UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (62) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: HoracePuckey Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 59135  
Subject: The last 20 posts Date: 5/28/2009 5:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
13 of the last 20 posts come from conservative posters.

Tell me again: Why is this board called "Retire Early Liberal Edition"?

Nothing wrong with conservative posters per se, but when every post is a smirking, insulting jibe at liberals, it makes me wonder.

Horace
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18904 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/28/2009 6:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<Nothing wrong with conservative posters per se, but when every post is a smirking, insulting jibe at liberals, it makes me wonder.

Horace
>>


Liberal pot complaining about the kettle again.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: HoracePuckey Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18905 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/28/2009 6:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Liberal pot complaining about the kettle again.

Seattle Pioneer

You may be correct that I am a smirking and insulting toward conservatives*, but then, I am not posting to RWCJ.

Horace
*except that I am always nice, polite, and honest - more than I can say for a couple of regular conservative posters here.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Volucris Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18907 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/28/2009 6:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
If they weren't here, we'd all just sit around agreeing with each other.

Where's the fun in that?

RELE Poster1: Bush 2 ran up a big debt.
RELE Poster2: Yep, sure did.

. . . .

cricket sound - cricket sound.

But, with RWCJ posters . .

RELE Poster1: Bush 2 is stupid
RWCJ Poster1: Why, you LibDem pick-pocketing terrorist appeasing socialists! Obama is the one running up the debt. Bush 2 was forced to run up a big debt because Clinton handed him such a mess. But Bush 2 handed over a perfect economy and two well run wars and Obama is really screwing it up. Why, he doesn't even order American Cheese blah blah blah . . yadda yadda yadda . . .and on and on and on .. . Ad Infinitum.

See the difference there?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: salaryguru Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18908 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/28/2009 7:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
If they weren't here, we'd all just sit around agreeing with each other.

Where's the fun in that?

RELE Poster1: Bush 2 ran up a big debt.
RELE Poster2: Yep, sure did.

. . . .

cricket sound - cricket sound.

But, with RWCJ posters . .

RELE Poster1: Bush 2 is stupid
RWCJ Poster1: Why, you LibDem pick-pocketing terrorist appeasing socialists! Obama is the one running up the debt. Bush 2 was forced to run up a big debt because Clinton handed him such a mess. But Bush 2 handed over a perfect economy and two well run wars and Obama is really screwing it up. Why, he doesn't even order American Cheese blah blah blah . . yadda yadda yadda . . .and on and on and on .. . Ad Infinitum.

See the difference there?


I think you're on to something here. You're saying that it takes stubborn, un-thinking trolls to keep a discussion board lively. I think that might be true.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18915 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/28/2009 8:24 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<If they weren't here, we'd all just sit around agreeing with each other.

Where's the fun in that?

RELE Poster1: Bush 2 ran up a big debt.
RELE Poster2: Yep, sure did.

>>


Heh, heh! Case in point ---- the pleasures of eating bacon have been a recent hot topic on the RECF board.

Also, for a while we were getting daily reports on the number of eggs being laid by one person's chickens.

So have pity on us....



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: FoolNBlue Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18925 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/29/2009 6:23 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Is the problem the dearth of "liberal" posts or excessive "conservative" posts? This board is rather quiet so if you took away more than half the posts and the "liberal" responses to the "conservative" posts, there wouldn't be many posts at all.

FoolNBlue (Reads both and still doesn't like the split)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: DorothyM Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18949 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 9:16 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
13 of the last 20 posts come from conservative posters.

Tell me again: Why is this board called "Retire Early Liberal Edition"?

Nothing wrong with conservative posters per se, but when every post is a smirking, insulting jibe at liberals, it makes me wonder.


They're here because people here feed them. If people here went to Campfire and posted the opposite of what conservatives post here, you would simply be sent on your way (with utter contempt). However, people here carry on long (and mostly polite, even though it's impossible to insult these folks) conversations. Then every few months someone posts a query which comes down to "why are they here?"

There's a conservative poster who doesn't post on PA more than a couple of times a month because on PA people call a lie, a lie and then go on to something else -- no fun for a conservative. Here a lie is just the start of a 50 or 70 post thread.

It's like feeding a pigeon -- You give away 3 peanuts and suddently you've got a swarm of 50 pigeons -- or a couple of conservative posters who won't go away.

Liberals are such wusses.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18951 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 11:44 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 70
"Liberals are such wusses."

We certainly are easy prey. I almost admired the way in which telegraph and seattlepioneer occupied the entire board by simply making up their facts. It takes them only a few seconds to make up stuff and the poor liberals then spend hours actually looking up the factual predicates, after which tele and sp ignore the facts and make up more stuff.

It's a microcosm of how conservatives have learned to control the debate nationwide.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18952 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 11:55 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
<<We certainly are easy prey. I almost admired the way in which telegraph and seattlepioneer occupied the entire board by simply making up their facts.>>


Well, I see that most people assert the facts they claim without providing proof. Your post above, for example.

I'd be glad to have you provide a reference to a recent post of mine where I simply made up facts. Let's see what you come up with.

