Prices are sky rocketing!!!

[acadia11]

Holy $$$$, prices, are sky rocketing! 80gb Intel SSD g2 drive was 215, in November, it's 300 today on New egg.

I was buying some crucial memory, the price jumped up $30 from saturday, that's 2 days $30 increase on 4gb kit, that's insane.

WTF? I understand supply and demand!!!! But let's demand this sticker shock stop!!!! We are only starting to come out of a recession now!!! They keep hitting my wallet like this, I'm going to do my part so we go right back in!!!

 

[acadia11]

acadia, I have no problems with welfare. Anyone through no fault of his (or her) own can run into problems, and need a helping hand. But there's a difference between your mother and a third generation welfare family.

For a while in the 70's, I was one small step away from being homeless. Public aid would have been, short term, a step up. I was young (relatively, anyway), single, healthy, and very lucky.

But jtt and I aren't talking about circumstances. We are talking about choices that allegedly intelligent adults make. And I am getting really tired of subsidizing other people's poor decisions.

But the reality is the poor decisions of people you want to blame have very little impact, very little power lies in those hands. Remember You didn't bailout those people, the banks are and did still foreclose on peoples homes, the banks were bailed out, did you give a dime to those families or individuals, no, your subsidy went to banks, furthermore as I explained, trying to blame some people who took on bad mortgages, or too much home, is tantamount to trying to blame zebra for getting eaten by a lion in Serangedie. The fact of the matter, that's completely false, and there a whole mess of factors that caused the financial collapse, and I went through it already ... one person made a good point, yeah, economist can't really pin point exactly why, but this what they think, not only that it's not something happened overnight, it's something that's brewed up over decades of decisions. And not just by any 1 political party, much like the collapse of manufacturing in the US, now even further with service jobs in the US , as more companies outsource. But I'm digressing. It's really naive and dangerous, especially, when it's simply wrong.

For example, you talk of 3 generations of welfare, #1 no one can stay on welfare that long (you actually have to be looking for a job) #2 Most people who take public assistance are off of it with in 1 year and a half #3) MOre than 60% of people on welfare actually have a job they just live far below the poverty line, and most assistance is in the form food stamps, section 8 housing, anyway ... the perceptions are far from the reality, in a bid to end public programs and end alot of work done related to new deal, Reagan, painted this image of black welfare cadillac queens, not only was an overt play on racism and a natural belief that many viewed of blacks, but it was completely false, for so many reasons, chiefly as a percentage of their population blacks make up a larger portion of the public aid ranks, however, in totality whites dwarf blacks in terms of numbers on public assistance, because, population wise whites still make up nearly 70% of this country, but here's more to the point ... your tax dollars don't go to welfare, welfare makes up a fraction of a percentage point in our budget, so who are you subsidizing ... but it's this line of thinking that scares me. You see the same thing now with this economic collapse and especially the republican party plays to it that it was poor , let's be frank, "minorities" getting in over their head and they brought down the US economy, you can't be that naive, honestly.

While you have someone like Henry Paulson , a former goldman-sachs president, and Bush's secretary say give me a $750 billion dollar check, and you can't ask me what I do with the money? That literally is your money. The people who have real power to control the flow of money in this country from corporations, to banks, to the very influentially wealthy and powerful, simply get ignored. When Bill Gates can argue an anti-trust case that MS is so important to maintaining the stability of the US economy that you can't break it up, ... but it's the people with the least amount of power in our society who are tearing down the economy. When an insurance company can argue, oh no we want you to be required to by insurance, just from us is all ... because, it's better than giving it to an entity that isn't profit driven and who's sole purpose is actually to provide healthcare and logically that makes sense to people I"m dumb founded. No wonder the have nots remain have nots, because, we live in a delusion about capital and power, and who has it. Many of us think we are way more important in the system, than we really are.

