Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
equalizer
Participant[quote=meadandale][quote=briansd1]
I’m for freedom of choice with a guiding government hand to assure welfare and safety.[/quote]“You can’t eat candy” is not freedom of choice. You seem to make that mistake a lot.[/quote]
Of course you know that conservative Supreme Court has basically said that students do NOT have freedoms that are supposedly promised in the Constitution. From random drug testing for any extra-curricular sport, denying fourth amendment rights to cutting facial hair, schools are almost a prison state with their own rules. The Court needs to expand those rules for caning gang members, disruptive students, etc.I’m sure you all know that school districts in Texas may enforce rules on facial hair as long as they don’t interfere with students’ religious beliefs. That means you can’t have long hair or grow a moustache. Even bogus religious reasons are routinely denied.
You don’t need to move to Singapore or send kids to Jewish schools with Mossad trained substitute teachers to find discipline in schools, just move to Texas public school district.
That’s how they kept hippies from ruining Texas!! I’m sure there is research that shows direct correlation between grooming standards and high tests in Texas and low crime rates.http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2009/06/texas-school-district-has-no.html
Participant[quote=meadandale][quote=briansd1]
I’m for freedom of choice with a guiding government hand to assure welfare and safety.[/quote]“You can’t eat candy” is not freedom of choice. You seem to make that mistake a lot.[/quote]
Of course you know that conservative Supreme Court has basically said that students do NOT have freedoms that are supposedly promised in the Constitution. From random drug testing for any extra-curricular sport, denying fourth amendment rights to cutting facial hair, schools are almost a prison state with their own rules. The Court needs to expand those rules for caning gang members, disruptive students, etc.I’m sure you all know that school districts in Texas may enforce rules on facial hair as long as they don’t interfere with students’ religious beliefs. That means you can’t have long hair or grow a moustache. Even bogus religious reasons are routinely denied.
You don’t need to move to Singapore or send kids to Jewish schools with Mossad trained substitute teachers to find discipline in schools, just move to Texas public school district.
That’s how they kept hippies from ruining Texas!! I’m sure there is research that shows direct correlation between grooming standards and high tests in Texas and low crime rates.http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2009/06/texas-school-district-has-no.html
Participant[quote=meadandale][quote=briansd1]
I’m for freedom of choice with a guiding government hand to assure welfare and safety.[/quote]“You can’t eat candy” is not freedom of choice. You seem to make that mistake a lot.[/quote]
Of course you know that conservative Supreme Court has basically said that students do NOT have freedoms that are supposedly promised in the Constitution. From random drug testing for any extra-curricular sport, denying fourth amendment rights to cutting facial hair, schools are almost a prison state with their own rules. The Court needs to expand those rules for caning gang members, disruptive students, etc.I’m sure you all know that school districts in Texas may enforce rules on facial hair as long as they don’t interfere with students’ religious beliefs. That means you can’t have long hair or grow a moustache. Even bogus religious reasons are routinely denied.
You don’t need to move to Singapore or send kids to Jewish schools with Mossad trained substitute teachers to find discipline in schools, just move to Texas public school district.
That’s how they kept hippies from ruining Texas!! I’m sure there is research that shows direct correlation between grooming standards and high tests in Texas and low crime rates.http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2009/06/texas-school-district-has-no.html
Participant[quote=meadandale][quote=briansd1]
I’m for freedom of choice with a guiding government hand to assure welfare and safety.[/quote]“You can’t eat candy” is not freedom of choice. You seem to make that mistake a lot.[/quote]
Of course you know that conservative Supreme Court has basically said that students do NOT have freedoms that are supposedly promised in the Constitution. From random drug testing for any extra-curricular sport, denying fourth amendment rights to cutting facial hair, schools are almost a prison state with their own rules. The Court needs to expand those rules for caning gang members, disruptive students, etc.I’m sure you all know that school districts in Texas may enforce rules on facial hair as long as they don’t interfere with students’ religious beliefs. That means you can’t have long hair or grow a moustache. Even bogus religious reasons are routinely denied.
You don’t need to move to Singapore or send kids to Jewish schools with Mossad trained substitute teachers to find discipline in schools, just move to Texas public school district.
