Posts by briskdrifter3

Charles Ramos7 said:To me, this just proves how many people were taking out loans they couldn't actually afford.

All I know is that those living in the former territories—you know, the old Soviet-bloc style regions—always ended up getting screwed over... forget all those fancy theories coming out of North America... let them deal with being the tenants...

William Richardson2 said:It's interesting how you have this constant need to blame everyone else for everything—usually the banks. So, let me get this straight: you aren't saving because you *have* to take out a mortgage instead... But suddenly, you've realized (whether it was you or someone else, doesn't matter) that you could actually be saving, yet now it's all the banks' fault for making it difficult. 🙄

You have literally hundreds of different financial instruments and savings options available to you—claiming it's "impossible" to save because of what was mentioned above is absolutely ridiculous.
If you want to save, you find a way to save. If you don't, you'll just blame everyone else and invent a hundred different excuses for why you can't. ☕

By all means, enlighten me... name just one of those hundred ways or types of savings that doesn't involve the stock market. I am genuinely curious.

driftingtinker said:So you’re basically using all that as an excuse to say that in this absolute circus of an economy, there’s no point in being frugal... I guess you think it’s just common sense to take out a thirty-year mortgage on some house, even though nobody has a clue if things will even be standing next month, let alone a decade from now.

Look, try viewing it from the other side. It is precisely because the situation is so volatile that it makes more sense to buy a home via a mortgage right now, rather than trying to save up for twenty years just to finally afford one.
Just ask the people who kept their money in those local savings banks back in the 90s... or ask those who used credit unions during the late 90s bubble... or even ask me—I've had money sitting in Chase Bank since last year—though, fortunately, I had government-backed insurance, so I managed to recover about 95% of my deposit. And don't even get me started on the financial gymnastics... the constant currency shifts, moving from different denominations to the Dollar... through every single conversion, the average American gets absolutely fleeced. Just ask anyone around you how much actual value they lost. Even the transition to the current standard wiped out a massive chunk of what people thought was real savings.
It turns out that in the last 22 years, there hasn't been a single ten-year stretch where your savings were left alone by financial tremors—whether they were global meltdowns or local collapses.
By your logic, someone who started saving 25 years ago—back in 1987—should theoretically have enough cash right now to buy a house outright without a loan. Does such a person exist?! Can you give me one example? JUST ONE? And please, don't count the private criminals who built wealth through tax evasion and theft... I mean a regular person, a worker at some standard firm.
Interest rates keep dropping lower and lower, and I see absolutely no upside to long-term saving when we are almost certainly going to be hit by at least one more major financial crisis in the next 20 years that will devalue everything we've put aside. I’m not advocating for reckless spending, I am simply... fearful, for myself and for my family. Our pensions will end up being a joke—given how pension funds are managed, losing money instead of actually growing it—and our savings will be gutted, leaving us essentially destitute.

driftingtinker said:So what, because interest rates suck, we should just go out and blow our cash instead of saving?

Look, I am simply observing that interest rates are low... I am certainly not advocating for mindless spending—quite the opposite, actually—I am trying to determine the most prudent way to save, but unfortunately, it seems that across all the major banks, savings rates are embarrassingly meager. When one actually sits down to run the numbers, it becomes clear that I am essentially losing money.
And things are likely to get even worse:

The moment there is talk about negative interest rates, it means they are well on their way to implementation. The article mentions that the Federal Reserve has seen rates hit -2%. Of course, that applies to commercial banks rather than individual citizens, but the momentum is already there. The banks will eventually force us to spend because keeping money in savings simply won't pay off anymore. Just take a look at your own checking accounts; you are already seeing a NEGATIVE yield because those various service fees and "account package" charges are significantly higher than any interest earned on a balance comparable to what a typical American worker earns. Between my two accounts over at JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo, I am losing money just by being a customer... the fees alone are enough to kill any potential gains.

As for this whole "love is all you need" sentiment... you might want to take that advice elsewhere—perhaps hang it on a hook in the hallway. The reality is that banks offer savings rates that barely scratch the surface of actual inflation, if they even manage to keep pace at all.

Alexander Thompson said:Personally, I’m pretty much done with the geniuses who seem to think it’s the bank's moral obligation to provide housing for them and their kids ☕...

