Whats going on in america?

[neorichieb1971]

Surely this cap ceiling is about as useful as putting a patch on the Titanic. America will need 20 years of unbelievable economic stature to get any of that money back.

Those terrorists really screwed the $.

If you look at what happened after Clinton...America dropped like a bomb. In the Clinton era I remember you were in the black and you gave that money away for free. I think I even got $300 or something like that in the mail come 2002 ish.

[CIT]

Surely this cap ceiling is about as useful as putting a patch on the Titanic.

The point of the ceiling was never to limit government debt, it only exists for technical reasons so that each bond issuance does not have to be approved by Congress separately.

If you look at what happened after Clinton...America dropped like a bomb. In the Clinton era I remember you were in the black and you gave that money away for free. I think I even got $300 or something like that in the mail come 2002 ish.

America had a balanced budget under Clinton, but it still had very high debt. You're right though that there is no way the US economy is going to grow so much that it can ever repay its debts. In fact, America's debts will only grow exponentially higher considering its outstanding social welfare and health care payments, and especially if its rating gets downgraded and borrowing becomes even more expensive. America will be bankrupt at some point, the only question is when. It's actually a very depressing situation.

For the first time ever, just the other week, our third biggest iron ore mining company entered into a contract with China to be paid in the Chinese currency, not the US dollar (as was always the case in the past).

Might not sound like much, but to me it felt like a seismic shift in the world economy.

This is the general trend the world economy is going: Away from the US dollar. Better get used to it.

[neorichieb1971]

If after 5 mins of inventing something China is making knock offs you can add that to the problematic situation as well. Chinas economy was boosted by getting back Hong Kong, learning a thing or two about how that region works and then applying it to the rest of China.

I watched a documentary recently that stated Chinas economy boosted due to copy cat techniques. They did in 12-15 years what the Western world took 100 years to do because they never invented anything. China should start inventing shit now so we can copy them

[CIT]

If after 5 mins of inventing something China is making knock offs you can add that to the problematic situation as well.

Yes and no. After all, nobody is forcing Americans to buy Chinese junk.

[RNGmaster]

If after 5 mins of inventing something China is making knock offs you can add that to the problematic situation as well.

Yes and no. After all, nobody is forcing Americans to buy Chinese junk.

Nobody's forcing them, but the alternative is buying more-expensive, lower-quality American junk.

[neorichieb1971]

Thats the problem though isn't it.

I just got quoted for tyres. Sunny/Hangkook are about £60 a tyre. Michelin = £158 per tyre. I've never heard of Sunny/Hangkook so I went with Michelin afterall its my safety at stake. I went to Primark clothes store today, jeans £6 a pair, T-shirts £2.50 a shirt and good quality. Debenhams = £50 jeans and £30 T-shirts. Thats a hell of a difference in price. Its like a years worth of clothing for two or 3 pieces, whats the choice?

I suppose some people still buy brand names on every day goods but the fact is if you want to get out of debt you have to be self dependent. Our countries are anything but. If you could import Chinese homes they would own the world.

[Skykid]

If after 5 mins of inventing something China is making knock offs you can add that to the problematic situation as well.

Yes and no. After all, nobody is forcing Americans to buy Chinese junk.

Nobody's forcing them, but the alternative is buying more-expensive, lower-quality American junk.

Zing!

[RNGmaster]

Thats the problem though isn't it.

I just got quoted for tyres. Sunny/Hangkook are about £60 a tyre. Michelin = £158 per tyre. I've never heard of Sunny/Hangkook so I went with Michelin afterall its my safety at stake. I went to Primark clothes store today, jeans £6 a pair, T-shirts £2.50 a shirt and good quality. Debenhams = £50 jeans and £30 T-shirts. Thats a hell of a difference in price. Its like a years worth of clothing for two or 3 pieces, whats the choice?

I suppose some people still buy brand names on every day goods but the fact is if you want to get out of debt you have to be self dependent. Our countries are anything but. If you could import Chinese homes they would own the world.

Next logical step: America exports its government to China.

[Aliquantic]

I went to Primark clothes store today, jeans £6 a pair, T-shirts £2.50 a shirt and good quality. Debenhams = £50 jeans and £30 T-shirts. Thats a hell of a difference in price. Its like a years worth of clothing for two or 3 pieces, whats the choice?

Do check the tags, you'll probably find that the garments come from the same sort of countries, unless you go pretty upscale or vintage, so the price difference isn't based on origin but rather materials, design/research and marketing (and profit margins)... but the fashion industry is a pretty weird example, so probably should be left aside

[BulletMagnet]

America had a balanced budget under Clinton, but it still had very high debt.