My aim is honest discussion, and if I'm mistaken in claims that I might make, I hope I acknowledge that.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GusSmed Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18953 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 12:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
It's a microcosm of how conservatives have learned to control the debate nationwide.

It also sheds some light on how REHP became RWCJ. The only reason this board hasn't gone completely the same way is the board title; those of us who are interested in early retirement and happen to be liberal feel the board "belongs" to us, no matter how much noise the usual suspects make in order to disrupt it.

- Gus

Print the post Back To Top
Author: salaryguru Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18955 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 1:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Liberals are such wusses.

Maybe ... but at least we're honest, analytical, and fun wusses.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18956 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 1:34 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
<<Liberals are such wusses.

Maybe ... but at least we're honest, analytical, and fun wusses.
>>


Well, of course that's not true. Most broad political movements indulge in campaigns of hate and fear, because they are reliable ways to motivate people.

We are blessed in the United States in that most major political groups rule out the use of violence against their opponents, and often wont object to having those who engage in political violence punished.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18957 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 2:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Maybe ... but at least we're honest, analytical, and fun wusses.



speak for yourself.


-
...... NOT fun

Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18958 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 3:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
"My aim is honest discussion, and if I'm mistaken in claims that I might make, I hope I acknowledge that." - Seattle Pioneer

Well, there's been scant little evidence of that, but hope springs eternal, no?

For example, anyone who believes our "healthcare system" is the bestest in the whole wide world ignores reams of fact...and that's a fact. While I hope that our board denizens/Nation will enter into an open and honest discussion as to how to remedy the malady, some are stuck in a dream world where they see no problems such as the fact that 15% of our countrymen are bereft of any insurance at all, blind to the precipitous and ever rising costs of healthcare fueled in part because the insureds are paying stiff premiums to cover the uninsured, and the fact that our "system" will eventually bankrupt this Nation.

I'm all for honest discussions. It's the blind, idealogically-based blather that annoys.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18959 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 3:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 9
<<"My aim is honest discussion, and if I'm mistaken in claims that I might make, I hope I acknowledge that." - Seattle Pioneer

Well, there's been scant little evidence of that, but hope springs eternal, no?

For example, anyone who believes our "healthcare system" is the bestest in the whole wide world ignores reams of fact...and that's a fact. While I hope that our board denizens/Nation will enter into an open and honest discussion as to how to remedy the malady, some are stuck in a dream world where they see no problems such as the fact that 15% of our countrymen are bereft of any insurance at all, blind to the precipitous and ever rising costs of healthcare fueled in part because the insureds are paying stiff premiums to cover the uninsured, and the fact that our "system" will eventually bankrupt this Nation.
>>


Your statement above is a perfect example of why you are mistaken, and why political differences tend to be persistent.

MOST political differences are fueled over differences in values, not facts.

Firstly, I'll ask you to find an example of where I've said our health care system is the best in the world.

Personally, I don't give a fig if 15% of Americans have no health insurance. The percentage should be higher, not lower.

By my values, health care is a commodity like any other. People should be free to decide if they want to purchase it, and if so work, save and invest accordingly. If they don't do that and get sick ---- tough.


So what we have fundamentally is a clash over values, not facts.


So I have to suggest that you haven't provided an example of where I've been "making up facts as I go along."

I invite you to try again if you like.



Seattle Pioneer

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18961 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 3:42 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 43
"So I have to suggest that you haven't provided an example of where I've been "making up facts as I go along." - Seattle Pioneer

Given that the vast majority of your posts are "fact-free" I'd be hard-pressed to do that.

I get that you're a "libertarian", a boot-strappin' kinda guy, a "guvment-can-do-no-right/business-can-do-no-wrong" kinda-guy. That's idealogical blindness...bereft of both fact or concern for economic/human consequences.

It's not a clash over "values". Pursuing one's own self-interest to the detriment of others is not some vaunted "value". It's simply the pursuit of one's own self-interest. My heroes aren't the Wall-Streeters who amassed huge fortunes by destroying the economic well-being of an entire Nation. My heroes aren't the health insurance company executives who personally and grandly benefit by perpetuating a system that causes economic damage to everyone else. Greed/exploitation is not a "value".

As I was taught by Catholic nuns, greed is one of the 7 Deadly Sins.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18962 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 4:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
<<"So I have to suggest that you haven't provided an example of where I've been "making up facts as I go along." - Seattle Pioneer

Given that the vast majority of your posts are "fact-free" I'd be hard-pressed to do that.

>>


All right, it sounds like you aren't supporting the claim made earlier that I make up facts willie nilly.


<<I get that you're a "libertarian", a boot-strappin' kinda guy, a "guvment-can-do-no-right/business-can-do-no-wrong" kinda-guy. That's idealogical blindness...bereft of both fact or concern for economic/human consequences.

It's not a clash over "values". Pursuing one's own self-interest to the detriment of others is not some vaunted "value". It's simply the pursuit of one's own self-interest. My heroes aren't the Wall-Streeters who amassed huge fortunes by destroying the economic well-being of an entire Nation. My heroes aren't the health insurance company executives who personally and grandly benefit by perpetuating a system that causes economic damage to everyone else. Greed/exploitation is not a "value".
>>


Adama Smith and a lot of modern economics recognize that self interest, controlled and limited by markets, creates both discipline and wealth, and places practical limits on greed.