As if someone else should just pick up the tab for those loans....

And don't worry about the evictions—that part is easy enough to coordinate. I guess Bancin's job is just to offer the loan, yours is to actually read the fine print before signing, and then some other crew comes along to toss you and your goldfish out on the curb. Everyone just plays their part, I suppose...

And then there are the other geniuses—the ones who think it’s perfectly fine to slaughter the chicken just to get one golden egg. They can act surprised when, after driving thousands of citizens—and even worse, thousands of businesses—straight into bankruptcy, the banks wonder why nobody wants to take out loans anymore or why business has completely dried up.

If we actually had a functional system in place, news like this would result in the banks collapsing rather than ordinary people ending up out on the street... It’s the institutions themselves—those executives sitting in high-rise offices—who bear the brunt of the blame. They hand out loans without a second thought regarding repayment, which seems to be the standard practice lately. Their entire purpose—the very reason they spent years studying at places like Wharton or Harvard—is to forecast the global economic landscape and decide whether to deploy capital or pull back. But instead, because of their sheer incompetence, arrogance, and blatant greed, it’s the everyday Americans who took out those loans who pay the price. And what’s truly infuriating? Those same bureaucrats will likely walk away with even larger bonuses, facing absolutely zero consequences for the mess they've made.

Charles Ramos7 said:I was talking about the banks. About 20% has been paid off, and since they're selling loan portfolios at 50 cents on the dollar, only about 30% is actually uncollectible.

If Linić hadn't introduced that real estate tax, buying up property right now might actually make sense.🤷

Are you planning on throwing families—people with actual children—out onto the streets? Because there are thousands of them out there... just waiting for a break. And how exactly do you intend to explain that to a five-year-old? "Look, kid, your old man was just being a greedy idiot when he signed those mortgage papers, so now you have to leave your bedroom behind. Take your teddy bear if you want..." It’s just... well, it's beyond absurd.

Look, if you’re going to stand there spilling nonsense about contracts, banking regulations, profit margins, and the sheer depth of human stupidity—then honestly... just keep it to yourself.

My suitcase is practically overflowing with nothing but excuses from the banks—just endless, hollow justifications for their blatant highway robbery...

This is nothing short of a blatant shakedown... an absolute slap in the face.
I can already see where this is heading—utility rates are going to skyrocket by at least 100% once they implement this "revised billing structure" nonsense and other similar bureaucratic garbage.
Essentially, we’ll all just be paying a premium for even less power than we have now.

The Holodomor unfolded in three distinct waves—1921-22, 1932-33, and finally 1946-47. The peak of the devastation occurred during that middle period in 1933... truly horrific. When you look at the total death toll across Ukraine and even the surrounding regions where Ukrainians made up as much as 60% of the population—take the Kuban Oblast, for instance—estimates range anywhere from 7 to a staggering 13.5 million people. If you examine the census data from 1939 compared to 1926 (I believe it was the '26 census...), the number of Ukrainians had plummeted by 25%!!! Meanwhile, every other ethnic group saw positive growth, which makes it quite clear there wasn't a general famine occurring throughout the rest of the country. This was a targeted genocide through starvation.
The underlying motive was quite simple, really: the Ukrainians possessed an intense national consciousness, bolstered by a robust intellectual elite and a culture deeply rooted in the Ukrainian language. The Ukrainian peasantry served as the backbone of this nationalism—and their drive for independence—so they had to be either eliminated or psychologically broken... and intentional starvation was the most efficient method to achieve that.
If you were to ask any Ukrainian survivor which was more terrifying—famine or war—you would receive a unanimous response... hunger.
Compared to those who endured the Holodomor, World War II was little more than a mere cough. You can find testimonies online where a woman who survived Auschwitz recounts that she actually ate better in the concentration camp than she did back in 1933!!!

