The EV is on fi Don't cut that orange wire

Tegger wrote:

>
> Artificial credit kept World War 1 going for 4 years instead of the 6-
> months that everyone expected. Artificial credit destroyed the very-
> healthy banking system that existed right up until December 1913, which
> is when the Fed law was passed.
>

That statement illustrates the vapid stupidity of your position. Your
claiming that under your system everyone would be so destitute they
couldn't afford to fight a war longer than 6 months.

Not a very convincing argument.

>
> Yep, the government does indeed waste some of your tax dollars, however
> they do indeed provide a lot of infrastructure bits you take for
> granted.

They also provide "infrastructure" bits that are neither productive nor
wanted. Bridges to nowhere, and lots of others. They waste a LOT
of our tax dollars.

"Government" has lost the ability to manage the affairs of the nation
effectively, fairly, and economically. We need some downsizing.

"Tegger" > wrote in message
...
> "hls" > wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "Ashton Crusher" > wrote in message > Maybe not what
>> you are thinking of but where I would start would be to
>>> cutting spending on any "program" that buys "stuff" if that "stuff"
>>> is being made in some OTHER country. So if, for example, we are
>>> buying $60billion worth of land mines from Austria, we stop. Let the
>>> Austrians lose their jobs. You or whoever said it, is right, if we
>>> just "cut spending" without regard to where we cut there will be some
>>> significant negatives, like increased unemployment.
>>
>> I think everybody had good points.
>>
>> Personal debt may have been the big factor that caused the Great
>> Depression. And the theory goes that personal debt rises because
>> too much money is locked into the hands of very few people.
>
>
>
>
> The Great Depression was caused primarily by a severe contraction of the
> inflation of the 1920's.
>

There is more to it than that. My statement on personal debt was not
pulled past a sphincter. It comes from an analysis of the depression
at about that time in history.There is a book on it, if you are interested