<<As I was taught by Catholic nuns, greed is one of the 7 Deadly Sins.
>>


Seems like it is a clash over values then, or do you suggest that the wisdom passed on by the nuns is something other than a statement of values?

And I think there are proper roles for government, too. Exactly where thast should be is where politics and values tend to clash.




Seattle Pioneer

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18963 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 4:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
"Adama Smith and a lot of modern economics recognize that self interest, controlled and limited by markets, creates both discipline and wealth, and places practical limits on greed."

Now look all around you, look at our economy and the global economy, and then explain to us all just how well laissez faire capitalism has proven itself to be as a "self-regulating" mechanism.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ariechert Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18964 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 4:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 31
For example, anyone who believes our "healthcare system" is the bestest in the whole wide world ignores reams of fact...and that's a fact - putnid
------------


It's the best in the world for Seattle Pioneer because it works for him. If he were one of the millions who were out of a job with no money or health insurance I'm sure he'd feel differently. If he were someone that got cancer and lost their job because they couldn't work anymore and then their health insurance because he couldn't afford it he'd feel very differently. As long as the system is working for him he feels no pressure to change it.

It's sort of like that old saying about "what is the difference between a recession and a depression?"

A recession is when your neighbor is out of work.

A depression is when you are out of work.

Art

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Gingko100 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18965 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 4:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
They are bored...Hey it's something to do.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18966 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 8:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
<<"Adama Smith and a lot of modern economics recognize that self interest, controlled and limited by markets, creates both discipline and wealth, and places practical limits on greed."

Now look all around you, look at our economy and the global economy, and then explain to us all just how well laissez faire capitalism has proven itself to be as a "self-regulating" mechanism.
>>


I mthink you've seen that illustrated very clearly. Excesses lead to crashes and wealth destruction. When a new and solid economic foundation is again developed, new growth will take place.

There are MANY natural cycles in human affairs and nature.Winter follows summer just as surely as summer follows winter.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Volucris Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18968 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 11:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
the poor liberals then spend hours actually looking up the factual predicates

No way! Really? Why?

I don't look up jack when arguing with Neo-Cons. Don't need to and it's not worth the effort anyway.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Adenovir Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18971 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 11:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Personally, I don't give a fig if 15% of Americans have no health insurance. The percentage should be higher, not lower.

By my values, health care is a commodity like any other. People should be free to decide if they want to purchase it, and if so work, save and invest accordingly. If they don't do that and get sick ---- tough.


Here's where you put ideology in front of reality. If an uninsured person gets sick or gets into a car wreck, who do you think pays for their care?

(Hint: look in the mirror)

Maybe not directly, but indirectly through higher insurance costs which cover higher health care expenses because health care providers need to cover their expenses from the un/under-insured.

It's the same as automobile insurance, just not as obvious. If the guy that hits you doesn't have auto insurance, you are stuck with the bill. That's why we mandate auto insurance for all drivers.

Adenovir

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18972 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/30/2009 11:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<Here's where you put ideology in front of reality. If an uninsured person gets sick or gets into a car wreck, who do you think pays for their care?

(Hint: look in the mirror)
>>


Obviously, I'd eliminate any obligation of health care providers to provide treatment, and eliminate a variety of government health care programs that pay for free services.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Adenovir Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18974 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 12:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Obviously, I'd eliminate any obligation of health care providers to provide treatment, and eliminate a variety of government health care programs that pay for free services.

In theory, I understand where you are coming from, but putting that into practice would be very difficult. Have you ever worked in a hospital?

If an uninsured pregnant lady shows up at my hospital in labor, am I supposed to turn her away at the door?

Should we stop immunizing uninsured children and risk having them infect others?

When the 93 year old man with severe advanced Alzheimer's, probably with only a few weeks to live, breaks his hip, are you saying we shouldn't repair it?

Adenovir

(ok, so the last one was easy, my point is, there is a line and we have to figure out where it is)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18976 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 12:39 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<Obviously, I'd eliminate any obligation of health care providers to provide treatment, and eliminate a variety of government health care programs that pay for free services.

In theory, I understand where you are coming from, but putting that into practice would be very difficult. Have you ever worked in a hospital?

If an uninsured pregnant lady shows up at my hospital in labor, am I supposed to turn her away at the door?
>>


Healthcare providers would of course be free to provide care on whatever terms they wished. If they wanted to provide free care, I certainly wouldn't stand in their way.

There's a reasonable argument for public control of contagious diseases.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18977 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 12:41 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 23
"Obviously, I'd eliminate any obligation of health care providers to provide treatment, and eliminate a variety of government health care programs that pay for free services."

Well, so much for a rational discussion...

I do believe this video will resonate with you, SP! Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0

Print the post Back To Top
Author: salaryguru Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18978 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 4:17 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
speak for yourself.


-
...... NOT fun


Events can be out of your control. Attitude is a personal decision.

