NASA stuff things up again.

[zybch]

The Genesis space capsule, which had orbited the sun for more than three years to find clues to the origin of the solar system, has crashed to Earth after its parachute failed to deploy.
It wasn't immediately known whether tiny cosmic samples it was carrying back to Earth as part of a six-year, $US260 million (AU$375.26 million) project had been lost.

NASA officials believed the fragile discs that held the atoms would shatter even if the capsule hit the ground with a parachute.

"There was a big pit in my stomach," said physicist Roger Wiens of Los Alamos National Laboratory, which designed the atom collector plates.

"This just wasn't supposed to happen. We're going to have a lot of work picking up the pieces."

Hollywood stunt pilots had taken off in helicopters to hook the parachute, but the refrigerator-sized capsule - holding a set of fragile discs containing billions of atoms collected from solar wind - hit the desert floor without the parachute opening.

The impact drove the capsule half underground. NASA engineers feared the explosive for the parachute might still be alive and ready to fire, keeping helicopter crews at bay.

"That presents a safety hazard to recovery crews," said Chris Jones, solar system exploration director for NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

The helicopters were supposed to snatch the capsule's parachute with a hook as it floated down at 120 metres a minute.

But the capsule went out of control. It was supposed to be spinning at 15 revolutions a minute to slice evenly through the atmosphere, but camera images showed it tumbling instead.

The solar wind is a stream of highly charged particles emitted by the sun.

Scientists hoped the charged atoms gathered in the capsule - a "billion billion" of them - would reveal clues about the origin and evolution of our solar system, said Don Burnett, Genesis' principal investigator and a nuclear geochemist at California Institute of Technology.

The Genesis mission, launched in 2001, marked the first time NASA has collected any objects from farther than the moon for retrieval to Earth, said Roy Haggard, Genesis' flight operations chief and chief executive of Vertigo Inc, which designed the capture system.

Together, the charged atoms captured over 884 days on the capsule's discs of gold, sapphire, diamond and silicone were no bigger than a few grains of salt, but scientists say that would be enough to reconstruct the chemical origin of the sun and its family of planets. Scientists had expected to study the material for five more years.

Link (http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/communications/0,2000061791,39158753,00.htm)

[FrnchDp]

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/space/0409/gallery.genesis.crash/gallery.06.nasa.jpg

[leprechaun_40]

OOOOPS:eek:

[mireland]

Just think of all the poor homeless people we could've helped.that's why when I become president the first thing I do is scrap NASA!!:rolleyes:

[MJCfromCT]

scrapping nasa...now there's an idea...do you know how many technological spinoffs have come from the space program over the years?

http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/

[MJCfromCT]

Here's some money that could have been used to help all those less fortunate...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html

[ukulele]

Originally posted by mireland
Just think of all the poor homeless people we could've helped.that's why when I become president the first thing I do is scrap NASA!!:rolleyes:

Do you realize how many millions of jobs would be affected by doing that? Who's going to pay for all the welfare? I good leader creates jobs, not destroys them.

[mireland]

Originally posted by ukulele
Do you realize how many millions of jobs would be affected by doing that? Who's going to pay for all the welfare? I good leader creates jobs, not destroys them.

I'd give them jobs that didn't require wasting BILLIONS of dollars on things that didn't work..of course I'd have to do something about our government as well...:D

[MJCfromCT]

Originally posted by mireland
wasting BILLIONS of dollars on things that didn't work..

See Following:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html

:D :D :D

[mireland]

Originally posted by MJCfromCT
See Following:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html

:D :D :D

well so far it dosen't look like it's working..:eek:

[causticVapor]

What we need to actually do is increase funding to the currently decadent NASA so that these things happen less often and we actually get to colonize the moon and land on mars.:rolleyes:

[Vampiel]

NASA is a good organization, but they need to have a 'common sense' dept.. All of the smart people gathered in one area that have all the say just throws common sense out of the window. They need the ganitor to have a say, seriously.

Sometimes a little common sense needs to be thrown into the mix.

As far as the capsule goes... WTF? A parachute failed? Who packed the chute, prob. a genious scientist who they pay a $100,000 salary, when all they needed was a grunt from the Air Force to do it for free.