jim wrote:
> Tegger wrote:
>> "hls" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> "Tegger" > wrote in message >>
>>>> I smell government employees trying to justify their department's
>>>> existence
>>>> and continued expansion...
>>>>
>>>> Don't cut the orange wire, cut government budgets instead.
>>>> Tegger
>>> I grouse as much as, if not more than, anyone else about the
>>> government's waste of money. But there is also another side....if
>>> they REALLY slowed their spending very much, our sick economy would
>>> get even worse.
>>>
>> That may seem intuitively obvious, but think about where governments get
>> their money from. They /produce/ nothing, remember.
>>
>> They only have three ways of acquiring spending cash:
>> 1) they can take it away from you (taxes);
>> 2) they can borrow it from somebody else (debt);
>> 3) they can invent it from scratch (new money).
>>
>> 1) If they take it away from you, then they're just moving money from
>> one place to another. To the extent the recipient is richer, you are
>> poorer. The dollar /you/ would have spent simply gets spent by /somebody
>> else/ instead.
>
> The problem is after the crash of 2008 nobody was inclined to spend
> anything.
> Without the massive US government spending
> there would have been another Hoover depression.
>
> Personally, I would vote for a deep depression.
> The western world needs to be knocked on its ass
> because it has lost track of where its ass is
>
> But you are going to have a hard time convincing
> the majority and get them to vote for that.
>
>
>> 2) If they borrow it from somebody else, it needs to get paid back. Plus
>> they're paying interest on the borrowing. And it's not like they ever
>> borrow and spend just the once, they keep on borrowing so they can keep
>> on spending. The debt mounts, and they ultimately end up needing to use
>> #1 or #3.
>
> The real problem is not government and its debt.
> The government debt is small compared to private debt.
> Private debt has grown exponentially in the last 20 years.
> Government debt has in the past been higher than it is now
> but private debts has never been even close to this high
>
> The value of private debt of western nations
> is several times their GDP and in comparison
> government debt seems puny
>
>
>> 3) If they invent it from scratch, they damage the cash that's already
>> in the system. The economy remains exactly the same size, but all that
>> new cash still has to fit inside it. This means that every dollar has to
>> get a lot skinnier so they'll all fit into the same-size economy. It's
>> called inflation, and you're the one most hurt, because you spend the
>> dollar LAST.
>
> If the world's assets and wealth grow, but the money supply stays
> constant
> then what do you have?
>
> The answer is the people who hold money increase in power
> and the people who produce goods and labor
> will work their butts off for little or nothing in return
>
> Increasing the money supply as the economy grows is a given
> unless you want to return to middle age feudalism
>
>
>> I know the Keynesians talk about the "multiplier effect", but that's
>> pure bull****, and stands up not at all to any sort of rational
>> thinking.
>
> So what rational suggestions have you made?
> You have proposed nothing rational
> you are just parroting somebody else's babble
> that you don't even begin to comprehend
>
> The US voting public is not very bright
> but they have a pretty good sense that the libertarians
> would lead them where they don't want to go.
>
>
> -jim
>
>> Friedman was right: "stimulus" does in fact spur the economy. But only
>> in the short term. In the long term, "stimulus" always causes
>> distortions and bubbles. Then it makes politicians afraid to be at the
>> helm when the bubble bursts, so they do everything possible to keep the
>> bubble inflated as long as possible.
>
>
>
>> But that's not the worst part : The worst part is that they then
>> consider the /maximum-inflated/ size of the bubble to be the /baseline/.
>> ANY reduction from the baseline is "contraction", or "deflation", or a
>> "slow economy", and is really, really bad. The max-inflated bubble size
>> becomes the baseline that must be maintained no matter how many new
>> bubbles or distortions they create in the process. That, in a nutshell,
>> is the situation today in the US. It's the cause of the Japanese
>> deflationary malaise.
>
>
>> Government spending does serious damage to the economy in general, and
>> it must be kept at an absolute minimum. But we're many leagues away from
>> that absolute minimum these days, which is /precisely/ why we've got
>> that "sick economy".
>>
>> Economies do best when governments do least.
>>
>> --
>> Tegger


jim wrote:
"The US voting public is not very bright
but they have a pretty good sense that the libertarians
would lead them where they don't want to go."

Don't be so sure. See you in 2012.


--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

"AMuzi" > wrote in message news:ihvd70
> jim wrote:
> "The US voting public is not very bright
> but they have a pretty good sense that the libertarians
> would lead them where they don't want to go."
>
> Don't be so sure. See you in 2012.

Both major parties got a little bit of a surprise in November, 2010.
The surprise CAN get worse for them both.

AMuzi wrote:


> jim wrote:
> "The US voting public is not very bright
> but they have a pretty good sense that the libertarians
> would lead them where they don't want to go."
>
> Don't be so sure. See you in 2012.
>

What's going to happen in 2012?
Will the libertarians win?
Will we dump the Federal reserve and the FDA and the DEA and the EPA?
Will we balance the budget and close down all the foreign military
bases?

Sure and pigs will be flying all over too.

ben91932 wrote:
> On Jan 24, 6:56 pm, bob urz > wrote:
>> http://eetweb.com/applications/EV_fi...111/index.html
>>
>> bob
>
> +So...correct me if I'm wrong, but arent first responders equipped
> with insulated cable cutters?
> Seems like quickly breaking the high voltage circuit would make things
> safer..
> Ben

Not usually. We cut the battery cables as a last resort. I like to just
pull the connector if possible. But it depends on the damage.
In the case of an EV you don't want to cut the cable because then you
have a high voltage source out in the open. Not a good thing. Also if
the vehicle is a hybrid you could have fuel leakage. Ever see the spark
that a high voltage cable causes when it grounds out?



