Printable View
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tropheee @ Mar 19 2009, 04:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>While I heartily agree, the relevant question is do you want retribution or recovery?Quote:
I'm a Capitalist at heart, but I must say that Wall Street has brought this pox upon themselves.....I think a little fudge packing is appropriate.[/b]
By all means recovery ASAP. However, Wall Street must understand, along with Congress, there is a price to pay for such irresponsibility. Otherwise history will continue to repeat itself.
If things don't improve soon, I'll be making plans to move to Galt's Gulch!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjorourke @ Mar 19 2009, 03:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>''The government needs these companies to survive -- and buy back the government’s ownership stake -- more than they need the government. Most of these CEOs are already wealthy. They don’t need a job working for the government, which is what running a bank amounts to today.''Quote:
Who is John Galt?[/b]
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=new...id=a0olyim4out4
Do you actually believe this bs? The wealthy need the government to protect them from the people if the chit ever hit the fan. You sound as if you forgot what happened after "qu'ils mangent de la brioche."
I dare say that there will be a shift from brain to brawn at some point, Galt's Gultch would not suvrive a month without hard work. All that brain power without any brawn is teets on a boar.
http://www.umverteilung.de/
38 years of global redistribution:
1960: The poorest 20% of the world's population only had a share of 2.3% of the global income. The top 20% of the world's population earned 70.2% of the global income.
From these data we compute: Gini ≥ 54%, Symmetric ≥ 46%, high/low ≥ 30
(Source: UNDP, 1996)
1998: The poorest 20% of the world's population only had a share of 1.2% of the global income. The top 20% of the world's population earned 89% of the global income.
From these data we compute: Gini ≥ 70%, Symmetric ≥ 71%, high/low ≥ 74
(Source: Intl. Herald Tribune 1999/02/05 pg.6; own estimations 1999/04/03)
Update 2001/11/02 from The No-Nonsense Guide to Globalization (Wayne Ellwood; by the way: he gets 74:1 for 1997.)
After 38 years of globalization income inequality grew significantly, especially after 1980. Associated with growing income inequality is the redistribution of more power to less people. The result is concentration of power - as long as power is mainly determined by economical power. The response to that development is to return to times where power is linked to violence. This is happening right now.
From NYTimes article
BTW it is quite possible that the House bill would survive a court challenge. It might be seen as a "bill of attainder" which is unconstitutional. However, "Numerous court rulings have upheld retroactive tax provisions, particularly over short periods. The House bill applies back only to Jan. 1, 2009. The measure is also strengthened by the fact that it does not apply to just one company or group of individuals, and does not take aim only at past bonuses but also bonuses to be paid in the future, experts said."
You guys really need to get laid more often :rolleyes:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (atlcomedy @ Mar 19 2009, 10:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Word! Particularly WTFQuote:
You guys really need to get laid more often :rolleyes:[/b]
A final thought on the subject:
http://www.investors.com/editorial/c...toon032009.gif
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (atlcomedy @ Mar 19 2009, 09:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjorourke @ Mar 19 2009, 09:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Quote:
You guys really need to get laid more often :rolleyes:[/b]
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (WTF @ Mar 19 2009, 03:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Quote:
Word! Particularly WTF[/b]
Damn fellows Golf $60 , dinner La Griglia $120 , Shagging a co-ed and helping with tuition...priceless. I'm really not sure what else I could have done yesterday for the betterment of society, cure cancer maybe? lolQuote:
....I'm off to play around and then if I'm not to tired to play around again.[/b]
Speaking of shagging......
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118655/quotes
Austin Powers: Shall we shag now, or shall we shag later? How do you like to do it? Do you like to wash up first? You know, top and tails... *****'s bath? Personally, before I'm on the job, I like to give my undercarriage a bit of a 'how's your father'!
----------------------------------
[filling out a form]
Austin Powers: Name? Austin Danger Powers. Sex? Yes please!
\
----------------------------------------
Vanessa Kensington: That's you in a nutshell.
Austin Powers: No, this is me in a nutshell: "Help! I'm in a nutshell! How did I get into this bloody great big nutshell? What kind of shell has a nut like this?"
----------------------------------------
Alotta Fagina: How dare you break wind before me
Austin Powers: I'm sorry I didn't realize it was your turn
---------------------------------------------------------
Austin Powers: I think you're shagedelic baby! You're switched on! You're smashing! You're shagadelic, baby!
------------------------------------------------------
JUST FOR PJ
Basil Exposition: Austin, the Cold War is over!
Austin Powers: Finally those capitalist pigs will pay for their crimes, eh? Eh comrades? Eh?
Basil Exposition: Austin... we won.
Austin Powers: Oh, smashing, groovy, yay capitalism!
Gosh WTF, I didn't know you'd be so upset about me thinking of moving to Galt's Gulch. Really I just like Colorado.....fly fishing is a passion. I,m not "anti business" nor I'm I "government is the answer to all our problems". But when you 're talking about the basic necessities of life such as food, shelter, utilities, transportation and CREDIT, rules and regs are in order. Otherwise someone out of pure greed will manipulate markets - ENRON and now AIG. Its amazing to me that Wall Street does not want any government interference, but when the shit hits the fan they want to be bailed out, but then they don't want any conditions placed upon them concerning the use of bailout funds. Hell, the banks I deal with require plenty of conditions, why should it be any different for Wall Street.
