utabintarbo
-
Posts
252 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by utabintarbo
-
-
My username is 'Manoftwistsandturns'. If there are enough serious people interested, I'd like to start an investment group as well in order to compete.
I'd be interested.
Can shorts/options/etc. be done on up/down?
-
*In other words -- why does a philosophy that rails against everything cults teach have people who actually treat it like a cult? That's not an insult to the philosophy, just certain people who claim to practice it.
This is hardly the fault of the philosophy, but rather those that look for a cult within the philosophy.
One would think it obvious that the actions of a few individuals that label themselves as "Brand X" do not necessarily impugn all adherents of "Brand X". That would be collectivist thinking, no?
-
...You should not be so quick to shut down every Republican you see or hear in an attempt to even the score with the people who criticize your Obama you enjoy defending poorly.
Such is the burden of an acolyte. He has no other choice.
-
There's some fodder for a new NY Post cartoon.
Too late. We are already living that cartoon.
-
Does the Rand Method imply making BS and baseless accusations and expecting someone to defend them? Why do you spend 75% of your disposable income on chocolate sundaes, fletch?
Well, you would think it would imply that if an on-topic question is asked, that it should be met with an answer, and not equivocations and ad hominem. Not that anybody really expected you to answer....
On-topic: Given the level of Democrat control in Congress, I would submit that any strongly right-wing Republican would be better, so as to establish gridlock. The economy needs the government to step back and let things fall where they may. This would be politically unpopular, and could probably only happen in a divided government (thereby allowing one side to blame the other).
And yes, I realize this is strongly antithetical to Objectivist reasoning on contemporary US politics. But I think it is defensible nonetheless, in so far as economic issues are concerned.
-
GM has negative equity of $86 billion, which I understand far exceeds all of the dividends it has paid to shareholders since the inception of the company. In short, the business has not generated a net economic profit over its long history.
Epic Fail. And now they beg for more money to flush.
No soup for you, GM. To bankruptcy you go!
-
I think people somehow have figured they'll have their entire mortgage paid off by the government. $8000 might be a year or two's worth of monthly payments, but it's hardly a substitute for people having jobs that enable them to make the payments themselves. Some of the people just need A job, but others are just in homes they can't afford and never could afford. $8000 is only going to put off the inevitable for them.
It is the triumph of form over substance. There are literally trillions of dollars that have gone away as a result of the deflation in housing prices. Throwing $75B at it is like trying to sink a battleship with a slingshot. But it looks like "change", and is designed to give all those upside-down homeowners "hope". Good fscking luck with that.
-
So, $8333 for each of 9 million people = about $75,000,000,000. What is that $8333 per household actually going to accomplish? Why hasn't anyone done the math?
Some have, but nobody listens.
-
...
The particulars are guesses in some cases...but if things were to get much much worse than they are now...would that be enough for American's come the next election where they will demand capitalism and a dramatic reduction in the size and scope of Government intervention into the economy? Or do you think that it's dangerous to juggle such sharp knives? Is a slow decay and a possible slow recovery, or a quick decline followed by a rapid change in direction better?
Given the current philosophical/cultural base of the country, it is more likely they will demand either a slight easing of the descent to socialism (a la Reaganism), or (IMO, more likely) a complete cradle-to-grave safety blanket and the concomitant economic stagnation rather than freedom and uncertainty. Personal responsibility has seemingly been bred out of all but those over ~50 yrs. old.
I hope I'm wrong.
-
didn't he say like 3 days ago he was going to half the deficit by 2013? i think he is moving in the wrong direction to do so.
That's his plan... Blow the deficit up, then cut it in half. Which would still leave it almost twice Bush's biggest deficit. He'll increase the national debt by 60% in 3 years, and still blame it all on Bush.
-
I realize that. My question is: what is your original avatar? It's still creepy and would scare the Detroit Lions silly.
It is actually a graphic off of a cake of fireworks. You can see it on top there.
I quite agree. But as I can't make it about Football I'm afraid I have to call an off-topic penalty, five yards.Hey, you brought it up!
-
BTW what the hell is your avatar? I know it's been Obamafied, but what was it before? It's creepy. It would be great for one of the more mediocre franchises to wear on their helmets to intimidate opponents (and scare children). For the Saints, say, or the Jets.
It's the obamafication of my usual avatar. I thought the "OBEY" would be especially apropos on this forum, don't you?
-
-
But don't they all use census data to determine where the lines are drawn?
Yes, they do that at the state level (rather than at the national level), hence my point.
-
It looks increasingly likely. Insolvent banks ought to have gone into bankruptcy. However, if we have the choice of the government de facto running zombie banks versus the government openly running those banks, then we're between the devil and the deep blue sea. If done right, nationalization can be the preferable poison.
This merely postpones the inevitable. Better to take our economic medicine fast and hard than draw it out, only to have a larger dose forced upon us later.
Bad debts need to be forced out into the open and written off. Nationalization will merely allow them to be hidden and serviced by the government (read: you and I) until the inevitable capitulation is forced upon us all (rather than "just" the shareholders/creditors of the insolvent bank). This will likely result in Weimar-style monetization of the debt and epic inflation. Let's not go there.
