twignberries Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 If it saves lives I'll drive around at 40mph in an electric car. Screw it. That sentiment makes a whole hell of a lot of sense. Why, oh why are we still driving giant friggin trucks to the corner store, then "tisk tisking" as our young people die for oil. Sad, sad state of affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zensmoke Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 HSBC, Unlike Fed, Sees Housing Bubble Fri Jun 25, 2004 01:43 PM ET By Victoria Thieberger NEW YORK (Reuters) - Economists at HSBC on Friday waded into the debate over whether the U.S. housing market is over-inflated, declaring a bubble exists, something the Federal Reserve has been reluctant to do. Just a few days after the Federal Reserve Bank of New York said there was little evidence of a nationwide housing bubble, HSBC said a bubble exists and prices are likely to deflate gradually over a few years, triggered by Federal Reserve interest rate rises. "This bubble-psychology has manifested itself in very rich valuations," HSBC chief U.S. economist Ian Morris wrote. http://www.reuters.com/financeNewsArticle....storyID=5518002 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Sleddog- You are a skilled propgandist. You change the subject when the facts don't suit your position. Teresa Heinz gives millions of dollars to many causes. She does not control what those causes publish or think. I think it is a testament to her magnanimity and her commitment to social causes that she does give so much money away. Once again, the use of Newsmax as a source diminishes the value of any points you might try to make. Newsmax is another extreme right wing propaganda outlet whose primary use of facts is to twist and spin them into something other than what they are. I won't go so far as to call them liars, but let's just say I have a hard time believing most of what they publish. I think there are big differences between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats believe in equal rights, freedom of choice, the right to affordable healthcare, and government accountable to the people. Democrats are for responsible and responsive government, more importantly, for open government, and for innovative solutions to problem solving. Democrats believe in protecting the rights of women and minorities, including protecting the rights of those of alternative sexual orientation. Democrats believe that government should be proactive in protecting the rights of the poor and disenfranchised, by regulating the unbridled power of corporations, where necessary. Do all Democrats believe in and behave according to those principles? No. Do Republicans believe in any of these things? Definitely not. But I sure do. I've been a Democrat all my life because I believe that the purpose of government is to protect the public. I realize that you, and the majority of Stoolies, don't agree with that. Many of you just want government to go away. I prefer good government to no government. I don't believe it's possible to have good government with the Republicans in control. I think it's possible with Democrats, although any party in power for too long will become corrupt. In that respect, change is sometimes a good thing. Now is the time for change. When you go to vote in November, don't throw your vote away on a third party. If nothing else, vote for change. Then vote for change again in four years. The Republic may not survive another four years of the status quo. I have my doubts as to whether it will even survive this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShitEatingGrinner Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 I want to see 4 more years of Bush/Cheney. The end of the empire is in sight. The repugnicant party will be finished for a generation if not forever. Putting a vacillator like Kerry in will buy the corrupt empire more time. A statist is a statist is a statist. You want limited govt like we're supposed to have according to our constitution, then destruction of the current cancerous system is the only answer. A "reboot" is in order. That's the truth no once can handle. Washington DC is a festering cesspool corrupt beyond repair. Anarchy NOW! It's the cycles. It's circular. Waves. Human nature drives the cycle, and we're heading into the bad part of it. Gold and guns. Fortify the compound. THE END IS NEAR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain's Log Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Excellent article in the Financial Times on energy. Basically, prices on heating oil will be going up as refiners make more margins on gasoline ($13.,50 vs $5) so are not producing heating oil in sufficient levels for a cold winter. This is leading to a shortage in heating oil which will have knock on effects on natural gas and coal. Another interesting snippet : Coal makes up 2/3 of their electricity source. They are expected to reduce their exports by 25% this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 I want to see 4 more years of Bush/Cheney. The end of the empire is in sight. The repugnicant party will be finished for a generation if not forever. Putting a vacillator like Kerry in will buy the corrupt empire more time. A statist is a statist is a statist. You want limited govt like we're supposed to have according to our constitution, then destruction of the current cancerous system is the only answer. A "reboot" is in order. That's the truth no once can handle. Washington DC is a festering cesspool corrupt beyond repair. Anarchy NOW! It's the cycles. It's circular. Waves. Human nature drives the cycle, and we're heading into the bad part of it. Gold and guns. Fortify the compound. THE END IS NEAR Rabble rouser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optical Rectitus Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Doc-just pulled my copy of the Constitution-I could find no right to healthcare anywhere. Does freedom of choice mean abortion? Another left-wing code word. We had 40 years of Democratic rule-gee, the gvt was SURE responsive then... IMO, the Democrats believe that all income is the governments-what the Congress cannot spend, they let us keep. Did we have good government with LBJ ? With Carter?? With Clinton??? The ONLY thing Clinton accomplished in 8 years was a good haircut. FWIW, I have no party affiliation-I did not vote for President Bush-I was one of 3400 in Palm Beach that voted for Buchanan. Optical Rectitus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optical Rectitus Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 MaHU Nice to see you this late OR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 In 1787 no one had health care. Today the fortunate do. To my knowledge we are the only industrialized nation which does not guarantee some form of health care to its citizens, and whose government does not negotiate drug prices on behalf of its