Everyone seems to have an opinion on where to cut the budget, but let’s be honest—it’s a pipe dream... we can't just slash everything and hope for the best. My philosophy? Incentives. Plain and simple. I’d advocate for giving every manufacturing firm a total VAT exemption—or at least a massive reduction down to 5%—to actually get things moving. Since we don't exactly have a massive industrial base here in the States yet, we wouldn't face an immediate hole in the US Federal Budget; after all, the tax revenue mostly flows from the big retailers anyway. I’d also push for eliminating customs duties and sales tax on imports of all primary raw materials—think timber logs, steel, polymer granules, and the like. And why not make utility hookups for electricity and water free? (Which is precisely why companies like Duke Energy and h voda should remain under state control...) Oh, and let's not forget making building permits and other regulatory hurdles non-existent for any greenfield manufacturing investments. We need to totally strip away restrictions on financial transactions too—so that services like PayPal finally work without all the endless friction—and waive taxes on all IT hardware.
Incentives are the actual solution, rather than just stripping away existing benefits or trying to cut through red tape...

Emily Fox2 said:🙂
The government would actually bring in more revenue if they just sold those companies off and lived off the profits instead of running them like this. Or maybe they wouldn't. 🤷
As it stands, you can't help but wonder if the state is just keeping them to hand out jobs to cronies and secure votes.

Go ahead—give me one example of a nation where every single strategic industry is handed over to foreign capital without the whole thing turning into a complete circus.
Granting foreign interests a monopoly over oil, water, electricity, and transportation is essentially national suicide. We’ve already sold off our banks, and now we’re dealing with the fallout—sky-high interest rates and a White House that's effectively toothless in that sector. We handed our oil interests over to the Canadians, and once they achieve total control, we'll see the fallout there too, via crippling raw material costs—something we're already witnessing with General Mills and Dow Chemical. If we sell off the power grid, the highways, and the water supply... well, at that point, we barely have a sovereign nation left.

Thomas Ortiz3 said:It sounds easy enough to say people want to leave, but you have to ask why anyone would hire our local crews when they can get Romanian workers much cheaper. Sure, in Germany it might end up being more expensive than here, but I doubt there's much left after you factor in housing, food, and travel back to America. High-skilled professionals are driven by ambition—and money, since making it at home is nearly impossible—but for low-skilled labor, it’s almost always just about the paycheck. Those golden days of guest workers are long gone...

That’s not quite right.
I have a brother-in-law working on a construction site in Germany at the moment. He left because he was absolutely fed up with our employers—the constant failure to pay on time is a chronic issue in the construction industry here. In America, your average builder might actually manage to collect maybe 70% of what they’re owed, and even then, it comes with delays stretching over a year. There were times he’d be waiting four months just to see any cash at all... he actually had to borrow money just to cover his rent and basic groceries. You couldn't dream of supporting a family with that kind of cash flow. In Germany, it’s a different story; the money hits the account regularly, and for a skilled tradesman like him, it's two to four times what he'd make here, naturally. The catch is that European immigration policy is far stricter than it was 30 or 40 years ago. You can work for a maximum of nine months straight before needing at least a three-month break, and you must be tied to a firm—either theirs or ours—that has a contract established there. Since most builders don't speak German, of course, they are essentially forced to go through our private construction firms; you need a connection in those companies because the interest is massive. It isn't as simple as knowing how to install drywall and just buying a plane ticket. It's a huge barrier that will only vanish once the transition period following EU entry is fully settled.
The whole argument about Romanians and Bulgarians doesn't hold water. Everyone knows exactly who does what and how they are perceived, as people from all sorts of countries have been migrating to Germany for years. It isn't just Romanians or Bulgarians arriving; that’s nothing new. A German employer will always—and I mean ALWAYS—prefer to hire a worker from the former America—especially Americans or Canadians—over Romanians, Bulgarians, or Turks, who are mostly used as low-paid auxiliary labor. That has been the reality for a long time, and experience proves it. Just ask any construction worker.
Once you strip away the bureaucratic hurdles, you'll see we'll be left without craftsmen for any meaningful construction work, and for a very simple reason. As a builder, you're already out in the field, separated from your family anyway, so it really doesn't matter if you're 124 miles or 622 miles from home (since you aren't coming back every night regardless). If you're single, the logic holds even more. No one is going to slave away here for a few thousand Kuna—which you might not even see for six months—when you can grab 1,000 to 1,500 Euros right off the bat in Germany.
Just think back to this thread in ten years, when you'll want someone to hang some drywall in an apartment and won't be able to find a soul who knows how to do it (except perhaps for some drunk handyman who claims he can fix everything). Not to mention the impossibility of finding crews capable of actual building construction.
Even now, America is facing a shortage of qualified professionals across almost every sector (just look at the idiots occupying various jobs around you), and it’s going to get much, much worse because people always migrate toward better opportunities—especially those who actually possess skills.

