Go Rick Santelli! - Page 2 - Nubblies.net Forums

TwoBlackEyes · 02-19-2009, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ugly Bastard

LOL at a start-up "stepping in to fill Exxon's shoes". You do know Exxon is a $360,000,000,000 company, right?

Haha... startup... good god that was funny...

You do know that Exxon had to start up at one point, right?

One company might not fill its shoes, but I bet a couple dozen could do it, and the strongest among those could eventually take the market.

Not to mention that it does actually have current competitors that would buy up its assets in a heartbeat if given the opportunity.

And I don't really think you understood my post. I'm not saying startups are the ones who will take over, but how can you expect a new company to compete while paying full taxes when the ones at the top get away with paying a fraction of those taxes due to loopholes? You can't have one set of rules for the big players and another set of rules for everyone else and expect the free market to work.

I really don't understand the culture of corporation worship. It's as irrational as corporation hatred. If a company fails, it's an opportunity, not a loss. At least it is if you believe in capitalism at all.

BigDongedHoe · 02-19-2009, 06:54 PM

UB I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. In fact I agree with it for the most part, I just think you're just taking an exaggerated stance.

I'll use a big picture illustration, sure the Donald Trumps of the world that borrow two for every dollar they earn are in trouble. But the Warren Buffet's of the world will whether the storm quite nicely. I don't agree with Obama's stimulus package and this could very well be the tip of the iceberg, but I'm not quite ready to take the doom and gloom stance yet.

SittinOnDubsWGW · 02-19-2009, 07:57 PM

I got a pretty nice raise last week. Congress is trying to pass a proposal in which I can make even more money for my position. We are still hiring large numbers, so as long as I don't do anything retarded (IE make it through this weekend partying w/ Blonde & UB without getting arrested) I'll be fine.

Currently in our muster room they put in huge plasmas and at the bottom they have the ticker of how the different funds are doing in the TSP (government retirement funds) and some of the guys that have a quite a bit of time in are like "well, I lost $xx,000 today out of my retirement."

Its good to be young at this point, and still being able to invest (wish I had more to invest at the moment) and not having to worry about retirement taking huge hits.

Ugly Bastard · 02-20-2009, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoBlackEyes

I'm not saying startups are the ones who will take over, but how can you expect a new company to compete while paying full taxes when the ones at the top get away with paying a fraction of those taxes due to loopholes? You can't have one set of rules for the big players and another set of rules for everyone else and expect the free market to work.

I agree completely! But the answer isn't to increase taxes for the company that is actually proven to be successful, the answer is to decrease taxes for startups to incentivize them to compete!

TBE, you're either one hell of a smart women or a dude. Whichever the case, I don't think you need to have your hand held and explained how letting companies make a profit is good for all of us. At some point, "profit" became a bad word in this country. Yet, that word is the only reason anyone has the luxury of the nice lifestyle you detailed in an earlier post in this thread.

Our government will not make a profit. If any of our lawmakers were actually good at such a thing, they wouldn't be spending their time in politics right now. Any money they spend is a waste.

DJ FC · 02-20-2009, 04:30 AM

Good thread UB. I used to stand 20 feet away from Santeli every day. And saw all of his broadcasts live, so it's very neat when I see these clips because I feel like I know these people.

TBE and UB: You both rock and I appreciate your logic. Most arguments on this board become quite dumb once the dumb members step in. But you both make good points. If anything you're both right.

TBE is absolutely right that all participants in the economy should have a level playing field, that all companies start as start-ups, that the creative process usually happens with a new company and not an established on, that any tax-loopholes that exist should be closed.

But UB is right that the economy is fucked. From a macro perspective spending, savings, investments, are all lower. I hate it when people argue macro things with specific examples. Sure there are some people making money in these times. And some people are living 90-110% of the lifestyle they did before the shit hit the fan. But on average, everybody is worse off.

