A Little Education...

[stevenash]

Congrats.  Now that you have established your clearly superior intellect and business mind, perhaps you will offer some answers/solutions rather than just promising how insightful and clear your answers are going to be.  Sooner or later you are going to have to deliver rather than saying things like be patient, the intelligent answers are imminent.  By the way, you have misinterpreted my comment about google.  I have been having trouble posting links on this board so will often recommend that someone consult google. ,How much $ did being in the top 10% of your exam  group pay?  Did it pay any more than the guy who passed at the very bottom? There are lots of people who test well and there are others who don't test so well.  Neither is directly correlated to successful productive careers.  I passed my exam with little room to spare but am in the top 10% of all who are in my field.  Does my google comment prevent you from giving opinions about the economy, business, etc etc.?  I am particularly interested in your comment "depends" when talking about the government being as productive/efficient/accountable in a business pursuit as compared to private enterprise.  One more thing: even though you have told me how dangerous it is, I am going to assume that I am more than qualified to discuss the business world with you.

[TxHoops]

May not be directly related but certainly helps. Ultimately you still have to make your way. I appreciate your concern but I am doing fine. I won't be switching to a career as a trader anytime soon. Since you seem to measure intelligence and success on wealth, who would you imagine is the wealthiest self-made individual in this area? Are you aware he is a hard-core democrat?

[TxHoops]

Now to my theory on long term answers to the economy:

First of all, it is a theory because obviously no one holds the magic answer to the question. If they did, we would have been doing it for some time and living in a utopian society. If you think you do, you are a fool (your vast fortune notwithstanding). However, we all have our thoughts and opinions and who knows if we are right. Our beliefs are our beliefs and we are entitled to them.

I believe the biggest ill in our country (and in our state for sure) is the failure to educate. Specifically, our public education is severely lacking. You see, I believe education is the great equalizer. Education is power, or at a minimum empowering. We have undervalued it in our country for too long. Sure we talk about its importance and almost every politician has it in their platform. But we never see any serious reform. We see how important we believe it is when our teachers, those charged with shaping our children and, thus, our future, are paid just enough to survive if they keep to a right budget. It is appalling.

I am not against government spending, per se, but I am against it when it is irresponsible. And in this millennium, we have seen it happen often with two different presidents from two different parties. It is not helpful to the discussion to say, "yeah, but he did it more!" Any of it is unnecessary. And far, FAR too much of it is spent overseas when we have so much to do within our borders.

Yes, I believe welfare reform is needed. But it will take more than merely drug testing the recipients. If someone receives benefits, require them to be working, actively pursuing jobs (with proof), or best, working on an education. Put more money into grants and less into other forms of assistance. Make it more attractive financially to be working towards a degree than receiving assistance.

If we become more educated as a society, a lot of other problems (crime, drugs, homelessness, poverty) will slowly eradicate themselves. We do a poor job in this country of educating the masses. For instance, I am not appalled by the recent discussions of student loan forgiveness. They have done this for years in the UK. I lived in London and can tell you with no reservation, the Brits, as a whole, are better educated than we are. Are our brightest and best educated behind theirs? Absolutely not and the reverse is probably true. But as a whole, top to bottom, they are well ahead of us. Don't believe me? Go spend some time there and visit with the people. They do not have anywhere near the "gap" we have in this country. As a result, walk down almost any street in London, at 3 am, bearing in mind that their law enforcement officers aren't armed. Do the same in NYC or LA and let me know where you felt safest. Hell do it it in Houston or Beaumont for that matter. It really is amazing.

If we would spend more in areas where we are truly benefiting our people, I have no problem with the taxes we pay. And I have no problem paying a higher percentage than those who aren't as fortunate as me. The wealth gap in this country continues to expand and that is not healthy. If history has taught us anything, it is when a powerful country has an elite few who have everything and masses with nothing, it is bound to fail. You have to try and figure out how to pull up those beneath you, not hold them down.

Although it is not the only answer, education is a great place to start.

