). The Samsung Origami unit is very promising. My next fridge will be a Samsung (based on my recent experience in India with the units I used there). Same thing with the microwave.
How is it that a quiet company from Korea can produce great products that actually work, and back it up with great customer service? When my cell phone gave me a few minor problems, Samsung replied within 6 hours. They offered to compensate me for my problems (I declined as most were just features I needed that weren't available).
The lady of the house has 2 iPods and she loves them. I know they're saving me time and money because we don't have to store CDs anymore, and the square footage savings alone reduces the clutter in my life. I personally don't like the iPod -- the interface is nice, but it isn't easy enough or fast enough.
I don't see the need to change things, yet, but as consumer goods go, for me it is more about time saved and my life made easier. I doubt there is anything they can offer to make me sell the iPods and buy the Z5. I wonder if there are enough happy iPod users out there to make the market ever-declining for the competition. Considering Samsung picked up the iPod brainstormer, it's possible they'll actually find ways to trump the iPod, but the momentum of sales so far will make it a very difficult path to take. It amazes me how much money is being spent by the competition for obviously sub-par products. What can Samsung do differently to attract the attention of the mass public who already is familiar with Apple's product?
Nonetheless, Samsung does have my attention -- here and in everything else they make. For those not familiar with their products, I highly recommend taking a look the next time you need a consumer appliance or product. I'm amazed at the pricing, features and overall service.
Yes, you buy some Treasury Bills -- but there are others issued based directly on thin air creation. Look at my M3 money chart and figure out where the money comes from and where it goes.
Considering I went specifically to research market viability, freedom to enter the business world for citizens, and an overall review of regulations, 3 weeks was more than enough. I spent nearly 18 hours a day spending time with business owners AND members of government to get my information -- people I had started relationships with over the past 4 years. I plan on repeating this step at least 3-4 times a year to get a better sense of the world market and how the US dollar's inflationary cycle affects other countries. I am amazed at what I learn by just stepping outside the country.
Interstate Commerce Clause used in the absolute opposite way to what the framers intended. I'd love to know how much of the money spent in these investigations goes to pork and preferential cronyism.
If everyone saved $1, the banks would take this money and invest it for you in safe business loans and safe mortgages.
Today's stock market is nothing but safe. A P:E of 20 means the company will take 20 years to earn its price -- ridiculous! All my businesses have a P:E of 3-5. The stock market is inflated because of all this fresh easy money the Fed has created. They give out money at tiny interest rates, people put it into the stock market to earn more than savings. All this easy money flooding into the stock market causes prices to go up artificially. Just wait for the correction, the insiders will be even happier.
Today's housing market is worse -- when the stock market tanks, people starting putting all this inflationary easy money into homes -- artificially forcing the prices up. This mess will also correct itself.
It is ridiculous to think we should pay people based on their years of experience or how long they've been with the company. You pay people based on the value that they offer the company, that's it.
When I was young, my dad said the best years of my life to work are from 18 to 35. He said after that, I won't be as efficient, and I won't be worth what I am getting paid. I agree with him now, but I didn't agree with him then.
You don't just raise salaries to show you appreciation, you raise salaries to compensate people for performing more efficiently or enhancing the bottom line. If you raise salaries for no reason, people will have no reason to work better.
I can see most people here have never run their own business. It is really sad that people think they have "rights" as an employee. The only rights you have is the right to pack up and find a better job if you're unhappy.
Philophically we could have a discussion about the level or form of this payment but even the existence of a government necessitates a citizen contribution of some kind.
The average middle class household pays 50% of their gross income and benefit burden to governments in various forms of taxation. 50%. Half your year you work for others. This is not a "free society" any more.
And the money DOES come out of thin air. Let me explain how the Fed creates new money:
The Fed buys U.S. Treasury bills from a government approved dealer. They write a check for the amount, say $5 million. The dealer takes the $5 million and deposits it into their bank.
Where does the Fed get this money? They print it out of thin air. The U.S. Treasury bills are also an out-of-thin air creation given to preferred cronies of the government.
In 1959, there were US$ 292 billion in print. In 1969, there were US$ 612 billion in print. In 1979, there were US$ 1612 billion in print. In 1989, there were US$ 3944 billion in print. In 1999, there were US$ 6102 billion in print. In 2006, there are US$10240 billion in print.
In less than 50 years, the Fed has creates almost $10 trillion out of thin air. Almost half of this was created in the past 8 years. Since the 1st of January 2006, if you base the current inflation rate of the Fed for this year and extend it for the rest of the year, the Fed will print more money in 2006 alone than the value of every ounce of gold in existance.
This is why I don't save in dollars, invest in dollars, or live on dollars.
Several online banks offer 3-4%... or you could invest in the stock market. I've beaten those numbers so far this year already in my investments.
3-4% isn't enough to combat inflation. The Fed increased the M3 money supply by 10% in 2005, so 4% would be a 6% loss for many. No thanks. Even the stock market rarely pays that much over time (the average stock owner made 2.6% annually according to some recent analyses of real investors between the 80s and the 00s).
That's one way to do it but then you create an entry barrier to new homeowners, conficting with the american dream. Personally I'm glad things are the way they are.
Today the average homeowner owns less of their home than in any other time in US history. In fact, inflation makes it harder for people to pay off their homes quickly, and it gives people reason to think their homes are worth more than they are. To see homes go from $50k to $250k in just 15-20 years is ridiculous.
The American dream is to own a home but not fill it with junk. Today's American dream is to live like millionaires on borrowed time.
If anything your system makes it worse with higher interest rates.
US$70 trillion dollars is the estimated liability the US owes. Someone will have to pay for it. That's passing it on to our descendents. How about Social Security? We live high on the hog, getting fat and sick, and we pass those costs to the next generation. I think that is unacceptable. Consumer debt is one thing, but public debt is tragic.
Higher interest rates also pay out better savings rates -- encouraging savings. Savings gives banks money to make good loans, unlike putting money into the stock market that just ends up in the pockets of the management of the company as we've so often seen.