UB I LOVE the comparison to the government with a bad business, because this is exactly how I, and most of our forefathers viewed the government. The invisible hand allocates resources to where they best create wealth. This is something the government simply cannot do. And the problem isn't just that we're allowing the government to have too many resources and use them in an inefficient way, it's that we're allowing the government to actually exacerbate the problem by short-sighted policies such as:

Increased taxation
Protectionist Policies
Distrust and Scorn of Wealth
Entitlement for those who have no incentive to provide wealth

In the long-run these policies will fuck us and America. And the new places which foster freedom will slowly take over. It won't be night and day guys. This is all very big picture.

PS: AMERIKKKA IS FUUUUCKED

f3lix · 02-20-2009, 04:34 AM

So as the founders did 250 years ago, where can we move to get our freedom back? The Free State Project is the smartest thing the Libertarians have ever done. It's just a bit sad they picked a state in that geographic region.

Ugly Bastard · 02-22-2009, 12:47 PM

Couldn't agree more: Soros thinks this is worse than the Great Depression and that there's no sign of a bottom.

Soros sees no bottom for world financial collapse | Reuters

Ugly Bastard · 02-22-2009, 12:48 PM

Hey... so maybe I double-posted... back the fuck off and give a guy a break...

SittinOnDubsWGW · 02-22-2009, 03:16 PM

Interesting article.

I wonder how quickly it all hits the shitter.

Ugly Bastard · 02-22-2009, 05:49 PM

It already has.

But seriously, I don't think it's going to be overnight. Just two to four years of a long, painful slowdown. It will seem gradual from here.

Pliedes · 02-22-2009, 09:16 PM

Ugly Bastard · 03-03-2009, 10:03 PM

This is interesting imo: Why Skilled Immigrants Are Leaving the U.S. - BusinessWeek

Beebs · 03-04-2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoBlackEyes

I think they'll make it. They might not make the record-breaking profits that they have posted under Bush, but not making BILLIONS in pure profit doesn't equal "getting killed"

There was nothing "record breaking" about their profits; they make a smaller margin than McDonalds.

Oil is a big industry, so the numbers are bigger, but all that matters is ROI, investors won't invest unless they get a certain % back; absolute numbers mean dick.

The hatred of oil companies has finally died down, but my god it shows how stupid people are.

TwoBlackEyes · 03-04-2009, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beebs

There was nothing "record breaking" about their profits; they make a smaller margin than McDonalds.

ORLY?

Exxon Roars To Record In Oil Slump - washingtonpost.com

Exxon posts quarterly, annual profit records - Feb. 1, 2008

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/bu...8b0&ei=5087%0A

Exxon Mobil posts record 4Q profit of $10.7 billion - Earnings- msnbc.com

AFP: ExxonMobil profit surges to record 14.8 billion dollars

Oil giants reap sky-high earnings - The Boston Globe

angry pancake · 03-04-2009, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ugly Bastard

This is interesting imo: Why Skilled Immigrants Are Leaving the U.S. - BusinessWeek

I'm not sure what Wadhwa is getting at. First he seems to not understand the difference between non-immigrants and immigrants. Folks here on visas, even the H visa, are supposed to leave. Why would anyone be surprised that people in China and India who either worked or went to school in the U.S. on a visa departed? That's what they're supposed to do when their visa expires. Wadhwa also seems to confuse the visa limits and quotas in place for other areas with something to do with employment based immigration. The most difficult part of employment based immigration is getting the labor certification from the state. Ricky Rubio will have no trouble getting a green card (if he wants one) this fall. Mahmoud the software engineer in an area with lots of out of work software engineers will have trouble adjusting his status when his visa expires. H, L, F, all visas are temporary for non-immigrants. It is not uncommon to immigrate to the U.S. Not immigrating and then changing your mind once you're here --for whatever reason-- makes things more difficult and time consuming.

