- This topic has 525 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 9 months ago by
spdrun.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 17, 2011 at 10:35 PM #679330March 17, 2011 at 10:45 PM #678205
ILoveRegulation
Participant[quote=KSMountain]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.[/quote]Maybe you should realize how clueless you are when you admit that you’ve never read Mother Jones and yet have still somehow developed an opinion on the veracity of its articles based on what you’ve gleaned from RushLimbaugh/GlenBeck/DrudgeReport/FoxNews.
March 17, 2011 at 10:45 PM #678260Participant[quote=KSMountain]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.[/quote]Maybe you should realize how clueless you are when you admit that you’ve never read Mother Jones and yet have still somehow developed an opinion on the veracity of its articles based on what you’ve gleaned from RushLimbaugh/GlenBeck/DrudgeReport/FoxNews.
March 17, 2011 at 10:45 PM #678862Participant[quote=KSMountain]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.[/quote]Maybe you should realize how clueless you are when you admit that you’ve never read Mother Jones and yet have still somehow developed an opinion on the veracity of its articles based on what you’ve gleaned from RushLimbaugh/GlenBeck/DrudgeReport/FoxNews.
March 17, 2011 at 10:45 PM #678997Participant[quote=KSMountain]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.[/quote]Maybe you should realize how clueless you are when you admit that you’ve never read Mother Jones and yet have still somehow developed an opinion on the veracity of its articles based on what you’ve gleaned from RushLimbaugh/GlenBeck/DrudgeReport/FoxNews.
March 17, 2011 at 10:45 PM #679340Participant[quote=KSMountain]
Maybe you could tone down the vitriol a bit.[/quote]Maybe you should realize how clueless you are when you admit that you’ve never read Mother Jones and yet have still somehow developed an opinion on the veracity of its articles based on what you’ve gleaned from RushLimbaugh/GlenBeck/DrudgeReport/FoxNews.
March 17, 2011 at 10:57 PM #678214CA renter
Participant[quote=Arraya]http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmar11/global-recovery-over3-11.html
OK, let’s run through the list:1. Natural disaster dusrupts production in a key global exporter: check.
2. An event which nudges a major economy into financial crisis: check. (If you don’t think Japan’s economy and finances will be pushed over a threshold by the quake, please be patient.)
3. Ignite a chain reaction of mass movements in a key oil exporting region: check.
4. Supply-demand imbalances in critical materials and grains: check.
5. Central banks and sovereign states addicted to vast quantities of printing-money and credit creation stimulus which trigger rampant inflation in essentials: check.
6. Massaged statistics, channel-stuffing, misrepresentation of risk and unlimited propaganda by a failed Status Quo: check.
Does anyone seriously think the global recovery is still intact? Based on what? Does anyone think that stagnant/declining wages, falling real estate values, skyrocketing prices for materials and energy, and belt-tightening by bankrupt States are ideal foundations for higher profits?
Anyone who doesn’t realize the quake in Japan is a tragic load dumped on a fragile addict’s quivering back (i.e. the global recovery) will undoubtedly be surprised by how fast the global economy will start unraveling. Anyone who kept their eyes open is only wondering how a debt and propaganda-fueled recovery lasted this long.[/quote]
Another excellent post, Arraya.
March 17, 2011 at 10:57 PM #678270Participant[quote=Arraya]http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmar11/global-recovery-over3-11.html
OK, let’s run through the list:1. Natural disaster dusrupts production in a key global exporter: check.
2. An event which nudges a major economy into financial crisis: check. (If you don’t think Japan’s economy and finances will be pushed over a threshold by the quake, please be patient.)
3. Ignite a chain reaction of mass movements in a key oil exporting region: check.
4. Supply-demand imbalances in critical materials and grains: check.
5. Central banks and sovereign states addicted to vast quantities of printing-money and credit creation stimulus which trigger rampant inflation in essentials: check.
6. Massaged statistics, channel-stuffing, misrepresentation of risk and unlimited propaganda by a failed Status Quo: check.
Does anyone seriously think the global recovery is still intact? Based on what? Does anyone think that stagnant/declining wages, falling real estate values, skyrocketing prices for materials and energy, and belt-tightening by bankrupt States are ideal foundations for higher profits?
Anyone who doesn’t realize the quake in Japan is a tragic load dumped on a fragile addict’s quivering back (i.e. the global recovery) will undoubtedly be surprised by how fast the global economy will start unraveling. Anyone who kept their eyes open is only wondering how a debt and propaganda-fueled recovery lasted this long.[/quote]
Another excellent post, Arraya.
March 17, 2011 at 10:57 PM #678872Participant[quote=Arraya]http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmar11/global-recovery-over3-11.html
OK, let’s run through the list:1. Natural disaster dusrupts production in a key global exporter: check.
2. An event which nudges a major economy into financial crisis: check. (If you don’t think Japan’s economy and finances will be pushed over a threshold by the quake, please be patient.)
3. Ignite a chain reaction of mass movements in a key oil exporting region: check.
4. Supply-demand imbalances in critical materials and grains: check.
5. Central banks and sovereign states addicted to vast quantities of printing-money and credit creation stimulus which trigger rampant inflation in essentials: check.