The problem with the value of US gold holdings is that the US (as well as other foreign central banks) have been leasing their gold holdings off the books to industry at a measly 1% interest rate. Eventually this gold will have to be returned -- bought at a much higher price likely. This added supply of gold in the market has kept the price of gold down while still allowing the central banks to say they have gold reserves, when they likely are down over 70% of what they report.
I have started to calculate the rate of inflation in my life. This is the only one that matters.
I also have tied the costs of my daily purchases to the current value of gold in US dollars. This also shows me how well gold's value holds up over time. In just 4 months my gold has been very stable versus most consumer products. I will soon be plotting these graphs weekly at my blog.
The inflation figure that the government (the BLS) creates is based on BS. Robert Blumen has a great article regarding this manipulation. They swap out numbers at will to hide the fact that they're creating money out of thin air, and depreciating the value of your money. The stock market has only gone up 500% in 90 years in terms of real value because of money printing.
There are a few links to Rothbard's book in this entire thread. It is a free and tiny e-book, I'd highly recommend reading it.
I have a big problem with people like you who have that attitude. Have you heard of a cost of living increase? I have been working for three years without even one of those. In essence, although my value to my company has increased, they are lowering my salary.
And this is your employer's fault? It is your job to work at the rate you're paid. If you want more money, you have to find someone willing to pay for it.
Your employee compensates you for what you are worth to them. If you want more money, you have to find someone else willing to pay you the increased amount. This is how competition works -- no one will just give you money because you think you deserve it. You have to warrant it.
If you don't pay your employees anything but or near minimum wage, you must not think very highly of your work. Just because an effort fails, does not mean that it was for lack of trying. Profit sharing should be an extra incentive to work even harder.
And yet I don't have people quit my businesses. I pay minimum wage plus a huge bonus because it gives people the added incentive to work really hard and get the job done. On top of that, they want to do a quality job so that we get rehired on contracts in the future.
You make a salary that is rarely tied to the amount of work you do. You feel safe and secure. My employees make more money than if they worked under a salary system -- they're tied directly to the work they do and the profitability of the project. On top of that, they want our customers happy.
Remember, I am the customer of the employee. I hate the term employer -- I am THEIR customer. They're working to satisfy me. I take all their work together, bundle it as a final product, and sell it to my customer.
If you feel you're worth more, shop around. I'm always looking for more people to hire, but the people I interview are 99% overpaid already, and have no desire to be good workers.
In a fixed money base (let us call it a 100% gold-backed reserve banking system), there will be more people and more products chasing the same quantity of money in the system. This means prices will fall as everyone tries to attract people to their goods and services. Over time, wages fall, but so do prices.
This is a GOOD thing. If you have $1 today, you want to spend it because you know in 1 year that $1 is worth less. In a free market, when you have $1 today, you want to save it because prices fall over time.
When you save money in a free market, you generally give it to a bank. In a free market with the Fed, banks that need money will offer better interest rates (not the 1% you get today). By investing that money in a bank, they are free to loan it to stable businesses with good business plans and equity, who are able to pay the loan back. They'll also loan it out to homeowners, but at a much higher interest rate than we see today.
Higher interest rates all around mean more wealth is created for everyone, rather than the quite theft that inflation takes from us, that confuses the entrepreneurs and that creates a massive amount of debt for your children and grandchildren to pay back. The US currenty has debt and off-book liabilities totalling over US$70 trillion. We can never pay this back, so we shove it to the next generations.
I'm a moral guy, and I think this is wrong. I'd rather live poorly than make others pay for my mistakes. The rest of the country would rather live beyond their means and let others pay for it.
What you are saying is very close to what many Keynesian economists believe -- the same economists teaching ECON101 and teaching the general public a myth that is now a lie.
Inflation is directly caused by government printing money out of thin air. Then, they lower interest rates (the Fed policy) to give people easy credit and easy money. If I put $500 into your pocket today, you'd spend it. If I gave $500 to every person in this country that never existed before, they'd all spend it at the same time. All this new money in the system will make sellers raise prices (added demand, lower supply) which is how inflation sneaks in.
Even worse, government uses inflationary creationism to force a hidden tax on you. Every year, your salary goes up but not enough to cover the REAL costs of inflation. This means you slide into higher tax brackets, causing you to pay more taxes on less income.
Taxation is theft, plain and simple. Inflation by the Fed is an even bigger crime.
I strongly advise getting a passport and going to see how the rest of the world lives if you think 2-3% inflation is out of control.
I just spent 3 weeks in Europe and Asia specifically to see how things are in the rest of the world. Inflation is a monster in every country, but just because all the other wolves are stealing the savings of the sheep doesn't mean it's correct.
I have a big problem with salaries in the U.S. -- employees believe they have a right to a raise every year, even if they are not providing more service or helping the company with added efficiency.
The big problem in the States is the government's crazy dollar creation (what we call inflation is directly caused by the Fed's out of control printing of dollars). This inflation creates cost of living increases (including the housing bubble in my opinion). Because of this inflationary cycle, people demand cost of living increases.
For my businesses, I pay my employees the lowest salary possible, in some cases minimum wage. I myself only earn minimum wage. Yet my employees also get a much larger share of profits, up to 70% on a given project. They are directly tied to the performance of their work, as well as the performance of the market. I'm one of the lowest paid in my IT business (although I also do less work than most).
To get raises, your company has to be making more money in terms of net profits. Microsoft is a company that has to constantly find new ways to profit in order to grow. With the added competition in the marketplace, it surprises me that slashdot geeks constantly berate Microsoft for being a monopoly when they have one of the most volatile markets to sell to -- they're constantly having to find ways to keep customers happy.
I wouldn't work for (or invest in) Microsoft or any large tech company. The red tape and bureaucracy is enormous, and the management system is bound to fail at multiple places when their market turns.
If you are an employee of a company that isn't getting a raise this year, consider the realities of your market:
1. Is your company growing? 2. Is the growth reflected in real profits? 3. Does your company see a volatile near-future that they need to save for? 4. Are you personally more efficient or creating more income for your company? 5. Is your government printing more currency than the economy needs, causing inflation in consumer and housing prices? Does this inflationary cycle hurt your employer? 6. Is your employer's tax burden increasing even if they're paying you the same? Is this increased tax burden causing you to earn less?
