Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 5, 2008 at 2:21 PM in reply to: OT: It’s official – the majority of Californians are idiots. #300008November 5, 2008 at 2:21 PM in reply to: OT: It’s official – the majority of Californians are idiots. #299960
BKinLA
Participant[quote=meadandale]Oh, and the idiots voted to permanently take away our right to enjoy a beer in a city park or at the beach. Nice.[/quote]
Hmmm….kinda like the idiots that voted to permanently take away our right to marry the person we love?
Or is the “right to beer in public” somehow a more fundamental human right?
Karma is a bitch.
November 5, 2008 at 2:21 PM in reply to: OT: It’s official – the majority of Californians are idiots. #299946Participant[quote=meadandale]Oh, and the idiots voted to permanently take away our right to enjoy a beer in a city park or at the beach. Nice.[/quote]
Hmmm….kinda like the idiots that voted to permanently take away our right to marry the person we love?
Or is the “right to beer in public” somehow a more fundamental human right?
Karma is a bitch.
November 5, 2008 at 2:21 PM in reply to: OT: It’s official – the majority of Californians are idiots. #299934Participant[quote=meadandale]Oh, and the idiots voted to permanently take away our right to enjoy a beer in a city park or at the beach. Nice.[/quote]
Hmmm….kinda like the idiots that voted to permanently take away our right to marry the person we love?
Or is the “right to beer in public” somehow a more fundamental human right?
Karma is a bitch.
November 5, 2008 at 2:21 PM in reply to: OT: It’s official – the majority of Californians are idiots. #299578Participant[quote=meadandale]Oh, and the idiots voted to permanently take away our right to enjoy a beer in a city park or at the beach. Nice.[/quote]
Hmmm….kinda like the idiots that voted to permanently take away our right to marry the person we love?
Or is the “right to beer in public” somehow a more fundamental human right?
Karma is a bitch.
Participant[quote=svelte]…remember the phrase “stagflation” and WIN (“Whip Inflation Now”) buttons?[/quote]
Remember wearing your WIN button upside-down:
(NIM = “No Instant Miracles”)?My family bought a house in 1980 by assuming the mortgage from the seller. Whatever the interest rate was on the existing mortgage, it was obviously lower than a new one at prevailing rates.
If rates do spike, I wonder if this might become commonplace again…although who wants to assume a toxic mortgage on a property that is declining in value?
Participant[quote=svelte]…remember the phrase “stagflation” and WIN (“Whip Inflation Now”) buttons?[/quote]
Remember wearing your WIN button upside-down:
(NIM = “No Instant Miracles”)?My family bought a house in 1980 by assuming the mortgage from the seller. Whatever the interest rate was on the existing mortgage, it was obviously lower than a new one at prevailing rates.
If rates do spike, I wonder if this might become commonplace again…although who wants to assume a toxic mortgage on a property that is declining in value?
Participant[quote=svelte]…remember the phrase “stagflation” and WIN (“Whip Inflation Now”) buttons?[/quote]
Remember wearing your WIN button upside-down:
(NIM = “No Instant Miracles”)?My family bought a house in 1980 by assuming the mortgage from the seller. Whatever the interest rate was on the existing mortgage, it was obviously lower than a new one at prevailing rates.
If rates do spike, I wonder if this might become commonplace again…although who wants to assume a toxic mortgage on a property that is declining in value?
Participant[quote=svelte]…remember the phrase “stagflation” and WIN (“Whip Inflation Now”) buttons?[/quote]
Remember wearing your WIN button upside-down:
(NIM = “No Instant Miracles”)?My family bought a house in 1980 by assuming the mortgage from the seller. Whatever the interest rate was on the existing mortgage, it was obviously lower than a new one at prevailing rates.
If rates do spike, I wonder if this might become commonplace again…although who wants to assume a toxic mortgage on a property that is declining in value?
Participant[quote=svelte]…remember the phrase “stagflation” and WIN (“Whip Inflation Now”) buttons?[/quote]
Remember wearing your WIN button upside-down:
(NIM = “No Instant Miracles”)?My family bought a house in 1980 by assuming the mortgage from the seller. Whatever the interest rate was on the existing mortgage, it was obviously lower than a new one at prevailing rates.
If rates do spike, I wonder if this might become commonplace again…although who wants to assume a toxic mortgage on a property that is declining in value?
September 19, 2008 at 12:26 PM in reply to: Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system #273083Participant“…The repetition of such events in the much larger banking and securities markets would be beyond the scope of any federal bailout.”
Until today, that is.
September 19, 2008 at 12:26 PM in reply to: Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system #273059Participant“…The repetition of such events in the much larger banking and securities markets would be beyond the scope of any federal bailout.”
Until today, that is.
September 19, 2008 at 12:26 PM in reply to: Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system #273017Participant“…The repetition of such events in the much larger banking and securities markets would be beyond the scope of any federal bailout.”
Until today, that is.
September 19, 2008 at 12:26 PM in reply to: Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system #273012Participant“…The repetition of such events in the much larger banking and securities markets would be beyond the scope of any federal bailout.”
Until today, that is.
September 19, 2008 at 12:26 PM in reply to: Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system #272766Participant“…The repetition of such events in the much larger banking and securities markets would be beyond the scope of any federal bailout.”
Until today, that is.
-
AuthorPosts