Personally, I just find it all pretty humorous, and have decided, just make sure you have, and the so called "republican (or conservatives) acolytes" and "(the democratic minions)" that means you lay people and your adherence to idealogy can continue to be guiled with non-sense .... I love this qoute from the outliers, rather the bible (Mathew 25:29) ...

"For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath."

 

[Onus]

The bank bailout was absurd. I agree. Banks had been compelled by force [of law] to make a lot of bad loans, which they did, duping a lot of people into taking out mortgages they could not possibly afford; not their problem though; the banks just sold those mortgages, making them someone else's problem. The people who bought them, repackaged them into so-called "financial instruments" and used them for gambling purposes, again duping the common man into betting on them. All greed+dishonesty.
I did not ever say, nor intend to imply, that welfare recipients were the bulk of the problem. Politicians, wielding unearned power to confiscate and redistribute not only earned wealth but money that hasn't even been earned yet (another 1.9 TRILLION dollars recently) in order to buy the votes needed to keep them in office is the problem. It will end in one of two ways. One, US debt will become unserviceable. At that point, all those consumer choices Americans love so much will be out of reach, since they come from outside our borders, where the dollar will be worthless. Companies who hastily outsourced production to save money with cheap labor will lose all of their overseas facilities and people. The USA will be set back to a farming economy, without benefit of full mechanization, as there won't be enough fuel to run everything. Perhaps the Chinese (no offense meant) will just want Alaska (for its resources) to write off all the debt they've bought. Will Japan get Hawaii? How about India? We will have been defeated without anyone firing a shot.
Or, Congress imposes staggering taxes, almost exclusively on the middle class, as they're the ones who make up most of the tax revenue (taking 90% from people like Bill Gates won't amount to squat); and massive spending cuts. This means of course that no one in office will be re-elected; you can guess which choice is more likely.
It isn't matter of being paranoid. No one is "out to get me;" I'm don't delude myself that I'm of sufficient importance.
Greed + dishonesty....

 

[acadia11]

The bank bailout was absurd. I agree. Banks had been compelled by force [of law] to make a lot of bad loans, which they did, duping a lot of people into taking out mortgages they could not possibly afford; not their problem though; the banks just sold those mortgages, making them someone else's problem. The people who bought them, repackaged them into so-called "financial instruments" and used them for gambling purposes, again duping the common man into betting on them. All greed+dishonesty.
I did not ever say, nor intend to imply, that welfare recipients were the bulk of the problem. Politicians, wielding unearned power to confiscate and redistribute not only earned wealth but money that hasn't even been earned yet (another 1.9 TRILLION dollars recently) in order to buy the votes needed to keep them in office is the problem. It will end in one of two ways. One, US debt will become unserviceable. At that point, all those consumer choices Americans love so much will be out of reach, since they come from outside our borders, where the dollar will be worthless. Companies who hastily outsourced production to save money with cheap labor will lose all of their overseas facilities and people. The USA will be set back to a farming economy, without benefit of full mechanization, as there won't be enough fuel to run everything. Perhaps the Chinese (no offense meant) will just want Alaska (for its resources) to write off all the debt they've bought. Will Japan get Hawaii? How about India? We will have been defeated without anyone firing a shot.
Or, Congress imposes staggering taxes, almost exclusively on the middle class, as they're the ones who make up most of the tax revenue (taking 90% from people like Bill Gates won't amount to squat); and massive spending cuts. This means of course that no one in office will be re-elected; you can guess which choice is more likely.
It isn't matter of being paranoid. No one is "out to get me;" I'm don't delude myself that I'm of sufficient importance.
Greed + dishonesty....