Which, it must be noted, can be laid almost entirely at the feet of Reagan and Bush Sr.

[Skykid]

I went to Primark clothes store today, jeans £6 a pair, T-shirts £2.50 a shirt and good quality. Debenhams = £50 jeans and £30 T-shirts. Thats a hell of a difference in price. Its like a years worth of clothing for two or 3 pieces, whats the choice?

Do check the tags, you'll probably find that the garments come from the same sort of countries, unless you go pretty upscale or vintage, so the price difference isn't based on origin but rather materials, design/research and marketing (and profit margins)... but the fashion industry is a pretty weird example, so probably should be left aside

Agreed, fashion is a bad example because the mark-ups people pay to walk around advertising a company's brand for them is vastly more than it cost the company to get a seven year old Pakistani kid to make it. Primark jeans are £6, and they're still making profit - that's a good an indication as any that brand label clothing is a certifiable rip off.

[xbl0x180]

I went to Primark clothes store today, jeans £6 a pair, T-shirts £2.50 a shirt and good quality. Debenhams = £50 jeans and £30 T-shirts. Thats a hell of a difference in price. Its like a years worth of clothing for two or 3 pieces, whats the choice?

Do check the tags, you'll probably find that the garments come from the same sort of countries, unless you go pretty upscale or vintage, so the price difference isn't based on origin but rather materials, design/research and marketing (and profit margins)... but the fashion industry is a pretty weird example, so probably should be left aside

Agreed, fashion is a bad example because the mark-ups people pay to walk around advertising a company's brand for them is vastly more than it cost the company to get a seven year old Pakistani kid to make it. Primark jeans are £6, and they're still making profit - that's a good an indication as any that brand label clothing is a certifiable rip off.

Same goes for sunglasses. It's something like 80% of sunglasses come from the same factory, so a $10 pair you can buy at the local pharmacy is of the same quality as a $100 pair you buy at the mall store

[neorichieb1971]

Well thats another problem. No inbetween ground. Cheap chinese knock off vs really expensive exotic stuff.

I'm all for paying the local guys but not 10x as much lol.

[maxlords]

Those terrorists really screwed the $.

Nope. Not at all. The US's kneejerk over-reaction (passing of the Patriot Act, founding of the TSA and Homeland Security, and lots of other ridiculousness) is undeniably primarily responsible. People that thought with their brains rather than their fucking flags would have shut that shit DOWN. It's contrary to everything America originally stood for. Let's be honest, the founding fathers would be all for an armed revolution at this point. The US is a fucking joke and has been since the late 80s. It's just sad that the rest of the world doesn't cut ties to keep from crippling the world economy when the US goes down.

By the way...I like tequila

[Skykid]

The US is a fucking joke and has been since the late 80s. It's just sad that the rest of the world doesn't cut ties to keep from crippling the world economy when the US goes down.

Oddly enough, it's kind of the other way around, they probably would have cut their ties if it weren't for the economy - or at least the concrete international presence of the dollar.

Economists have been watching the US national debt for some time and been aware of the western world's impending doom, but no country has any power or balls to suddenly step out of the jerk circle and start buying selling in other currencies. Too risky. Soon they may have no choice.

Besides, look what happened when Saddam requesting payment for oil in Euros. He was a the end of a noose pretty quick.

[GaijinPunch]

what the Western world took 100 years to do because they never invented anything. China should start inventing shit now so we can copy them

Just like Japan though, they won't. Why spend the R&D?

that's a good an indication as any that brand label clothing is a certifiable rip off.

It's economics. There is no right or wrong. I'm sure someone has done a study showing it's harder to get laid in a pair of £6 jeans as compared to £120 designer jeans. You're paying for the designers, not the manufacturers. I pay up for some clothes, although I've not in a while. As a professional in a small community, looking good is not a bad thing. In short, to each their own.

[Ganelon]

China should start inventing shit now so we can copy them

I'm assuming that part is supposed to be sarcasm?

[Randorama]

I'm sure someone has done a study showing it's harder to get laid in a pair of £6 jeans as compared to £120 designer jeans

Well, business-wise, you really need to look clean and well-dressed, it shows that you care about establishing a commercial bond with your client. Brands per se have very low impact factor, but looking good is statistically significant. If you look like you bothered to dress up properly, your clients will uncosciously think that you're taking the meeting seriously. What matters is showing that you care about building the human side of the exchange, not just getting the money.