[Johnny Fist]

Maybe NASA could employ homeless people.

[zybch]

Currently, NASA gets more money (in real terms) that it did during the Apollo era.
What they lack is a clear target to aim for, so instead of concentrating on getting men to MArs they have decided to do heaps of other stuff instead.
Nasa should receive a cut in funding and a mission brief that states exactly what the aim is as well as the conditions that would constitute success or a failure of this aim.

At the time it was made, 2001: A Space Odyssey was based on the predicted advance of space technology at the time.
Now it seems we have actually taken a few steps backwards since Eugene Cernan lifted his foot from the lunar surface in 1972, the last person to do so.

[Vampiel]

NASA does not recieve more money than 'it did during the Apollo era'? Were did you get this information?

Also, if no one else, Bush has given them the clearest vision since the first men landed on the moon.

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by Johnny Fist
Maybe NASA could employ homeless people.

Yea, homeless people have plenty of common sense.:rolleyes:

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
NASA does not recieve more money than 'it did during the Apollo era'? Were did you get this information?

Also, if no one else, Bush has given them the clearest vision since the first men landed on the moon.


ok, so he's helped NASA..at the expense of common working Americans..look at all the jobs he HASN'T created...:rolleyes:

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by mireland
ok, so he's helped NASA..at the expense of common working Americans..look at all the jobs he HASN'T created...:rolleyes:

You mean the largest economic growth spurt in 20 years?
http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/30/news/economy/gdp/?cnn=yes

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
You mean the largest economic growth spurt in 20 years?
http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/30/news/economy/gdp/?cnn=yes

so why is unemployment so high?? and so much poverty??..you know the government counts .50 cent an hour jobs as a "job" AND they don't count the people who've given up looking for a job. The government can skew the numbers any way they want..only us people in the trenches know the truth...:mad:

[Vampiel]

so why is unemployment so high??

5.4% unemployment is high??

The government can skew the numbers any way they want..only us people in the trenches know the truth...

So the government can skew the numbers, but they cant fake WMD's??

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
5.4% unemployment is high??

to me it is..when it gets down to about 1% I'll be happy(I do realize that there are deadbeats out there..we'll never reach 0%)



So the government can skew the numbers, but they cant fake WMD's??

uh what? they DID fake WMD..at least for Iraq..meanwhile North Korea is about to turn South Korea into a MUSHROOM CLOUD but we won't invade them..wierd..

[Vampiel]

So they discovered WMD's?

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
So they discovered WMD's?

I mean they faked that there WAS wmd when there WASN'T... :rolleyes:

[mireland]

Originally posted by mireland
I mean they(I guess I should say, HE, bush) faked that there WAS wmd when there WASN'T... :rolleyes:

[Vampiel]

So why wouldnt Bush just fake that we found WMD's?

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
So why wouldnt Bush just fake that we found WMD's?


I just said that..he DID fake it so he could come up with an excuse to slaughter a bunch of our troops...http://www.fancysplace.com/smileys/thistopicsucks.gif

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by mireland
I just said that..he DID fake it so he could come up with an excuse to slaughter a bunch of our troops...http://www.fancysplace.com/smileys/thistopicsucks.gif

I am asking... why did BUSH not FAKE that WMD'S have been found in Iraq AFTER the war?

[Johnny Fist]

Because he was obviously busy skewing numbers personally. One man can only do so much.

[MJCfromCT]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about a space probe? :):)

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by Johnny Fist
Because he was obviously busy skewing numbers personally. One man can only do so much.

Thats what is funny... some people say that Bush stole the election, he fabricated WMD claims (that were actually backed up by the UN) and he lied bla bla bla... but yet somehow its not within his allmighty power to make up the WMD stockpile numbers that have been found in Iraq.