Wall Street wrecked the credit markets and my livelihood has been directly impacted because they failed to consider and manage risk. They could not see beyond all the fees and bonuses they were making - "Greed tends to corrupt, and absolute greed corrupts absolutely." I have no sympathy and I am so tired of hearing "we have to pay the bonuses because we don't want to lose the talent". With that kind of talent who needs enemies.
Now that I have completed my purge, its time to get laid!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tropheee @ Mar 20 2009, 10:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Galt's Gulch is where all the smart Wall Street executive's and the people that support their theory of 'we can't live without them' are residing. Be careful they will just try and cheat you out of more money and try and convince you how smart they are.Quote:
Gosh WTF, I didn't know you'd be so upset about me thinking of moving to Galt's Gulch.[/b]
We are actually on the same page brother.......now I off to play some golf
PJ cartoon
ROTFL; brilliant
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tropheee @ Mar 20 2009, 10:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Thank GOD somebody else said this out loud as I've sure been thinking it!!! And I'd squeeze in between those two attempting to use OBE accounting methods to pay for a war of drifting - if not dubious - purpose & popularity....Quote:
...ENRON and now AIG....[/b]
Hubris! I know I sound like a broken record but that's what I keep coming back to... I am so fed up with the titans of industry AND the fools on the hill... world is far too full of morons who believe they are mensa material simply because they can wrap their hands around a few shekels of silver for a little while.
Where's our resident lyrist?
"You think that you're SO smart... but you don't have a FUCKIN' clue!..."
Hell, send them ALL to Gault Gultch. Then, maybe... just maybe... those of us who are left can get down to the nasty business of cleaning this mess up.
As for getting laid... LOVE to. Unfortunately, I've still got a few more miles to go & promises to keep today. Gives me time to calm down.
Definitely not the right frame of mind to take BCD... I think way too much of you ladies for that!!!! ;)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (discreetgent @ Mar 18 2009, 01:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>I quite agree! I'm thinking somewhere sunny and warm... CA might fit the bill. :DQuote:
I think the best way to discuss this, Ms. Cole, is to get a secluded room somewhere where you would show up without that sheet LOL.[/b]
I don't hold any illusions that the bill would have looked fundamentally different had the GOP been running the show, and yes, in pretty much any form it would take under either party - it pretty much amounts to socialism. That would be why I'm dead set against this, or any other tax-payer funded government bail out. Even though it's a bitter pill to swallow and a whole lot of people will feel the crunch, I think it's better to let the economy right itself than to "help" it along with billions in "stimulous". It's that whole butterfly/cocoon thing. The butterfly has to struggle mightily to free itself from the cocoon - and some don't have the strength to do so and die trying - but that struggle is what pumps blood into it's wings and enables them to strengthen and fly. If you "help" it out, it'll die shortly because it's wings won't work.
My theory on why middle/poor American military families tend to vote Republican is just a theory... It has to do with core values. Republicans tend to favor a strong military, Dems tend not to. Those who favor a strong military are often the ones who understand that sometimes, unfortunately, it takes death to ensure freedom and that sometimes you can't always simply talk your way out of a situation. Not to sound trite but the Hitlers of this world don't respond to chit-chat. I don't think anyone really *likes* war, but those with the core values that support a strong military presence understand that sometimes it takes sacrifice to bring peace. Sort of choosing between the lesser of two evils. So that large chunk of middle/poor America splits down the line of core values - those who want a strong military presence and are willing to sacrifice for the safety it provides, and those who just want a handout and social programs galore. Tadum! You have middle/poor America dividing itself into Reps and Dems. Also, the families of soldiers don't often hold the same core values as the soldiers - otherwise they might be in the armed forces themselves. It's those families that often have the most emotional and distressing pleas to end wars - but they are speaking from the place of their own core values (and pain at having lost a son/daughter/etc) and not those of the soldier's necessarily. I know, I know, it's a lot more complicated than that. I did say it was just a theory.....
Unfortunately, I agree that most any Dem would have won in 2008 against most any Rep for all the reasons you state. It's a damn shame this is just a two party system... But despite the "any Dem" issue, the one that won the nomination and then the Presidency did so based on (IMO) class envy and socialism. Hillary would have probably also won, but her main thrust was much less based on those two items. Would I have been happy about that? No. My political ideology doesn't lean Democratic in any way I can think of.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Edrienne Cole @ Mar 20 2009, 02:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>Sounds like I need to find an excuse to get out to CA. :DQuote:
I quite agree! I'm thinking somewhere sunny and warm... CA might fit the bill. :D
My political ideology doesn't lean Democratic in any way I can think of.[/b]
I can think of one way you might lean Democratic. Democrats are probably more likely to go along with decriminalizing the world of escorts than Republicans :P
re: Stimulus. The theory of cocoon and butterfly might be attractive under most circumstances. The problem we are having now is that there may not be enough resources for the larvae to even build the cocoon.