I value fun highly. Try it.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18979 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 9:49 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
<<"Obviously, I'd eliminate any obligation of health care providers to provide treatment, and eliminate a variety of government health care programs that pay for free services."

Well, so much for a rational discussion...
>>


It is a rational position to take, and one that was the governing systrem in the United States and throughout world history until recent decades.


<<I do believe this video will resonate with you, SP! Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0
>>


Amusing.... Perhaps you would be interested in studying up on the Soviet Gulags where Stalin killed far more people than Hitler killed in his extermination camps in order to keep the lid on his worker's paradise?

Probably not.


Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: HarryHope Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18980 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 10:00 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 9
<<We certainly are easy prey. I almost admired the way in which telegraph and seattlepioneer occupied the entire board by simply making up their facts.>>


Well, I see that most people assert the facts they claim without providing proof. Your post above, for example.

I'd be glad to have you provide a reference to a recent post of mine where I simply made up facts. Let's see what you come up with.

My aim is honest discussion, and if I'm mistaken in claims that I might make, I hope I acknowledge that.


Here's my post questioning factual claims you made.

A universal health insurance program would reduce the quality and accessibility of the health care generally received by the middle class, and raise costs to the middle class substantially in order to finance health care for low income people.

Exactly how is this so? Europe has universal health care and the quality and accessibility of the health care received by its middle class is better than what they receive in the US. That's based on my own personal experience and studies readily accessible through Google showing superior outcomes in Europe. What's your claim based on?

When confronted by that reality, universal coverage health care has not been salable politically.

That's not reality it's a right wing fabricated talking point.

For decades Democrats have been undermining that reality by increasing costs for middle class health care in hopes of making their universal health care coverage salable politically.

Precisely which Democrats did this, how did they do it and how do you know their motivation?

Your response was to finally concede that what you posted as fact was nothing more than your opinion.

When you replied to my post, I thought you were referring to the statement just above your reply, which I think is pretty much a matter of fact.

Instead, you were referring to my earlier statement, which is more a matter of opinion I agree.
SP


At no time have you even made an effort to provide facts to back up your "opinion." The facts are made up.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Adenovir Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18981 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 10:03 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Obviously, I'd eliminate any obligation of health care providers to provide treatment, and eliminate a variety of government health care programs that pay for free services.

So you would repeal EMTALA? (The biggest unfunded mandate in the land).

http://www.emtala.com/faq.htm

What is EMTALA?

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act is a statute which governs when and how a patient may be (1) refused treatment or (2) transferred from one hospital to another when he is in an unstable medical condition.

EMTALA was passed as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986, and it is sometimes referred to as "the COBRA law". In fact, a number of different laws come under that general name. Another very familiar provision, also referred to under the COBRA name, is the statute governing continuation of medical insurance benefits after termination of employment.

(Reportedly, a 1989 amendment to the statute removed the word "active" from the official name of the statute. The amendment, however, cannot be found in the report of the official public law.)

EMTALA is also known as Section 1867(a) of the Social Security Act. It is included as part of the section of the U.S. Code which governs Medicare.

EMTALA applies only to "participating hospitals" -- i.e., to hospitals which have entered into "provider agreements" under which they will accept payment from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) under the Medicare program for services provided to beneficiaries of that program. In practical terms, this means that it applies to virtually all hospitals in the U.S., with the exception of the Shriners' Hospital for Crippled Children and many military hospitals. Its provisions apply to all patients, and not just to Medicare patients. (See Section 15 below.)

The avowed purpose of the statute is to prevent hospitals from rejecting patients, refusing to treat them, or transferring them to "charity hospitals" or "county hospitals" because they are unable to pay or are covered under the Medicare or Medicaid programs. This purpose, however, does not limit the coverage of its provisions -- see Sections 15 and 16 below.

EMTALA is primarily but not exclusively a non-discrimination statute. One would cover most of its purpose and effect by characterizing it as providing that no patient who presents with an emergency medical condition and who is unable to pay may be treated differently than patients who are covered by health insurance. That is not the entire scope of EMTALA, however; it imposes affirmative obligations which go beyond non-discrimination. See Section 16 below.


Adenovir

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Guthree Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18982 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 10:07 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
It's a microcosm of how conservatives have learned to control the debate nationwide.


Yes, but have we not reached a tipping point where that strategy no longer works beyond a very small core group of True Believers?

Remember the old joke? "Q: How can you tell a so-and-so is lying? A: He moves his lips."

Are we not at that point with the conservative spokesmen? Before I make my next comment, I want to stress that I am not exaggerating. I honestly have this mindset: When I see a conservative spokesperson on television "explaining" an issue, my default interpretation is that he is lying. Like you said, a person can spend hours researching the facts to prove his gut instinct (of disbelief) was correct, but at a point, why bother? On almost every major issue of the past decade, the conservatives have told us bald-faced lies. Remember that girl who carved a backward "B" onto her head during the campaign? She could be the poster child for conservatives' "do or say anything" strategy. How about Cheney's "this economy is going gangbusters" remark for another blunt example of denial of obvious truth? The practice is so common, it's probably pointless to even give examples: the nation is onto their strategy of deception, and every sentient person you meet on the street can tell you his or her Top Ten list of conservative lies.

