Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Stage1 on August 01, 2008, 08:58:47 AM
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey folks.......facts are facts!!
This has to make you think a little bit, if not, then keep your blinders on!
George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
4) the DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 +
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations o'seas, living large!...
But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress & yep--we got 'CHANGE' all right. In the PAST YEAR:
1) Consumer confidence has plummeted ;
2) Gasoline is now over $4 a gallon & climbing!;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by 12 Trillion dollars & prices are still dropping!!!!
5) At least 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
6) as I write, THE DOW is probing another low~~11,100--
$2.5TRILLIONDOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS!
YEP , IN 2006 AMERICA VOTED FOR CHANGE!...AND WE SURE AS HELL GOT IT!!!....NOW OBAMA, the DEM'S CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT--AND THE POLLS SAY HE'S GONNA BE 'THE MAN'--CLAIMS HE'S GONNA REALLY GIVE US CHANGE!!....JUST HOW MUCH MORE 'CHANGE' DO YA THINK YOU CAN STAND???!!!!???
-
(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/angry047.gif)
-
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/pelosi-bush-drilling-proposal-hoax/story.aspx?guid=%7BBF9364BD-0DEA-4923-A780-74A0DDF77BDA%7D&dist=hppr
I love the last paragraph....
"Today, the New Direction Congress..."
-
The everybody's fault but my own is a theme for the republicans. What your seeing is the result of 7 1/2 years of catering to lobbyist and big business unrestrained spending of bad policies and bad politics. Even the talking heads of the right wing, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly talk about how disappointed they are in the mismanagement of the republicans in the government. If you think that magically when the Democrats took the majority, which they very barely have thanks to Joe Lieberman, that the country suddenly went downhill, then you are very naive.
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey folks.......facts are facts!!
This has to make you think a little bit, if not, then keep your blinders on!
George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
4) the DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 +
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations o'seas, living large!...
But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress & yep--we got 'CHANGE' all right. In the PAST YEAR:
1) Consumer confidence has plummeted ;
2) Gasoline is now over $4 a gallon & climbing!;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by 12 Trillion dollars & prices are still dropping!!!!
5) At least 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
6) as I write, THE DOW is probing another low~~11,100--
$2.5TRILLIONDOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS!
Your stats are bogus.
-
The everybody's fault but my own is a theme for the republicans. What your seeing is the result of 7 1/2 years of catering to lobbyist and big business unrestrained spending of bad policies and bad politics. Even the talking heads of the right wing, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly talk about how disappointed they are in the mismanagement of the republicans in the government. If you think that magically when the Democrats took the majority, which they very barely have thanks to Joe Lieberman, that the country suddenly went downhill, then you are very naive.
Did we forget that the Republican's candidate got us out of Clinton's debt?
-
The everybody's fault but my own is a theme for the republicans.
Really? Just the republicans?
Wow, and here I thought that the Democrats were just as good at passing the blame--sort of like you just did in your post.
-
Did we forget that the Republican's candidate got us out of Clinton's debt?
Huh?
-
Your stats are bogus.
Actually, it's pretty much with right on. If we still had a republican congress, gas would probably be back at $1.50-$2.50. Only reason the Republican congress left with gas at 2.10 was the crisis Katrina.
The American people got what they deserved and they're suffering for it. Congrats to them.
The everybody's fault but my own is a theme for the republicans.
And the Democrats them is the 'Cut and Run' tactic. I'd rather have 'Everyones fault but my own' than 'Cut and run' atleast I got the balls to blame it on someone other than myself. :rock
-
atleast I got the balls to blame it on someone other than myself. :rock
double huh?
-
Your stats are bogus.
Being that I assume you are intelligent and would not just throw a short rebuttal like that without doing some research, could you point out what was bogus about his stats?
-
The everybody's fault but my own is a theme for the republicans. What your seeing is the result of 7 1/2 years of catering to lobbyist and big business unrestrained spending of bad policies and bad politics. Even the talking heads of the right wing, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly talk about how disappointed they are in the mismanagement of the republicans in the government. If you think that magically when the Democrats took the majority, which they very barely have thanks to Joe Lieberman, that the country suddenly went downhill, then you are very naive.
Your stats are bogus.
"facts are facts!!"
"This has to make you think a little bit, if not, then keep your blinders on!"
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey folks.......facts are facts!!
This has to make you think a little bit, if not, then keep your blinders on!
George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
4) the DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 +
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations o'seas, living large!...
But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress & yep--we got 'CHANGE' all right. In the PAST YEAR:
1) Consumer confidence has plummeted ;
2) Gasoline is now over $4 a gallon & climbing!;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by 12 Trillion dollars & prices are still dropping!!!!