[ukulele]

Yes, MJC is correct. Vampiel needs to check more recent economic data. The third quarter gains of 2003 have all been pretty much erased considering the massive budget deficit, higher fuel costs and ballooning health care cost that were a direct result of Bush administration inept policies. NASA is another stupid example of his short sightedness. His recent announcements of an attempt for a manned Martian landing is nothing more then wishful crowing on his part. We are in no position economically to attempt such an overpriced science adventure and publicity stunt for the blue bloods and Ivy Leaguer's in America to once again exploit the masses. The Shuttle, along with the ISS is doomed to failure by economic harsh realities too.

NASA needs to concentrate on fixing what is has started not delving into the pork barrel for missions that are even a lot more ambitious.

[mireland]

Originally posted by MJCfromCT
I thought this thread was supposed to be about a space probe? :):)


NASA needs a major overhaul..do we really need to spend billions of dollars to see what's on Mars..who cares!! worry about our own FREAKIN planet...http://www.fancysplace.com/smileys/fume2.gif

[MJCfromCT]

I'm sure there were plenty of people back in the 15th and 16th century saying "why do we need to go to the new world, lets fix all the problems we have in the old world!"

Exploration is human nature. And since the moon landings we've done something quite unusual, taken steps backwards in terms of exploration. Its time to take steps forward again.

But then again since i'm a soon-to-be aerospace engineer i may be biased. :)

[causticVapor]

The problem all revolves around a mid 1970's decision. Back then, public enthusiasm for the space program was at an all-time low, and congress had the opportunity to vote for a manned mission to mars, further moon landings, or the space shuttle. They chose the cheapest option - the space shuttle - and after that there were really no clear goals and not enough funding for a manned trip to mars, for instance.

A trip to Mars would require a much larger ship and far more resources than the Apollo program. Without any direction and without any money, NASA is in a quandary.

And I hold my stance that there is decadent administration there as well, which contributes to the problem.:t

[zybch]

Originally posted by Vampiel
NASA does not recieve more money than 'it did during the Apollo era'? Were did you get this information?

Also, if no one else, Bush has given them the clearest vision since the first men landed on the moon.

I do believe I said 'In real terms". Do some maths to account for inflation, the worth of the US dollar etc, and you'll find that NASA has a higher level of funding now than during the Apollo years.

Oh, and the only reason that Bush hasn't 'found' any WMDs in Iraq is that there is too much media there at the moment.
You can only perform slight-of-hand if people aren't watching both your hands.

[Vampiel]

Vampiel needs to check more recent economic data. The third quarter gains of 2003 have all been pretty much erased considering the massive budget deficit, higher fuel costs and ballooning health care cost that were a direct result of Bush administration inept policies.

What does this have anything to do with what I said?

[Vampiel]

Oh, and the only reason that Bush hasn't 'found' any WMDs in Iraq is that there is too much media there at the moment.
You can only perform slight-of-hand if people aren't watching both your hands.

Really? So the media is in every cubbie hole in Iraq? Maybe they should have reported Saddams location since the media seems to have an eye on every inch.... gimme a break this is the stupidest excuse ive ever heard anyone give. 'He cant because the media is there'.

In fact that would make it much easier... all he has to do is airlift some from the US, plant it somewere in Iraq and goto the nearest media outlet and say look what we found!

zing

Theres some food for thought.

[zybch]

Personally, I think its more like this.

:)

[ukulele]

Originally posted by Vampiel
What does this have anything to do with what I said?

That largest spurt in 20 years was no actual indicator of jobs created in the last 4 years. You posted the link. It's just one high point on the graph.

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
Really? So the media is in every cubbie hole in Iraq? Maybe they should have reported Saddams location since the media seems to have an eye on every inch.... gimme a break this is the stupidest excuse ive ever heard anyone give. 'He cant because the media is there'.

In fact that would make it much easier... all he has to do is airlift some from the US, plant it somewere in Iraq and goto the nearest media outlet and say look what we found!

zing

Theres some food for thought.

we should send the media to find Osama bin Laden..cuz obviously bush can't(or won't) find him...:mad:

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by ukulele
That largest spurt in 20 years was no actual indicator of jobs created in the last 4 years. You posted the link. It's just one high point on the graph.