[stevenash]

I know of whom you speak and there is a good possibility he is what you say he is.  My guess is that he is a democrat for a reason relating to tort reform/politics but that is just a guess and I certainly cant prove it.( never have yet met a plaintiff attorney who is a Republican)  I just am curious why you imply that you have many answers and know many things but wont volunteer any of them.  In lieu of dealing with the question, you get very enchanted with your ability to circumvent it by discussing the ambiguity of the question posed.  We have already had Bill Clinton tell us that " that depends on what the definition of is is.  Furthermore, if one acquires wealth, the results/intellligence are not what I have determined but what the markets have determined and the collective wisdom of the markets far exceeds anything learned on the bar exam..  I will ask you once again ( and wont be surprised if you re-circumvent) two questions and would assume you have very good answers because you elucidated on your degree of intelligence.  In what instances is the government  more efficient, profitable, and accountable in a business pursuit than private enterprise?  Mr. Jobs and Mr. Gates had little if any formal advanced education.  Were they highly intelligent?  I agree with your decision not to become a trader.  The markets have a very strong preference for veracity over double speak and they will severely punish the pretenders.

[stevenash]

Do you have a problem with candidate Obama, with the debt then at 9 trillion, telling us how irresponsible and unpatriotic it was for the debt to increase by 4 trillion( over an 8 year period)with Bush at the helm and then to, in six years, increase it by 7 trillion?

 

Do you have any problem with the statement " If you like your doctor/healthcare plan, you can keep it"?

 

Do you have any problem with President Obama stating that if you just pass his stimulus bill, the national debt will be halved by the end of his first term and unemployment will be at 5.5%?

 

Do you have any problem with half of the wage earners in the country not paying any Federal Income tax and, simultaneously, most of those who do pay are told they are not paying their fair share?

 

I am sure that education will help deal with crime, poverty,drugs and homelessness but family values play a critical role in those issues to and we do very little in this country to promote the family and family values.

[stevenash]

While the education theory you suggested certainly is an admirable and worthwhile cause,  don't you think we need some solutions a lot quicker than it takes to get more people educated?  I know I have said it before but I must repeat it because it is important.   We have been in our "recovery" for some time now and it simply is too weak.  Following a recession, the average recovery has a GDP in the 4 to 4.5% area.  This one has been running in the 2% arena.  The markets are telling us that the administrations polices are counter productive.  The bulk of the Presidents financial advisors come from academia rather than the business world.  I have yet to meet anyone with any business sense at all who believes raising taxes in the middle of a recession or early part of a very weak recovery is good policy. Our corporate tax rate is, on average, 10 percentage points higher than it is in Europe and yet they just cant figure out why so much corporate cash is saved and invested somewhere outside of the U.S.  I have heard often ( and this sort of relates to our exchanges tonight) that the President is super smart and knows the law very well.  While that may be true, he has little if any knowledge of the economy and is willing to sacrifice it in order to advance his social agenda.  I think Detroit( and some others not far behind) and Greece are shining examples of what happens when one takes the " to hell with the economy and to hell with fiscal responsibility" approach.

[TxHoops]

I thought we already established Gates and Jobs are/were highly intelligent. As good democrats, how could they not be. As for their education, both were exceedingly bright and could have finished at prestigious schools had they chosen. Both chose to take advantage of their tech skills instead. They may not be stock brokers, but they did pretty well for themselves.

You seem to be full of questions and not answers. Maybe you aspire(d) to be a lawyer. Despite the fact that few of your questions could withstand objection in a court of law, I will play along you since you spend hours a day posing questions to others on this site and thus, perhaps merit some answers.

The government is certainly can be more efficient than some private enterprises. Otherwise some companies, including a few in your field, would need to "bail out" the government and not vice versa. However, by and large, I agree with your premise.

As for your litany of questions with regard to the President (with whom you may have an unhealthy obsession), I would say I do, in fact, have a problem with hypocrisy and unfulfilled promises. I won't make any assumptions as to whether he believed what he was saying when he said those things. As I won't when GHWB had us read his lips. I will say that in my humble opinion, history will not be particularly kind to any president elected thus far in this millennium.

[smitty]

Which President was the first to raid the Social Security fund?

I was for certain that BigGirl would have stepped up to the plate and, POP, knocked it out of the ball park with the correct answer.  But...

