lannarebirth

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

In 2012, China's spending on R&D was 34% that of America’s. But, by 2016, based on ‘purchasing power parity’, the giant Asian nation’s spending was equivalent to 88% that of the US. It seems likely to surpass America soon. China's budget for basic research hit US$14.1 billion in 2016, up 18.5% over the previous year.

https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20181207064734679

Yes I know. I follow that stuff closely. Mostly it's about how to use existing technology (admittedly leading edge) for both profit and control. They're not going to be leading anything unless they beat us in quantum computing, which is a real possibilty.

6 minutes ago, rabas said:

That's why the Chinese are there in droves. And also note US research is made up of people from everywhere. 

Which is why countries everywhere are now competing with the US. The joke goes like this: “How far behind the US is China in AI research?” Answer: “12 hours.”

1 hour ago, Crazy Alex said:

Biden has already promised to not use who is the best person for the job as his criteria, so who cares?

When has any president done that?

1 hour ago, TopDeadSenter said:

The problem with Biden is he will be reliant completely on his VP. 

 

That's the good news. I hope he chooses well, but I'm not sure he'll be there at all in November. Or Trump either, for that matter.

2 hours ago, Tug said:

Go git him joe time for competent leadership I’ll venture it’s going to be Amy with a plum cabinet gig for kamala 

I'm guessing out of Bernie, Joe and Trump, 2 of the 3 will contract the virus. I expect at least one or two of these frontrunners to drop out.

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

It's to stop people from waiting to enrol until they get ill.

OK, but I thought that's what the 30 day waiting period was for.

8 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Obamacare bad.

This just in from Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal:

U.S. Considers Special Enrollment Period for Affordable Care Act Due to Coronavirus Spread

 

The Trump administration is considering the launch of a special enrollment period for people to sign up for health coverage under the Affordable Care Act because of the new coronavirus crisis, a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services spokeswoman said Saturday.

At least nine states that run their own exchanges where people can go to buy health coverage have said they would let people obtain coverage under the ACA even though the enrollment season has passed. But most states rely on the federal government to run their exchanges and need approval to initiate a special sign-up period.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-considers-special-enrollment-period-for-affordable-care-act-due-to-coronavirus-spread-11584814494?mod=hp_lead_pos4

I never understood why a limited duration enrollment period was necessary in the first place.

1 minute ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Should I be afraid?

 

Nah.

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

Rates would go up on the long end of th curve and it could trigger further selling and even higher rates by bondholders looking to lock in gains from this latest bull market in bonds. The whole thing would be pretty short lived though. If rates spike 3 to 5 points one should be an aggressive buyer IMO. Can't see it happening though. 

Or they could engage in a series of off market transactions with sovereign funds or large wealth funds at a predetermined price so as not to roil the market.

Just now, Cryingdick said:

 

What would happen if the Chinese unleashed hell on the USA and put everything they had on the market? 

Rates would go up on the long end of th curve and it could trigger further selling and even higher rates by bondholders looking to lock in gains from this latest bull market in bonds. The whole thing would be pretty short lived though. If rates spike 3 to 5 points one should be an aggressive buyer IMO. Can't see it happening though. 

6 minutes ago, Blue Muton said:

China doesn't need to sell, it can simply call in the $1.1 trillion that the USA owes.

You can't call in Treasury bonds. You can sell on the open market though.

1 minute ago, Cryingdick said:

 

really???? I just sold off all my futures based upon such sage advice.

That may still work out.

22 minutes ago, bartender100 said:

DOW futures already another 5% down, I thought Buffet called the bottom?

That was Friday. Futures trading doesn't beging again until 1700 CT tomorrow in US.

They are not racing towards anything.  A week late and $2T short.

1 hour ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Wasn't trying to argue with you in the first place. Was replying to somebody that seems to label every corporation as evil. Too many people who couldn't survive without corporations blame everything in their life on the man keeping them down.

 

So that aside I was listening to Cuban speak on the biz news the other day. He was saying if you need the gov to bail you out you should lose your right to buyback stocks forever. Not just temporarily but for good. He was also saying they should have to offer something like this... not sure I remember it exactly but the baggage handler that makes $30,000 a year or whatever gets an equal amount in shares. Every employee gets to participate in the wealth that the compounding brings to the very last janitor. 