5) At least 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
6) as I write, THE DOW is probing another low~~11,100--
$2.5TRILLIONDOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS!
YEP , IN 2006 AMERICA VOTED FOR CHANGE!...AND WE SURE AS HELL GOT IT!!!....NOW OBAMA, the DEM'S CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT--AND THE POLLS SAY HE'S GONNA BE 'THE MAN'--CLAIMS HE'S GONNA REALLY GIVE US CHANGE!!....JUST HOW MUCH MORE 'CHANGE' DO YA THINK YOU CAN STAND???!!!!???
i don't disagree with anything you're saying..but unless i'm missing something..and i may well be........
4.5% to 5% is only .5% increase
-
Did we forget that the Republican's candidate got us out of Clinton's debt?
i thought we were already out of that debt before bush got appointed?
-
People are never going to be satisfied.
-
Actually, it's pretty much with right on. If we still had a republican congress, gas would probably be back at $1.50-$2.50. Only reason the Republican congress left with gas at 2.10 was the crisis Katrina.
The American people got what they deserved and they're suffering for it. Congrats to them.
And the Democrats them is the 'Cut and Run' tactic. I'd rather have 'Everyones fault but my own' than 'Cut and run' atleast I got the balls to blame it on someone other than myself. :rock
katrina was not a good excuse for the prices to skyrocket like that.
if the congress can really control gas prices, lets challeng the repubs then. we vote them back in, and within 6 months of their taking office, we get our gas for 1.50 a gallon again. i think that'll never happne though
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey folks.......facts are facts!!
This has to make you think a little bit, if not, then keep your blinders on!
George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
4) the DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 +
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations OSes, living large!...
But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress & yep--we got 'CHANGE' all right. In the PAST YEAR:
1) Consumer confidence has plummeted ;
2) Gasoline is now over $4 a gallon & climbing!;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by 12 Trillion dollars & prices are still dropping!!!!
5) At least 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
6) as I write, THE DOW is probing another low~~11,100--
$2.5TRILLIONDOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS!
YEP , IN 2006 AMERICA VOTED FOR CHANGE!...AND WE SURE AS HELL GOT IT!!!....NOW OBAMA, the DEM'S CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT--AND THE POLLS SAY HE'S GONNA BE 'THE MAN'--CLAIMS HE'S GONNA REALLY GIVE US CHANGE!!....JUST HOW MUCH MORE 'CHANGE' DO YA THINK YOU CAN STAND???!!!!???
What you don't understand, Stage 1, is that everything started tanking slowly since 2001. The invisible shift of our Manufacturing to China; Your gas of $2.19 in 2006 was $1.28 in 2001. The houses' on the market were still affordable in '01, but Boosh and his repub congress turned a blind eye (or simply didn't give a damn) about curbing it before it got out of hand. Katrina' impact on oil prices' was bloated and bogus, and the gov't. knew it. The biggest impact on oil prices' has been our involvement in the middle east, and problems' with other OPEC nations' like Venezuela...And not even keeping tabs' on what Oil companies were doing. None of the problems' you listed popped up in such a short time. They've been building up since GWB's first term, and getting out of hand. It will take about 3 presidential administration's to fix the damage, if that.
-
4.5% to 5% is only .5% increase
think again. It is actually more that 10% increase
0.5/4.5 * 100 = 11.11 %
-
Your stats are bogus.
Outside of a 4 word answer, can you refute those stats?
And...when's the last time you had shrimp & grits? I put imitation crabmeat in the last time and it was awesome.)
ROX
-
lets not forget that the dems have been in control of congress for two years. now the last time i checked, they have done absolutely NOTHING to curb any of these problems. elect osamabama, and no one will be able to stop the havoc the socialists will wreak on our nation.
NOT
-
think again. It is actually more that 10% increase
0.5/4.5 * 100 = 11.11 %
maybe i was missing something?
4.5 + .5=5?
or is there new math?
-
Take 5 -10%= 4.5 (duh!) So there is your 10% increase!!
-
As much as I'd like to agree with the original post, I cannot since no sources are cited. I mean I could make up whatever somewhat believable stats I want.
E.g.
The unemployment rate was actually 4.9% and your mother's maiden name was really toejamzoomski.
-
I know an election is coming up so people have to try to make the opposition look bad, but is there anyone who seriously believes high US gasoline prices are caused by the actions of congress since November 2006? Seriously? If so, by what possible mechanism?
-
Actually, it's pretty much with right on. If we still had a republican congress, gas would probably be back at $1.50-$2.50. Only reason the Republican congress left with gas at 2.10 was the crisis Katrina.