Again, more non-sense, there is no the law that requires banks make any such loans. Banks made loans XY,Z because they were lucrative, hence, why individuals who even qualified for conventional loans were steered towards "sub-prime loans", although, these again were still only a fraction of loans given. Without the creation of "obscure financial instruments and very low interest rates" these type of loans would not be possible. Furthermore, to show a more basic principle as to why that statement makes no sense, "assume banks are forced to make loans" .... where in the law would it say banks must make those loans "sub-prime, or not require verification of income, or .... " I mean the preposition is already false, as there is no such law, but that basic bit of reasoning such asking a very simple question such as asking if I am a bank and I'm told to make loans, wouldn't it stand to reason I want to make loans that are most likely to get my money back? All of this of course is moot in that there doesn't exist any such laws, atleast, none in the form that you are trying to state.

Welfare recipients aren't the problem at all, they are simply not on the radar when it comes to budget, neither is NASA's $15 billion budget, again another fraction of a percentage point. etc ... do a little research on where your tax dollars go please, if you want to complain, that's all I ask. Our budget is nearly 70% comprised of 4 things, military, SS, medicaid medicare, and debt interest.

AGain, more fallacy, in terms of taxes have steadly gone down since the end of WWII, the highest taxable income was at 90% in the 40's, enventual eroding to 70% in the 70's, and stands at what 35% today (but again this is only your highest amount of income, I believe all the money you earn over XXXXXX, as our tax code is staggered, everyone pays the same amount for each portion of income earned. The wealthy have seen a huge drop in what they pay over the years (the highest tax brackets), but overall everyone has. The biggest missing portion of taxes are from corporations although our tax rate is higher than many nations, our effective tax rate on corporations is very low. Anyway, this is going back into idealogical debates and I've already pointed out that these are a waste of time, because, they don't have any base in reality. As I've shown you have gross errors (i mean stuff that's really easy to just look up) already in your argument but that doesn't seem to matter to you.

Finally, the US dominance, is faltering because, the world is simpymore competative, after WWII the US faced very little competition, as the rest of the world rebuilt that competition increased, but here is more important the state means nothing, in an ever shrinking global economy, corporations who are driven by profit do what is best is for profits and share holders, because, "greed is good" right ... no it's good for those with the power, for you, it means nothing. A corporation isn't required to give you a job, isn't required to provide health care, isn't required to do anything but make money for it's share holders. the destruction of manufacturing jobs in the US proved that, which initially started the erosion, because no longer did you have middle income jobs that didn't require years of college education (which means alot of people were left out) .... look at the explosino of crimeafter the 70's as thes esorts of jobs wer elossed .... anyway, I'm digressing again. The bottom line is corporations will do just fine, because, the idea of "the country" simply will matter less as time goes on. the idea of loyalty to a country will mean less.

 

[Onus]

Wrong. Banks were compelled to make a lot of loans in "disadvantaged" areas. They were assured that they would be shielded from high losses.

 

[acadia11]

Again, site documentation, site me this law, that states "there is a law that requires banks to make "SUB-PRIME" Loans in disadvantaged areas" Please, point me to this mythical law, I can already tell you it doesn't exist, but feel free. More over like I said "SUB-PRIME" loans are not purchased by Freddi or FAnnie, this is a complete instrument of banks, banks pushed for loosened fannie and freddie laws because they could sell more loans to those companies, and in turn could tap more potential borrowers, but again this has nothing to do with "SUB-PRIME" lending. Although, banks did get incentives to make loans in some depressed area much like home owners aren't required to pay taxes if they buy a home in area a state is trying to build up.

You are simply talking out of your a$$ at this point, like I said, when you want to have a factual based discussion let's do it, especially, when the research is ready available. P.S. I'll be waiting for you to tell me this mythical sub-prime loan law.