 

 

His point was nobody will ever get ahead just renting their time without using some sort of leverage. The devil would be in the details but it is an interesting idea. If we could start making more people stock holders and they could benefit. Maybe the shares wouldn't vest until five years of leaving the company if you quit or a certain age. No cashing out early as that would mean stupid people wouldn't get the benefit. Every paycheck you get shows your whole shares and fractional shares.

 

Would this damage the stock? I am thinking it could be like buybacks because the shares are restricted for a length of time. So instead of buying back shares to simply retire them they are bought back to put into the employee accounts. They are still off the market for 5 years. So hopefully the employee would benefit from a rising price until their own shares vesting and the torch gets passed on. 

 

Once you have proved as a corporation you have failed in every metric and go to the government, your job is no longer to profit (you have already showed that is not with in your capability)  but provide the best for those you hire. These formerly failed companies at that point would have people lined up to work for them.

 

Even modest salaries can produce results if investing like this is started right from high school. Your first job you get at McDonald's after working through college, you now have maybe $25K for a down payment pay down student etc. Your very next job does the same thing. 

 

I know in my explanation maybe there are holes. However I like the idea. It's sort of like something Yang had in mind but doesn't raise taxes, is only  for the employed, uses money that would have been used for buybacks and makes more people shareholders of what he called the "American dividend". 

 

If you are only renting your time by the hour the only help that is currently given can only be temporary in nature. 

 

That was lengthier then intended. LOL 

 

 

 

Many years ago during the period when I thought I was too smart for college, I bought a share in a worker owned company. It was the best run company I have ever had any affiliation with and employees/owners were making 100% more in wages than comparable workers at competing companies.

6 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

What is it, truly?

A country whose laws are constructed whereby its legislature and executive can sell dispensations to corporations to feast on a captive populace. Somethin' like that.

Also bearin mind that just making the current systen available universally WILL banrupt the country. The whole model of how healthcare is delivered and paid for has to change. Doctors should be paid based on keeping people healthy and of course we need twice as may of them too.

8 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Something has occurred to me that I hope occurs to the Biden campaign.

 

The Covid-19 situation has changed everything, including of course the election.

 

It will now not simply be a referendum of 45 but specifically a referendum on his performance in response to Covid-19.

 

Covid-19 has laid bare some horrific truths about the American medical system and indeed inequalities in general.

 

I have no doubt that Joe Biden has the goal of universal health care just as do almost all democrats and the majority of all Americans.

 

Now is the time. This crisis is the time.

 

How did the UK get their wonderful jewel the NHS after World War 2 while the US did not?

 

Because the UK more or less had to. They were devastated by WW2 domestically in a way the US was not.

This is now a wartime like situation in the U.S. We will have one of the most severe recessions ever if not a full blown depression. 

 

If not now for fast progress for universal health care under Biden, when?

 

Of course 45 won't do it. He's all about his gaslighting daily reality show.

 

Would it be ironic for Biden to be the man to effect this historic progress rather than Bernie? Perhaps. But it actually makes a lot of sense practically and politically. Biden is less threatening to mainstream Americans and by shifting on this issue to the left, he unifies both the Bernie base and also the majority of Americans that really want this but thought it was impossible before.

 

That could be the argument. It's not possible or at the very least not ethical or moral to continue with the status quo now. 

Duh! Biden is being termed "the accidental president". He has been characterized as an extremely lazy if likeable politician. There is no way, absent Trump's election that Biden would even be among the Democrat list of candidates for the presidency. He is that bad. Still, if he can find his spine, he might be able to make a difference. Bear in mind any progress Biden could ever hope to make will be over the objections of his own donors. The people will be for it and IMO the Republicans will be in the minority in both houses. So if it doesn't pass it will be because the Democrat elite doesn't want it to pass.

Why doesn't Congress just insert language in a law that states that any company wishing to sell pharmaceutical drugs in the US cannot sell them for over the average price the drug is sold at on the global market?