You have no understanding on this subject. The Republican controlled congress repealed the acts that were controlling the way investors put their money into the commodities. http://seekingalpha.com/article/81243-the-enron-loophole (http://seekingalpha.com/article/81243-the-enron-loophole) This has accounted for around 55% of the increases in direct gas prices at the pump. The fact that you ignore this fact and continually vomit BS is astounding.
QUOTE IS FROM HYPERLINK ABOVE
What I do want to get to is what has come to be known as the “Enron Loophole”, a provision that was slipped into the bill literally in the dead of night by then-Senator Phil Gramm [R – TX].
The provision, allegedly at the behest of Ken Lay of Enron, exempted from regulation energy trading on electronic platforms. This provision is believed to be the primary reason for the spike in electricity costs in California in 2001 and is at the heart of the debate re the speculation in oil prices today.
The most vociferous of the expert witnesses at last Tuesday's congressional event was I. Michael Greenberger, professor of law at Maryland University and former CFTC Director of the Division of Trading & Markets (1997 – 1999). Professor Greenberger argued that the “Enron Loophole” provision in the CFMA produced a change in the supervision of certain commodities (energy, for example) that had been in place since 1922 thereby enabling Enron to engage in their trading practices (with led to the electricity crisis in California in 2001) and the development of “dark markets” (Intercontinental Commodities Exchange in Atlanta, for example) enabling unlimited positions and limited transparency to be established by speculators. All outside the purview of the US regulatory bodies such as the CFTC.
Currently, an attempt to eliminate the “Enron Loophole” has been attached to the massive farm bill (amendment by Sen. Carl Levin) that was passed with a veto proof majority and has been threatened with a veto by President Bush for stated reasons that are suspect, at best.
There are several dimensions to this dynamic issue and they will be explored in the coming days. But let me leave you with a few initial observations:
1 - There is a real probablity that investment banks will be at risk as last week’s testimony makes abundantly clear. One point illustrates the danger – Professor Greenberger noted that the largest holder of heating oil for New England residents is Morgan Stanley. Related to this, George Soros and other panelists noted that hoarding is taking place, as the incentive to convert a rising and controllable asset such as heating oil to US dollars (which is in a structural decline in value and not controllable) is not in the investment banks' interest.
2 – The obvious direct economic impact cannot be overstated. From consumers to industries (airlines, for example) are being effected by the speculation of indexers and hedgies. With consumers stressed and industries on the verge of bankruptcy, the uproar in an election year will not go unnoticed. To that end, consider the following point re the upcoming presidential election.
3 – Former Senator Phil Gramm is acknowledged as the key economic advisor to Senator John McCain. Senator McCain has joined President Bush in opposing the current farm bill for the same apparent reasons. However, in Senator McCain’s case the reason may be more ignorance by relying on his economic advisor, Sen. Gramm, than the more nefarious supporting of the Enron Loophole. The bottom line is there is real risk that McCain will look more than a touch clueless on the key economic matter of the price of energy.
Investment Strategy Implications
At last week’s congressional hearing, several experts testified to what the fair value of oil might be – a subject that I wrote about last week, without knowledge of the actual testimony. It was interesting to hear that my rather simplistic calculation of where the fair value of oil might be (approx. $80) matched very closely to several expert witnesses’ estimates, as well as the more sophisticated analysis conducted by Exxon Mobil and Shell Oil.
The coming weeks will be telling as the farm bill works its way into law. And then we shall see if $130 oil is really only about real economy supply and demand and not the supply and demand of the speculators.
-
I know an election is coming up so people have to try to make the opposition look bad, but is there anyone who seriously believes high US gasoline prices are caused by the actions of congress since November 2006? Seriously? If so, by what possible mechanism?
If I were to take a half-hearted stab at that one, Nashwan, I'd say that Gov't. de-regulation could be a culprit.
-
If I were to take a half-hearted stab at that one, Nashwan, I'd say that Gov't. de-regulation could be a culprit.
Specifically, deregulation in 2001 of the electonic investment platform.