When you're an employee, you put off the reward of a very high salary by hedging against the risk of running a business. Some people believe a business' only goal is to generate profits for the owners, but this in totally untrue. A business operates to generate profits in the long run, not the short run. The only way to profit in the long run is to make your customers happy and return for more. Also, the only way to profit is for your employees to be operating more efficiently (more work or less cost) than your competitors. Profitable years might be needed to cover unprofitable years, so you can not focus on only one year or 5 years -- you have to look at the overall picture. When you take a salaried job, you give up having to worry about these things in exchange for job security.
Sometimes you won't get raises, but the world will get more expensive around you. You can almost always blame across-the-board cost of living increases on the guys printing the money. Across-the-board prices don't go up unless the money supply goes up. Don't blame your boss for not being able to compensate for these mistakes made by the central banks.
As a lover of the free market and someone who has seen repeatedly that all politicians lie, and no politician will run government the way you want it run, I am constantly surprised by the Progressive movement. I have so many friends who label themselves Progressive, when they don't realize that the Progressive ideaology is no different than the political agenda of both the Democrats and the Republicans: to control others against their will in hopes of creating a better world. The reality of any political agenda is to control the many in order to give more power to the few, usually the friends and family (the cronies).
Here's my review of the review:
assisting with the Howard Dean campaign's blogging efforts.
I'm sure Howard Dean had time to blog himself. Most political blogs are carefully crafted and planned by the campaign crew -- it is no different than a speech given by a politician: they usually haven't read it before hand.
precisely 196 pages of 100% post-consumer waste recycled, old-growth forest-free paper
Which means the paper costs way more to make than regular forest paper. Considering that this cost means more people had to work on it, more air conditions were run, more people had to drive to work and more buildings were needed, I'm not sure how environmentally friendly the book is. I do know that Boise-Cascade has a great tree-planting policy, so I prefer to buy non-recycled paper. In fact, I never buy recycled products unless there is no alternative.
While I didn't fact check every line of the book,
I check every fact because I don't trust political books.
what I received was a pretty thorough, analysis-driven opinion of what has gone wrong with Democratic Party politics.
In my experience, the Democrats and Republicans both have the same problem: they don't follow through with their promises. When they do pass a law that they promised to pass, along with it comes 1000 other pork barrel projects. Usually the law is so modified from the promise that it has unintended consequences that affect us all in a negative way.
Corporate insiders, right-wing think tank graduates, religious leaders, and old-school mindsets are overstuffed in a barrel.
That's an interesting attack there. Almost every single Democrat in federal office is a corporate insider as well. Instead of being think tank graduates, most Democrat politicians are graduates of a college where the mindset is more socialist than Democratic. Don't get me started on old-school mindsets -- the Republicans definitely have forgotten the old school that they came from.
the infighting, and the selfishness which has kept it divided.
Of course there is infighting, you're talking about accepting a job that gives you incredible power over the masses.
campaign dollars by political/media consultants, who enrich themselves fabulously while using worn out techniques that lead to failure after failure.
Consider that the campaign finance system was broken by any time of reform or regulation (which created these consultants and it is now these consultants to fight for even more reform to give them even more power)
The D.C. power base, showing no inclination to stop the madness, is not forgotten either. If any one point becomes perfectly clear to readers, it will be that big money has and is wasted in extraordinary magnitudes.
The big money would not be wasted if campaign finance was deregulated, and Congress and the President were returned to the minimal powers as set forth by the Constitution in very specific ways. Destroy the power of the federal government, and you'll see the big money disappear.
redirected high-dollar contributions from direct-to-politicians pockets into 527 organizations that cannot "explicitly advocate the election or defeat of any candidate for federal office."
Actually, McCain-Feingold was written specifically to keep incumbents in powe
Re:Private enviro-bacterial research organization?
on
Bacteria Eat Styrofoam
·
· Score: 1
Corporations want to maximize profit. Period. Full stop. That's it.
While this is true of all my corporations, this is a confusing statement.
How do I maximize profit? By making my customers happy today, and making sure they come back tomorrow. There are VERY few corporations that want to get in and get out -- the reality is that business has costs that take time to overcome, and exiting the market after gaining back these costs-to-entry doesn't make much sense from a time preference perspective.
Also, not all profits are financial. One of my businesses offers advice for free, but I still make a huge profit. It isn't a financial profit, it is a profit in gaining information from those I advise. I use this information to make financial profits in other businesses.
Profit is not bad, it means a gain instead of a loss. When a consumer buys something, they profit as well -- they're trading money worth less to them than the item they're gaining.
Private enviro-bacterial research organization?
on
Bacteria Eat Styrofoam
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I had a good debate with a ('socialist') friend yesterday regarding funding research and development voluntarily -- medical, environmental, etc.
We had talked about the problem with pollution and his solution was always using government to try to make people stop polluting. Yet it seems to me that there are other solutions, including finding ways to take pollutants and break them down. I've heard more and more over the recent years about using bacteria to break down oil spills and radioactive wastes and even to use bacteria to eat up garbage dumbs. Here is another article regarding new bacteria that serve the purpose of cleaning up past pollutions.
I know from my experiences that government regulations on polluting seem to have a positive effect of making the world cleaner, but they also have a negative effect of reducing a company's ability to provide their customers with a product or service at the best price. Sure, the average socialist will say that corporations just want to pollute the world so they can make a buck, but that's not the case: corporations want to provide the best price to their consumers, which is why pollution has tended to be so obvious. It also seems to me that there are new and amazing ways to fix the problem of pollution without only making the source stop.
Are there organizations, private ones, that are dedicated to finding new ways to combat the pollutants around us? If so, I'd love to know how I can help fund them. I'm a regular reader of perc.org which focuses on private and voluntary environmentalism, and I'd love to put my money where my mouth is.
Many countries are starting to experience inflation of their own (based on our inflationary cycle) and are also starting to gain western desires as well. It would not surprise me to see the new consumer countries being the previous supply companies.
I doubt the dollar will collapse (but I have hedged against it with gold and silver). I do think its purchasing power will severely drop as other countries step up to the plate. A real dollar crash would likely hurt the international markets enough that things would just correct themselves and move forward. It is a very difficult projection to make in any case, but there is nothing wrong with protecting against all outcomes.