[TxHoops]

While the education theory you suggested certainly is an admirable and worthwhile cause, don't you think we need some solutions a lot quicker than it takes to get more people educated? I know I have said it before but I must repeat it because it is important. We have been in our "recovery" for some time now and it simply is too weak. Following a recession, the average recovery has a GDP in the 4 to 4.5% area. This one has been running in the 2% arena. The markets are telling us that the administrations polices are counter productive. The bulk of the Presidents financial advisors come from academia rather than the business world. I have yet to meet anyone with any business sense at all who believes raising taxes in the middle of a recession or early part of a very weak recovery is good policy. Our corporate tax rate is, on average, 10 percentage points higher than it is in Europe and yet they just cant figure out why so much corporate cash is saved and invested somewhere outside of the U.S. I have heard often ( and this sort of relates to our exchanges tonight) that the President is super smart and knows the law very well. While that may be true, he has little if any knowledge of the economy and is willing to sacrifice it in order to advance his social agenda. I think Detroit( and some others not far behind) and Greece are shining examples of what happens when one takes the " to hell with the economy and to hell with fiscal responsibility" approach.

I was talking long term solutions which are more important in my opinion. I certainly don't minimalize that there are other changes that should be made nor is my theory the only solution obviously.

Speaking of presidents and their knowledge of economics, Alan Greenspan was a Reagan appointee who served under 4 presidents as FC. He also was an advisor to various presidents prior to Reagan. Who did he say was the president with the strongest grasp of the economy and far and away the brightest that he worked with? Who was second? (Hint: the two were not in the same party.)

[TxHoops]

I was for certain that BigGirl would have stepped up to the plate and, POP, knocked it out of the ball park with the correct answer. But...

You are still off base with what you assume the correct answer is to the question. I am almost certain. But feel free to prove me wrong.

[TxHoops]

By the way Nash, I am sure you are a bright guy and are successful at what you do. We obviously agree on some things and disagree on others. We both think we are right with an emphasis on think. The little jabs going back and forth are meant in good fun (at least on my behalf) and I sincerely hope you haven't been offended (as I haven't).

[stevenash]

Long term solutions are great but in the case of Greece and Detroit, shorter term ones were needed to deal with problem at hand.  Not too long ago, our debt rating was downgraded for the first time in the history of this country.  That ought to suggest to anyone with half a brain that the situation is serious now and more education for more people does not address that issue.  As for my questions not being able to withstand objections in a court of law, I don't believe we are in a court of law and I don't profess to be a lawyer.  I believe we are on a message board exchanging thoughts about the country and its circumstances.  In regard to Alan Greenspan, I have read his book " The Age of Turbulence" in its entirety but it was several years ago.  I recall him lauding Clintons intelligence but don't remember the other President he held in high esteem.  As for the questions I asked, isn't that how the less intelligent gain knowledge from the more intelligent?  Alan Greenspan basically tutored Bill Clinton very frequently about how the economy works and hence Mr. Clinton put that knowledge to good use.  I don't think Mr. Obama gets tutored and I don't think he cares a bit about the economy just as long as he can institute his version of social justice.  I heartily disagree with you suggestion that the governments "ability" to bail anyone out implies business savvy.  And lets be clear that the bailout is ultimately a taxpayer bailout and the government is the only issuer who has unlimited check writing ability ( until we become Greece or Detroit).    I am quite confident that UPS is in much better financial shape than the US Postal Service who, incidentally defaulted on $5.6 billion payment last fall and projected losses of 15 billion for last year.  That's just one shining example of private vs govt. Amtrak also comes to mind when considering  successes/failures of govt managed business efforts.

[stevenash]

TXHOOPS- Not offended in the slightest.  These types of exchanges are always instructive and stimulating.   Also, I don't know that I am particularly bright.  I would guess that I am average.  But I do know how to work and apply myself and I believe that those qualities have, sadly, been minimized in importance by our society.

[smitty]

You are still off base with what you assume the correct answer is to the question. I am almost certain. But feel free to prove me wrong.

You can presume right that I know the correct answer to who and why it was done.  Now, if you what to squabble over semantics, let me make it easy for you:  Who was the first to "take money out of" the Social Security fund?  And have been "taking money out" ever since! 