I won't even attempt to imagine what America will look like in 10 or 20 years. Just a mass of fools living off the budget, wondering, like a bunch of clueless tourists, where all the money went...

Jerry Clark72 said:I’m not exactly convinced that only the highly skilled folks are going to be heading out.

A buddy of mine used to pull shifts on a construction site just as a general laborer, making about $15 an hour.

The company was owned by some local guys, so the whole crew was basically all Americans. If the process for moving to Germany were actually made that easy, way more people would be packing their bags to go work there.

That’s the truth of it; I have friends in construction myself. Everyone would jump at the chance if the paperwork weren't such a nightmare. Who in their right mind wants to toil away for pennies all day on a job site? It isn't as simple as just showing up, either—you can't just wander onto a site; someone—some firm—has to officially call you out there.

A crucial factor here—if you happen to be highly skilled—is that your family can tag along without needing to grasp a word of German. Personally, I wouldn't be able to handle being separated from them...

Gerald Chavez7 said:I've already done a little digging into this. 😁

here is the link to the RWR card

You can rack up a decent amount of points; interestingly enough, you're required to know either English OR German...

I have been studying the RWR card quite closely. I currently sit at 71 points, which places me in the highly qualified category—it certainly gave me pause for thought. I am fluent in English, naturally, but my German would likely require a quick refresher through some sort of intensive conversation course...

Thomas Ortiz3 said:Smart, skilled professionals now have the freedom to move elsewhere—if not within the European Union, then perhaps to Canada or Australia... many who had the means and the desire have already left. Meanwhile, European nations facing labor shortages, like Germany or Austria, are actively easing immigration paths for the talent they need. Austria is even rolling out its "RWR card," which essentially gives any educated professional a shot at settling down and finding work there.
So, I don't expect joining the European Union to fundamentally change the brain drain situation. It will likely impact those with fewer qualifications more significantly, though they often harbor a rather distorted view of how much prosperity actually exists within the European Union...
There will certainly be some migration, but I doubt it will be anything transformative...
The Polish, for instance, headed out in droves—mostly to Ireland and the United Kingdom—though we're starting to see them head back home in significant numbers.

Migration is inevitable because we are, by tradition, an emigrant nation. Once the final hurdles are cleared—that is, once it becomes as simple as buying a bus ticket or hopping on a bicycle—then the exodus will truly explode. Even now, leaving isn't easy, especially if you're trying to move an entire family with children in tow. Sorting out work permits involves an exhausting amount of paperwork. It also tends to deter potential employers, who simply don't want the headache of dealing with immigrants.
As for the whole "honey and milk" idea, I know for a fact that groceries are cheaper across Europe, clothing and shoes are cheaper, and consumer electronics are cheaper... basically, you can eat better, dress better, and furnish an apartment much more easily than we can here. That is a plain reality, stemming from the fact that we produce nothing of our own.
The only things that are pricier are housing and land—though even that is manageable through a functional rental market, unlike our situation where the only reliable option seems to be taking out a massive mortgage. The alternative is being an off-the-books renter, living in constant fear that your landlord might marry off his son and toss you onto the street with fifteen days' notice.
So, I am genuinely curious what would stop a twenty-something with a high school diploma or a college degree from at least giving it a shot abroad—I'm just saying, *trying*—and if every third person actually succeeds in finding steady work, we'll still be in a crisis. There won't be enough workers to plug the budget holes we're already struggling with, even without the emigration.
It only takes a little... just a tiny bit.

