Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
urbanrealtor
Participant[quote=markmax33][quote=walterwhite]And I commend you for not bringing up greenspans religion.[/quote]
Lol…no wonder SK loves the fed and doesn’t want to see it audited…jk, sort of.[/quote]
Dude.
You are such a bigoted douche bag.I find it funny how you complain about Jews being anti-American as you drop your English every 3rd post.
I really don’t get that you are very American.
Yeah I am sure you have a flag on your car and worship at The Rock but you really don’t seem to get the whole diversity of opinion thing.
We are the mother-fucking homeland for lots of groups.
We have most of the worlds Irish and Jews and about half of all Mexicans.
I don’t know where all the Pollacks came from but both my dad and I married Polish chicks so apparently there are a lot.
This becomes relevant to the US as a country in the following way:
-We supported Solidarity in Poland in the 70’s and 80’s partially out of ethnic sentiment (though fighting commies was part of that).
-We supported the independence of Ireland (over the oppression of our British allies) largely out of ethnic and personal sentiment. Mind you we did that when most of Ireland (and Irish Americans) sided with the Axis powers.
-We supported a Jewish state on some god-awful real estate that we thought would go largely uncontested based on moral and ethnic sentiment. We are still paying for the stupidity in execution of that one.
-We continue to support liberal reforms in the near east as part of this sentiment.
Remember, there is nothing in the constitution permitting us to go to war in Europe in the 40’s.
We could have just defended ourselves from Japan and called it a day.I, for one, am really glad that we allow our sentiment to guide us. We have made mistakes to be sure.
Likud, Hamas, UVF, and Sinn Fein are great examples of us not thinking through our actions.Still I am glad we did them and that alone is a good reason to vote against Ron Paul.
ParticipantNo.
I don’t buy associating all bigots with Nazis.But I think its fair to call a spade a spade (or a bigot a bigot).
Participant[quote=walterwhite]Right. Basically the Jews are controlling the entire election by determining who and who cannot debate, right?[/quote]
Is it true that you carry little bags of gold at all times?
None of my Red-Sea-Pedestrian friends will ever show me theirs.
It just ain’t fair.
Participant[quote=flu]
Markets open in 13 minutes and today’s going to be a irrational day, so I’ll be brief…
It’s not necessarily about Israel.. I was just curious how Wrong Paul would do in general on special interests groups…I’m curious how Wrong Paul would handle special interest group from Saudia Arabia too.. That’s been going on for a long long time too.
Max will probably go away after the elections or earlier once the GOP candidate comes forward..,… Looking more and more like it’s going to be Newt…Scary….[/quote]
As an Obama supporter, I really am stoked about Newt getting the nomination.
He is self-destructive and unstable.
He is very intelligent but that does not make for a good candidate per se.Romney is a cause for concern because he is good at drawing from the center (though his flip flops will hurt him).
Huntsman is a fucking nightmare for Obama.
He is very intelligent and restrained and actually looks presidential.
He would be a credible threat if he got the nomination.
I am pleased that he remains behind.Bachman, Perry, and Santorum are just punchlines.
ParticipantSK:
I think you need to actually do something other than be an anti-Jewish (which is different from anti-semitic) bigot to be called a Nazi.For example..say..advocate putting them in ovens or at least endorse a pogrom or something. You can call Ratko Mladic a Nazi or maybe Tom Metzger.
However, some assclown who whacks off to pictures of RP and blames Jews for him not being successful (instead of his actual positions..which are often poorly thought out and articulated) does not rise to that particular designation.
As a native of Nuremberg, most of my babysitters were former party members.
There is indeed a difference between “I don’t like/trust those people” and “The Holocaust never happened and anyway they deserved it”. I have actually been present for conversations that involved the latter.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=markmax33]Again it’s a shame 15% of the population controls that much of the media and controls the other 85%. That’s not what America was built on. Jewish Americans should be called anti-American when they attack us and control our media.[/quote]
Fucking racist bigot. You should be banned for spewing that Nazi propaganda.[/quote]
No.
Hold up there.
Godwin orgasm way too fast, SK.As a person related to a bunch of Jews and who is rather negative on Israel’s foreign and domestic habits, I don’t think that criticizing a country makes you a bigot.
However, complaining that Jews control the media is a bit too far.
And that does suggest you are a bigot.
Sorry if I lose the ability to find you credible, Markmax.
As if you needed to become less relevant to conversation here.
ParticipantYeah.
You pleasure yourself using a picture of Ron Paul.
We get it.
You think he is the new Jesus.
We get it.
Ron Paul is God’s last prophet (blessings be upon him).
We get it.Do you have more than one note in your song?
As far as inflation, you don’t really understand it at all. If you were to print money and bury it in the ground, it would have no effect (other than to kill trees).
That is kind of what happened here.
Anyway, the definition of inflation is price rise.
There have not been significant price increases.
Ergo, your argument fails as bad as your Toscano-as-a-dumb-tea-partyer impressions (because he isn’t).
Q to the E to the muthafuckin D.
Here.
Read the first sentence here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InflationAlso, read this article about someone who knows more about economics than you or Ron Paul.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokio_HotelParticipantNo dude.