That’s how they kept hippies from ruining Texas!! I’m sure there is research that shows direct correlation between grooming standards and high tests in Texas and low crime rates.http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2009/06/texas-school-district-has-no.html
Participant[quote=meadandale][quote=briansd1]
I’m for freedom of choice with a guiding government hand to assure welfare and safety.[/quote]“You can’t eat candy” is not freedom of choice. You seem to make that mistake a lot.[/quote]
Of course you know that conservative Supreme Court has basically said that students do NOT have freedoms that are supposedly promised in the Constitution. From random drug testing for any extra-curricular sport, denying fourth amendment rights to cutting facial hair, schools are almost a prison state with their own rules. The Court needs to expand those rules for caning gang members, disruptive students, etc.I’m sure you all know that school districts in Texas may enforce rules on facial hair as long as they don’t interfere with students’ religious beliefs. That means you can’t have long hair or grow a moustache. Even bogus religious reasons are routinely denied.
You don’t need to move to Singapore or send kids to Jewish schools with Mossad trained substitute teachers to find discipline in schools, just move to Texas public school district.
That’s how they kept hippies from ruining Texas!! I’m sure there is research that shows direct correlation between grooming standards and high tests in Texas and low crime rates.http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2009/06/texas-school-district-has-no.html
April 17, 2010 at 12:17 AM in reply to: In hindsight, who is most to blame for the Financial Crisis? #539972Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]I like sdduuuude’s answer, but I have to put Greenspam first and the ratings agencies second.
The agencies were the lynchpin to the whole mortgage crisis, so they bear huge responsibility there. However, Greenspam was asleep at the wheel for not one but two world-beating asset bubbles. No, scratch that — he wasn’t just asleep at the wheel, he was a cheerleader for both bubbles. And the mop-up from the first bubble basically created the environment that allowed the second and much worse bubble.
His “reign” was truly catastrophic and I just hope he clings to life for long enough to witness the final outcome of his legacy (the nigh-inevitable US govt funding crisis) and, if there is any justice, the resulting complete destruction of his reputation as a central banker.
Rich[/quote]
Here is a right wing DC lawyer’s take on Greenspan,etc. He wrote three major pieces of legislation that were enacted into law: the Anti-Tying Provision of the Bank Holding Company Act; the “Brooke Amendment” relating to public housing; and the national “Housing Allowance” that morphed into the Section 8 housing program.These comments are not from an uneducated lunatic.
1. “What surprised me the most were senators and congressmen preying on young women.”
2. “Volcker seems to have thrown in the towel, and I am sorry about that because I have always admired and respected him greatly. In fact, if he had been Fed Chairman instead of Greenspan, I do not believe the credit crisis or the economic meltdown would have happened. Greenspan is the real culprit, who has admitted that he never saw the housing crisis coming”
3. “People are suffering in this country and around the world, and Greenspan is the person who caused all of this. In another country and in a different time, someone who did this would have been killed. I am surprised that Greenspan has any reputation at all, given the enormous human suffering that he is responsible for.”
“… Mr. Naegele also served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at The Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal”
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/2951-ilene/31177-interview-with-timothy-d-naegele
April 17, 2010 at 12:17 AM in reply to: In hindsight, who is most to blame for the Financial Crisis? #540094Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]I like sdduuuude’s answer, but I have to put Greenspam first and the ratings agencies second.
The agencies were the lynchpin to the whole mortgage crisis, so they bear huge responsibility there. However, Greenspam was asleep at the wheel for not one but two world-beating asset bubbles. No, scratch that — he wasn’t just asleep at the wheel, he was a cheerleader for both bubbles. And the mop-up from the first bubble basically created the environment that allowed the second and much worse bubble.
His “reign” was truly catastrophic and I just hope he clings to life for long enough to witness the final outcome of his legacy (the nigh-inevitable US govt funding crisis) and, if there is any justice, the resulting complete destruction of his reputation as a central banker.
Rich[/quote]
Here is a right wing DC lawyer’s take on Greenspan,etc. He wrote three major pieces of legislation that were enacted into law: the Anti-Tying Provision of the Bank Holding Company Act; the “Brooke Amendment” relating to public housing; and the national “Housing Allowance” that morphed into the Section 8 housing program.These comments are not from an uneducated lunatic.
1. “What surprised me the most were senators and congressmen preying on young women.”