--
Steve W.
(\___/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

"hls" > wrote in
:

>
> "Tegger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "hls" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> "Ashton Crusher" > wrote in message > Maybe not what
>>> you are thinking of but where I would start would be to
>>>> cutting spending on any "program" that buys "stuff" if that "stuff"
>>>> is being made in some OTHER country. So if, for example, we are
>>>> buying $60billion worth of land mines from Austria, we stop. Let
>>>> the Austrians lose their jobs. You or whoever said it, is right,
>>>> if we just "cut spending" without regard to where we cut there will
>>>> be some significant negatives, like increased unemployment.
>>>
>>> I think everybody had good points.
>>>
>>> Personal debt may have been the big factor that caused the Great
>>> Depression. And the theory goes that personal debt rises because
>>> too much money is locked into the hands of very few people.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The Great Depression was caused primarily by a severe contraction of
>> the inflation of the 1920's.
>>
>
> There is more to it than that.



Yes, but that was the gist of it. Plus Hoover's and FDR's appalling and
repeated mistakes.



> My statement on personal debt was not pulled past a sphincter.



You cannot have excessive debt without someone to lend it. You cannot
have excessive lending unless somebody's been insulated from the risk,
and/or has been /ordered/ to lend. There's your personal debt, in a
nutshell.

Everybody has always wanted credit so as to be able to live beyond their
means. That is NOT new in history. What IS new is the modern obsession
with cheap and abundant credit.

Excessive credit, and the mandates to lend, can only come from one
place. Guess what that place is?



> It comes from an analysis of the depression
> at about that time in history.There is a book on it, if you are
> interested
>
>


There are several for you too, if you are interested:

"The Bubble that Broke the World", by Garet Garrett.

"America's Great Depression, by Murray Rothbard.

Also good is "The Forgotten Man", by Amity Shlaes. Although her book
has, to me, a fatal flaw in that she begins in 1929, not in 1913.

I also recommend extensive and long-term reading of The Wall Street
Journal, Forbes, Reason magazine, and the various leftish publications.
Tons of tiny historical tidbits tend to get revealed here and there over
the years.

--
Tegger

On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 22:36:19 -0500, "Steve W." >
wrote:

>Ashton Crusher wrote:
>>
>> I'm not surprised. At the state level our safety people (don't know
>> if they dreamed it up or it was some new regulation) said we had to
>> replace ALL hard hats every two years and the interior suspension
>> every one year. To have a couple guys climb over a guardrail and do a
>> little work on a slope they wanted us to spend $32,000 on a "safety
>> class" that would teach them to be safe on unstable ground. We had to
>> spend $4000 with a hazardous waste company to dispose of 50 pounds of
>> zeolite, which had been tested for asbestos and came back clean just
>> because "maybe your sample missed the asbestos". The whole safety
>> culture has gone well past the point of absurdity.
>
>
>Sounds like the law in NY requiring ALL Firefighters to have a bail out
>rope kit. The law was put in place after some NYFD guys got trapped in a
>building and couldn't get out.
>
>At the time NYFD didn't "require" the crews to have bail out ropes, it
>was STRONGLY encouraged though. This crew didn't bother.
>The result ALL firefighters have to have the ropes or you're in
>violation of OSHA. The kicker, any department that serves a population
>over 1 million is exempt from the law!!!! Care to guess how many people
>live in NYFD jurisdiction... So the people who pushed for the law and
>rammed it through the legislature are exempt from it.
>
>The law has a few things that does allow for exemptions IF you're SOP is
>written a certain way or you don't EVER send someone in the building you
>can get around it.
>BUT if you have interior training you have to have a rope, doesn't
>matter what your current job is either. For instance if you're on scene
>and directing traffic but could possibly be put into the fire then you
>need a rope.
>
>The ropes - 50 feet of special NFPA rope, Carabiner, Descent device,
>belt or harness = About $500.00 each.
>For a device that will likely NEVER be used. You also need a second one
>that is used ONLY for training. the one you carry is a one time use item!

That summarizes gvt stupidity in a nutshell.