This statement is only true for a very carefully selected group of products (and almost no services).
This is very true, and one of the things I am doing to show gold's power is to plot gold versus consumer goods and consumer services. I've only been tracking this since January 06, but I plan on opening up my graph and my data to a larger group of recorders so we can better track gold's holding power. The fact that gold still has any value versus any fiat currency proves to me that there is a lasting power.
that have disrupted local economies and created great misery until things restabilized.
Again, very true, but a little ignorant of the fact that distribution and communications in the past were severely limited. Today's structure of distribution and communication has allowed us to have protection mechanisms in the market (derivatives are a great example, although they are over-used due to the inflationary cycle).
How to correct this imbalance of incentives? It's more complex than you think.
I agree that it is complex, but the bank's ability to make money from credit comes directly out of its ability to generate new currency where none existed before (through the Federal Reserve's creation of new currency). When the Fed makes new money available, it does so through the credit system of the member banks. Hence the easy money/easy credit cycle.
Which turned out to be disastrous for them once the oil crisis passed.
I believe this is a problem that can be tied to gold's "newness" to investors. Gold had been illegal to own for decades, and was also tied to a pre-set dollar value. I personally don't care of gold is US$100 per ounce or US$1000 per ounce as it is merely a store of wealth for me -- my wealth can greatly fluctuate but its value to me is what will it be worth in the future. As I currently have numerous stable income streams, as long as my gold and silver holdings continue to rise in weight, the current and future value is unimportant as long as the value is something greater than zero. I don't see gold dropping below US$300 ever again, but I also don't see gold dropping below 7 barrels of oil per ounce. The most important factor to me is how much of X can I buy with an ounce of gold (or an ounce of silver).
Actually, pretty risky. Almost all of my money is in my home and will soon be in my own entrepreneurial venture.
I was in a similar situation not that long ago. I downsized greatly (from a gorgeous 4 bedroom home to a much smaller trailer home), but I also upsized my wealth and time availability greatly. I went from owning one small business to a variety of businesses in different markets. My income is lower than before, but my debt and monthly burden is near zero. Do I like living in a cheaper home? Actually, yes. My home is much more energy efficient, I utilize the space much better, and the lack of a mortgage (nearly a US$1500 a month savings) allows me to travel, work less, and spend more time studying the world and human action. Most of my friends own less than 5% of their McMansion's, so I'm not concerned with keeping up with the Joneses.
It's funny, not that long ago I was driving a huge Land Rover, living in a big home (with a big vacation condo as well), and working 50 hours a week, never seeing my family or spending any quality time traveling. Now I drive a used Toyota, live in a house made of foam on wheels, but I have the world at my fingers. It is amazing what a difference life can be once you realize your previous premises were wrong!
That's 20% net profit after expenses (including salaries). I put in $100,000 into a business, I expect to make 20% net profits in dividend form at year's end. Even in retail I was able to hit 30% net profits after 2 years. In wholesale the margins are even higher but require more risk I feel. In mostly service-oriented businesses, the margin returns are a little different, but they still return significant profits on year's end if cash flow and customer happiness is managed friendly.
You're right, I witness such a "business." I also witnesses families who were able to leave the situation and better themselves just a few miles over in a tourist-friendly town.
In American, we carry the burden of our parents on our heads so much that by the time we'll retire, we'll have to pass our our expenses to the next generation. I'm not sure this is that much different. Instead of being able to provide for ourselves from the get-go, we're stuck in an endless loop of work, pay taxes, and work more. I exited the system as best as I could and have found more happiness and wealth than ever before.
I see opportunities for growth in India, I see almost none hear. More and more doors are closed to entrepreneurs in this country, yet in India I found at least 10 markets that are ready to be entered, if not for government restrictions to foreign investment. I met with dozens of "poor" people there ready and willing to work to better themselves, yet in the US all I do is interview college graduates who feel they are worth much more than they really are.
This country, the US, will learn a very harsh lesson, very soon. If it wasn't for the imperialist wars waged against others, I think we'd have collapsed by now. Yet the day grows closer that we'll have to pay for our debts and pay for our imperialism, and from what I learned on my recent trip, those loaning up the money and goods to live our excessive lifestyles are getting close to stopping the flow back.
I'm neither a libertarian nor a Rand-droid, fwiw:)
I do travel the world, in fact I just got back from a 3 week trip to Eurasia. My visits to Poland and India were eye opening, indeed. This summer I am traveling to 2 other continents, and following up with a late winter visit to Dubai, one of the my favorite cities in the world, and also the freest market to boot. I see growth everywhere I go, except in the US. Of all my businesses, my 2 biggest failures were due to regulation by the government. My 2 biggest successes were in the free markets that were unburdened by regulations.
I believe we've put too much faith in government, which is the reason things are as bad as they are. Most people don't notice it, though, but traveling to other countries has proven to me that we have no idea what we're talking about. The Chinese "slaves" working in the corporate towns are happier than those who don't have jobs. The Indian "slaves" working for the megacorps have a much higher standard of living than their neighbors. I'm not sure where the bad things are, but I keep looking for them and I find nothing.
When Ethiopia was "starving and the people were dying," I went there. I saw prosperous cities, people with brighter futures, and an economy that would explode if it wasn't for excessive regulations and taxes. I see the same thing today in Tunisia and other parts of Northern Africa.
My words don't come out of some utopian fantasy, they come from honest experience working with many people in many countries. Humans want to make themselves better, and they find ways to do it regardless of what government promises to do. Usually those promises are the main reason we can't better ourselves.
FWIW, I believe megacorporations come directly out of government support and subsidy. I don't know if we'd see the same megacorporation control in a free market, as most megacorps get there through utilizing regulations in their favor.
Slashdot Mirror
For me it suffers from trying to be too simple but requiring too many steps to get to where I want to go.
I don't have an answer or a solution, but I think there is more "AI" style interface designs out there to be discovered. I love T9 on my cell phone, I'd love to find something not really similar but in the same vein for getting to a song, album or whatever quicker.
If I had the solution, I'd make the product. I don't, but I know there is still the killer app interface waiting to be found.
