Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,021
Default No blood for oil

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:31:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:43:43 -0700,
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:11:10 -0400,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 23:23:21 -0700,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:43:18 -0400,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:40:28 -0700,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:43:12 -0400,
wrote:


You are not that stupid. How can you possibly say a program that
spends moire than it takes in is not in deficit?

Medicare has been upside down for several years and SS went upside
down 2 years ago.

And, it is not contributing one penny to the current deficit problem.
It "may" at some point if it isn't fixed.


WHAT? We are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar of the short fall and
Obama chopping 2% off of the FICA tax rate only makes it worse.

WHAT? Not because of SS/MC. I don't agree with any tax cut for the
wealthy.

The income taxes have nothing to do with the short fall in FICA.


Were do you get the notion that I think FICA and income tax are the
same things?

... because you linked the shortfall in SS/MC with the Obama tax cut
(It stopped being the Bush tax cut when Obama renewed the bill)


I did no such thing.


Didn't you just say "WHAT? Not because of SS/MC. I don't agree with
any tax cut for the wealthy."
There was no FICA tax cut "for the wealthy", it was an income tax cut.
The FICA tax cut was for the people who make less than $101k

As I said the wealthy need to be taxed more not less.

OK, it still won't fix this problem.


Which problem is "this"? You keep changing the subject, so it's hard
to tell what you're talking about.


"This" is the SS/MC short fall.

Before that, they were trying to say a recovery would put SS back into
the black for a year, maybe two. Now they can't even make that claim.

Medicare is just spiraling down the black hole of debt with no end in
sight.

Go hide under your blankey.

Denial is not the answer.

Ok, so don't hide and face the facts. One fact is that there is no
short-term crisis for either program. Another is that lowering taxes
on wealthy people will do little or nothing to help job creation.

The plane has already hit the mountain. We are borrowing money to pay
out SS/.MC benefits now and the big outlays are still ahead of us.
When do you think this will be a problem? When the bonds demand 3% or
5% to sell? At around 7% and our current rate of borrowing, the
interest alone will be bigger that the whole budget is now, within a
decade.


According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant
that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth
certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level.


I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist
right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly
true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut
an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ...
except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to
prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure.


Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified.

Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent
problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed.

If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of
what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I
am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering.
It is just the math that makes me worry.


Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math.
  #82   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,021
Default No blood for oil

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:38:11 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:44:56 -0700,
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:13:21 -0400,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 23:24:41 -0700,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:52:53 -0400,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:35:05 -0700,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:26:13 -0400,
wrote:


If you listened to any news outlet (no Fox doesn't count), you'd know
that we'll be handing off more of the air bombing to others.

I will feel better when it happens.

So what? Do you think anyone really wants us to be in another war?

Yet we are


Yet that has nothing to do with your "endless" war paranoia.


Endless war means the wars never end. I would feel better if we
actually started ending a few. The only war we ended in 60 years was
Vietnam. The rest are still on hold. The troops are still there armed
to the teeth, just waiting for another provocation to start them up
again.


So according to you, Mr. Expert, we should just disband the military.



I still remember the early talk about the NFZ there when it was
"humanitarian" to save the Kurds with the bonus that they would topple
Saddam if we could just give them a chance.

I don't think Obama would go in but who knows what the next yahoo
might do if he has it all teed up.

I agree. Let's try and keep Jeb out of the White House.

There won't be another Bush in there anytime soon.
Huckabee could be scary.
I don't really see a viable republican I like.

I guess you'll be voting for Obama then. Good for you!

I am not sure who I will vote for. Obama is not standing out as being
much more than the 5th Bush brother.


Feel free to vote for Palin.


I would rather write in Ron Paul


Feel free. It'll be about as likely that he'll win.
  #83   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Mar 2011
Posts: 131
Default No blood for oil

On 3/24/2011 1:47 PM, wrote:

Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math.


Oh dear, dear. Have you flipped your wig?
  #84   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,021
Default No blood for oil

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:01:02 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:47:35 -0700,
wrote:



According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant
that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth
certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level.

I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist
right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly
true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut
an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ...
except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to
prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure.


Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified.


You started the name calling


By calling you Mr. Expert? Well, ok.


Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent
problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed.


When are they going to start? Obama just made the problem worse by
lowering taxes when they really should be going up. The only real fix
will be adjusting eligibility age to reflect life expectancy and
nobody will even talk about that.


"They" already have. Changes are being discussed (rationally) on both
sides of the isle. Even the lunatics who want to gut the safety net
have a voice, albeit a hysterical one. Sometimes, and I know this is
non-intuitive, but it's a long term problem not a short term problem.


If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of
what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I
am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering.
It is just the math that makes me worry.


Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math.


When the math shows us bankrupting the government and devaluing the
dollar, it is a reason to worry. This is not a long term problem
anymore. We are already upside down, borrowing money to cover the
short fall.