-
I say four years. I think most Americans already realize how awful he is and will certainly feel the same in four years. (Just like Jimmy Carter.) Then they will proceed to vote in a Republican that's just as bad. Back and forth, back and forth, getting worse each time. (Isn't that already the pattern?)
Of course, if they succeed with controlling the Census Bureau then perhaps he can gerrymander his way into a second term. Or he could just go Chavez style with more corruption and voter fraud (see ACORN, which just got "stimulated"), eventually leading to a third term.
Not to be overly pedantic here, but AFAIK, gerrymandering can really only take place at the state level, and can only really affect the Legislature/Congress. As the electoral college is by state, it would seem the best he can do is possibly add a very few* undeserved seats to "blue" states. While this might come into play in a very tight election, I think the depth of the coming disaster we face will make a tight election highly unlikely. More probable that he gets ousted/re-elected by near-acclimation.
* I say "very few" due to the numbers of humanoids involved in defrauding the states out of rightful numbers. Conspiracies (not in the tin-foil hat sense) are successful in inverse proportion to the number of conspirators. States are often allocated funds by population, and the "losers" will raise a huge ruckus, and that will serve to expose any political "maneuvering" to cheat the states of their "rightful" allocation.
-
Alternative energy sources are, I think,
and there is that direction which will deduce the world from crisis.
The epoch of oil and gas monopolies will end.
Eh?
-
http://fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/
Apparently, the Foundation for Economic Education has a special edition available in PDF format.
Read this book.
-
By that you mean that their conclusions were the total opposite of your conclusions. How do we know that their conclusions are "totally backwards", and yours are right? Give a few specific examples of both your and their conclusions, and let us decide.
If we decide against you, I'm sure you'll add us to the long list of Objectivists who are applying their principles the wrong way. Nevertheless...
<crickets chirping>
Mammon?
-
I think, in addition to all that is being done to positively promote Objectivism, that an effort to impeach harmful competing popular philosophies (read: Pragmatism) may be in order.
Right now, being "pragmatic" is in vogue. Everyone wants to be pragmatic. Our Supreme High Commander is all about pragmatism. "Pragmatic" is used as a compliment. I'm sure that in large part, the common usage is as a classier (sic) synonym for "practical", and that the larger (and more sinister) implications are lost on the average guy. This is where we need to concentrate some effort.
By de-legitimizing Pragmatism, we would effectively blunt the sword being held to our political throats. No longer would politicians be able to substitute the word "pragmatic" for a discussion of the principles behind their argument. They would be forced to lay the truth out for all to see. This may not change the ultimate outcome, but I submit that it may make some proponents of Pragmatic Politics just a little uneasy.
In short. we must hammer the point that Pragmatism is Politics stripped of ethics. This may not sell Objectivism, but making it difficult to sell a competitor can't hurt.
-
...
I certainly don't want to jump to any conclusions about your relationships, but if I were your partner and read what you posted, I would be hurt, angry and sad. If you are unhappy with the person that is supposed to reflect your highest values, does your problem lie with your partner, or you?
...
I can't speak for Bryan, but in my case, it (the underwear comment) is a running joke between my wife and I. Perhaps the
smiley did not make that clear enough. We are actually pretty happy despite my inability to lift my underwear from the floor. Of course, I certainly don't get called "sexycakes" anymore.
-
Much love to my most supreme sexycakes, my very own Bryan. Here's to another eight years and more.
Wow! Lucky guy. After 22 yrs. of marriage, I generally just get told to pick up my G.D. underwear.
-
Not really. Football can be seen as an emulation of warfare. The goal being to "take" the enemy's end zone, and the defense working to keep the enemy out. Boxing is more like an emulation of a duel, where the objective is to kill the other man (in boxing it would be to "merely" render the man unconscious).
To take your warfare metaphor, one could view Boxing as an individual battle within the greater battle. Kinda the same, but different perspective.
In martial arts there are points scored in an objectively defined way (hit the opponent in a certain spot, pin him to the mat for a number of seconds, etc) Not so in boxing. Nor do other martial arts require blows to the opponent's head.There are objective criteria in Boxing as well. It is just that they are subjectively interpreted.
FWIW, the effort to remove the subjectivity from Boxing (and other contact sports where "subtlety" is involved) have led to the disgusting mess that is Olympic Boxing, where 3 people on 3 sides of the ring must all see the same punch at the same time to score it. This has effectively caused a disconnect between Olympic success, and success out in the "real world" of Pro Boxing. The jab has become only useful punch in the Olympics, since it is the only punch all judges can easily see.
You could suplant boxing by a "sport" where a neutral party hits two men on the head with a two by four, the winner being the last man to loose consciousness. I agree it would be rather boring, but the effect would be the same.I'm sure the Jackass fans would dig it.
In any case, just as there are fans of Ballroom Dancing and women's sports (like soccer
), there are always going to be those that "get" a sport, and those that don't. I refuse to let this particular expression of individuality keep me from making fun of the fans of sports I don't "get". -
And a virgin
That's just sad.
The Coming Auto Bailout
in Economic News
Posted
What K-Mac said.
I am not happy about this. I work in the auto industry (so far). But throwing good money after bad seems like a silly policy. Time to re-org or liquidate.
And this particular Seinfeld ref. seems pretty apropos here. Sorry.