Well lets look at more recent data... say the past nine months of job creation?
http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/03/news/economy/jobless_august/payroll_aug04.gif

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
Well lets look at more recent data... say the past nine months of job creation?
http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/03/news/economy/jobless_august/payroll_aug04.gif

how many of those "jobs" actually had livable wages..anything less then 10 bucks an hour most families can't live on...jobs created? maybe..poverty decreasing..NOPE! :mad:

[Vampiel]

http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=208

A new set of figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show HIGHER-paying jobs growing faster.





I never give 'em hell, I just give 'em facts and they think its hell.

[causticVapor]

Originally posted by Vampiel
I never give 'em hell, I just give 'em facts and they think its hell.

Ahh...the emotional minded will never understand, Vampiel...:p

[ukulele]

I appreciate what you are trying to say, Vampiel, but you are being misled by handpicked statistics that can be made to look anyway you want them to look. If you listen to the folks desparately trying to stay in office they will tell you there was no inflation either when adjusted for inflation. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see all our jobs have gone to foriegn countries. Hell, for that matter so have all the factories. Wake up!

[Billforce]

Uke, you mean like ....Why do they have INTERSTATE Highways in Hawaii?

[zybch]

:)

[ukulele]

Originally posted by Billforce
Uke, you mean like ....Why do they have INTERSTATE Highways in Hawaii?

Yeah right. H3 took the crooks 30 years to complete the last 18 miles of a freeway that no one uses because it goes no where anyone wants to go except the military.

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by ukulele
I appreciate what you are trying to say, Vampiel, but you are being misled by handpicked statistics that can be made to look anyway you want them to look. If you listen to the folks desparately trying to stay in office they will tell you there was no inflation either when adjusted for inflation. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see all our jobs have gone to foriegn countries. Hell, for that matter so have all the factories. Wake up!

Im not being misled by handpicked statistics. Jobs are going oversea's no denying that. The job numbers would have been even higher if it were not for that. We have to learn to compete in a global market.

Who is handpicking statistics?
http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=208
Bogus Poster Boy

An extreme example of the Democratic line can be seen in the TV ad released June 22 by Moveon.org Voter Fund, showing a dejected man who's lost his job after "30 years at the company" reporting for his new job as a burger-flipper. It's a caricature, of course. Somewhere in a nation of nearly 294 million people there must be some workers in that unhappy position. But the guy in the paper hat is by no means the poster boy for this economy.

(The ad blames Bush for sending the man's job overseas. We'll address the "offshoring" argument in a later article.)

Kerry has been making a similar but less excessive argument. After a West Coast appearance May 18 he was quoted by The Associated Press saying "The jobs that are being created in Oregon and elsewhere are paying significantly less than the jobs we're losing." A Kerry news release issued June 19 says "90 percent of the new jobs created since August of 2003 are in industries that pay an average hourly wage that is less than the national average."

It's true that looking at job changes by industry shows lower-paying industries have been growing faster than better-paying industries in recent months. A June 30 story in USA Today -- headlined "Low-wage jobs rise at a faster pace" -- also cites industry-by-industry statistics to document that idea. The newspaper even illustrated the story with a photograph of a food server, supposedly typical of the low-wage jobs said to predominate.
...

But we respectfully disagree: neither the statistics cited by Kerry nor the numbers cited by USA Today really prove the case

[ukulele]

The damage being done to the economy and job market in general has not yet begun to manifest itself as fully as it will in the comming years. The cummulative effects of an ecomomy based on services wrather then manufacturing will wear itself thin when the novelty rubs off. Already the devastating effects of too much fast food in America is beginning to turn the tide in American eating habits. Just take a look at MCD (Mc Donalds)stock prices for the last 5 years. It's still barely half of what it was 4 years ago and that's considered a strong economic job creator today. Who's doing well? Walmart, but where is the benifit to the American consumer? Lower prices? Hardly. Because of the much lower quality of consumer goods in general, especially durable goods, Americans now must purchase the same products much more often and to complicate the growing problem, the products are no longer able to be repaired. Even automobiles which for the past 100 years spawned a huge service industry now is just a hollow shell of what it used to be. Todays mechanics can't fix the new cars even if they knew how. When was the last time you took your car to a "service station" even to buy gas? Electronic techs are no longer in demand either. There is no profit in fixing cheap Chinese made junk. The only Americans benefiting in todays new deal business model are those working for big business. America needs tax incentives for the little guy, not big business as Bush is bragging about. Big business is just taking the huge tax breaks and investing over seas.