-
U.S. jobless rate jumps to four-year-high 5.7% (www.marketwatch.com)
Oil futures close above $125, up 1.5% for the week (www.marketwatch.com)
"Consumers' assessment of current conditions was little changed, suggesting there has been no significant improvement, nor significant deterioration, in business or labor market conditions. Looking ahead, while consumers remain extremely grim about short-term prospects, the modest improvement in expectations, often a harbinger of economic times to come, bears careful watching over the next few months." ( http://www.conference-board.org/economics/ConsumerConfidence.cfm)
Dow Jones Averages
Dow Jones Industrial Average
1 Aug
16:04
11326.32
-51.70
-0.45
-1886.80
-14.22
Dow Jones Transportation Average
1 Aug
16:05
4949.22
-122.69
-2.42
Dow Jones Utility Average
1 Aug
16:08
469.53
-15.35
-3.17
-47.65
-8.95
Dow Jones Composite Average
1 Aug
16:08
4069.79
-68.26
-1.65
-256.01
-5.83
Indicative Dow Jones Industrial Average (U.S.$)
1 Aug
09:29
11371.88
-4.85
-0.04
Indicative Dow Jones Industrial Average (euro)
1 Aug
16:04
8518.45
-6.52
-0.08
(www.djindexes.com)
L.A. Times blogs on Dataquick’s announcement that foreclosures are running 261% ahead of year ago levels. (L.A. Times)
-
U.S. jobless rate jumps to four-year-high 5.7% (www.marketwatch.com)
Oil futures close above $125, up 1.5% for the week (www.marketwatch.com)
"Consumers' assessment of current conditions was little changed, suggesting there has been no significant improvement, nor significant deterioration, in business or labor market conditions. Looking ahead, while consumers remain extremely grim about short-term prospects, the modest improvement in expectations, often a harbinger of economic times to come, bears careful watching over the next few months." ( http://www.conference-board.org/economics/ConsumerConfidence.cfm)
Dow Jones Averages
Dow Jones Industrial Average
1 Aug
16:04
11326.32
-51.70
-0.45
-1886.80
-14.22
Dow Jones Transportation Average
1 Aug
16:05
4949.22
-122.69
-2.42
Dow Jones Utility Average
1 Aug
16:08
469.53
-15.35
-3.17
-47.65
-8.95
Dow Jones Composite Average
1 Aug
16:08
4069.79
-68.26
-1.65
-256.01
-5.83
Indicative Dow Jones Industrial Average (U.S.$)
1 Aug
09:29
11371.88
-4.85
-0.04
Indicative Dow Jones Industrial Average (euro)
1 Aug
16:04
8518.45
-6.52
-0.08
(www.djindexes.com)
L.A. Times blogs on Dataquick’s announcement that foreclosures are running 261% ahead of year ago levels. (L.A. Times)
A year and a half ago, the DJIA was breaking 14k. What it's fallen to now, can be directly attributed to the Credit/Mortgage crisis. That can also be said for the jobless rate, as well. The price of oil isn't really affected by the stock market so much as other factors.
-
maybe i was missing something?
4.5 + .5=5?
or is there new math?
what is 10% of 4.5?
it's not that hard to figure out dude, it's .45
what is 5% of 4.5? isn't that .225
-
Cap1,
Stop thinking of the relationship of the 4.5% to 100% of the overall employment rate. 4.5% was the total unemployment before. In that case the 4.5% is actually 100% of the unemployed.
Now the change in unemployment to the total of employable workforce to 5% is not just .05 of the total it's actually 10%+ of the 100% of the unemployed that had been counted as 4.5% (now 5%) of the entire population of employable people. It's not just straight addition and subtraction of the entire population.
The change is .05 of the entire employable population but is a 10%+ change in the population of the unemployed. Those are 2 different populations not just one.
-
Specifically, deregulation in 2001 of the electonic investment platform.
That's not since 2006, but the whole "speculation" thing is wide of the mark anyway. Have you seen the CFTC report released a few days ago?
The Task Force’s preliminary assessment is that current oil prices and the increase in oil prices between January 2003 and June 2008 are largely due to fundamental supply and demand factors. During this same period, activity on the crude oil futures market – as measured by the number of contracts outstanding, trading activity, and the number of traders – has increased significantly. While these increases broadly coincided with the run-up in crude oil prices, the Task Force’s preliminary analysis to date does not support the proposition that speculative activity has systematically driven changes in oil prices.
The imbalance between scarce supply and growing demand, and expectations that this imbalance will persist in the future, have led to upward pressure on oil prices and greater market reactions to any actual or perceived disruptions in available supply. Under such tight market conditions, it is often the case that only large price increases can re-establish equilibrium between supply and demand. Consequently, large or rapid movements in oil prices are not inconsistent with the fundamentals of supply and demand; such price movements, by themselves, do not indicate that prices have become divorced from fundamentals. Moreover, if speculative positions, rather than fundamentals, were pushing prices upward, then inventories would be expected to rise. To date, there is no evidence of such an accumulation; in fact, known inventory levels actually have declined.