Jeremy Castillo7 said:I think we’re a bit too hard on ourselves sometimes. Speaking from my own experience—having worked with folks from both the West and the Far East—our people are more than capable of holding their own. In fact, they’re often left staring in disbelief at how much we can actually pull off under pressure. It probably comes down to the fact that around here, you have to be resourceful just to survive, whereas over there, everything is so structured that they rarely ever have to improvise.
The issue isn't a lack of talent or competence; the real headache is the systemic organization and management. We're talking about failures at the high-level executive tier, not at the actual workstation.
If you’re a sharp individual with the right skills and experience, you’ll find work. Of course, being a highly trained specialist is a prerequisite, and if you've got those credentials, doors open everywhere. I mean, where else are you going to go to find a turnkey expert? No matter what you pay them, you're getting a bargain.
Our massive problem, however, is that given the current state of our economy, fewer and fewer people are getting the chance to actually "learn the ropes." Even without the whole brain drain phenomenon, we're still losing ground.

I agree—anyone who managed to survive in this swamp of a country isn't just a specialist, they're practically a superhero. As a nation, we underestimate ourselves far too much in certain areas. I'd argue there's no one in Europe quite like us when it comes to improvising and working within tight constraints and limited resources... which is an invaluable skill set for any field operative. On the flip side, organized systems feel completely foreign to us—a direct consequence of living in regions marked by constant warfare and shifting borders. My grandfather was born in the Kingdom of America, my father in the NDH, I grew up in socialist America, my daughter was born in America, and if God wills it, my grandkids will surely be born in some tenth different state.
And then someone has the nerve to talk about a "well-ordered state"? Honestly, once things finally get organized, they fall apart!!! It'll be the same story with this America.

Ryan Gomez4 said:I’m not worried about the brain drain from the European Union; I’m actually worried about all those people from the European Union moving here. Just the other day, I was chatting with some colleagues about how once we join the European Union, foreign engineers will be the ones handling all the major projects, while we'll be lucky if we even land a job near the construction site.

The real issue, though, is that they don't even have enough engineers left to cover their own domestic needs, let alone have any surplus to send over to America.

Larry Williams5 said:Any serious assessment must take into account the demographic trends within immigration-destination countries:
For instance: According to the Eurostat population projection tool, looking specifically at the 20-24 age bracket, we see the following:

SEX: Total AGE: From 20 to 24 years
TIME GEO 2010 2015 2020
Bulgaria 516,606 413,395 314,216
Czech Republic 700,740 653,331 506,140
Poland 2,957,225 2,536,915 2,042,583
Romania 1,725,796 1,262,653 1,106,628
Slovakia 419,859 373,504 298,201

By 2020, these nations have been effectively hollowed out; there simply aren't enough young people left to replace the local workforce as they retire.

Conversely, in the countries receiving immigrants, the influx of new labor into the market is steadily declining:
If immigration were to cease entirely, the 20-24 age demographic would look like this:

AGE: From 20 to 24 years
SEX: Total
TIME 2010 2020
GEO
European union 31,871,673 26,131,294
Germany 4,934,457 3,955,921
Spain 2,619,904 2,108,488
Austria 520,986 443,761
Canada 132,119 93,595
Sweden 605,453 496,054
United Kingdom 4,305,902 3,577,258
Switzerland 470,871 416,567

The bottom line is that the demand for settlement will be massive, even if not a single new job is ever created.

That is precisely the case. It isn't just that jobs won't decrease—rather, the needs across Europe will actually expand, though certainly not uniformly across all sectors. The economy is fundamentally broken... my colleague Linda Johnson15 serves as a perfect illustration here. Europe is absolutely saturated with economists and various types of managers. Young people seem quite fond of sketching out charts and wearing expensive suits, but unfortunately, a corporation doesn't consist solely of upper management and sales departments... and everything cannot simply be outsourced..
On the other hand, there is a glaring deficit of technical expertise in virtually every field. Some might argue that we simply cannot compete with the Chinese or Indians, but they are gravely mistaken. Anyone who has worked directly with them—as I have, within my own firm, dealing with both groups—understands there is zero chance they can ever compete with a European in roles requiring genuine expertise and inventiveness. Sure, they are inexpensive, but cultural and historical traditions have molded the Chinese into obedient, uninspired workers, while the Indians have become a mass of lazy individuals with degrees... My company actually shuttered its office in India, not because of the cost, but because of the staggering expenses required to fix the blunders they committed. They were useful only for mindless copying and pasting—and even then, they were incredibly lazy..