[zybch]

Originally posted by ukulele
The damage being done to the economy and job market in general has not yet begun to manifest itself as fully as it will in the comming years. The cummulative effects of an ecomomy based on services wrather then manufacturing will wear itself thin when the novelty rubs off.

SOme countries seem to make a fair go at it. Most of the successful scandinavian like finland etc are pretty much a services based economy and have better living standards, no political corruption, lower crime etc that most wertern countries, including (and especially) america.

[ukulele]

Originally posted by zybch
SOme countries seem to make a fair go at it. Most of the successful scandinavian like finland etc are pretty much a services based economy and have better living standards, no political corruption, lower crime etc that most wertern countries, including (and especially) america.

What the heck are you talking about this time? The key ecomomic industry in every single Scandinavian country in existance is manufacturing and has been since the dawn of humanity. Fishing is second. :rolleyes:

[Vampiel]

The cummulative effects of an ecomomy based on services wrather then manufacturing will wear itself thin when the novelty rubs off.

Could you back up this claim that our economy is relying more on services than manufacturing, because the last time I checked the Gross Domestic Product was increasing, the trade import debt was decreasing, and the manufacturing sector jobs are increasing.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aBXhKn_kNPJY&refer=top_world_news
Sept. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Manufacturing undergirded the U.S. economy in August and probably into this month, helping sustain the expansion as retail sales slowed, reports this week are forecast by economists to show.

Industrial production rose 0.5 percent last month after rising 0.4 percent in July, according to the median forecast of economists surveyed before the Federal Reserve issues its numbers Wednesday in Washington. Regional reports from the Fed banks in New York and Philadelphia are forecast to show that manufacturing expanded in those regions this month.

Retail sales probably fell last month because of fewer automobile purchases. Exports and business spending on equipment are helping bolster production as consumers spend less, economists said.

http://www.iht.com/articles/538381.htm
WASHINGTON The U.S. trade deficit narrowed 9 percent in July from the record of the previous month as exports rose and a decrease in oil shipments led to the first decline in imports in 11 months, the Commerce Department said Friday.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/30/news/economy/gdp/?cnn=yes

http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/30/news/economy/gdp/gdp_chart_3q2003.2.gif

US economic growth with not be the result, on a global market, from taxing companies that outsource jobs. That will put additional expenditures on companies that are in the US doing business outside of the US as well as vis versa.

The key is to pass this flat tax (http://www.sysopt.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=169761&perpage=15&pagenumber=1) and that will encourage business to come back into the United States.

What will more taxes do? Will it encourage more business in the Unites States or will it run more businesses out of the United States?

The answer is simple, lower taxes, simplify the tax code and put in a flat tax. You have to compete on the global market not push it away.

[Vampiel]

The only Americans benefiting in todays new deal business model are those working for big business. America needs tax incentives for the little guy, not big business as Bush is bragging about. Big business is just taking the huge tax breaks and investing over seas.

What? Bush does not favor large businesses over small businesses. Show me some data on that because I have alot of facts that say otherwise.

[ukulele]

Originally posted by Vampiel
What? Bush does not favor large businesses over small businesses. Show me some data on that because I have alot of facts that say otherwise.

You can cite facts and figures until you are blue in the face and it won't change a thing. You simply cannot point to graphs and charts and say things like "well, in July blah, blah, blah" or " In August Blah, blah, blah,..." You have to look around you to see what's happening. Here in the tiny community I live in, property is suddenly booming. It has nothing to do with the overal ecomomy improving, it has to do with people fleeing the mainland in droves in search of an affordable place to retire and get away from the general poor economic conditions in many parts of the mainland. There is no technology boom there, there is no major manufacturing boom, there is wholesale destruction of the environment, increasingly more severe weather problems, greater fear of terrorist attacks, and a very weak job market everywhere. Why are they moving here? Because land is cheap, the air and water is still pristine and the weather is not subject to global warming effects as much as other places simple because of the huge heat sink that is the Pacific Ocean which keeps it temperate. The real issues that challanges America are being sidestepped by the present administration in the name of fighting terrorist that have not struck another blow in three years.