6. Massaged statistics, channel-stuffing, misrepresentation of risk and unlimited propaganda by a failed Status Quo: check.
Does anyone seriously think the global recovery is still intact? Based on what? Does anyone think that stagnant/declining wages, falling real estate values, skyrocketing prices for materials and energy, and belt-tightening by bankrupt States are ideal foundations for higher profits?
Anyone who doesn’t realize the quake in Japan is a tragic load dumped on a fragile addict’s quivering back (i.e. the global recovery) will undoubtedly be surprised by how fast the global economy will start unraveling. Anyone who kept their eyes open is only wondering how a debt and propaganda-fueled recovery lasted this long.[/quote]
Another excellent post, Arraya.
March 17, 2011 at 10:57 PM #679007Participant[quote=Arraya]http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmar11/global-recovery-over3-11.html
OK, let’s run through the list:1. Natural disaster dusrupts production in a key global exporter: check.
2. An event which nudges a major economy into financial crisis: check. (If you don’t think Japan’s economy and finances will be pushed over a threshold by the quake, please be patient.)
3. Ignite a chain reaction of mass movements in a key oil exporting region: check.
4. Supply-demand imbalances in critical materials and grains: check.
5. Central banks and sovereign states addicted to vast quantities of printing-money and credit creation stimulus which trigger rampant inflation in essentials: check.
6. Massaged statistics, channel-stuffing, misrepresentation of risk and unlimited propaganda by a failed Status Quo: check.
Does anyone seriously think the global recovery is still intact? Based on what? Does anyone think that stagnant/declining wages, falling real estate values, skyrocketing prices for materials and energy, and belt-tightening by bankrupt States are ideal foundations for higher profits?
Anyone who doesn’t realize the quake in Japan is a tragic load dumped on a fragile addict’s quivering back (i.e. the global recovery) will undoubtedly be surprised by how fast the global economy will start unraveling. Anyone who kept their eyes open is only wondering how a debt and propaganda-fueled recovery lasted this long.[/quote]
Another excellent post, Arraya.
March 17, 2011 at 10:57 PM #679350Participant[quote=Arraya]http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmar11/global-recovery-over3-11.html
OK, let’s run through the list:1. Natural disaster dusrupts production in a key global exporter: check.
2. An event which nudges a major economy into financial crisis: check. (If you don’t think Japan’s economy and finances will be pushed over a threshold by the quake, please be patient.)
3. Ignite a chain reaction of mass movements in a key oil exporting region: check.
4. Supply-demand imbalances in critical materials and grains: check.
5. Central banks and sovereign states addicted to vast quantities of printing-money and credit creation stimulus which trigger rampant inflation in essentials: check.
6. Massaged statistics, channel-stuffing, misrepresentation of risk and unlimited propaganda by a failed Status Quo: check.
Does anyone seriously think the global recovery is still intact? Based on what? Does anyone think that stagnant/declining wages, falling real estate values, skyrocketing prices for materials and energy, and belt-tightening by bankrupt States are ideal foundations for higher profits?
Anyone who doesn’t realize the quake in Japan is a tragic load dumped on a fragile addict’s quivering back (i.e. the global recovery) will undoubtedly be surprised by how fast the global economy will start unraveling. Anyone who kept their eyes open is only wondering how a debt and propaganda-fueled recovery lasted this long.[/quote]
Another excellent post, Arraya.
March 17, 2011 at 11:00 PM #678224Participant[quote=zk][quote=CA renter]Anyone here considered “taking a vacation” back east as a result of the nuclear problems?[/quote]
If you fly, you’ll get more extra radiation from being at altitude for 8 hours (round trip) than you would from staying here on the west coast.[/quote]
Yes, I’ve thought about this. Was planning to drive, but not sure if we could get far enough ahead of the radioactive plume. I do have my iodine pills, though. 😉
March 17, 2011 at 11:00 PM #678280Participant[quote=zk][quote=CA renter]Anyone here considered “taking a vacation” back east as a result of the nuclear problems?[/quote]
If you fly, you’ll get more extra radiation from being at altitude for 8 hours (round trip) than you would from staying here on the west coast.[/quote]
Yes, I’ve thought about this. Was planning to drive, but not sure if we could get far enough ahead of the radioactive plume. I do have my iodine pills, though. 😉
March 17, 2011 at 11:00 PM #678881Participant[quote=zk][quote=CA renter]Anyone here considered “taking a vacation” back east as a result of the nuclear problems?[/quote]
If you fly, you’ll get more extra radiation from being at altitude for 8 hours (round trip) than you would from staying here on the west coast.[/quote]
Yes, I’ve thought about this. Was planning to drive, but not sure if we could get far enough ahead of the radioactive plume. I do have my iodine pills, though. 😉
March 17, 2011 at 11:00 PM #679017Participant[quote=zk][quote=CA renter]Anyone here considered “taking a vacation” back east as a result of the nuclear problems?[/quote]
If you fly, you’ll get more extra radiation from being at altitude for 8 hours (round trip) than you would from staying here on the west coast.[/quote]
Yes, I’ve thought about this. Was planning to drive, but not sure if we could get far enough ahead of the radioactive plume. I do have my iodine pills, though. 😉
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.