[smitty]

I thought we already established Gates and Jobs are/were highly intelligent. As good democrats, how could they not be. As for their education, both were exceedingly bright and could have finished at prestigious schools had they chosen. Both chose to take advantage of their tech skills instead. They may not be stock brokers, but they did pretty well for themselves.

You seem to be full of questions and not answers. Maybe you aspire(d) to be a lawyer. Despite the fact that few of your questions could withstand objection in a court of law, I will play along you since you spend hours a day posing questions to others on this site and thus, perhaps merit some answers.

The government is certainly can be more efficient than some private enterprises. Otherwise some companies, including a few in your field, would need to "bail out" the government and not vice versa. However, by and large, I agree with your premise.

As for your litany of questions with regard to the President (with whom you may have an unhealthy obsession), I would say I do, in fact, have a problem with hypocrisy and unfulfilled promises. I won't make any assumptions as to whether he believed what he was saying when he said those things. As I won't when GHWB had us read his lips. I will say that in my humble opinion, history will not be particularly kind to any president elected thus far in this millennium.

Why would a private industry have to bail out a government entity?  All they have to do, and are doing it, is print more money and tax more people.  Example:  The Postal Service.  How much per quarter do they lose?  If it was a private industry it would have been bankrupt a long time ago.  But, when you have the power of taxing and the power of the printing press (computer entries now), inefficiency is prolonged.  Just another example that private industry (UPS and FedEx) can do a better job. 

[TxHoops]

Long term solutions are great but in the case of Greece and Detroit, shorter term ones were needed to deal with problem at hand. Not too long ago, our debt rating was downgraded for the first time in the history of this country. That ought to suggest to anyone with half a brain that the situation is serious now and more education for more people does not address that issue. As for my questions not being able to withstand objections in a court of law, I don't believe we are in a court of law and I don't profess to be a lawyer. I believe we are on a message board exchanging thoughts about the country and its circumstances. In regard to Alan Greenspan, I have read his book " The Age of Turbulence" in its entirety but it was several years ago. I recall him lauding Clintons intelligence but don't remember the other President he held in high esteem. As for the questions I asked, isn't that how the less intelligent gain knowledge from the more intelligent? Alan Greenspan basically tutored Bill Clinton very frequently about how the economy works and hence Mr. Clinton put that knowledge to good use. I don't think Mr. Obama gets tutored and I don't think he cares a bit about the economy just as long as he can institute his version of social justice. I heartily disagree with you suggestion that the governments "ability" to bail anyone out implies business savvy. And lets be clear that the bailout is ultimately a taxpayer bailout and the government is the only issuer who has unlimited check writing ability ( until we become Greece or Detroit). I am quite confident that UPS is in much better financial shape than the US Postal Service who, incidentally defaulted on $5.6 billion payment last fall and projected losses of 15 billion for last year. That's just one shining example of private vs govt. Amtrak also comes to mind when considering successes/failures of govt managed business efforts.

Nixon was the other. And you are spot on with the tutoring situation with Greenspan/Clinton. Alan said he would ask questions that were unlike any politician he ever worked with. Grasped complex concepts immediately. As I recall (maybe from the same book), Greenspan called him the smartest person he ever met.

I already agreed short term solutions, no matter how temporary the "fix" may be, are often needed. As far as government bailouts are concerned, I don't recall saying it required business savvy. Your ups/usps is actually a good example. I merely was making a point that your assertion is not absolute. Some segments of the private sector have been worse, even though that is the exception to the rule. Hence my original answer of "depends."

[TxHoops]

You can presume right that I know the correct answer to who and why it was done. Now, if you what to squabble over semantics, let me make it easy for you: Who was the first to "take money out of" the Social Security fund? And have been "taking money out" ever since!

I was correct in my presumption after all (happens every so often). The answer is that the first president to allow social security funds (I.e., money deducted from the work force's for the social security trust) for a purpose other than funding the social security trust is the same president that created the program.

[stevenash]

Few things, if any, are absolute.  But when it comes to operating a business, the chances of the private sector doing a better job than the government has a higher likelihood than most situations.   If I were wrong, you could depend on this current administration being involved in as many businesses as possible.  And, since they can't get involved on the operational side, they simply do so on the regulatory side.