Nope. It's a long term problem. A short term problem is something like
the nuclear plants in Japan. A middle term problem is something like
job growth. A long term problem is something like SS/MC.
  #85   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,021
Default No blood for oil

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:05:45 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:48:35 -0700,
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:38:11 -0400,
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:44:56 -0700,
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:13:21 -0400,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 23:24:41 -0700,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:52:53 -0400,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:35:05 -0700,
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:26:13 -0400,
wrote:


If you listened to any news outlet (no Fox doesn't count), you'd know
that we'll be handing off more of the air bombing to others.

I will feel better when it happens.

So what? Do you think anyone really wants us to be in another war?

Yet we are

Yet that has nothing to do with your "endless" war paranoia.

Endless war means the wars never end. I would feel better if we
actually started ending a few. The only war we ended in 60 years was
Vietnam. The rest are still on hold. The troops are still there armed
to the teeth, just waiting for another provocation to start them up
again.


So according to you, Mr. Expert, we should just disband the military.


No, I just want the military to do what it is constitutionally
authorized to do, protect the USA.


How do they do that without being involved elsewhere and being
prepared?

We could certainly cut the DoD budget by half tho and still be
spending more than anyone else in the world.
It is funny when I am the one saying the pentagon budget is bloated,
to a lefty.


I've already said several times that we need to cut the DoD budget.
So, your last comment is disingenuous.


I still remember the early talk about the NFZ there when it was
"humanitarian" to save the Kurds with the bonus that they would topple
Saddam if we could just give them a chance.

I don't think Obama would go in but who knows what the next yahoo
might do if he has it all teed up.

I agree. Let's try and keep Jeb out of the White House.

There won't be another Bush in there anytime soon.
Huckabee could be scary.
I don't really see a viable republican I like.

I guess you'll be voting for Obama then. Good for you!

I am not sure who I will vote for. Obama is not standing out as being
much more than the 5th Bush brother.

Feel free to vote for Palin.

I would rather write in Ron Paul


Feel free. It'll be about as likely that he'll win.


I have not voted for a winning candidate since Reagan and I don't feel
bad about it at all. At least I felt good about my vote.


Good for you. That's not a great track record for making a difference
in this country though.


  #86   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,596
Default No blood for oil

On 24/03/2011 4:04 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:01:02 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:47:35 -0700,
wrote:



According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant
that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth
certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level.

I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist
right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly
true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut
an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ...
except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to
prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure.

Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified.


You started the name calling


By calling you Mr. Expert? Well, ok.


Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent
problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed.


When are they going to start? Obama just made the problem worse by
lowering taxes when they really should be going up. The only real fix
will be adjusting eligibility age to reflect life expectancy and
nobody will even talk about that.


"They" already have. Changes are being discussed (rationally) on both
sides of the isle. Even the lunatics who want to gut the safety net
have a voice, albeit a hysterical one. Sometimes, and I know this is
non-intuitive, but it's a long term problem not a short term problem.


If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of
what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I
am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering.
It is just the math that makes me worry.

Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math.


When the math shows us bankrupting the government and devaluing the
dollar, it is a reason to worry. This is not a long term problem
anymore. We are already upside down, borrowing money to cover the
short fall.


Nope. It's a long term problem. A short term problem is something like
the nuclear plants in Japan. A middle term problem is something like
job growth. A long term problem is something like SS/MC.


Actually, US economic problems are near, mid and long term. USD is
loosing value pretty fast and accelerating. Faster she goes, the harder
it is to stop. Widmark? Zimbabwe? 1948 German currency reform.

Hey, USD might be revalued at 10 cents on the dollar tomorrow. If you
own gold or oil, who cares. If you own USD, you got wiped out.
  #87   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,021
Default No blood for oil

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:55:40 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 24/03/2011 4:04 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:01:02 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:47:35 -0700,
wrote:



According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant
that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth
certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level.

I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist
right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly
true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut
an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ...
except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to
prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure.

Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified.

You started the name calling


By calling you Mr. Expert? Well, ok.


Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent
problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed.

When are they going to start? Obama just made the problem worse by
lowering taxes when they really should be going up. The only real fix
will be adjusting eligibility age to reflect life expectancy and
nobody will even talk about that.


"They" already have. Changes are being discussed (rationally) on both
sides of the isle. Even the lunatics who want to gut the safety net
have a voice, albeit a hysterical one. Sometimes, and I know this is
non-intuitive, but it's a long term problem not a short term problem.


If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of
what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I
am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering.
It is just the math that makes me worry.

Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math.

When the math shows us bankrupting the government and devaluing the
dollar, it is a reason to worry. This is not a long term problem
anymore. We are already upside down, borrowing money to cover the
short fall.


Nope. It's a long term problem. A short term problem is something like
the nuclear plants in Japan. A middle term problem is something like
job growth. A long term problem is something like SS/MC.


Actually, US economic problems are near, mid and long term. USD is
loosing value pretty fast and accelerating. Faster she goes, the harder
it is to stop. Widmark? Zimbabwe? 1948 German currency reform.