I guess I'm a Samsung fanboi, but it was without realizing it. I used to be a big Sony guy, but over the past decade I've lost all faith in the company. Now I slowly replace all my products with what I consider the best (through a lot of research and actual testing of customer service and warranty support).
Last year my Sony television finally died. I replaced it with a Samsung unit, and couldn't be happier. My cell phone needed replacement, and my Samsung t809 has to be the best cell phone I've ever used (I believe it earns me at least $300 a month more just through added efficiency in my life). The Samsung Origami unit is very promising. My next fridge will be a Samsung (based on my recent experience in India with the units I used there). Same thing with the microwave.
How is it that a quiet company from Korea can produce great products that actually work, and back it up with great customer service? When my cell phone gave me a few minor problems, Samsung replied within 6 hours. They offered to compensate me for my problems (I declined as most were just features I needed that weren't available).
The lady of the house has 2 iPods and she loves them. I know they're saving me time and money because we don't have to store CDs anymore, and the square footage savings alone reduces the clutter in my life. I personally don't like the iPod -- the interface is nice, but it isn't easy enough or fast enough.
I don't see the need to change things, yet, but as consumer goods go, for me it is more about time saved and my life made easier. I doubt there is anything they can offer to make me sell the iPods and buy the Z5. I wonder if there are enough happy iPod users out there to make the market ever-declining for the competition. Considering Samsung picked up the iPod brainstormer, it's possible they'll actually find ways to trump the iPod, but the momentum of sales so far will make it a very difficult path to take. It amazes me how much money is being spent by the competition for obviously sub-par products. What can Samsung do differently to attract the attention of the mass public who already is familiar with Apple's product?
Nonetheless, Samsung does have my attention -- here and in everything else they make. For those not familiar with their products, I highly recommend taking a look the next time you need a consumer appliance or product. I'm amazed at the pricing, features and overall service.
Yes, you buy some Treasury Bills -- but there are others issued based directly on thin air creation. Look at my M3 money chart and figure out where the money comes from and where it goes.
Considering I went specifically to research market viability, freedom to enter the business world for citizens, and an overall review of regulations, 3 weeks was more than enough. I spent nearly 18 hours a day spending time with business owners AND members of government to get my information -- people I had started relationships with over the past 4 years. I plan on repeating this step at least 3-4 times a year to get a better sense of the world market and how the US dollar's inflationary cycle affects other countries. I am amazed at what I learn by just stepping outside the country.
Interstate Commerce Clause used in the absolute opposite way to what the framers intended. I'd love to know how much of the money spent in these investigations goes to pork and preferential cronyism.
If everyone saved $1, the banks would take this money and invest it for you in safe business loans and safe mortgages.
Today's stock market is nothing but safe. A P:E of 20 means the company will take 20 years to earn its price -- ridiculous! All my businesses have a P:E of 3-5. The stock market is inflated because of all this fresh easy money the Fed has created. They give out money at tiny interest rates, people put it into the stock market to earn more than savings. All this easy money flooding into the stock market causes prices to go up artificially. Just wait for the correction, the insiders will be even happier.
Today's housing market is worse -- when the stock market tanks, people starting putting all this inflationary easy money into homes -- artificially forcing the prices up. This mess will also correct itself.
It is ridiculous to think we should pay people based on their years of experience or how long they've been with the company. You pay people based on the value that they offer the company, that's it.
When I was young, my dad said the best years of my life to work are from 18 to 35. He said after that, I won't be as efficient, and I won't be worth what I am getting paid. I agree with him now, but I didn't agree with him then.
You don't just raise salaries to show you appreciation, you raise salaries to compensate people for performing more efficiently or enhancing the bottom line. If you raise salaries for no reason, people will have no reason to work better.
I can see most people here have never run their own business. It is really sad that people think they have "rights" as an employee. The only rights you have is the right to pack up and find a better job if you're unhappy.
Philophically we could have a discussion about the level or form of this payment but even the existence of a government necessitates a citizen contribution of some kind.
h ist1.txt
The average middle class household pays 50% of their gross income and benefit burden to governments in various forms of taxation. 50%. Half your year you work for others. This is not a "free society" any more.
And the money DOES come out of thin air. Let me explain how the Fed creates new money:
The Fed buys U.S. Treasury bills from a government approved dealer. They write a check for the amount, say $5 million. The dealer takes the $5 million and deposits it into their bank.
Where does the Fed get this money? They print it out of thin air. The U.S. Treasury bills are also an out-of-thin air creation given to preferred cronies of the government.
Look at the M3 money supply figure here http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h6/hist/h6
In 1959, there were US$ 292 billion in print.
In 1969, there were US$ 612 billion in print.
In 1979, there were US$ 1612 billion in print.
In 1989, there were US$ 3944 billion in print.
In 1999, there were US$ 6102 billion in print.
In 2006, there are US$10240 billion in print.
In less than 50 years, the Fed has creates almost $10 trillion out of thin air. Almost half of this was created in the past 8 years. Since the 1st of January 2006, if you base the current inflation rate of the Fed for this year and extend it for the rest of the year, the Fed will print more money in 2006 alone than the value of every ounce of gold in existance.
This is why I don't save in dollars, invest in dollars, or live on dollars.
Several online banks offer 3-4% ... or you could invest in the stock market. I've beaten those numbers so far this year already in my investments.
3-4% isn't enough to combat inflation. The Fed increased the M3 money supply by 10% in 2005, so 4% would be a 6% loss for many. No thanks. Even the stock market rarely pays that much over time (the average stock owner made 2.6% annually according to some recent analyses of real investors between the 80s and the 00s).
That's one way to do it but then you create an entry barrier to new homeowners, conficting with the american dream. Personally I'm glad things are the way they are.
Today the average homeowner owns less of their home than in any other time in US history. In fact, inflation makes it harder for people to pay off their homes quickly, and it gives people reason to think their homes are worth more than they are. To see homes go from $50k to $250k in just 15-20 years is ridiculous.
The American dream is to own a home but not fill it with junk. Today's American dream is to live like millionaires on borrowed time.
If anything your system makes it worse with higher interest rates.