The Task Force’s preliminary analysis also suggests that changes in the positions of swap dealers and non-commercial traders most often followed price changes. This result does not support the hypothesis that the activity of these groups is driving prices higher. The Task Force has found that the activity of market participants often described as “speculators” has not resulted in systematic changes in price over the last five and a half years.
The entire reason for the increase in oil prices is encapsulated in one graph in the report:
(http://www.theoildrum.com/files/CFTC_Fig_1.png)
The extracts and image come from www.theoildrum.com , but the entire report is at http://www.cftc.gov/stellent/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/itfinterimreportoncrudeoil0708.pdf
-
We really need Charon to chime in with the oil stats. My take on the growing economic crisis is pretty much the same for you guys as it is for us here is Oz.
The recessions we are facing are related directly to three things. Reduced personal disposable income, a rapidly increasing outgoing international cash flow and increased government spending.
People have less money to spend at the store because they are having to pay more for fuel. Because they have less to spend they are more likely when they do to spend it on the less expensive imported goods.
The number of locally produced items is rapidly disappearing and we are becoming dependant on China to supply most of what we take for granted for our day to day life. Most of our factories no longer exist, you will have a hard time even finding their sites anymore. They have been bought by Chinese interests and when they were, they packed it all up put it on a ship and moved the entire operation to China, taking everything except the employees. We no longer have the capability to make that thing in this country. If we wanted to restart it, we'd have to purchase the machinery, and guess what? We'd probably have to either retool and remanufacture it all from scratch or buy it from China!
We have all this to deal with and yet our Governments are insisting on spending BILLIONS of dollars supporting military actions in the Middle east combating a problem we helped to create?
We're going under. No ifs no buts. It is just a matter of time. When the final blow comes the politicians are going to say "this came out of nowhere!" and it was staring them in the face since the 1970's
-
maybe i was missing something?
4.5 + .5=5?
or is there new math?
no. It is a real math. No further comment.
-
Take 5 -10%= 4.5 (duh!) So there is your 10% increase!!
no the base is 4.5, A change to 5.0 is a 0.5
so...
it's been 50+ years but hear me out.
a change (0.5) over the base (4.5) times (I know - will confuse many), so I'll replace * with times 100 %
0.5/4.5 TIMES (like multiplied) 100 = (still) 11.11(1) %
I wonder haw many know what the parenthesis mean in
11.11(1) %
P.S. Math does not hurt. It it good for you
-
Once you UNDERSTAND a concept, (any concept) you don't have to remember any formulas. ever. You just derive them as you need them.
I'm afraid (more accurately terrified) that they do not teach this train of thought anymore.
"Same outcome" trumps all. If some in the class (and obviously there will be some), can't grasp the CONCEPT of, say, calculus, none in the class will be allowed to know it (not even talking about mastering it).
Once you are denied a certain level of knowledge/understanding, it is unlikely that you'll be hungry for more.
Thus, a perfect society.
-
Am I banned? the silence is killing me.
-
Oh, I know, the ignore thingie kicked in
-
P.S. Math does not hurt. It it good for you
Apparently for you, english is painful.
-
i thought we were already out of that debt before bush got appointed?
Oh hell no. We were still deep in debt, we were not just borrowing so much. The budget was balanced for the last few years of Clinton.
Let's see... somewhere it says...
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
So apparently it is Congress, not Clinton or Bush who tax, spend, and borrow.
So it was the Congress at the time who balanced the budget, then blew the lid off of it later.
-
Apparently for you, english is painful.
Like in English, you mean, right?
-
And to answer your question directly, it was not as easy as my other languages but I hope I can finally get my point across in it.
It is my fourth language, and I was talking about a grade 0 math.
P.S. Just to impress me please answer me in Swiss. (you can find a web translator somewhere)
-
And to answer your question directly, it was not as easy as my other languages but I hope I can finally get my point across in it.
It is my fourth language, and I was talking about a grade 0 math.
Never mind him mietla. He is incapable of actually contributing something substantial to the conversation. He's better suited to the drive by "look, I'm better than you" posting.
-
well yeah. Usually I just smack the mosquitoes ...splat, but sometimes it is fun to catch one (those that feasted at your body are heavy and REALLY SLOW), pull his legs and wings (I usually leave one wing intact) apart, and then let him go (or speak as it is here). Fun to see him take off.
SkyRock, your typing skills are impeccable. I do not speak web-easeee but for what it is worth... <S>
on one wing.
P.S. I hope I did not mis-type anything here. I'll look like a complete idiot if I misspelled something like english or "i" (including web-easeee). Could not find this thing on the web.
Be gentle AH buddies.
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey folks.......facts are facts!!