 

[acadia11]

I'll help you out, start with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, if you want to argue your case atleast have a little knowledge about the argument. I'm just tired of discussing things with mindless sheep. Although, banks, covered by CRA actually were less likely to make "sub-prime" loans, the guys covered by CRA or facing more regulator over sight weren't the ones making these loans ... and most sub-primes loans came from institutions that were not covered by CRA, ... but this is all moot as sub-prime lending was not the cause of the crisis, but a simple factor like anything else, there were many factors, but you seem to ignore this fact. Moreover, like I said, sheep on, sheep on, while banks laugh all the way to the bank- so to speak ... "it wasn't us, it was those poor people see ... now give us your money?" Was it the poor people who created S&L? Was it the poor people started the depression too .... LIke the sheep you are jtt283, you eat all hook line and sinker, I hope your bail out money was well spent. Because, I know, I know ... in times of crisis no matter what the society, it's always the poor or the minorities, this seems a recurring theme in history whether it be the US in 2010, Germany in 1929. But, never, the fault of the people who actually have the power and make decisions in these societies. So, naive, my friend, so naive.

 

[GunBladeType-T]

Holy $$$$, prices, are sky rocketing! 80gb Intel SSD g2 drive was 215, in November, it's 300 today on New egg.

I was buying some crucial memory, the price jumped up $30 from saturday, that's 2 days $30 increase on 4gb kit, that's insane.

WTF? I understand supply and demand!!!! But let's demand this sticker shock stop!!!! We are only starting to come out of a recession now!!! They keep hitting my wallet like this, I'm going to do my part so we go right back in!!!

There are different sites for prices take a look on www.nexttag.com and see whats on sale it leads to alot of sites that have discounts and price comaprative shop, you can always find a better deal. www.pricegrabber.com

 

[GunBladeType-T]

Also SSID are faster performance but very expensive! RAM Memory transfer is in The GBps range how do you get hardrives to that speed in raid-0 without going Maybe Cheaper Drives. It looks like you need about 4 to get around 1GPps but than again how much is used at peak bandwith and sustained bandwith

 

[jawn]

inflation. get used to it

 

[jawn]

Look at the prices of games. 60$!!!! remember when it used to be 40?

 

[GunBladeType-T]

60bucks used to be Collector Edition Games not Regular !

 

[GunBladeType-T]

I'm not liberal or conservative. I'm anti-idealogy, because, idealogical debates are pointless. They are rarely grounded in facts, nor logic, but emotion and perception. But to the point, you have to ask specifically, on a subject and I'll tell you what I think of that matter. If anything, I find that idealogs scare me, and to be honest, I'd probably be far more conservative if not for the undercurrent of idealogy that invades the conservative base. It borders on ridiculous and lunacy. About as ridiculous and idiotic as "code pink", except, I'm not worried about code pink stripping me naked, scrawling, anti-government epitaths all over my body and leaving me for dead, they are more likely to try and smother me with hugs and kisses. Equally, as luny, but atleast I'll be alive.

When you look at the World News and Software that lets you play as different world leaders, or as Different American Leaders doing business against the world! I would find more touching base in terms of ideology there are so many different varieties of theology of world leaders, find more solutions in terms of concepts, such as more political parties than liberal, conservative, radical, patriot, republican, federalist, democratic, judical! Take some courses in political science from various persepectives than cut people down, or join a merc force (F.e.a.r. 3 and solve these debates)!

 

[Randomacts]

60bucks used to be Collector Edition Games not Regular !

It still is.

LOL@ console gamer.

Oh and *The 70s or 80s can't remember* games costed $70 if you convert that into today's money that's about $100 pre a game and those games where often alot shorter.

 

[GunBladeType-T]

It still is.

LOL@ console gamer.

Oh and *The 70s or 80s can't remember* games costed $70 if you convert that into today's money that's about $100 pre a game and those games where often alot shorter.

Well thats the conversion of Euro and Pounds!

 

[Randomacts]

Well thats the conversion of Euro and Pounds!

Xbox/ps3 games cost $60

PC/wii games cost $50

Collectors edition often only cost $10 more.

 

[mikegrimlr]

what happended to the good old days when games were 45 bucks a pop? stupid fed pooping out billions in unfunded money. I love how they just took a 600 billion dollar dump too .........not

 

[Reynod]

This topic has been closed by Reynod