US$70 trillion dollars is the estimated liability the US owes. Someone will have to pay for it. That's passing it on to our descendents. How about Social Security? We live high on the hog, getting fat and sick, and we pass those costs to the next generation. I think that is unacceptable. Consumer debt is one thing, but public debt is tragic.
Higher interest rates also pay out better savings rates -- encouraging savings. Savings gives banks money to make good loans, unlike putting money into the stock market that just ends up in the pockets of the management of the company as we've so often seen.
The problem with the value of US gold holdings is that the US (as well as other foreign central banks) have been leasing their gold holdings off the books to industry at a measly 1% interest rate. Eventually this gold will have to be returned -- bought at a much higher price likely. This added supply of gold in the market has kept the price of gold down while still allowing the central banks to say they have gold reserves, when they likely are down over 70% of what they report.
I have started to calculate the rate of inflation in my life. This is the only one that matters.
I also have tied the costs of my daily purchases to the current value of gold in US dollars. This also shows me how well gold's value holds up over time. In just 4 months my gold has been very stable versus most consumer products. I will soon be plotting these graphs weekly at my blog.
The inflation figure that the government (the BLS) creates is based on BS. Robert Blumen has a great article regarding this manipulation. They swap out numbers at will to hide the fact that they're creating money out of thin air, and depreciating the value of your money. The stock market has only gone up 500% in 90 years in terms of real value because of money printing.
There are a few links to Rothbard's book in this entire thread. It is a free and tiny e-book, I'd highly recommend reading it.
I have a big problem with people like you who have that attitude. Have you heard of a cost of living increase? I have been working for three years without even one of those. In essence, although my value to my company has increased, they are lowering my salary.
And this is your employer's fault? It is your job to work at the rate you're paid. If you want more money, you have to find someone willing to pay for it.
Your employee compensates you for what you are worth to them. If you want more money, you have to find someone else willing to pay you the increased amount. This is how competition works -- no one will just give you money because you think you deserve it. You have to warrant it.
If you don't pay your employees anything but or near minimum wage, you must not think very highly of your work. Just because an effort fails, does not mean that it was for lack of trying. Profit sharing should be an extra incentive to work even harder.
And yet I don't have people quit my businesses. I pay minimum wage plus a huge bonus because it gives people the added incentive to work really hard and get the job done. On top of that, they want to do a quality job so that we get rehired on contracts in the future.
You make a salary that is rarely tied to the amount of work you do. You feel safe and secure. My employees make more money than if they worked under a salary system -- they're tied directly to the work they do and the profitability of the project. On top of that, they want our customers happy.
Remember, I am the customer of the employee. I hate the term employer -- I am THEIR customer. They're working to satisfy me. I take all their work together, bundle it as a final product, and sell it to my customer.
If you feel you're worth more, shop around. I'm always looking for more people to hire, but the people I interview are 99% overpaid already, and have no desire to be good workers.
I prefer this slow deflation versus inflation.
In a fixed money base (let us call it a 100% gold-backed reserve banking system), there will be more people and more products chasing the same quantity of money in the system. This means prices will fall as everyone tries to attract people to their goods and services. Over time, wages fall, but so do prices.
This is a GOOD thing. If you have $1 today, you want to spend it because you know in 1 year that $1 is worth less. In a free market, when you have $1 today, you want to save it because prices fall over time.
When you save money in a free market, you generally give it to a bank. In a free market with the Fed, banks that need money will offer better interest rates (not the 1% you get today). By investing that money in a bank, they are free to loan it to stable businesses with good business plans and equity, who are able to pay the loan back. They'll also loan it out to homeowners, but at a much higher interest rate than we see today.
Higher interest rates all around mean more wealth is created for everyone, rather than the quite theft that inflation takes from us, that confuses the entrepreneurs and that creates a massive amount of debt for your children and grandchildren to pay back. The US currenty has debt and off-book liabilities totalling over US$70 trillion. We can never pay this back, so we shove it to the next generations.
I'm a moral guy, and I think this is wrong. I'd rather live poorly than make others pay for my mistakes. The rest of the country would rather live beyond their means and let others pay for it.
What you are saying is very close to what many Keynesian economists believe -- the same economists teaching ECON101 and teaching the general public a myth that is now a lie.
I'd highly recommend going and download Rothbard's free and tiny e-book: http://www.mises.org/money.asp
Inflation is directly caused by government printing money out of thin air. Then, they lower interest rates (the Fed policy) to give people easy credit and easy money. If I put $500 into your pocket today, you'd spend it. If I gave $500 to every person in this country that never existed before, they'd all spend it at the same time. All this new money in the system will make sellers raise prices (added demand, lower supply) which is how inflation sneaks in.
Even worse, government uses inflationary creationism to force a hidden tax on you. Every year, your salary goes up but not enough to cover the REAL costs of inflation. This means you slide into higher tax brackets, causing you to pay more taxes on less income.
Taxation is theft, plain and simple. Inflation by the Fed is an even bigger crime.
I strongly advise getting a passport and going to see how the rest of the world lives if you think 2-3% inflation is out of control.
I just spent 3 weeks in Europe and Asia specifically to see how things are in the rest of the world. Inflation is a monster in every country, but just because all the other wolves are stealing the savings of the sheep doesn't mean it's correct.
I have a big problem with salaries in the U.S. -- employees believe they have a right to a raise every year, even if they are not providing more service or helping the company with added efficiency.
The big problem in the States is the government's crazy dollar creation (what we call inflation is directly caused by the Fed's out of control printing of dollars). This inflation creates cost of living increases (including the housing bubble in my opinion). Because of this inflationary cycle, people demand cost of living increases.
For my businesses, I pay my employees the lowest salary possible, in some cases minimum wage. I myself only earn minimum wage. Yet my employees also get a much larger share of profits, up to 70% on a given project. They are directly tied to the performance of their work, as well as the performance of the market. I'm one of the lowest paid in my IT business (although I also do less work than most).
To get raises, your company has to be making more money in terms of net profits. Microsoft is a company that has to constantly find new ways to profit in order to grow. With the added competition in the marketplace, it surprises me that slashdot geeks constantly berate Microsoft for being a monopoly when they have one of the most volatile markets to sell to -- they're constantly having to find ways to keep customers happy.