This has to make you think a little bit, if not, then keep your blinders on!
George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
4) the DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 +
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations o'seas, living large!...
But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress & yep--we got 'CHANGE' all right. In the PAST YEAR:
1) Consumer confidence has plummeted ;
2) Gasoline is now over $4 a gallon & climbing!;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by 12 Trillion dollars & prices are still dropping!!!!
5) At least 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
6) as I write, THE DOW is probing another low~~11,100--
$2.5TRILLIONDOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS!
YEP , IN 2006 AMERICA VOTED FOR CHANGE!...AND WE SURE AS HELL GOT IT!!!....NOW OBAMA, the DEM'S CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT--AND THE POLLS SAY HE'S GONNA BE 'THE MAN'--CLAIMS HE'S GONNA REALLY GIVE US CHANGE!!....JUST HOW MUCH MORE 'CHANGE' DO YA THINK YOU CAN STAND???!!!!???
uh. please tell me that you are kidding about gas being 2.19 a gallon a year ago so i can read along further without laughing my tail off.
-
Dutch closest I can get
mietla, u is een hoser, maar is juist over math, zoals ik te hierboven op wees
can't find a single swiss translator
-
FO Mustaine. I need my fish
-
Apparently for you, english is painful.
Oh. cm'on SkyRock take pity. Reel me in? (in Swiss)
-
BTW, I am obviously not aware of your age. I am 98, so whatever age you are. I think that you can find in your heart to give me a handicap... I hope.
Just give me terms ((max distance of 6 feet) and I'll meet you there.
Unless you are a yellow belly.
The challenge is a 4 ft. grammar and spelling (In your own language)
-
learn your Swiss before you speak
-
Cap1,
Stop thinking of the relationship of the 4.5% to 100% of the overall employment rate. 4.5% was the total unemployment before. In that case the 4.5% is actually 100% of the unemployed.
Now the change in unemployment to the total of employable workforce to 5% is not just .05 of the total it's actually 10%+ of the 100% of the unemployed that had been counted as 4.5% (now 5%) of the entire population of employable people. It's not just straight addition and subtraction of the entire population.
The change is .05 of the entire employable population but is a 10%+ change in the population of the unemployed. Those are 2 different populations not just one.
thank ya sir......now i get it. i was thinking wrong. all i needed was for someone to explain it like you just did. :aok
-
Am I banned? the silence is killing me.
i only just got home. maverick and you explained it well. i got it now.
but..i don't know what the parenthesis are for though......
-
Oh hell no. We were still deep in debt, we were not just borrowing so much. The budget was balanced for the last few years of Clinton.
Let's see... somewhere it says...
So apparently it is Congress, not Clinton or Bush who tax, spend, and borrow.
So it was the Congress at the time who balanced the budget, then blew the lid off of it later.
well......although i've been guilty too, of laying blame on a president, i've pretty much always(in verbal conversations) of saying the president and the powers that be(meaning congress, the guys that bribe them, etc.....)
i think to the politicians way of thinking, if we were borrowing less, then in their eyes, we were out of debt :D
-
And to answer your question directly, it was not as easy as my other languages but I hope I can finally get my point across in it.
It is my fourth language, and I was talking about a grade 0 math.
P.S. Just to impress me please answer me in Swiss. (you can find a web translator somewhere)
Tack sir. jag uppskattar att du tar dig tid att förklara detta för mig.
:D
-
learn your Swiss before you speak
I'll take a try mietla...
*clears throat*
Die Karotten haben sich aufgelehnt und haben die Mäuse weggetrieben
-
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/pelosi-bush-drilling-proposal-hoax/story.aspx?guid=%7BBF9364BD-0DEA-4923-A780-74A0DDF77BDA%7D&dist=hppr
I love the last paragraph....
"Today, the New Direction Congress..."
Nancy Pelosi, sheesh! New Direction Congress. How do these people get elected how?
BTW, I blame all of congress. The Republicats went berserk with pork barrel spending. Plus they had a majority at one time why didn't they free up drilling.
-
Nancy Pelosi, sheesh! New Direction Congress. How do these people get elected how?
BTW, I blame all of congress. The Republicats went berserk with pork barrel spending. Plus they had a majority at one time why didn't they free up drilling.
THEORY A) the election system is bogus. it is used onl to keep the sheeple thinking they have some form of control over thier government. our "elected" officials are actually appointed. :noid
THEORY B) the country is full of incredibly stupid people
THEORY C) our politicians are expert liars, and they play on theory B. they will promise the world with a fence around it, sheeple believe them. after 6 months, most forget what they were promised.