...I did research on this stuff during a part-time research job, please don't look at me with that puzzled face

[xbl0x180]

what the Western world took 100 years to do because they never invented anything. China should start inventing shit now so we can copy them

Just like Japan though, they won't. Why spend the R&D?

that's a good an indication as any that brand label clothing is a certifiable rip off.

It's economics. There is no right or wrong. I'm sure someone has done a study showing it's harder to get laid in a pair of £6 jeans as compared to £120 designer jeans. You're paying for the designers, not the manufacturers. I pay up for some clothes, although I've not in a while. As a professional in a small community, looking good is not a bad thing. In short, to each their own.

I'd think physical looks and attitude would work best when it comes to getting laid. It's biology

[dcharlie]

It's economics. There is no right or wrong. I'm sure someone has done a study showing it's harder to get laid in a pair of £6 jeans as compared to £120 designer jeans. You're paying for the designers, not the manufacturers. I pay up for some clothes, although I've not in a while. As a professional in a small community, looking good is not a bad thing. In short, to each their own.

A friend in London turned up to a drinking session wearing what i can only describe as the worst court jester looking fucking shirt i've ever had the mispleasure to see. We ribbed him constantly but he pointed out that this shirt was a) very very very expensive b) had been featured in various fashion magazines c) would see him pull on the night with no effort at all.

We mocked, we were wrong. Whilst males were laughing at him all night , he was fighting the women off with a shitty stick.

[Michaelm]

What matters is showing that you care about building the human side of the exchange, not just getting the money

Surely this must only be true to managers.
Personally I would make a deal with whomever is the most capable instead of whomever dresses the best.
At the end of the day I don't care at all about the human side. I just care about getting what I paid for.

The human side might get more important when they don't do their work right as you have to exchange words to get it done right.
When they do their work right however there's a big chance I will never see them again as the deal went smoothly and satisfactory,
or if it's a service I might never ever have to call in for support cause things just work.

Managers views are by definition inhuman as they have to focus on profits.
Only when it comes to dealing with potential customers they think, more out of tradition then anything else, that good looks get in more profit.
Once it is an actual customer the service the customer gets is more dependent on the amount of profit they provide then anything else.
So saying it's showing you care is a big farce anyway.
But then again, this does fit perfectly in managers views.

As for girls who rather fuck a well dressed man, they just think your income matches your clothing price tags.
You don't need a study for that as it's plain obvious.

[Skykid]

China should start inventing shit now so we can copy them

I'm assuming that part is supposed to be sarcasm?

Gotta be.

that's a good an indication as any that brand label clothing is a certifiable rip off.

It's economics. There is no right or wrong. I'm sure someone has done a study showing it's harder to get laid in a pair of £6 jeans as compared to £120 designer jeans. You're paying for the designers, not the manufacturers. I pay up for some clothes, although I've not in a while. As a professional in a small community, looking good is not a bad thing. In short, to each their own.

Not sure how you managed to find a tangent in that, it was a pretty black and white statement that applies to most of everything in capitalistic trade. I'm not saying you should dress like a homeresu, I'm just saying brand garments are preposterously overpriced whether they get you laid by an ultra materialistic female who goes moist for Abercrombie & Vuitton, or otherwise.

[Aliquantic]

As for girls who rather fuck a well dressed man, they just think your income matches your clothing price tags.
You don't need a study for that as it's plain obvious.

To be quite fair, it's hard to tell the price of a garment just by looking at it, unless it's one of those obnoxious "label emblazoned everywhere" things (in which case beware of counterfeits and second-hand goods)... the effect is more likely that few men care much about their clothes, so they tend to stand out from the crowd and just appear more confident, alluring or whatever. ZZ Top was onto something you know

You can probably make a case about status, though, which does tend to correlate with income, but really if you're going after someone's wallet, you probably should look at other things than their clothes!

[GaijinPunch]

...I did research on this stuff during a part-time research job, please don't look at me with that puzzled face

Nah, I totally buy it. However, brands also carry some weight in there, I would think. Maybe not make or break, but in a lot of cases (suits, for example) I've found spending up generally means they last longer. I buy tons of clothes at H&M now, but I buy them knowing they'll fall apart by next season.

I'd think physical looks and attitude would work best when it comes to getting laid.

Indeed... on that note, I have a pair of jeans that always get compliments. They retail for about $130 USD, which is high for jeans, but I've found they're worth it. I wore my last pair into the ground which took a few years, and I'm still on 2nd next pair. They rock, and I'm looking to load up another.

Not sure how you managed to find a tangent in that,

I was illustrating the fact that it's kind of silly to say "something isn't worth it". Go to the FS thread and look at the thousands of dollars that pass hands here alone for video games. Surely any normal person would say that's beyond ridiculous. Yet, here we are...