I wouldn't work for (or invest in) Microsoft or any large tech company. The red tape and bureaucracy is enormous, and the management system is bound to fail at multiple places when their market turns.
If you are an employee of a company that isn't getting a raise this year, consider the realities of your market:
1. Is your company growing?
2. Is the growth reflected in real profits?
3. Does your company see a volatile near-future that they need to save for?
4. Are you personally more efficient or creating more income for your company?
5. Is your government printing more currency than the economy needs, causing inflation in consumer and housing prices? Does this inflationary cycle hurt your employer?
6. Is your employer's tax burden increasing even if they're paying you the same? Is this increased tax burden causing you to earn less?
When you're an employee, you put off the reward of a very high salary by hedging against the risk of running a business. Some people believe a business' only goal is to generate profits for the owners, but this in totally untrue. A business operates to generate profits in the long run, not the short run. The only way to profit in the long run is to make your customers happy and return for more. Also, the only way to profit is for your employees to be operating more efficiently (more work or less cost) than your competitors. Profitable years might be needed to cover unprofitable years, so you can not focus on only one year or 5 years -- you have to look at the overall picture. When you take a salaried job, you give up having to worry about these things in exchange for job security.
Sometimes you won't get raises, but the world will get more expensive around you. You can almost always blame across-the-board cost of living increases on the guys printing the money. Across-the-board prices don't go up unless the money supply goes up. Don't blame your boss for not being able to compensate for these mistakes made by the central banks.
As a lover of the free market and someone who has seen repeatedly that all politicians lie, and no politician will run government the way you want it run, I am constantly surprised by the Progressive movement. I have so many friends who label themselves Progressive, when they don't realize that the Progressive ideaology is no different than the political agenda of both the Democrats and the Republicans: to control others against their will in hopes of creating a better world. The reality of any political agenda is to control the many in order to give more power to the few, usually the friends and family (the cronies).
Here's my review of the review:
assisting with the Howard Dean campaign's blogging efforts.
I'm sure Howard Dean had time to blog himself. Most political blogs are carefully crafted and planned by the campaign crew -- it is no different than a speech given by a politician: they usually haven't read it before hand.
precisely 196 pages of 100% post-consumer waste recycled, old-growth forest-free paper
Which means the paper costs way more to make than regular forest paper. Considering that this cost means more people had to work on it, more air conditions were run, more people had to drive to work and more buildings were needed, I'm not sure how environmentally friendly the book is. I do know that Boise-Cascade has a great tree-planting policy, so I prefer to buy non-recycled paper. In fact, I never buy recycled products unless there is no alternative.
While I didn't fact check every line of the book,
I check every fact because I don't trust political books.
what I received was a pretty thorough, analysis-driven opinion of what has gone wrong with Democratic Party politics.
In my experience, the Democrats and Republicans both have the same problem: they don't follow through with their promises. When they do pass a law that they promised to pass, along with it comes 1000 other pork barrel projects. Usually the law is so modified from the promise that it has unintended consequences that affect us all in a negative way.
Corporate insiders, right-wing think tank graduates, religious leaders, and old-school mindsets are overstuffed in a barrel.
That's an interesting attack there. Almost every single Democrat in federal office is a corporate insider as well. Instead of being think tank graduates, most Democrat politicians are graduates of a college where the mindset is more socialist than Democratic. Don't get me started on old-school mindsets -- the Republicans definitely have forgotten the old school that they came from.
the infighting, and the selfishness which has kept it divided.
Of course there is infighting, you're talking about accepting a job that gives you incredible power over the masses.
campaign dollars by political/media consultants, who enrich themselves fabulously while using worn out techniques that lead to failure after failure.
Consider that the campaign finance system was broken by any time of reform or regulation (which created these consultants and it is now these consultants to fight for even more reform to give them even more power)
The D.C. power base, showing no inclination to stop the madness, is not forgotten either. If any one point becomes perfectly clear to readers, it will be that big money has and is wasted in extraordinary magnitudes.
The big money would not be wasted if campaign finance was deregulated, and Congress and the President were returned to the minimal powers as set forth by the Constitution in very specific ways. Destroy the power of the federal government, and you'll see the big money disappear.
redirected high-dollar contributions from direct-to-politicians pockets into 527 organizations that cannot "explicitly advocate the election or defeat of any candidate for federal office."
Actually, McCain-Feingold was written specifically to keep incumbents in powe
Corporations want to maximize profit. Period. Full stop. That's it.
While this is true of all my corporations, this is a confusing statement.
How do I maximize profit? By making my customers happy today, and making sure they come back tomorrow. There are VERY few corporations that want to get in and get out -- the reality is that business has costs that take time to overcome, and exiting the market after gaining back these costs-to-entry doesn't make much sense from a time preference perspective.
Also, not all profits are financial. One of my businesses offers advice for free, but I still make a huge profit. It isn't a financial profit, it is a profit in gaining information from those I advise. I use this information to make financial profits in other businesses.
Profit is not bad, it means a gain instead of a loss. When a consumer buys something, they profit as well -- they're trading money worth less to them than the item they're gaining.
I had a good debate with a ('socialist') friend yesterday regarding funding research and development voluntarily -- medical, environmental, etc.
We had talked about the problem with pollution and his solution was always using government to try to make people stop polluting. Yet it seems to me that there are other solutions, including finding ways to take pollutants and break them down. I've heard more and more over the recent years about using bacteria to break down oil spills and radioactive wastes and even to use bacteria to eat up garbage dumbs. Here is another article regarding new bacteria that serve the purpose of cleaning up past pollutions.
I know from my experiences that government regulations on polluting seem to have a positive effect of making the world cleaner, but they also have a negative effect of reducing a company's ability to provide their customers with a product or service at the best price. Sure, the average socialist will say that corporations just want to pollute the world so they can make a buck, but that's not the case: corporations want to provide the best price to their consumers, which is why pollution has tended to be so obvious. It also seems to me that there are new and amazing ways to fix the problem of pollution without only making the source stop.
Are there organizations, private ones, that are dedicated to finding new ways to combat the pollutants around us? If so, I'd love to know how I can help fund them. I'm a regular reader of perc.org which focuses on private and voluntary environmentalism, and I'd love to put my money where my mouth is.