For the record, I am not some lifelong "knee-jerk liberal commie" or whatever the conservatives might want to label me. I am a guy who, two decades ago, used to read National Review cover-to-cover -- and argued vehemently for conservative policy. But quite simply I've reached the point where I don't believe a #$%*@^& word coming out of these conservative spokesperson's mouths.

Guthree

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18983 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 10:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
"Perhaps you would be interested in studying up on the Soviet Gulags where Stalin killed far more people than Hitler killed in his extermination camps in order to keep the lid on his worker's paradise?

Probably not."
- Seattle Pioneer

You're barking up the wrong tree there, SP. I HAVE studied up on the Soviet Gulags, far more than you can/will EVER understand. Almost my ENTIRE family died in the Gulags.

It's so easy for you self-righteous boot-stappin' dudes to pontificate when you've never experienced TRUE suffering/hardship yourself.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18984 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 10:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"When I see a conservative spokesperson on television "explaining" an issue, my default interpretation is that he is lying. Like you said, a person can spend hours researching the facts to prove his gut instinct (of disbelief) was correct, but at a point, why bother?" - Guthree

I reached that state of mind years ago regarding Wall-Streeters and...by extension...the prevailing "conservative" economic philosophies (that are anything but).

I've been an active investor for more than 30 years. I started out like most, trusting the "gooroos" and following their "advice". After all, they were the "experts", no?

Investing provided me with a great education as to how Wall Street really works. It taught me to question every opinion, every statement of "fact". I've come a long ways as an investor (and have prospered) precisely because I research, research and research some more to understand what is REALLY happening. And, in that process, I've come to understand that Wall Street is self-absorbed and intent solely on self-aggrandizement and enrichment, with no regard for the consequences to any and all others. And the "conservatives" who've embraced and propogated the mantras of the rich and powerful gave Wall Street free rein to plunder the Nation and its citizenry.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: DorothyM Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18987 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 11:13 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"Obviously, I'd eliminate any obligation of health care providers to provide treatment, and eliminate a variety of government health care programs that pay for free services."

Well, so much for a rational discussion...



It's impossible to reason with unreasonable people. ;-)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18988 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 11:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"Now look all around you, look at our economy and the global economy, and then explain to us all just how well laissez faire capitalism has proven itself to be as a "self-regulating" mechanism. "

It's one heck of a lot better than the Russian system.......

and if you live in Japan these days and graduate from college, you might think the Japanese system is totally broke these days too...especially when you get 'packed' in subway cars that pack you in like sardines on your long commute to your 16 hour work day.

Of course you need a minimal amount of regulation. But you also need failures of companies/ideas that don't succeed as well as success.

Bill Gates didn't invent the PC software business for 'the good of mankind'. He invented it because he was going to get rich in the process. He didn't put in 18 hour days for years for the 'good of mankind' and 'out of the kindness of his heart'. It was basically greed. And he didn't say 'I've got enough, just pay me $1 a year' as the head of MSFT.

You're silly. Of course, folks work in their own self interest. Otherwise, you degenerate to the silly ditty about the few baking bread and making money...until everyone complains.....so they decide to join everyone else in being lazy, because success is punished.

t

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18989 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 11:24 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"We certainly are easy prey. I almost admired the way in which telegraph and seattlepioneer occupied the entire board by simply making up their facts"

Ah, the libs get upset...challenge them and they accuse you of 'making up facts' if they don't like what they say!....

What can you say?

Like making a comment about something Obama said, and the first thing out of their mouths , if they don't like your comment' is 'Rascist'....

t.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18990 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 11:34 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Investing provided me with a great education as to how Wall Street really works. It taught me to question every opinion, every statement of "fact"."

Of course...but then again, if you digest every annual statement, there are still gotchas, and the statements can be fabrications as well.

"I've come a long ways as an investor (and have prospered) precisely because I research, research and research some more to understand what is REALLY happening. "

Only if the facts are available to you. Sometimes, unless you have insider information, the situation is not available to you as an investor.

"And, in that process, I've come to understand that Wall Street is self-absorbed and intent solely on self-aggrandizement and enrichment, with no regard for the consequences to any and all others."

That is what investing is all about. If you buy a company because it is the best in the market, has the best products, best product development team, the best customer care and satisfaction ratio, does that not mean that now, after buying that stock, you have NO REGARD for the consequencs of what happens to the competitors? They might go out of business? They might lay off tens of thousands of AMericans with families who will starve to death and lose their health insurance.

Ha - it's obvious that you invest for YOUR OWN self aggrandizement and enrichment.

I doubt it totally that you invest for 'social purposes' - not to make money or a good return on your investment, because you simply like 'the social goals' of a company - and don't worry about whether they will be in business 2 years from now, or their competitors are about to wipe them out.

You obviously shot yourself in the foot.




" And the "conservatives" who've embraced and propogated the mantras of the rich and powerful gave Wall Street free rein to plunder the Nation and its citizenry."

And you invest to become poor?

You can always follow some guru. As the 'facts' will show, 90% of them underperform the indexes after 10 years.......and very few 'stock pickers' succeed. Buffet usually didn't buy 'stock' at market prices. He bought the companies at bargain prices.