[Vampiel]

I see, so you think that because of the fact that the property in your area is booming you make the connection that it is because the rest of the US is being destroyed.

When the reality is property is booming across the US and this is due to extremely low federal interest rates, not because the rest of the US is being destroyed so everyone is moving to Hawaii. Its because people can get an interest rate that is lower now than they will be able to most likely for the rest of their lifetime.

Call any home realtor anywhere in the US and ask them how their business is doing, since you dont take the word of charts and graphs.

The real issues that challanges America are being sidestepped by the present administration in the name of fighting terrorist that have not struck another blow in three years.

You make a very good point. The terrorists are hell bent to strike the US on our soil, but have not managed to in three years.

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
What? Bush does not favor large businesses over small businesses. Show me some data on that because I have alot of facts that say otherwise.

want proof..just look..big business are profiting big time..small busniesses are struggling, harder to start one up then before..bush favors big business(especially oil companies):(

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by mireland
want proof..just look..big business are profiting big time..small busniesses are struggling, harder to start one up then before..bush favors big business(especially oil companies):(

When have small businesses not struggled? Thats name of the competitive game. I own a small business, its called competition, you have to deal with it or sink.

You can yell all day, but unless you adapt you will not survive.

I remember when a booth across from mine lowered their prices to beat mine, what did I do? Lower my price to match theirs, and insured that I gave better customer service than they did.

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
When have small businesses not struggled? Thats name of the competitive game. I own a small business, its called competition, you have to deal with it or sink.

You can yell all day, but unless you adapt you will not survive.


:rolleyes:

[Vampiel]

Competition, if you cant take the heat, get out of the oven.

[mireland]

Originally posted by Vampiel
Competition, if you cant take the heat, get out of the oven.


kinda hard to compete when Wal-Mart and these other big chains move into the neigborhood..at least some communities are fighting back and not let some of these AHOLES into their neighborhoods...)-|

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by mireland
kinda hard to compete when Wal-Mart and these other big chains move into the neigborhood..at least some communities are fighting back and not let some of these AHOLES into their neighborhoods...)-|

Actually its easy to compete with Wal-Mart. I do it everyday.

When someone walks into wal-mart they expect cheap prices and crappy customer service, its not hard to counter this.

Hell, I wish I had a store right next to wal-mart, it would increase my traffic ten fold. Being right smack next to wal-mart would do my business wonders.

[ukulele]

Tell that to the nearly 300 failed businesses here in Kona alone due to Walmart, Kmart, Costco, Home Improvement Warehouse, and Lowes all popping up in the past 7 years here. Just in computers alone there is no longer any small shops at all building computers. There was half a dozen of them four or five years ago. There is two small shops remaining now. One of them had a job offer I applied for last year as a repair technician (my ukulele business is all but ruined due to outsourcing). They wouldn't tell me the starting pay, but a friend got the job. He was started at $8.65 an hour (BTW they charge $50.00 P.H. for his services). Oh, and by the way Walmart reported lower then expected earnings this quarter too. US Air filed for bankruptcy this morning, Holsum bakeries warn of pending bankruptcy among others. Lou Dobbs will be on tonight in a special on American Jobs. He will be presenting details on why outsourcing is about to break the back of Boeing. No one in the administration has even brought up the subject of the massive soaring budget deficit. Bush just totally swept it under the rug as if it never existed. As for lower intrest rates, gee, I wonder why that is? Do you think it has anything to due with a failing enonomy? Whoda thunk it?
It is time for the American voter to wake up and stop listening to the constant diet of lies and dirty politics spewed by both sides in this gutter ball election.

[Vampiel]

Your right, Bush should immidiately ban Walmart, Kmart, Costco, Home Improvement Warehouse, and Lowes.