Hey, USD might be revalued at 10 cents on the dollar tomorrow. If you
own gold or oil, who cares. If you own USD, you got wiped out.


Paranoia is obviously your forte.

The value of the dollar fluctuates quite a bit. A strong dollar
doesn't necessarily mean good things for the US economy. It's a
tradeoff when it's strong and when it's weak.
  #89   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,596
Default No blood for oil

On 24/03/2011 5:42 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:55:40 -0600,
wrote:

On 24/03/2011 4:04 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:01:02 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:47:35 -0700,
wrote:



According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant
that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth
certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level.

I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist
right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly
true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut
an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ...
except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to
prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure.

Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified.

You started the name calling

By calling you Mr. Expert? Well, ok.


Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent
problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed.

When are they going to start? Obama just made the problem worse by
lowering taxes when they really should be going up. The only real fix
will be adjusting eligibility age to reflect life expectancy and
nobody will even talk about that.

"They" already have. Changes are being discussed (rationally) on both
sides of the isle. Even the lunatics who want to gut the safety net
have a voice, albeit a hysterical one. Sometimes, and I know this is
non-intuitive, but it's a long term problem not a short term problem.


If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of
what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I
am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering.
It is just the math that makes me worry.

Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math.

When the math shows us bankrupting the government and devaluing the
dollar, it is a reason to worry. This is not a long term problem
anymore. We are already upside down, borrowing money to cover the
short fall.

Nope. It's a long term problem. A short term problem is something like
the nuclear plants in Japan. A middle term problem is something like
job growth. A long term problem is something like SS/MC.


Actually, US economic problems are near, mid and long term. USD is
loosing value pretty fast and accelerating. Faster she goes, the harder
it is to stop. Widmark? Zimbabwe? 1948 German currency reform.

Hey, USD might be revalued at 10 cents on the dollar tomorrow. If you
own gold or oil, who cares. If you own USD, you got wiped out.


Paranoia is obviously your forte.

The value of the dollar fluctuates quite a bit. A strong dollar
doesn't necessarily mean good things for the US economy. It's a
tradeoff when it's strong and when it's weak.


Generally down. In the last few years lost 20% against the Yuan. Lost
against the CAD too -- bad since the CAD value is mush too.
  #90   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,021
Default No blood for oil

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 22:11:10 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 24/03/2011 5:42 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:55:40 -0600,
wrote:

On 24/03/2011 4:04 PM,
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:01:02 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:47:35 -0700,
wrote:



According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant
that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth
certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level.

I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist
right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly
true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut
an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ...
except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to
prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure.

Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified.

You started the name calling

By calling you Mr. Expert? Well, ok.


Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent
problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed.

When are they going to start? Obama just made the problem worse by
lowering taxes when they really should be going up. The only real fix
will be adjusting eligibility age to reflect life expectancy and
nobody will even talk about that.

"They" already have. Changes are being discussed (rationally) on both
sides of the isle. Even the lunatics who want to gut the safety net
have a voice, albeit a hysterical one. Sometimes, and I know this is
non-intuitive, but it's a long term problem not a short term problem.


If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of
what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I
am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering.
It is just the math that makes me worry.

Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math.

When the math shows us bankrupting the government and devaluing the
dollar, it is a reason to worry. This is not a long term problem
anymore. We are already upside down, borrowing money to cover the
short fall.

Nope. It's a long term problem. A short term problem is something like
the nuclear plants in Japan. A middle term problem is something like
job growth. A long term problem is something like SS/MC.

Actually, US economic problems are near, mid and long term. USD is
loosing value pretty fast and accelerating. Faster she goes, the harder
it is to stop. Widmark? Zimbabwe? 1948 German currency reform.

Hey, USD might be revalued at 10 cents on the dollar tomorrow. If you
own gold or oil, who cares. If you own USD, you got wiped out.


Paranoia is obviously your forte.

The value of the dollar fluctuates quite a bit. A strong dollar
doesn't necessarily mean good things for the US economy. It's a
tradeoff when it's strong and when it's weak.


Generally down. In the last few years lost 20% against the Yuan. Lost
against the CAD too -- bad since the CAD value is mush too.


Yes, generally down, but that's great for items we sell elsewhere...
e.g., Caterpillar and such. It's just not cut and dried that it's a
bad thing or a good thing. Ideally, all currencies shouldn't fluctuate
much. That fluctuation certainly gives currency arbitrage some legs
though.

FYI, very nice, near coherent discussion from you. I'm hoping it'll
last. LOL
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Smell of Blood HK General 0 June 25th 09 07:50 PM
A little something to get the blood moving... Tom Francis - SWSports General 1 October 24th 08 02:50 PM
Blood on my mast Joe ASA 58 November 27th 06 04:13 AM
Kira draw blood yet? Joe ASA 13 December 31st 05 02:44 PM
O/T Any French blood out there? Don White General 0 July 16th 04 02:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017