Economy and that scary "R" word

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by dmek25

its seems like we disagree all those tax cuts did was try to balance out the ever rising rate of inflation. so now your taxes are a wee bit lower, but your paying more for your actual purchases

I'd rather see higher inflation than higher unemployment. You'd think the democrats, who decry the rich and seem to be the party for the lower and middle class, would get this. But they don't seem to.

Inflation and unemployment go hand in hand. If you're taking steps, like cutting taxes and running a deficit, you're going to end up keeping unemployment nice and low, but you put inflation pressures in place. Sure enough inflation is at 4% right now, and unemployment is real low, below 5%.

Inflation costs me more money. But I'm willing to pay more for my milk and my gasoline if it means more Americans have a chance at jobs, especially the lower and middle class who need the jobs so much. Democrats love to balance the budget and love to bring in tax revenue, but they never acknowledge that these moves put a ton of lower-middle class workers out of work.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by dmek25

wasn't he appointed by the president? and isn't there any meetings or consulting done with the president over the economy? i know that any administration that has any economic issues always went straight to Greenspan. why the difference now? you should know that any CEO is only as good as the people he surrounds himself with

Yeah I guess you're right. It's all Bush's fault.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Asian and Latin American countries don't have the underlying resources and skill sets to continue driving profit from investment. The United States is positioned strategically with natural resources and, despite growth in other nations, still contains the most highly skilled and educated workforce in the world. You're right, investment from overseas investors will not last long, but that is the case because American businesses will invest the cash in new products and markets successfully, driving profits up, driving tax revenues to the government up, driving the deficit down, and ultimately strengthening the dollar. The strengthening dollar is what will curtail overseas investment. That's the cycle that will take place in the US, not a downward spiraling cycle, but the typical business cycle we've observed over the past fourty to fifty years.

There's a reason that US government bonds yield the lowest return of all government bonds in the world. It's the most stable economy on Earth, and hence least risky to invest in.

And while we're mentioning academic credentials, BS in Finance/Economics with a minor in math, and an MBA in finance.

And Schneed wins the thread.

Where'd you get your MBA? I've been looking at doing my MBA in Finance while still working...aw hell, I'll PM you some time.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I wont quibble about NAFTA but this is a prime example of piling on Bush. Bush has nothing, NOTHING, to do with the Federal Reserve and it's policies. The rate cuts are their discretion and frankly the decision makers in the Fed are probably more qualified to make those decisions than any economic advisor any president has had in decades. Bush gives us plenty to get mad about but why do people have to attribute everything to him?

One of the fundamental characteristics of irrational hatred. "Person X did y wrong, therefore everything done thereafter is wrong."

Hey, I think Bill Clinton was the sorriest excuse for a president to ever walk this earth, but I wouldn't argue that every last decision he made in office was wrong.

Unfortunately things in politics get so polarized that people lose their ability to consider each issue rationally, one by one.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

saden is right and schneed is right. tax cuts should be permanent and we need to cut our government spending. alas we haven't one singl politician who is brave enough to make reducing spending happen. not one.

Well there's Ron Paul, but everyone on here concluded he's a "loon" already, so...

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by mheisig

And Schneed wins the thread.

Where'd you get your MBA? I've been looking at doing my MBA in Finance while still working...aw hell, I'll PM you some time.

I was just teasing hooskins, since he was talking about classes he took. I wasn't really trying to have a pissing contest based on academic credentials. Probably came out sounding arrogant, so my bad on that.

But I went to Temple. Here in Philly, you've got your Wharton School at U Penn, which is one of the best in the country obviously. I definitely couldn't have gotten into Wharton, didn't have the grades in college (too much messin around!). Then after that, you've got your Villanova and you've got your Temple. Those are the other two programs in the area that are be considered strong.

I work for Temple Health System, so the tuition was free for me. Worked out well. They still made me apply like anybody else though.

I see you're from "the southeast." If you're in the DC area, Georgetown and George Washington are great programs. I think Maryland, American, and George Mason are good too.

[SmootSmack]

I got my MBA at American...it's a'ight

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I was just teasing hooskins, since he was talking about classes he took. I wasn't really trying to have a pissing contest based on academic credentials. Probably came out sounding arrogant, so my bad on that.

But I went to Temple. Here in Philly, you've got your Wharton School at U Penn, which is one of the best in the country obviously. I definitely couldn't have gotten into Wharton, didn't have the grades in college (too much messin around!). Then after that, you've got your Villanova and you've got your Temple. Those are the other two programs in the area that are be considered strong.

I work for Temple Health System, so the tuition was free for me. Worked out well. They still made me apply like anybody else though.

I see you're from "the southeast." If you're in the DC area, Georgetown and George Washington are great programs. I think Maryland, American, and George Mason are good too.

Southeast is actually Knoxville, TN. The University of Tennessee apparently has a decent MBA program - I think it's somewhere in the top 100 worldwide, and top 25 in the U.S. depending on who you read.

My career is currently more in marketing, and UTK has a marketing concentration for the MBA program, so that would tend to be the logical choice. I find anything finance-related to be absolutely fascinating, however, so that's awfully tempting.

Did any of you do your MBA while maintaining a full-time job? And do you think it's helped at all in your career in terms of compensation or promotion?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by mheisig

Did any of you do your MBA while maintaining a full-time job?

We're on the verge of hijacking, so I'll answer here but will be more than willing to discuss further via PM.

Yes I was working full-time when I went for it. I did two classes each semester, and then one during the first summer session, and one during the second summer session. It amounted to two nights each week of 3-hour classes. With a full-time job, plus the classes, plus the homework, it was pretty intense. But I just burned through it and got it over with in less than two years, that was the plus side.

Originally Posted by mheisig

And do you think it's helped at all in your career in terms of compensation or promotion?

For me, yes. I finished the MBA in 2003 and was immediately promoted from staff financial analyst to senior financial analyst. In 2004 I got moved up to the next level, which required an MBA. Another analyst in my department was good, but remained at his level because he didn't have the MBA. I'm now managing a small group of analysts. Compensation went up accordingly.

The degree really has nothing to do with how good you are at your job. But if an exec has two good people on his hands, and he can only promote one, he'll go with the MBA.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by mheisig

Southeast is actually Knoxville, TN. The University of Tennessee apparently has a decent MBA program - I think it's somewhere in the top 100 worldwide, and top 25 in the U.S. depending on who you read.

My career is currently more in marketing, and UTK has a marketing concentration for the MBA program, so that would tend to be the logical choice. I find anything finance-related to be absolutely fascinating, however, so that's awfully tempting.

Did any of you do your MBA while maintaining a full-time job? And do you think it's helped at all in your career in terms of compensation or promotion?

I worked full-time while pursuing my MBA full-time. It's a challenge but it's not terribly difficult to do.

It has definitely helped me in my career. I got a nice promotion to management this past summer. While I did have a decent level of experience, I have no doubt it was my education that put me over the top and helped me leapfrog people with more experience but less education.