Now, please tell me you invest your money only because the companies you buy do 'social good' and not because you expect it to reward and enrich you FINANCIALLY. ha... no different than Wall Street - out to make money.


t.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18991 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 11:53 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
"You're silly. Of course, folks work in their own self interest. Otherwise, you degenerate to the silly ditty about the few baking bread and making money...until everyone complains.....so they decide to join everyone else in being lazy, because success is punished." - telegraph

Yes, of course, folks work in their own self-interest. No rational being argues otherwise. What the idealogues who preach laissez faire capitalism fail to respect is that one man's "self-interest" can destroy or harm another man; hence, the term "the tragedy of the commons" for matters environmental, and terms such as crime, fraud, usury, slavery, exploitation, etc. for matters human.

Corporations pursue their "self-interest" - generating profits. Profits are maximized by minimizing the costs of the externalities, the labor costs, waste disposal/emissions/discharge costs, etc. Corporations also try to maximize profits by limiting competition, honorably or otherwise. We enforce a body of laws and regulations precisely because the "free market" does not "self-regulate". Randians/Libertarians/Utopians seem to have a problem understanding the obvious. Let me know when you find "Gault's Gulch" on a map.

The pursuit of self-interest, unchecked, becomes exploitation. Every failed third-world nation stands as a testament to the outcomes guaranteed by unfettered pursuit of "self-interest" by a limited and powerful few.

So why not set aside those childish homilies of yours and take a stab at answering my original question:

"Now look all around you, look at our economy and the global economy, and then explain to us all just how well laissez faire capitalism has proven itself to be as a "self-regulating" mechanism."

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18992 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 12:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
My goodness, telegraph, you are so full of gibberish.

Of course I invest in companies that provide goods and services to their customers better than their competitors, in order to personally benefit financially and materially. The competition can either improve or perish. I've no problems with that. I've no problems with the "creative destruction" that free market capitalism engenders.

I DO have problems with a "financial industry" that now represents more than 40% of all US corporate profits, profits generated by bogus "innovative financial products", insane lending and leveraging practices, and managements that could care less about the consequences to shareholders and the economy. I have problems with the usurers, the frauds, embezzlers and exploiters.

I have problems with Wall-Streeters endlessly preaching BS to the gullible (in order to personally benefit) and selling snake oil, like a "sock-puppet" dotcom company reportedly worth billions when, in fact, it's worth squat.

I have problems with the speculators who push commodity prices to extremes for their own personal gain, regardless of the consequences to the actual customers and consumers.

I have problems with the mantra that making solely the rich richer is gonna make everyone rich. Like when has THAT ever happened in all of recorded human history? I've got problems with the idealogues and twits who swallow all the BS and regurgitate it endlessly...regardless of the economic damage that rages all around them.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18993 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 12:49 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<Obviously, I'd eliminate any obligation of health care providers to provide treatment, and eliminate a variety of government health care programs that pay for free services.

So you would repeal EMTALA? (The biggest unfunded mandate in the land).
>>


At the top of the list.

Government programs which at least pay some substantial part of the cost of providing care are vastly better than those which compel health care providers to provide expensive services and take substantial legal risks for what is often no compensation at all.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18994 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 12:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<For decades Democrats have been undermining that reality by increasing costs for middle class health care in hopes of making their universal health care coverage salable politically.

Precisely which Democrats did this, how did they do it and how do you know their motivation?

Your response was to finally concede that what you posted as fact was nothing more than your opinion.

When you replied to my post, I thought you were referring to the statement just above your reply, which I think is pretty much a matter of fact.

Instead, you were referring to my earlier statement, which is more a matter of opinion I agree.
SP

At no time have you even made an effort to provide facts to back up your "opinion." The facts are made up.

>>


I acknowledged that my statement is fairly regarded as a matter of opinion. But just as an example Democrat mandates for emergency rooms to provide services to people who can't pay is one of many examples of how Democrats have supported government actions which raise health care costs.

If I never made an effort to provide facts to back up my opinion, please explain which facts were made up?



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18996 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 1:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<So why not set aside those childish homilies of yours and take a stab at answering my original question:

"Now look all around you, look at our economy and the global economy, and then explain to us all just how well laissez faire capitalism has proven itself to be as a "self-regulating" mechanism."

>>


We have had many recessions, depressions and financial panics in the last 150 years or so in the United States. Each time, wasteful uses of assets and resources were discarded and provided the basis for greater economic growth during the next cycle of expansion.

We may well be already be beginning that next cycle of expansion.

I would say that's a good example of a self regulating system.

Government helped create those problems by screwing around with the money supply, and whether the "help" it's provided through bailouts is worth while remains to be seen.

But just because there's a business cycle that's been repeating itself for more than a century doesn't mean that capitalism is a failure.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18997 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 1:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<I have problems with the mantra that making solely the rich richer is gonna make everyone rich. Like when has THAT ever happened in all of recorded human history? I've got problems with the idealogues and twits who swallow all the BS and regurgitate it endlessly...regardless of the economic damage that rages all around them.
>>


Even a lot of officially poor people live like or better than the rich a hundred years ago.