:noid :noid :noid :D
-
THEORY A) the election system is bogus. it is used onl to keep the sheeple thinking they have some form of control over thier government. our "elected" officials are actually appointed. :noid
THEORY B) the country is full of incredibly stupid people
THEORY C) our politicians are expert liars, and they play on theory B. they will promise the world with a fence around it, sheeple believe them. after 6 months, most forget what they were promised.
:noid :noid :noid :D
It would be C with a thicker mix of B in it. Too many people play party politics, and the career politician's play up on that.
-
Does anyone else notice that the Obama mantra of "change" tells us very little, and that defenders of that empty suit will rally to his side lacking their own ability to explain exactly how he will make anything better?
Nobody, even the most blind moonbat can tell us that he has the experience to lead a large nation. Nobody can deny his limited history is absolutely one of the most liberal non-inspiring histories of anyone ever to seek such a high office.
In the last 6 months, his flip-flopping on issues has been extremely evident, with the 2nd amendment as a prime example.
Honestly, I can see NO reason why I or anyone else should vote for this empty suit.
-
Meitla :aok
-
Meitla :aok
I'M STILL WAITING TO SEE IF ANY OF US DID WELL WITH THE DIFFERENT LANGUAGES FOR HIM :D
-
Does anyone else notice that the Obama mantra of "change" tells us very little, and that defenders of that empty suit will rally to his side lacking their own ability to explain exactly how he will make anything better?
Nobody, even the most blind moonbat can tell us that he has the experience to lead a large nation. Nobody can deny his limited history is absolutely one of the most liberal non-inspiring histories of anyone ever to seek such a high office.
In the last 6 months, his flip-flopping on issues has been extremely evident, with the 2nd amendment as a prime example.
Honestly, I can see NO reason why I or anyone else should vote for this empty suit.
I believe that is exactly what his charm has been so far, though. He doesn't SEEM like a career politician; He's young, and expresses new ideas. McCain? He's exactly one of those old, In-it-for-myself-and-not-you-the-American-people kinda sweetheartbag's that everyone's tired of. Hell, He doesn't have a platform that changes' anything from the current president, and people definetely want something better than Bush. IMHO, McCain would do better if he changed up a little himself.
-
It would be C with a thicker mix of B in it. Too many people play party politics, and the career politician's play up on that.
Ditto B & C.
Both sides do it too. Just some insight though. Several studies have found that Democrats are less educated than Republicants. I remember when word got out by talk radio that congress was trying to give amnesty to the illegals the Men and women of congress phones started ringing off the hook. Then one congressman, a republican, got angry because the people found out about it. The moral of the story is that Congress does not want you to know what they are doing until afterward.
You now we can vote these people out! I'm willing to get rid of Lugar and that moron Carter here in Indiana.
-
Frode, your view of McCain aside, do you really think that American voters want a black radical leftist for president? Just look at Obama's actual documented voting history and associations.
The actual walk - not the talk - is the tale of the tape for politicians.
-
Ditto B & C.
Both sides do it too. Just some insight though. Several studies have found that Democrats are less educated than Republicants. I remember when word got out by talk radio that congress was trying to give amnesty to the illegals the Men and women of congress phones started ringing off the hook. Then one congressman, a republican, got angry because the people found out about it. The moral of the story is that Congress does not want you to know what they are doing until afterward.
You now we can vote these people out! I'm willing to get rid of Lugar and that moron Carter here in Indiana.
true, we can vote them out. but the problem again, is that what wqe get in their place may well be soo bad that we wish we had the first amazinhunks back.
but then, these guys are most likely apoinhted.....the voting process is just an illusion anymore.... :noid
-
but..i don't know what the parenthesis are for though......
it means that 1s go to infinity. In other words there isn't a decimal form that can express 05/4.5
The answer is
05/4.5
whoever takes it, can approximate it to whatever degree of accuracy they want
11
or
11.1
or
11.11
or
11.11111111111111
it's all 1s until you hit the turtle
-
when Mr. Obama has those little campaign posters that say "Change" you can believe in. all that means is he will contiue to change is mind about issues. notice how he was against off-shore oil drilling in the gulf coast. Well now he is all for it. Who knows what will happen in the future.
-
Frode, your view of McCain aside, do you really think that American voters want a black radical leftist for president? Just look at Obama's actual documented voting history and associations.
The actual walk - not the talk - is the tale of the tape for politicians.
