|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
On Mar 2, 12:40*pm, "Paul G." wrote:
On Mar 2, 11:00*am, Bill C wrote: *When they are insisting that Congressmen have to vote to pass this without even giving them the time to read the thousands of pages, "trust us", then that's beyond ****ed up, but hey if it works for you folks. Practical consideration- how long do you figure it would take all 500+ members of Congress to read those thousands of pages? *What would happen in the meantime? -Paul How long did it take Pelosi and crew to write those 1000+ pages? Perhaps I'm naive, but if a bill is too long to be read in it's entirety, it's too long to vote on (for or against). Oh, as to what would happen in the meantime, we might not have lost another 15% in the market. Doing nothing is often a bad thing, but doing the wrong thing is always a bad thing. Sometimes nothing is better. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
In article ,
"Robert Chung" wrote: Tom Kunich wrote: What? Are you saying that we shouldn't have elected an avowed socialist into office and then act surprised when he is destroying our system of government? You hoping our President fails? When I was pointing out one of the many flaws in the Bush admin.'s "way" of doing business, he lectured me that disagreeing with the government was the same thing as "stealing from the company" that you work for. Strange how fast things have changed. Another strange thing is to read him trying to pretend that the people (Bush and the Republican-lead Congress) he was so vigorously defending for the last eight years were not "real conservatives" and that he really didn't support them. hehindeedy. Think about it this way: all that the Republicans and conservatives have right now are Rush Limbaugh (a drug adict sex tourist), Not-Joe the Not-Plumber and some 14 year old kid who "spoke" at CPAC this weekend. Haha! -- tanx, Howard Caught playing safe It's a bored game remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok? |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
In article ,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote: Should the government own 80% of AIG, or should it have let it fail? Since it is *so* tied into the world-wide economy, it became something that can't be allowed to fail (and I believe that no entity should ever be allowed to "get so big it can't be allowed to fail"). However, the fact that they were doing business with the big banks of so many countries that makes me think that the governments of those other countries need to pony up also. -- tanx, Howard Caught playing safe It's a bored game remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
On Mar 2, 5:09*pm, "K. Gringioni" wrote:
On Mar 2, 3:09*pm, "Paul G." wrote: On Mar 2, 1:25*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote: Would it actually be worse than prolonging things as we are now, looking for the bottom but not knowing what the bottom looks like? Wanting so badly to start "recovering" but because we keep throwing band-aids out there, that recovery from the bottom is further off? In military terms, you can have an orderly retreat... or a rout. Examples: Chosin Reservoir and Stalingrad, respectively. *The former is bad, but the latter is far, far worse. Dumbass - Nice analogies. Did you ever read "Stalingrad: the Fateful Siege" by Beevor? Pretty goddamm epically awful conflict. No, but I saw the movie... and the History Channel programs. Horrific. The -uh- "German leader" reminded me a lot of Bush- needlessly sacrificing the lives of thousands of his troops rather than admit his blunder. -Paul |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
On Mar 2, 5:32*pm, Scott wrote:
On Mar 2, 12:40*pm, "Paul G." wrote: On Mar 2, 11:00*am, Bill C wrote: *When they are insisting that Congressmen have to vote to pass this without even giving them the time to read the thousands of pages, "trust us", then that's beyond ****ed up, but hey if it works for you folks. Practical consideration- how long do you figure it would take all 500+ members of Congress to read those thousands of pages? *What would happen in the meantime? -Paul How long did it take Pelosi and crew to write those 1000+ pages? Perhaps I'm naive, but if a bill is too long to be read in it's entirety, it's too long to vote on (for or against). Oh, as to what would happen in the meantime, we might not have lost another 15% in the market. *Doing nothing is often a bad thing, but doing the wrong thing is always a bad thing. *Sometimes nothing is better. How many times did you vote for Bush? -Paul |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
On Mar 2, 3:25*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote: Would it actually be worse than prolonging things as we are now, looking for the bottom but not knowing what the bottom looks like? Wanting so badly to start "recovering" but because we keep throwing band-aids out there, that recovery from the bottom is further off? Mike, Stop being rhetorical...say where you think the bottom is and then you'll get a response. I don't know where it is, but you don't either, and that hasn't stopped you from opining that we're on the wrong path. I have no freaking idea myself, so don't take what I have to say as a slam. But if you have the money, go buy stock. -Philip |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