Printing money is not inflation per se.
Printing money is printing money.
Inflation is broad based price increases.
Printing often historically has led to inflation but they are not the same thing.
Currently there are no stores of wealth as safe as greenbacks that are widely accessible.
Some commodities (eg: gold, oil) function as alternative stores but thats really a different thing.
There is not any near-term risk of loss of confidence.
Inflation of less than 10 percent per year is not considered high.Remember, you started this thread by discussing “exploding inflation” which simply does not exist right now (or in the foreseeable future or the last 30 years)
We are have been seeing less than 5% inflation annually since 2005.
And one more plain talkin’ texan won’t save anyone from any apocalypse.
That is true whether it is LBJ, W, Perry, or Paul.
ParticipantIMHO discussion of an apocalypse without zombies is just a waste of pixels.
Participant[quote=Arraya]The big question is why did academics fail at forecasting this? THAT is the question and how that applies to society overall?[/quote]
Probably because the immediate incentive structure did not benefit more than small actors and constituencies.
That is a recurring problem with treating Adam Smith and Milton Friedman as if they were Muhammed.
The explanatory utility of small actors working as an invisible hand gets wildly goofy when applied to big companies.You have lots of little actors with incentives that benefit them instead of their company or that benefit their division instead of the firm or that benefit their company’s p/l this year but alienate clients moving forward.
For example, WaMu made lots of loans when the lending side needed better market share. They took resources away from other priorities.
When the loans started to go bad (inevitably) they did not have a functioning loss mitigation department (it had been folded into collections).
So when a distressed homeowner called them, they had aggressive credit card collectors bully the borrower.
This was a failure of overall strategy due its sacrifice at the alter of tactics.A more obvious example is how Sony who had the largest catalog of songs and the best portable music player failed utterly to capitalize on digital music.
However, Apple, who had just come back from being within 90 days of bankruptcy ate their fucking lunch. Unbelievable.
The answer is that Sony set up divisions to compete with each other.
So the music division hated the electronics and vice versa and the tech side couldn’t get anyone to talk to them.
Each small actor there (the division bosses) lived in fear of being upstaged by or having talent poached by, the other division bosses.
Ever wonder why there are like 3 distinct Sony companies that make video games?The bottom line is that academics assume that private actors know how to operate in their own best interest.
And that is often not true.
If those giant actors (banks or conglomerates) have strategies and incentive structures that are too focused on small constituent actors (like short term options and bonuses based on short term localized success), then it is often to the detriment of the overall mission of the company or big actor.
ParticipantMARKMAX:
SO…
Lets see:
monetary base in 2004 was about 800b and pop was about 283m so that gives us a ratio of about 2827 dollars per person.
In 2011 the monetary base was about 2800b and population was about 303M. That gives us a ratio of about 9241 dollars per person.
So that is a ratio increase of 3.3x.
Yet, strangely, milk does not cost $10 a gallon.
Nor does gas.Inflation is strictly defined as a change in nominal effective demand. Our demand has not nominally changed all that much because while there are more dollar bills in existence, purchasing power in the aggregate (in other words, our economy) has not increased significantly.
Nor has there been some great cost push to drive it up suddenly like in the 1970s with oil.
The reason is that much of the nominal (and real) economic growth prior to 2008 was predicated on leverage.
Then there was a grand deleveraging event and tripling the money base hardly moved prices.
Most of that M1 increase went to cover losses and shore up balance sheets at banks.
Pallets of money were not newly lent (at least not to end user producers and consumers) and prices did not shoot up.
That may happen in the future but history does not bode well for ultra-daring risk (mis-)management in the short to medium term.
Banks are not smart but they can stay scared for a long time.
Unlike Rich, I think that fear (along with the scary, scary “GOV” intervention) will keep inflation well below 10% for the next 5 years at least.
I guess we’ll see.
Here’s a fun bet.
I bet you 100 dollars that the CPI stays below 60% between now and 2016.Hey if I lose the dollars will be worth $40 in today’s funds.
If I win…..well AWESOME!
November 19, 2011 at 11:30 AM in reply to: I am shocked. Shocked! Conforming limits going back up. #733261ParticipantThis sums up my thoughts on this conversation.
http://www.garfunkelandoates.com/music/clips/18/this-party-took-a-turn-for-the-douche-official/
Not really but I just like linking to that video.
November 18, 2011 at 9:45 PM in reply to: I am shocked. Shocked! Conforming limits going back up. #733252Participant[quote=sdrealtor][quote=urbanrealtor]I just talked to a lender and some assumptions require new appraisals.
Ergo, I don’t really know how much that assumability is worth as a general rule.[/quote]
Unless its BG’s assumable OPTION ARM loan which always has infinite value. Just ask her.[/quote]
Yeah.
You hate BG and she’s dumb.
You’re always right.
We get it.November 18, 2011 at 2:59 PM in reply to: I am shocked. Shocked! Conforming limits going back up. #733232Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]Talking about the assumable loan, here…[/quote]
Fine.
No guns.
Party pooper. -
AuthorPosts