To tell the truth, IMHO it depends' on how many of the Voting populace see him as-Either the Black, radical leftist, or as someone who's not gonna keep going the same way the current administrations' going. Right now, people see the mortgage crisis, energy prices, increasing job losses, inflation of the dollar, And no plan to fix these things. The War on terror? What's that, the occupation of Iraq? People are tired of that, too. All they see of that is the huge tax burden it incurs. People are getting hit in the wallet, and to them, that's all that matters to them, they want to see some relief. When McCain keeps' parroting basically the same things' that Bush is, and Obama's talking economic and energy reform, they're listening to Obama because that's what they want. McCain would be wise to split with bush, and start harping up a plan to get the economy back to where it was in the year 2000.
Myself...I don't foresee either of those candidate's coming up with any kind of economic plan that would fix all of our domestic problems in 4 years, or even 8. Not without some really draconian moves on the gov't's. part. Stimulus packages' are nice little windfalls, but not what this country needs. It needs' it's factories back. It needs' it's outsourced jobs back. It needs' it's base manufacturing economy on american soil paying wages to american consumers, so that they can spend their money in an american economy. And neither of those candidates' has come out and said that.
-
true, we can vote them out. but the problem again, is that what wqe get in their place may well be soo bad that we wish we had the first amazinhunks back.
ooooo, now THIS is funny!!!!!!!! i type in the typical work for anal oriface, and amazinhunks comes out on the boards??????? :rofl :lol :O :rofl :rofl
-
obama is not "all for drilling", he is for "reasonable drilling", just like he is for reasonable gun laws.
obama is playing the polls, his advisers have told him that most americans want drilling so he must pretend to want drilling to get the votes.
what is obama's position? let me check the polls.
-
is Obama really a person?
-
obama is not "all for drilling", he is for "reasonable drilling", just like he is for reasonable gun laws.
obama is playing the polls, his advisers have told him that most americans want drilling so he must pretend to want drilling to get the votes.
what is obama's position? let me check the polls.
define reasonable?
-
define reasonable?
"reasonable" gives you lots of wiggle room to change your mind, IE, "i did not mean what i said when i said something else".
-
insert tangent here:
"Hey guys - let vote to adjourn this congress and have some vacation! We wouldn't want to actually work to figure out this energy problem..."
"If we go on vacation, it'll buy 5 more weeks of nothing getting done so we can blame Bush/McCain and we can sell Barrack' plan to the masses"
"here, here!"
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll566.xml
Gotta love "Change" and "The New Direction Congress".... :rolleyes:
-
To tell the truth, IMHO it depends' on how many of the Voting populace see him as-Either the Black, radical leftist, or as someone who's not gonna keep going the same way the current administrations' going. Right now, people see the mortgage crisis, energy prices, increasing job losses, inflation of the dollar, And no plan to fix these things. The War on terror? What's that, the occupation of Iraq? People are tired of that, too. All they see of that is the huge tax burden it incurs. People are getting hit in the wallet, and to them, that's all that matters to them, they want to see some relief. When McCain keeps' parroting basically the same things' that Bush is, and Obama's talking economic and energy reform, they're listening to Obama because that's what they want. McCain would be wise to split with bush, and start harping up a plan to get the economy back to where it was in the year 2000.
Myself...I don't foresee either of those candidate's coming up with any kind of economic plan that would fix all of our domestic problems in 4 years, or even 8. Not without some really draconian moves on the gov't's. part. Stimulus packages' are nice little windfalls, but not what this country needs. It needs' it's factories back. It needs' it's outsourced jobs back. It needs' it's base manufacturing economy on american soil paying wages to american consumers, so that they can spend their money in an american economy. And neither of those candidates' has come out and said that.
Unfortunatley, some people will vote for Obama regardless of the issues - just to see a black brother get over - much like the many blacks who supported the OJ Simpson verdict. Some will vote for Obama out of black guilt, like the hollywood elite. Some will vote for Obama out of pure hate for the evil Booosh.
Some will give their automatic vote because they have been trained to vote themselves money, welfare programs and government legislation like affirmative action and reparations and pure wastes of time, like the "midight basketball" program - a fiasco of the Clinton administration, and the nearly catastrophic national healthcare plotted by Hilary during that same democratic administration.
Some who are not sure exactly sure what ideology moves Obama, or what his real positions are, will vote Obama to get change for change's sake, in the hopes that he will solve their problems in a way that will be good for the country.
I hope that people give a little more thought and research to their choice for the leader of our country, even if it amounts to a vote that is more against one, than a vote for the other.
-
Your stats are bogus.
wow whitty comeback!!! never heard that one before.
-
I'M STILL WAITING TO SEE IF ANY OF US DID WELL WITH THE DIFFERENT LANGUAGES FOR HIM :D
none
You see I did not expect much, RIGHT to work was I was was nI qas lookomg for