[TxHoops]

Few things, if any, are absolute. But when it comes to operating a business, the chances of the private sector doing a better job than the government has a higher likelihood than most situations. If I were wrong, you could depend on this current administration being involved in as many businesses as possible. And, since they can't get involved on the operational side, they simply do so on the regulatory side.

You're first sentence here was my original point. And I agree with most of this statement in general.

[TxHoops]

Long term solutions are great but in the case of Greece and Detroit, shorter term ones were needed to deal with problem at hand. Not too long ago, our debt rating was downgraded for the first time in the history of this country. That ought to suggest to anyone with half a brain that the situation is serious now and more education for more people does not address that issue. As for my questions not being able to withstand objections in a court of law, I don't believe we are in a court of law and I don't profess to be a lawyer. I believe we are on a message board exchanging thoughts about the country and its circumstances. In regard to Alan Greenspan, I have read his book " The Age of Turbulence" in its entirety but it was several years ago. I recall him lauding Clintons intelligence but don't remember the other President he held in high esteem. As for the questions I asked, isn't that how the less intelligent gain knowledge from the more intelligent? Alan Greenspan basically tutored Bill Clinton very frequently about how the economy works and hence Mr. Clinton put that knowledge to good use. I don't think Mr. Obama gets tutored and I don't think he cares a bit about the economy just as long as he can institute his version of social justice. I heartily disagree with you suggestion that the governments "ability" to bail anyone out implies business savvy. And lets be clear that the bailout is ultimately a taxpayer bailout and the government is the only issuer who has unlimited check writing ability ( until we become Greece or Detroit). I am quite confident that UPS is in much better financial shape than the US Postal Service who, incidentally defaulted on $5.6 billion payment last fall and projected losses of 15 billion for last year. That's just one shining example of private vs govt. Amtrak also comes to mind when considering successes/failures of govt managed business efforts.

By the same token, our society has become more and more about instant gratification. The "quick fix" is what everyone searches for. We fall into being short sighted far too often.

Ultimately, I believe the lasting solutions are long term methologies. It's not unlike you advising someone entering the work force and starting a retirement plan. So while I can appreciate your assertion that we need something that more immediate with our economy, I believe more important is finding solutions that will last for generations.

[CraigS]

All of this has been a great read. Interesting perspectives from BOTH sides. However, you are BOTH over complicating the whole matter. I often hear the statement don't treat the symptoms, cure the problem.

 

The only, and I  repeat, the ONLY problem this country has is the breakdown of family and moral values.

 

All else is a self fix when these two become priority....

 

oh, and I barely graduated HS (athlete, didn't have to do much) went to 3 different colleges (2 for baseball) before finally getting my associate degree. But none of that seemed to have any bearing on my financial or life success once I got my priorities in order and put FAITH and FAMILY at the top of my list....

[TxHoops]

I often hear the statement don't treat the symptoms, cure the problem..

Truer words.

I wouldn't agree with your solution being the only problem we have. I would also not argue with you and say that it is not a real problem we have (although our definitions of family values would probably differ somewhat).

I think we would also agree, by your statement, that "success" is not defined by wealth. I have also been very blessed financially but it has little, if anything, to do with my happiness.

[CraigS]

Truer words.

I wouldn't agree with your solution being the only problem we have. I would also not argue with you and say that it is not a real problem we have (although our definitions of family values would probably differ somewhat).

I think we would also agree, by your statement, that "success" is not defined by wealth. I have also been very blessed financially but it has little, if anything, to do with my happiness.

My wife is a first grade teacher. For the most part, they know who will be contributors to society by that time, by the participation and care given by the parents of each student. Is it 100%, probably not, but I'd be a very wealthy person just betting on the odds. 

 

Children are the most innocent and precious commodity of any institution, what they become will define our society, our family, etc. Sure, there are a lot of peer pressures that can turn a well raised child against their teachings, likewise turn a less fortunate to overcome. However, those are the exceptions.

 

As far as the "Education System", it is my opinion that if any child in any particular "system" can come away with a quality education, then they all can. If not it is NOT the fault of the system....not to mention. you get out of something what you put into it...no amount of money or legislation will FIX that...that's on the parents...starting with the value they put into their families success, and that is determined by the morals in which they instill............

[77]

Nailed it!

[stevenash]

BINGO