I was impressed by reading a biography of Peter the Great a few years ago. He suffered the agonies of the damned from a kidney stone for years before it finally killed him.

At the time, I'd had episodes of kidney stones myself, and had effective treatment and surgery which removed the kidney stones. As a working class guy I had far better medical treatment than did the Czar of All the Russias a few centuries earlier.

I have problems with my liberal or socialist friends who believe their own propaganda about how terrible things are, when for most people in the world things are far better than at any time in history, and far far greater numbers of people in absolute numbers.


Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18998 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 1:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Government helped create those problems by screwing around with the money supply" - SeattlePioneer

You may wish to study up on the history, purpose and "ownership" of the Federal Reserve. Hint: it ain't government.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Adenovir Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 18999 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 1:49 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
But just as an example Democrat mandates for emergency rooms to provide services to people who can't pay is one of many examples of how Democrats have supported government actions which raise health care costs.

Who was running this country in the 80s?

http://www.ena.org/government/emtala/article1.asp

In the late 1970's and early 1980's, publicity focused on the unethical practice of some U.S. hospitals which were refusing to accept and treat emergency patients and attempting to transfer others that could not pay to "charity" or "county" hospitals. In response to this practice, in 1986 Congress passed the COBRA statute more commonly known to all of us as the "antidumping" law. In 1989 President Bush signed into law amendments that made the previous COBRA restrictions even more stringent. These amendments increased the scope of COBRA's effect so that it applied to all hospitals who were Medicare providers. That just about includes every hospital in the United States.

Adenovir

Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19000 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 2:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Double talk once again from putnid!

putn: "Of course I invest in companies that provide goods and services to their customers better than their competitors, in order to personally benefit financially and materially."

Good.so we have established that you are 'greedy' in wishing to have the 'best returns' possible.

putN:" I've no problems with the "creative destruction" that free market capitalism engenders."

I DO have problems with a "financial industry" that now represents more than 40% of all US corporate profits, profits generated by bogus "innovative financial products", insane lending and leveraging practices, and managements that could care less about the consequences to shareholders and the economy."

Would you care to show us

a) Historically, what percentage of corporate profits have been earned by the banking, investment, insurance industry?

b) Is it any different today?

And please explain 'bogus' products. Yes, derivatives got way out of hand, but they go back to the 1600s......

And please explain how, if your world, only lenders lend, and no one ever borrows? IT takes equally insane borrowers who leverage to the greatest degree - like buying homes with no money down, interest only for five years, negative amortization loans....then borrowing every



put: "I have problems with Wall-Streeters endlessly preaching BS to the gullible (in order to personally benefit) and selling snake oil, like a "sock-puppet" dotcom company reportedly worth billions when, in fact, it's worth squat."

Well, you forgot to mention the dot.com bust...but it wasn't much different that 1000 other stock scams over the year...and folks WILLINGLY invested in dot.coms. No one held a gun to their heads!

In the 1960s, companies went bust. Just look at car companies - 300? 500 went bust? Ever seen a Nash Rambler? Studebaker? How about DeLorean? Hudson?

In the 1860s, there were the telegraph systems....the 'dot.com' of the era......hundreds of millions wagered...and most of it lost. Western Union cleaned up buying things for dimes on the dollar at best.

Then the railroads...and before that the canals. Ever hear of the Potowmac Canal? Good ole G. Washington took a bunch of investors for a ride......financially, not on his canal.



putn: "I have problems with the speculators who push commodity prices to extremes for their own personal gain, regardless of the consequences to the actual customers and consumers."

Takes two to speculate, doesn't it? SOmeone thinking the price is going up, someone thinking the price is going down, or willing to sell future production as a hedge or for getting a loan. You really think that speculators don't get creamed at times. Remember the movie Trading Places? Maybe you need to watch it?





putn: "I have problems with the mantra that making solely the rich richer is gonna make everyone rich. "

I assume, that you would give back any gains that the 'rich' also got? That if your stocks go up 20%, and the stocks of the rich went up 20%, you'd give 18% back because you'd feel guilty?

obviously, if other investors can't succeed - at all levels of investment, then it is out of kilter. And, as CA and NY have discovered, when the rich earn less, the tax collections plummet by 50% in NY, and by 20-30% in CA - and everyone else is going to have to fork up the difference..making them poorer in the process.



t

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: telegraph Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19001 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 2:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"In the late 1970's and early 1980's, publicity focused on the unethical practice of some U.S. hospitals which were refusing to accept and treat emergency patients and attempting to transfer others that could not pay to "charity" or "county" hospitals. In response to this practice, in 1986 Congress passed the COBRA statute more commonly known to all of us as the "antidumping" law. In 1989 President Bush signed into law amendments that made the previous COBRA restrictions even more stringent. These amendments increased the scope of COBRA's effect so that it applied to all hospitals who were Medicare providers. That just about includes every hospital in the United States."

Now, a lot of hospitals don't have an 'emergency room'...precisely for that reason.

t.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19002 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 2:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<But just as an example Democrat mandates for emergency rooms to provide services to people who can't pay is one of many examples of how Democrats have supported government actions which raise health care costs.