2. “Volcker seems to have thrown in the towel, and I am sorry about that because I have always admired and respected him greatly. In fact, if he had been Fed Chairman instead of Greenspan, I do not believe the credit crisis or the economic meltdown would have happened. Greenspan is the real culprit, who has admitted that he never saw the housing crisis coming”
3. “People are suffering in this country and around the world, and Greenspan is the person who caused all of this. In another country and in a different time, someone who did this would have been killed. I am surprised that Greenspan has any reputation at all, given the enormous human suffering that he is responsible for.”
“… Mr. Naegele also served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at The Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal”
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/2951-ilene/31177-interview-with-timothy-d-naegele
April 17, 2010 at 12:17 AM in reply to: In hindsight, who is most to blame for the Financial Crisis? #540564Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]I like sdduuuude’s answer, but I have to put Greenspam first and the ratings agencies second.
The agencies were the lynchpin to the whole mortgage crisis, so they bear huge responsibility there. However, Greenspam was asleep at the wheel for not one but two world-beating asset bubbles. No, scratch that — he wasn’t just asleep at the wheel, he was a cheerleader for both bubbles. And the mop-up from the first bubble basically created the environment that allowed the second and much worse bubble.
His “reign” was truly catastrophic and I just hope he clings to life for long enough to witness the final outcome of his legacy (the nigh-inevitable US govt funding crisis) and, if there is any justice, the resulting complete destruction of his reputation as a central banker.
Rich[/quote]
Here is a right wing DC lawyer’s take on Greenspan,etc. He wrote three major pieces of legislation that were enacted into law: the Anti-Tying Provision of the Bank Holding Company Act; the “Brooke Amendment” relating to public housing; and the national “Housing Allowance” that morphed into the Section 8 housing program.These comments are not from an uneducated lunatic.
1. “What surprised me the most were senators and congressmen preying on young women.”
2. “Volcker seems to have thrown in the towel, and I am sorry about that because I have always admired and respected him greatly. In fact, if he had been Fed Chairman instead of Greenspan, I do not believe the credit crisis or the economic meltdown would have happened. Greenspan is the real culprit, who has admitted that he never saw the housing crisis coming”
3. “People are suffering in this country and around the world, and Greenspan is the person who caused all of this. In another country and in a different time, someone who did this would have been killed. I am surprised that Greenspan has any reputation at all, given the enormous human suffering that he is responsible for.”
“… Mr. Naegele also served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at The Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal”
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/2951-ilene/31177-interview-with-timothy-d-naegele
April 17, 2010 at 12:17 AM in reply to: In hindsight, who is most to blame for the Financial Crisis? #540656Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]I like sdduuuude’s answer, but I have to put Greenspam first and the ratings agencies second.
The agencies were the lynchpin to the whole mortgage crisis, so they bear huge responsibility there. However, Greenspam was asleep at the wheel for not one but two world-beating asset bubbles. No, scratch that — he wasn’t just asleep at the wheel, he was a cheerleader for both bubbles. And the mop-up from the first bubble basically created the environment that allowed the second and much worse bubble.
His “reign” was truly catastrophic and I just hope he clings to life for long enough to witness the final outcome of his legacy (the nigh-inevitable US govt funding crisis) and, if there is any justice, the resulting complete destruction of his reputation as a central banker.
Rich[/quote]
Here is a right wing DC lawyer’s take on Greenspan,etc. He wrote three major pieces of legislation that were enacted into law: the Anti-Tying Provision of the Bank Holding Company Act; the “Brooke Amendment” relating to public housing; and the national “Housing Allowance” that morphed into the Section 8 housing program.These comments are not from an uneducated lunatic.
1. “What surprised me the most were senators and congressmen preying on young women.”
2. “Volcker seems to have thrown in the towel, and I am sorry about that because I have always admired and respected him greatly. In fact, if he had been Fed Chairman instead of Greenspan, I do not believe the credit crisis or the economic meltdown would have happened. Greenspan is the real culprit, who has admitted that he never saw the housing crisis coming”
3. “People are suffering in this country and around the world, and Greenspan is the person who caused all of this. In another country and in a different time, someone who did this would have been killed. I am surprised that Greenspan has any reputation at all, given the enormous human suffering that he is responsible for.”
“… Mr. Naegele also served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at The Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal”
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/2951-ilene/31177-interview-with-timothy-d-naegele
April 17, 2010 at 12:17 AM in reply to: In hindsight, who is most to blame for the Financial Crisis? #540925Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]I like sdduuuude’s answer, but I have to put Greenspam first and the ratings agencies second.