As for lower intrest rates, gee, I wonder why that is? Do you think it has anything to due with a failing enonomy? Whoda thunk it?
I thought it was due to the fact that US land elswere is being destroyed so everyone is moving to Hawaii.

http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/16/news/economy/household_wealth.reut/?cnn=yes
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. household wealth swelled to a new record in the second quarter of 2004, while borrowing outside the financial sector grew at a slower pace, the Federal Reserve said on Thursday.

In its quarterly Flow of Funds report, the Fed said household balance sheets increased 1.4 percent to $45.907 trillion in the second quarter, compared to an upwardly revised $45.270 trillion in the first quarter of this year.

First-quarter household wealth was initially reported at $45.153 trillion.

Total U.S. borrowing, excluding the financial sector, rose at a seasonally adjusted 7.7 percent annual rate in the second quarter, slightly slower than its upwardly revised 9.1 percent growth in the first quarter. First-quarter nonfinancial debt was initially reported to be growing 8.6 percent.

The Fed said the slowdown in debt growth was nearly evenly distributed across all the major nonfinancial sectors, including the federal government, households, nonfinancial businesses and local governments.

The total level of nonfinancial debt outstanding at the end of the second quarter was $23.220 trillion, in seasonally adjusted terms.

[ukulele]

Household wealth cannot be accurately calculated by the net worth of durable goods that are no longer durable. It's an election year, so of course the feds will say the economy is improving by citing any statistics that will support it, but the truth is that the average American owns very little personal wealth compared to what they owned 20 years ago. You think you are worth more? Just have a garage sale and see what your houseful of "stuff" is really worth. Put that car you financed for $30,000 just a few years ago on the auction block and see what it's worth, then deduct the interest you paid to get a real net value assessment. How about that $2,000 laptop you bought three years ago that is now worth $300 on a good day? Real estate is the only thing that has steadily gone up in value but what difference does that have for the average American? All that means is it will cost you more to buy one. It's not a better house. The fact is that quality is down and prices are up no matter how you look at it.

[Vampiel]

Thats called inflation. Things also lose their value once they are used, especially electronics.

[Prushka]

How does immigration fit into job market statistics...do these people find jobs? compete for jobs? I don't think they're all on welware, if so, send them back.

2002...11,451,000 (lpr) legal permanent resident population.
http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/lprest2002.pdf

Here, I'm finding that many non-english speaking persons (typically eastern europeans) are being shipped in from over-sea's and returning home with their pay, enabling these contractors to low-ball contracts; some of course are legal permanent resident's

[Prushka]

Originally posted by mireland
NASA needs a major overhaul..do we really need to spend billions of dollars to see what's on Mars..who cares!! worry about our own FREAKIN planet...http://www.fancysplace.com/smileys/fume2.gif

And back to the topic...I AGREE

[Vampiel]

I disagree.

The exploration of outer space is not only in the interest's of the human race as a whole, it is also in our own basic instinct as explorers and search for knowledge. The outbreak of the next technologic advance is a part of human history and space should not be restricted as long as it is within our reach technologically. No one knew what Columbus was to begin when he crossed the vast ocean to discover a new world and the chain of events that followed. Or the discovery of the wheel.

Some will doubt, others will explore. The explorers have become history and the doubters have become just that.

[ukulele]

The quest for knowledge is always good for a nation. The problem with NASA is that there is many companies trying to make a profit at NASA's expense and it is a government funded organization. Our government can not and will not even try to manage it's finances like a business would. In fact every government funded project ever started in America has become nothing more then a bottomless pork barrel for the administrators. The money would be better spent in the hands of private industry.

[zybch]

All of the large companies that make stuff like the rockets that NASA use, work on the 'Costs Plus' basis.
Costs Plus works by the contractors/suppliers selling their products to nasa at a rate of their costs plus a percentage of those costs, usualy 10%.
These suppliers routinely overprice their stuff. Which would you rather as profit? 10% of $500,000 or 10% of $850,000?
Its because of this ridiculous system of costs-plus, that innovation has been stifled, like the SSTO projects, and those funding NASA (the US public) are getting far less for their buck than ever before.
NMasa needs to slim down and the costs-plus system needs to be rethought, at least then we might get a useable SSTO launch system which would cut costs dramatically, alowing more money to be spent on the exploration of space.