On Mar 2, 8:03 pm, LawBoy01 wrote:
On Mar 2, 3:25 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote: Would it actually be worse than prolonging things as we are now, looking for the bottom but not knowing what the bottom looks like? Wanting so badly to start "recovering" but because we keep throwing band-aids out there, that recovery from the bottom is further off? Mike, Stop being rhetorical...say where you think the bottom is 5339 Of course, I don't know anymore than the next person but remember, this *is* the nation that RE-elected George Bush. Besides, somebody has to get the cluster **** started. Glad to help, tf |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
On Mar 2, 5:32*pm, Scott wrote:
On Mar 2, 12:40*pm, "Paul G." wrote: On Mar 2, 11:00*am, Bill C wrote: *When they are insisting that Congressmen have to vote to pass this without even giving them the time to read the thousands of pages, "trust us", then that's beyond ****ed up, but hey if it works for you folks. Practical consideration- how long do you figure it would take all 500+ members of Congress to read those thousands of pages? *What would happen in the meantime? -Paul How long did it take Pelosi and crew to write those 1000+ pages? Perhaps I'm naive, but if a bill is too long to be read in it's entirety, it's too long to vote on (for or against). Dumbass - Believe it or not, nearly all bills are too long for the congressmen to read. As for doing nothing: read what Warren Buffet said in the article in the first post of this thread. There were times when doing nothing was better, such as the Clinton/ Gingrich years. This is not one of those times. thanks, K. Gringioni. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
On Mar 2, 6:41*pm, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article , *"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote: Should the government own 80% of AIG, or should it have let it fail? * *Since it is *so* tied into the world-wide economy, it became something that can't be allowed to fail (and I believe that no entity should ever be allowed to "get so big it can't be allowed to fail"). However, the fact that they were doing business with the big banks of so many countries that makes me think that the governments of those other countries need to pony up also. Dumbass - The only problem is: it's our fault. Phil Gramm started the ball rolling with the "Commodities Futures Modernization Act". Google it. Then Greenspan compounded the error by letting the post 9/11 easy money policy go on for 2 or 3 years too long. Because of the ways the derviatives spread risk, we spread the contagion to all the other large financial institutions in the world. It's a ****ing mess. There was a reason that those types of financial instruments were outlawed after 1929. Thank you very much Phil Gramm. ****ing asshole. thanks, K. Gringioni. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
STOP THE FEAR MONGERING
On Mar 2, 6:59*pm, "Paul G." wrote:
On Mar 2, 5:09*pm, "K. Gringioni" wrote: On Mar 2, 3:09*pm, "Paul G." wrote: On Mar 2, 1:25*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote: Would it actually be worse than prolonging things as we are now, looking for the bottom but not knowing what the bottom looks like? Wanting so badly to start "recovering" but because we keep throwing band-aids out there, that recovery from the bottom is further off? In military terms, you can have an orderly retreat... or a rout. Examples: Chosin Reservoir and Stalingrad, respectively. *The former is bad, but the latter is far, far worse. Dumbass - Nice analogies. Did you ever read "Stalingrad: the Fateful Siege" by Beevor? Pretty goddamm epically awful conflict. No, but I saw the movie... and the History Channel programs. Dumbass - Those programs were ok, but the book has a lot of first person accounts. It's heartbreaking. So much suffering. The statistcs alone on the casualtes (minus the anecdotal drama) are mind blowing. Luckily for us, our guy whom you mention never managed to get into a mess of that magntude. Not for a lack of trying. thanks, K. Gringioni. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
BBC documentary exposes the Zionist jew conspiracy and the NeoCon war mongering - using our countries to carry out Israel's dirty work. Australia needs to stop supporting these racist terrorists, Israel. | Midex | Australia | 0 | May 6th 07 03:52 PM |
Why I dont stop at red lights or stop signs | Tom Keats | Social Issues | 5 | August 4th 04 07:55 AM |
Why I dont stop at red lights or stop signs | Pete | Racing | 1 | August 3rd 04 06:13 AM |
Aren't bicycles suposed to stop at stop signs? | Ken | General | 85 | September 22nd 03 11:22 PM |
The Fear | dannyfrankszzz | UK | 33 | August 29th 03 09:47 AM |