The agencies were the lynchpin to the whole mortgage crisis, so they bear huge responsibility there. However, Greenspam was asleep at the wheel for not one but two world-beating asset bubbles. No, scratch that — he wasn’t just asleep at the wheel, he was a cheerleader for both bubbles. And the mop-up from the first bubble basically created the environment that allowed the second and much worse bubble.
His “reign” was truly catastrophic and I just hope he clings to life for long enough to witness the final outcome of his legacy (the nigh-inevitable US govt funding crisis) and, if there is any justice, the resulting complete destruction of his reputation as a central banker.
Rich[/quote]
Here is a right wing DC lawyer’s take on Greenspan,etc. He wrote three major pieces of legislation that were enacted into law: the Anti-Tying Provision of the Bank Holding Company Act; the “Brooke Amendment” relating to public housing; and the national “Housing Allowance” that morphed into the Section 8 housing program.These comments are not from an uneducated lunatic.
1. “What surprised me the most were senators and congressmen preying on young women.”
2. “Volcker seems to have thrown in the towel, and I am sorry about that because I have always admired and respected him greatly. In fact, if he had been Fed Chairman instead of Greenspan, I do not believe the credit crisis or the economic meltdown would have happened. Greenspan is the real culprit, who has admitted that he never saw the housing crisis coming”
3. “People are suffering in this country and around the world, and Greenspan is the person who caused all of this. In another country and in a different time, someone who did this would have been killed. I am surprised that Greenspan has any reputation at all, given the enormous human suffering that he is responsible for.”
“… Mr. Naegele also served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at The Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal”
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/2951-ilene/31177-interview-with-timothy-d-naegele
April 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #534369Participant[quote=flu]
Thanks equalizer. I’ll read up on this…
Trying to hedge against restricted stock grants were part of a comp package and perf bonus that I chosen lieu of additional cash comps (shares, not options). Just looking to mitigate losses on it (in this economy).Come on, no QC’s or Illumina folks????[/quote]
The site I linked has a lot of info to snare the high brow SV big honchos. There seems to be little info on hedging unvested options, so hope that Stansd has the lowdown.Here’s an interesting article:
“Buying Puts to Hedge Employee Stock Options or Long Stock has unique Tax Advantages”
http://www.optionsforemployees.com/articles/article.php?id=128
April 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #534497Participant[quote=flu]
Thanks equalizer. I’ll read up on this…
Trying to hedge against restricted stock grants were part of a comp package and perf bonus that I chosen lieu of additional cash comps (shares, not options). Just looking to mitigate losses on it (in this economy).Come on, no QC’s or Illumina folks????[/quote]
The site I linked has a lot of info to snare the high brow SV big honchos. There seems to be little info on hedging unvested options, so hope that Stansd has the lowdown.Here’s an interesting article:
“Buying Puts to Hedge Employee Stock Options or Long Stock has unique Tax Advantages”
http://www.optionsforemployees.com/articles/article.php?id=128
April 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #534956Participant[quote=flu]
Thanks equalizer. I’ll read up on this…
Trying to hedge against restricted stock grants were part of a comp package and perf bonus that I chosen lieu of additional cash comps (shares, not options). Just looking to mitigate losses on it (in this economy).Come on, no QC’s or Illumina folks????[/quote]
The site I linked has a lot of info to snare the high brow SV big honchos. There seems to be little info on hedging unvested options, so hope that Stansd has the lowdown.Here’s an interesting article:
“Buying Puts to Hedge Employee Stock Options or Long Stock has unique Tax Advantages”
http://www.optionsforemployees.com/articles/article.php?id=128
April 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Strategies for protecting stock options/stock plan granted shares #535053Participant[quote=flu]
Thanks equalizer. I’ll read up on this…
Trying to hedge against restricted stock grants were part of a comp package and perf bonus that I chosen lieu of additional cash comps (shares, not options). Just looking to mitigate losses on it (in this economy).Come on, no QC’s or Illumina folks????[/quote]
The site I linked has a lot of info to snare the high brow SV big honchos. There seems to be little info on hedging unvested options, so hope that Stansd has the lowdown.Here’s an interesting article:
“Buying Puts to Hedge Employee Stock Options or Long Stock has unique Tax Advantages”
http://www.optionsforemployees.com/articles/article.php?id=128
-
AuthorPosts