To be fair to Wadhwa, there are problems that cause a lot of delays with INS. Typically those revolve around changing status. Going from an F visa to an H isn't always easy. Family based immigration is subject to all sorts of delays when the applicant is not a citizen or the beneficiary is a more distant relative. Regardless, there can be a lot of reasons why things just don't go through smoothly. Most of it can be blamed on the ineptitude of the INS. However, employment based immigration isn't all that difficult for those who qualify.

Beebs · 03-04-2009, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beebs

smaller margin than McDonalds.

but all that matters is ROI

absolute numbers mean dick.

Exxon: Profit Margin (ttm): 9.47% XOM: Key Statistics for EXXON MOBIL CP - Yahoo! Finance

McD's: Profit Margin (ttm): 18.34% MCD: Key Statistics for MCDONALDS CP - Yahoo! Finance

There are more factors to profitability than profit margin, but you aren't even smart enough to follow that one, so I will leave those out.

TwoBlackEyes · 03-04-2009, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beebs

Exxon: Profit Margin (ttm): 9.47% XOM: Key Statistics for EXXON MOBIL CP - Yahoo! Finance

McD's: Profit Margin (ttm): 18.34% MCD: Key Statistics for MCDONALDS CP - Yahoo! Finance

There are more factors to profitability than profit margin, but you aren't even smart enough to follow that one, so I will leave those out.

Did I say anything about profit margins?

I believe my post was pointing out that it's extremely clear that it WAS a year of record breaking profit. You have yet to show that it isn't.

You sure kicked the shit out of that strawman that you set up though. Good for you.

Even if you're wrong. You seem to be under the impression that you can compare profit margins across industries. You can't. The profit margins of oil companies compared to other oil companies is all that really matters to savvy investors. I mean, the prostitution industry has a fucking insane profit margin, but you can't exactly call McDonald's a failed company just because it can't compare to the insane profit of a completely different industry.

Beebs · 03-04-2009, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoBlackEyes

Did I say anything about profit margins?

I believe my post was pointing out that it's extremely clear that it WAS a year of record breaking profit. You have yet to show that it isn't.

You sure kicked the shit out of that strawman that you set up though. Good for you.

Even if you're wrong. You seem to be under the impression that you can compare profit margins across industries. You can't. The profit margins of oil companies compared to other oil companies is all that really matters to savvy investors. I mean, the prostitution industry has a fucking insane profit margin, but you can't exactly call McDonald's a failed company just because it can't compare to the insane profit of a completely different industry.

What the hell are you going on about?

Ok, yes the absolute profit is record breaking, thats a given, my point is that is a meaningless stat. Oil companies have to compete with other industries because investors will only invest at a given risk level if they can expect a given return. So long as the market cap is smaller than the amount the investor plans to invest, absolute profit is not what you should judge a company on. All it would take is splitting Exxon into several different companies that exist only in a drawer somewhere, and the amount of profit per individual company would not be record setting, gasoline would still be the same, and the profit margins on gasoline would still be the same, but dumb people like you would think that those evil oil companies are stealing less of your money.

My point is everybody is getting up in arms about them making quite average profit margins, what would they have them do to avoid these windfalls? Not give the investors the return they require? If they did this there would be no oil companies, no oil, and no economy. People who were screaming bloody murder for "windfall" profits, which I suspect you were one of, are idiots.

DJ FC · 03-05-2009, 02:44 AM

TBE it's pretty clear this is not your realm of expertise.

Beebs is right. If a company makes $1billion but has 1 billion shareholders who each made a 5% return and another makes $500million but has 1 shareholder who made a 5000% return which was more profitable?

Clearly the latter. Oil companies, like any other large company in America, are publicly owned and traded, and it's people like you and me who own these companies with our 401ks. Millions of Americans own Exxon, and they each got some return.

Dent · 03-05-2009, 05:37 PM

I like Jon Stewart.