Many countries are starting to experience inflation of their own (based on our inflationary cycle) and are also starting to gain western desires as well. It would not surprise me to see the new consumer countries being the previous supply companies.
I doubt the dollar will collapse (but I have hedged against it with gold and silver). I do think its purchasing power will severely drop as other countries step up to the plate. A real dollar crash would likely hurt the international markets enough that things would just correct themselves and move forward. It is a very difficult projection to make in any case, but there is nothing wrong with protecting against all outcomes.
This statement is only true for a very carefully selected group of products (and almost no services).
This is very true, and one of the things I am doing to show gold's power is to plot gold versus consumer goods and consumer services. I've only been tracking this since January 06, but I plan on opening up my graph and my data to a larger group of recorders so we can better track gold's holding power. The fact that gold still has any value versus any fiat currency proves to me that there is a lasting power.
that have disrupted local economies and created great misery until things restabilized.
Again, very true, but a little ignorant of the fact that distribution and communications in the past were severely limited. Today's structure of distribution and communication has allowed us to have protection mechanisms in the market (derivatives are a great example, although they are over-used due to the inflationary cycle).
How to correct this imbalance of incentives? It's more complex than you think.
I agree that it is complex, but the bank's ability to make money from credit comes directly out of its ability to generate new currency where none existed before (through the Federal Reserve's creation of new currency). When the Fed makes new money available, it does so through the credit system of the member banks. Hence the easy money/easy credit cycle.
Which turned out to be disastrous for them once the oil crisis passed.
I believe this is a problem that can be tied to gold's "newness" to investors. Gold had been illegal to own for decades, and was also tied to a pre-set dollar value. I personally don't care of gold is US$100 per ounce or US$1000 per ounce as it is merely a store of wealth for me -- my wealth can greatly fluctuate but its value to me is what will it be worth in the future. As I currently have numerous stable income streams, as long as my gold and silver holdings continue to rise in weight, the current and future value is unimportant as long as the value is something greater than zero. I don't see gold dropping below US$300 ever again, but I also don't see gold dropping below 7 barrels of oil per ounce. The most important factor to me is how much of X can I buy with an ounce of gold (or an ounce of silver).
Actually, pretty risky. Almost all of my money is in my home and will soon be in my own entrepreneurial venture.
I was in a similar situation not that long ago. I downsized greatly (from a gorgeous 4 bedroom home to a much smaller trailer home), but I also upsized my wealth and time availability greatly. I went from owning one small business to a variety of businesses in different markets. My income is lower than before, but my debt and monthly burden is near zero. Do I like living in a cheaper home? Actually, yes. My home is much more energy efficient, I utilize the space much better, and the lack of a mortgage (nearly a US$1500 a month savings) allows me to travel, work less, and spend more time studying the world and human action. Most of my friends own less than 5% of their McMansion's, so I'm not concerned with keeping up with the Joneses.
It's funny, not that long ago I was driving a huge Land Rover, living in a big home (with a big vacation condo as well), and working 50 hours a week, never seeing my family or spending any quality time traveling. Now I drive a used Toyota, live in a house made of foam on wheels, but I have the world at my fingers. It is amazing what a difference life can be once you realize your previous premises were wrong!
That's 20% net profit after expenses (including salaries). I put in $100,000 into a business, I expect to make 20% net profits in dividend form at year's end. Even in retail I was able to hit 30% net profits after 2 years. In wholesale the margins are even higher but require more risk I feel. In mostly service-oriented businesses, the margin returns are a little different, but they still return significant profits on year's end if cash flow and customer happiness is managed friendly.
You're right, I witness such a "business." I also witnesses families who were able to leave the situation and better themselves just a few miles over in a tourist-friendly town.
In American, we carry the burden of our parents on our heads so much that by the time we'll retire, we'll have to pass our our expenses to the next generation. I'm not sure this is that much different. Instead of being able to provide for ourselves from the get-go, we're stuck in an endless loop of work, pay taxes, and work more. I exited the system as best as I could and have found more happiness and wealth than ever before.
I see opportunities for growth in India, I see almost none hear. More and more doors are closed to entrepreneurs in this country, yet in India I found at least 10 markets that are ready to be entered, if not for government restrictions to foreign investment. I met with dozens of "poor" people there ready and willing to work to better themselves, yet in the US all I do is interview college graduates who feel they are worth much more than they really are.
This country, the US, will learn a very harsh lesson, very soon. If it wasn't for the imperialist wars waged against others, I think we'd have collapsed by now. Yet the day grows closer that we'll have to pay for our debts and pay for our imperialism, and from what I learned on my recent trip, those loaning up the money and goods to live our excessive lifestyles are getting close to stopping the flow back.
I'm neither a libertarian nor a Rand-droid, fwiw :)
I do travel the world, in fact I just got back from a 3 week trip to Eurasia. My visits to Poland and India were eye opening, indeed. This summer I am traveling to 2 other continents, and following up with a late winter visit to Dubai, one of the my favorite cities in the world, and also the freest market to boot. I see growth everywhere I go, except in the US. Of all my businesses, my 2 biggest failures were due to regulation by the government. My 2 biggest successes were in the free markets that were unburdened by regulations.
I believe we've put too much faith in government, which is the reason things are as bad as they are. Most people don't notice it, though, but traveling to other countries has proven to me that we have no idea what we're talking about. The Chinese "slaves" working in the corporate towns are happier than those who don't have jobs. The Indian "slaves" working for the megacorps have a much higher standard of living than their neighbors. I'm not sure where the bad things are, but I keep looking for them and I find nothing.
When Ethiopia was "starving and the people were dying," I went there. I saw prosperous cities, people with brighter futures, and an economy that would explode if it wasn't for excessive regulations and taxes. I see the same thing today in Tunisia and other parts of Northern Africa.
My words don't come out of some utopian fantasy, they come from honest experience working with many people in many countries. Humans want to make themselves better, and they find ways to do it regardless of what government promises to do. Usually those promises are the main reason we can't better ourselves.
FWIW, I believe megacorporations come directly out of government support and subsidy. I don't know if we'd see the same megacorporation control in a free market, as most megacorps get there through utilizing regulations in their favor.