I'm just saying brand garments are preposterously overpriced

Word... but, they do go on sale. I have become somewhat of a bargain hunter of the last couple of years, but I still dont' mind splurging every now and again on something that looks awesome. I have a few designer shirts that, in all honesty, look better on me than cheap shit. An worthwhile investment in my eyes. Doesn't mean my wardrobe requires a mortgage.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

Well one thing is for sure the American people are already suffering. If they are asked to suffer more the morale of the country will go to shit. Americans are already overworked (if they have jobs) and most of them get hardly any vacation.

If you work in a union job in the USA, you're guaranteed a certain number of paid weeks off for vacation -- (it just depends on the number of years of service on the job through the union, of course). Or if you choose not to take them, you'll still get paid for the unused vacation weeks (but at the expense of having to work an entire year with no vacation -- this can definitely cause what's known as "worker burn-out syndrome"). Try working six days a week and that's hell with just one day off to try & recuperate. Nah, that type of work week ain't for me...sure, I could use the extra $$$ but it does get tiring after a while (not to mention overtime issues which management frowns upon -- but if the job needs to be done, overtime it is).

I knew of one co-worker who said that she hadn't taken a vacation in over ten years. But she had to pay higher taxes as a result of not taking vacation time and getting paid quite well for it at the end of the five year period (through her union). Such is the high price one pays for going against the grain, eh?

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[xbl0x180]

Well one thing is for sure the American people are already suffering. If they are asked to suffer more the morale of the country will go to shit. Americans are already overworked (if they have jobs) and most of them get hardly any vacation.

If you work in a union job in the USA, you're guaranteed a certain number of paid weeks off for vacation -- (it just depends on the number of years of service on the job through the union, of course). Or if you choose not to take them, you'll still get paid for the unused vacation weeks (but at the expense of having to work an entire year with no vacation -- this can definitely cause what's known as "worker burn-out syndrome"). Try working six days a week and that's hell with just one day off to try & recuperate. Nah, that type of work week ain't for me...sure, I could use the extra $$$ but it does get tiring after a while (not to mention overtime issues which management frowns upon -- but if the job needs to be done, overtime it is).

I knew of one co-worker who said that she hadn't taken a vacation in over ten years. But she had to pay higher taxes as a result of not taking vacation time and getting paid quite well for it at the end of the five year period (through her union). Such is the high price one pays for going against the grain, eh?

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

In California, those days are over. Your average union county worker cannot cash out the overtime pay because the govt. has changed the rules for cashing out those hours... as in, you can't. Also, gone are the days when one could work overtime on one day and take the day off using your own vacation hours; the govt. will pay you regular time instead of overtime. Seriously, I wouldn't put it past Congress to repeal child labour laws, the minimum wage, and the 40-hour work week, and take us back to 100+ years when living and working conditions were comparable to those of a 3rd world country.

[BulletMagnet]

Seriously, I wouldn't put it past Congress to repeal child labour laws, the minimum wage, and the 40-hour work week, and take us back to 100+ years when living and working conditions were comparable to those of a 3rd world country.

Grover Norquist (the guy who came up with that "no new taxes ever" pledge that a big hunk of Congress has signed) has openly stated that this is exactly what he (and his conservative brethren) wants: namely, to quite literally take America back to the pre-Teddy Roosevelt era. It's not exactly a huge secret, it's just that a significant portion of the electorate has apparently been convinced that it's a worthy sacrifice to make as long as gay people can't get married.

In related news, apparently Obama and Boehner have come to terms on a plan...now Congress has to look at it and vote on it. I wouldn't mind a few more specifics for my own perusal...

[yojo!]

Democats caved in again, but that can't be considered as news...

[xbl0x180]

Congress is beholden to corporations and the rich, not the people, but that can't be considered as news...

[Randorama]

Nah, I totally buy it. However, brands also carry some weight in there, I would think. Maybe not make or break, but in a lot of cases (suits, for example) I've found spending up generally means they last longer. I buy tons of clothes at H&M now, but I buy them knowing they'll fall apart by next season.

Just to derail further...the most comprehensive review article I read found that good manners are the strongest factor that plays a role, if you want to sell something (+%10-%15 chances), then looking clean and orderly dressed (3-5%), with brand-based dresses adding whopping +1% at most. So yeah, a "thank you" and generally treating people like human beings is still your best chance (and that's free), the Tag Heuer watch might only help a little bit (and that's too much money). Nothing surprising, of course, but now we have empirical evidence in support