CNBC Gives Financial Advice \| The Daily Show \| Comedy Central

Ugly Bastard · 03-05-2009, 06:49 PM

I like Jon Stewart and all, but he just has this hyper-liberal streak about him which he can never seem to back off of that annoys me. I think he's going to look pretty silly in 2-3 years once the degree to which Obama is fucking the country right now is more apparent to your everyday folk.

I think Obama being a one-term President might be even money or better at this point. We ain't gonna be out of this mess in four years.

ninjaface · 03-05-2009, 07:07 PM

The thing with Jon Stewart is regardless of the socio-economic/political climate, as long as the writers keep pumping out the goods he will still have something to "say."

Ugly Bastard · 03-06-2009, 02:55 PM

This is the best article I've read on how Obama's policies are effecting the country: Michael Boskin Says Barack Obama Is Moving Us Toward a European-Style Social Welfare State and Long-Run Economic Stagnation - WSJ.com

Ugly Bastard · 03-09-2009, 04:15 PM

Chalk up another example of the Democrats working to destroy America: Pro-union organizing bill coming in U.S. House | Markets | Markets News | Reuters

DDTempest · 03-09-2009, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ugly Bastard

Chalk up another example of the Democrats working to destroy America: Pro-union organizing bill coming in U.S. House | Markets | Markets News | Reuters

Unions are so outdated and unnecessary and have near completely become breeding grounds for corruption. Having said that, I would be mostly fine with this legislation.

In other economic "Obama is ruining the economy" news Warren Buffet said today that he believes the economy will recover, but will be followed by rapid inflation. I don't know why anyone would think that adding a couple trillion dollars to the economy would cause inflation ... fucking balls right?

02-19-2009, 06:54 PM	#27 (permalink)
BigDongedHoe Sex Kitten Milf fuuucck Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 3,704 Internets: 55974	UB I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. In fact I agree with it for the most part, I just think you're just taking an exaggerated stance. I'll use a big picture illustration, sure the Donald Trumps of the world that borrow two for every dollar they earn are in trouble. But the Warren Buffet's of the world will whether the storm quite nicely. I don't agree with Obama's stimulus package and this could very well be the tip of the iceberg, but I'm not quite ready to take the doom and gloom stance yet.
	There's life and then there is Cubs baseball, it's a chore to seperate the two. Last edited by BigDongedHoe; 02-19-2009 at 06:55 PM.

02-19-2009, 07:57 PM	#28 (permalink)
SittinOnDubsWGW I make bad decisions. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Desert Posts: 3,018 Internets: 108015	I got a pretty nice raise last week. Congress is trying to pass a proposal in which I can make even more money for my position. We are still hiring large numbers, so as long as I don't do anything retarded (IE make it through this weekend partying w/ Blonde & UB without getting arrested) I'll be fine. Currently in our muster room they put in huge plasmas and at the bottom they have the ticker of how the different funds are doing in the TSP (government retirement funds) and some of the guys that have a quite a bit of time in are like "well, I lost $xx,000 today out of my retirement." Its good to be young at this point, and still being able to invest (wish I had more to invest at the moment) and not having to worry about retirement taking huge hits.
	Last edited by SittinOnDubsWGW; 02-19-2009 at 07:58 PM.

02-20-2009, 04:30 AM	#30 (permalink)
DJ FC MURICAN Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Virginia Posts: 5,136 Internets: 253094	Good thread UB. I used to stand 20 feet away from Santeli every day. And saw all of his broadcasts live, so it's very neat when I see these clips because I feel like I know these people. TBE and UB: You both rock and I appreciate your logic. Most arguments on this board become quite dumb once the dumb members step in. But you both make good points. If anything you're both right. TBE is absolutely right that all participants in the economy should have a level playing field, that all companies start as start-ups, that the creative process usually happens with a new company and not an established on, that any tax-loopholes that exist should be closed. But UB is right that the economy is fucked. From a macro perspective spending, savings, investments, are all lower. I hate it when people argue macro things with specific examples. Sure there are some people making money in these times. And some people are living 90-110% of the lifestyle they did before the shit hit the fan. But on average, everybody is worse off. UB I LOVE the comparison to the government with a bad business, because this is exactly how I, and most of our forefathers viewed the government. The invisible hand allocates resources to where they best create wealth. This is something the government simply cannot do. And the problem isn't just that we're allowing the government to have too many resources and use them in an inefficient way, it's that we're allowing the government to actually exacerbate the problem by short-sighted policies such as: Increased taxation Protectionist Policies Distrust and Scorn of Wealth Entitlement for those who have no incentive to provide wealth In the long-run these policies will fuck us and America. And the new places which foster freedom will slowly take over. It won't be night and day guys. This is all very big picture. PS: AMERIKKKA IS FUUUUCKED
	The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them.