citizens. I am in favor of universal health care. I am also in favor of limiting the ability of the drug companies to screw the American people. The fact that the constitution does not mention that is irrelevant. It also doesn't mention a right to privacy, but it is something most Americans believe in. I supported most of Lyndon Johnson's domestic initiatives. We of course did not have 40 years of "Democratic rule." We had a Democratically controlled Congress for 40 years. It passed landmark civil rights legislation, and a variety of other legislation which I supported. It established Medicare. It was a proactive Congress on issues of human rights and human needs. Yes they spent money. The Republicans have spent more. It so happens that Democrats spent it on some things I believe in. The Republicans spent it on military buildups and massive pork projects in their own districts. They also gave massive tax breaks which overwhelmingly benefitted their biggest contributors. I call that a kickback, a payoff. I thought Carter was a good man and a decent President. Clinot was and is a lying scumbag. He did have some good people in his government. He should have been impeached. Those are my views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brisbane Bear Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Talking of politics,I dont know if many are aware,but Australia has stood shoulder to shoulder with the US through every war for the last 85 years or so...we continue to be one of the most loyal supporters of this current mess in Iraq. England also has a long history of standing with the US and also are one of the strongest supporters in the current coalition. What is interesting is that in Australia we have a very conservative govt and in England they have a Socialist govt,and yet they both support Bushs war. We in Australia look like we might go to the polls on August 7,it could be announced as early as tomorrow . Our current Prime Minister has been lagging in the polls for the past 6 months or so,up against a new younger opponent who wants to bring the troops home. Our current govt is giving away huge amounts of money in the lead up to the election,in fairness they have been very fiscally responsible over the past 7 years or so and now think they have nothing to lose by big spending and big promises to try and win a 3rd term in office. I think they probably want to go to the polls early to avoid any parallels that might be drawn by how Bush goes or is going and assuming they lose, to maybe even give Bush time to recover from the comparisons that they will make with the Spanish elections,where the war support cost the incumbents office. I think our Prime Minister will probably win,but he would need to go sooner rather than later,especially if the real estate bubbles bursts faster than people expect. The one thing that really bothers me with my theory is, as Mark points out,the AllOrds is really very strong at the moment,no sign of any concern,if anything it is signaling a boom is upon us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alceringa Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 In 1787 no one had health care. Part of the brillance of those that drafted the Constituion is that they knew they could not foresee the future. That's why they wrote this....... We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. with the hope that succeeding generations would be able to redefine both what "the general welfare" and "the blessings of liberty" mean. Today, that means universal health care and should mean the universal right to education, IMO. It also doesn't mention a right to privacy... Actually, it's in the The Ninth Amendment, if one reads it with care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drano Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Off topic CECO mess seems to be worse than what we've discussed here. Barron's article: http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...28951&mid=12967 "For-profit schools are heavily dependent on federal student loan money, which accounted for 58% of Career Education's 2003 revenues. A big selling point for potential students is Career Education's advertised 93% placement rates for graduates. But the shareholder lawsuit alleges that the figure is puffed up by counting students who enroll in the military or go on to other Career Education degree programs." Hmm. Short it to zero? Possibly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonmug Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 ... Strikes me as more innocent than the pharmaceutical industry giving Shrub a ton of money and before you know it he wants everyone in the US tested for mental diseases--so that offending sick people can be prescribed the pharma companies drugs-the expensive ones. brown one- would you be referring to Bush plans to screen whole US population for mental illness by Jeanne Lenzer Strikes me as a bad idea for more reasons than I have digits- Brave New World, pharma raid on Treasury, a screen for abandonment of the mentally ill... in short drug 'em & dump 'em on the street; if they cause a disturbance in the Mall, lock 'em in the (privatized) prison system. Of course, no one would be compelled to take their meds, right? Right? Realistically, I doubt any such grandiose project would be implemented- most likely to end up like the AIDS program- legisleation passed, not funded. Tho it would be handy to have a few laws on the books to be selectively applied to those exhibit deviant/ disruptive behaviors... Compassionate conservatism, my ass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hypertiger Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Kerry and bush are both Absolute capitalists Bush represents the violent and Kerry the Gradual... One slight problem...In a systemic collapse the Gradual turns Violent... When it comes time you need a good demagog/orator to sing the masses to sleep...to keep chaos to a minimum...Kerry can do that and that is why the Gradual faction want's Bush out... The Gradual faction for the most part maintains control of the media... The war on Terror could not of happened without both factions supporting it... It all looks good on paper...Unfortunately when put into practice the grim realities of trying to turn lies into truth which was impossible right from square 1 become sickeningly apparent...The factions begin splintering when it also becomes blindingly self evdient even to downs syndrom sufferers that the sales pitch the biggest delusion of them all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucid and confused Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Hyper, Why are yo so certain that the fall of debt backed fractional banking will be blindingly self-evident, even to someone with Down Syndrome?? It seems to me that most people, myself included sometimes, don't even realize that they're alive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.