Gyroscopic Investing

I'm more worried about the ref deciding to reallocate my points to the other team out of "fairness" or because he promised them a win. I'm also worried about unwarranted penalties because the ref is biased or paid off.

I've only been in the workplace since 2008, but I've already seen the government actively try and destroy my job twice. The first time when I worked for Cessna and the government was on its anti-private jet crusade. I lost my job designing flight controls for the CJ4 jet program. Now Obama's moronic energy policy is threatening my job security.

moda0306 wrote: Maybe I misinterpreted... can you clarify your position?

I'm just going along with the "fiscal cliff" meme.  What I post doesn't always reflect my beliefs.

melveyr wrote:If I were playing football I would try and score as many points as I could, but I would not worry about the referee running out of points. I can simultaneously worry about my own limits in gaining points while recognizing the ultimately limitless nature about the source of points.

RuralEngineer wrote:I'm more worried about the ref deciding to reallocate my points to the other team out of "fairness" or because he promised them a win. I'm also worried about unwarranted penalties because the ref is biased or paid off.

We also have to be worried about the clock running out.  We all live in a specific time, under the rules in place at that time.

Another factor is the number of "points" you're able to acquire in relation to the rest of society, which affects your standard of living.  That's why football (a team sport) may not be a perfect analogy.  Perhaps gymnastics would be better where individuals score points for their own performances but those points also contribute to the success of the team.  That's not perfect either though because the number of points per performance is limited to 10.

At any rate, it's easier to be abstract when you're young.  Wait until you have a family, a mortgage, college tuitions and retirement looming on the horizon, etc. etc.  But you younger guys on the forum seem to be a lot wiser than most people your age so you'll probably have it all figured out by then.

melveyr wrote:

flyingpylon wrote: Moda and Melveyr- I generally understand your arguments, but how do you go about your day in such an abstract state?  Do you not have wages, expenses, and savings that can't always adjust as quickly as economic conditions or inflation, etc.?  Do you not worry about things like tax rates or government spending and how decisions made by politicians may have a very real impact on your personal financial condition in the future?

If I were playing football I would try and score as many points as I could, but I would not worry about the referee running out of points. I can simultaneously worry about my own limits in gaining points while recognizing the ultimately limitless nature about the source of points.

The problem is that the referee will either take points from you and give them to someone else (taxation) or just decide to give out free points to others (defecits/inflation) even though they didn't score.  These points are only important when you want to get your trophy/medal/reward at the end; it takes more and more points to win the game, or to even hope to place.

Thinking about macro vs. micro as different is great, but you have to connect them, because the "macro" has a big impact on the "micro".  The fed/govt/banking empire (macro) just operates under different constraints than the rest of us (micros), and no one really understands the interface between the two (including the people running it), which I would argue is the most important piece to understand (my understanding comes and goes).

Obama appears to be either an idiot in over his head again, or he is setting the bar so high just for the Republicans to lower it for both sides to arrive at a middle-ground compromise.  It's all on him now to see what his true intentions really are:

http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/ho ... scal-cliff

I though his idiocy was self evident by now.

It's clear to me that in addition to getting the tax increases he wants, Obama is looking to bloody the Republicans some more. The only benefit to avoiding the fiscal cliff is it spares us (the people) pain. It's advantageous to Obama if we go over and strengthens his position. I honestly believe he doesn't care if we have a short recession as a result.

just heard a clip of howard dean wanting to raise taxes for everyone "across the board", not just the rich. wants to go over the cliff.

"going off the cliff is the solution" howard dean

murphy_p_t wrote: just heard a clip of howard dean wanting to raise taxes for everyone "across the board", not just the rich. wants to go over the cliff.

"going off the cliff is the solution" howard dean

What a depressingly (pun intended) ignorant thing to say.

melveyr wrote:

murphy_p_t wrote: just heard a clip of howard dean wanting to raise taxes for everyone "across the board", not just the rich. wants to go over the cliff.

"going off the cliff is the solution" howard dean

What a depressingly (pun intended) ignorant thing to say.

It depends on your desired outcome. If I were sufficiently misanthropic I might say "war is the answer." Howard Dean dropped off the left end of the spectrum a while ago. I'm sure getting as much of the wealth passing through the governments hands as possible would be very desirable.