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by ukulele
The quest for knowledge is always good for a nation. The problem with NASA is that there is many companies trying to make a profit at NASA's expense and it is a government funded organization. Our government can not and will not even try to manage it's finances like a business would. In fact every government funded project ever started in America has become nothing more then a bottomless pork barrel for the administrators. The money would be better spent in the hands of private industry.

I agree. That is a good idea that I have never thought about. The government has never been good at running businesses because they allow themselves to be ripped off, and of course corruption.

NASA needs to be privatized. I never knew you were such a capitalist ukulele.

[MJCfromCT]

I for one can't wait for the space program to become privatized...the competition will drive costs down and new innovations up...the lure of a profit in space will motivate the companies...it seems as though war is the only thing that motivates government-funded things to innovate (just look at technology before and after WWII)

I remember reading that some asteroids in space have trillions of dollars worth of silver and other rare metals in them...just imagine if companies decided mining them would be good for business :)

[ukulele]

Originally posted by Vampiel
I agree. That is a good idea that I have never thought about. The government has never been good at running businesses because they allow themselves to be ripped off, and of course corruption.

NASA needs to be privatized. I never knew you were such a capitalist ukulele.

Of course I'm a capitalist. Why do you think I am not happy with the current administration acting like it has a blank check with this mistake of a war in Iraq? Guess who get's to pay for it. You can bet it won't be those most able to pay. It will be the little guys once again.

[Vampiel]

Guess who get's to pay for it. You can bet it won't be those most able to pay. It will be the little guys once again.

So you are saying that the rich do not pay the majority of the taxes?

Sorry if I had the wrong impression. But dont capitalists believe in free enterprise?

[ukulele]

Originally posted by Vampiel
So you are saying that the rich do not pay the majority of the taxes?

Sorry if I had the wrong impression. But dont capitalists believe in free enterprise?

Why do you think the rich got that way? They are in a higher tax bracket but they have a lot more ways around taxes and can afford good lawyers and accountants that keep the taxman at bay. I am not fool enough to believe that the rich pay more taxes in America. You believe what you want.

[Vampiel]

LMAO ok.... if I make one million/year and I pay 1% of my income and somehow avoid the rest, im still paying way more than most people. Believe what you want, I wont bother showing little pie charts since you are impervious to them.

BTW Socialist's believe in government business regulation, not capitalists.

[zybch]

In the US (possible elsewhere but I'm not sure) the rich are indeed paying more taxes. This isn't because they've decided to be honest though, its because the loopholes that have traditionally been used are getting closed up.
As Uke says, being rich means you can afford good (!) tax lawers who are able to greatly reduce the ammount of tax you actually pay.
Being poor means that you generally have to pay every cent of yur tax bill simply because to hire a high-end tax lawyer is simply not an option if you want to eat and have a roof over your head.

Pie charts are all well and good is provided by an impartial organisation, yours aren't unfortunatley.

Say I make 20,000 per year and I pay my tax bill, its gonna be a lot higher than your example of someone paying only 1% of a million. This isn't fair, nor legal.
Those that make $1m+ each year are definatley more able to pay their taxes without going hungry, than some poor sod who only makes 20,000 and is honest about his taxes. Remember the average American makes under $25,000 per year and has to pay their tax debts in FULL no matter what.
Why should rich people not have the same standards applied to their tax debts and have to pay in full rather than sneaking through various loopholes whos comprehension requires you to have a tax lawyer with a brain that can think its way through a corckscrew in a hurricane without touching the edges?

[ukulele]

Now, now. Let's not start talking about Theresa Hines Kerry and her brand of fair tax payments. God forbid I should use swear words like Hilary too.

[Vampiel]

Pie charts are all well and good is provided by an impartial organisation, yours aren't unfortunatley.

Have you been smoking crack again? Or is this another conspiracy you cooked up out of thin air from to much acid?

What 'pie charts'?

The flat tax will close all of the loopholes, but it just dawned on me. Would that mean products you buy on the internet would be taxed?

I would assume so... otherwise you could get out scott free of federal taxes.