02-22-2009, 12:48 PM	#33 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	Hey... so maybe I double-posted... back the fuck off and give a guy a break...
	Last edited by Ugly Bastard; 02-22-2009 at 12:50 PM.

03-05-2009, 02:44 AM	#44 (permalink)
DJ FC MURICAN Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Virginia Posts: 5,136 Internets: 253094	TBE it's pretty clear this is not your realm of expertise. Beebs is right. If a company makes $1billion but has 1 billion shareholders who each made a 5% return and another makes $500million but has 1 shareholder who made a 5000% return which was more profitable? Clearly the latter. Oil companies, like any other large company in America, are publicly owned and traded, and it's people like you and me who own these companies with our 401ks. Millions of Americans own Exxon, and they each got some return.
	The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them.

02-20-2009, 04:34 AM	#31 (permalink)
f3lix Gangnam Style Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DH's Massage Parlor Posts: 6,383 Internets: 213510	So as the founders did 250 years ago, where can we move to get our freedom back? The Free State Project is the smartest thing the Libertarians have ever done. It's just a bit sad they picked a state in that geographic region.

02-22-2009, 12:47 PM	#32 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	Couldn't agree more: Soros thinks this is worse than the Great Depression and that there's no sign of a bottom. Soros sees no bottom for world financial collapse \| Reuters

02-22-2009, 03:16 PM	#34 (permalink)
SittinOnDubsWGW I make bad decisions. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Desert Posts: 3,018 Internets: 108015	Interesting article. I wonder how quickly it all hits the shitter.

02-22-2009, 05:49 PM	#35 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	It already has. But seriously, I don't think it's going to be overnight. Just two to four years of a long, painful slowdown. It will seem gradual from here.

02-22-2009, 09:16 PM	#36 (permalink)
Pliedes Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Puget Sound Posts: 4,594 Internets: 1608

03-03-2009, 10:03 PM	#37 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	This is interesting imo: Why Skilled Immigrants Are Leaving the U.S. - BusinessWeek

03-05-2009, 06:49 PM	#46 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	I like Jon Stewart and all, but he just has this hyper-liberal streak about him which he can never seem to back off of that annoys me. I think he's going to look pretty silly in 2-3 years once the degree to which Obama is fucking the country right now is more apparent to your everyday folk. I think Obama being a one-term President might be even money or better at this point. We ain't gonna be out of this mess in four years.
	Last edited by Ugly Bastard; 03-05-2009 at 06:50 PM.

03-05-2009, 07:07 PM	#47 (permalink)
ninjaface Level 20 Holothetan Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Space Posts: 5,245 Internets: 210144	The thing with Jon Stewart is regardless of the socio-economic/political climate, as long as the writers keep pumping out the goods he will still have something to "say."

03-06-2009, 02:55 PM	#48 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	This is the best article I've read on how Obama's policies are effecting the country: Michael Boskin Says Barack Obama Is Moving Us Toward a European-Style Social Welfare State and Long-Run Economic Stagnation - WSJ.com

03-09-2009, 04:15 PM	#49 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	Chalk up another example of the Democrats working to destroy America: Pro-union organizing bill coming in U.S. House \| Markets \| Markets News \| Reuters