Who was running this country in the 80s?
>>


Oh, I'm confident in claiming that Democrats and Democratic interest groups were big supporters of this law. There was a Democratic Congress that passed it, if I'm recalling correctly.

Are you making the claim that Bush was the major advocate and supporter of this law. or that Richard Nixon was the major advocate and supporter of starting the Environmental Protection Agency, because he signed that law?


Similarly, I don't claim that Bill Clinton deserves the major credit for the welfare reform law he signed. Republicans were the major advocates, supporters and spark plugs behind that law, and controlled the Congress at the time as I recall.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19003 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 2:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I note with amusement that we now have 50+ posts on this thread about the last 20 posts....



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19005 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 3:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"...we have established that you are 'greedy' in wishing to have the 'best returns' possible..." - telegraph

Sorry, but you've "established" diddly. Your definition of "greedy" does not conform to mine (I use the commonly-accepted English definition):

GREED (noun)
excessive or rapacious desire, esp. for wealth or possessions.

Synonyms:

avarice, avidity, cupidity, covetousness; voracity, ravenousness, rapacity. Greed, greediness denote an excessive, extreme desire for something, often more than one's proper share. Greed means avid desire for gain or wealth (unless some other application is indicated) and is definitely uncomplimentary in implication: His greed drove him to exploit his workers.

As for the rest of your questions, I've posted many a link on many a board and provided many a citation over the years (as have many, MANY, MANY others) that served as the basis for my summary statements. Clearly you've shown no interest in all that has been presented before. If you truly desired knowledge, information and wisdom, you'd research these subjects yourself.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: putnid Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19006 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 3:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Would you care to show us

a) Historically, what percentage of corporate profits have been earned by the banking, investment, insurance industry?

b) Is it any different today?"
- telegraph

OK, even though I believe in the saying: "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he can eat for a lifetime" I'll relent, 'cuz your "softball" question was simply too pathetic to pass by.

Here, educamate yourself:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=...

The market mystique didn’t always rule financial policy. America emerged from the Great Depression with a tightly regulated banking system, which made finance a staid, even boring business. Banks attracted depositors by providing convenient branch locations and maybe a free toaster or two; they used the money thus attracted to make loans, and that was that.

And the financial system wasn’t just boring. It was also, by today’s standards, small. Even during the “go-go years,” the bull market of the 1960s, finance and insurance together accounted for less than 4 percent of G.D.P. The relative unimportance of finance was reflected in the list of stocks making up the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which until 1982 contained not a single financial company.

After 1980, of course, a very different financial system emerged. In the deregulation-minded Reagan era, old-fashioned banking was increasingly replaced by wheeling and dealing on a grand scale. The new system was much bigger than the old regime: On the eve of the current crisis, finance and insurance accounted for 8 percent of G.D.P., more than twice their share in the 1960s. By early last year, the Dow contained five financial companies — giants like A.I.G., Citigroup and Bank of America.


Oh, there's more, lots more:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200905/imf-advice

From 1973 to 1985, the financial sector never earned more than 16 percent of domestic corporate profits. In 1986, that figure reached 19 percent. In the 1990s, it oscillated between 21 percent and 30 percent, higher than it had ever been in the postwar period. This decade, it reached 41 percent. Pay rose just as dramatically. From 1948 to 1982, average compensation in the financial sector ranged between 99 percent and 108 percent of the average for all domestic private industries. From 1983, it shot upward, reaching 181 percent in 2007.

The great wealth that the financial sector created and concentrated gave bankers enormous political weight—a weight not seen in the U.S. since the era of J.P. Morgan (the man). In that period, the banking panic of 1907 could be stopped only by coordination among private-sector bankers: no government entity was able to offer an effective response. But that first age of banking oligarchs came to an end with the passage of significant banking regulation in response to the Great Depression; the reemergence of an American financial oligarchy is quite recent.


And if you are truly interested in learning more, read what John Bogle (founder of the Vanguard Group) has to say in any number of articles and interviews.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: sykesix Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19009 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 4:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Amusing.... Perhaps you would be interested in studying up on the Soviet Gulags where Stalin killed far more people than Hitler killed in his extermination camps in order to keep the lid on his worker's paradise?

Probably not.



I will must say, the notion that a single-payer system will lead to a Soviet-style Gulag is on of the more interesting arguments we've heard on this topic.

It is a completely dopey thing to say and shows a complete divorce from reality. But it is interesting, and no goofier than any of the other arguments against we've heard.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19012 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 5:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<<I will must say, the notion that a single-payer system will lead to a Soviet-style Gulag is on of the more interesting arguments we've heard on this topic.

It is a completely dopey thing to say and shows a complete divorce from reality. But it is interesting, and no goofier than any of the other arguments against we've heard.

>>


Yes, it's about as dopy as the U-tube video that was being recommended as an argument.

Fighting one display of irony with another seems fair to me.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Adenovir Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19014 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 5:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Oh, I'm confident in claiming that Democrats and Democratic interest groups were big supporters of this law. There was a Democratic Congress that passed it, if I'm recalling correctly.

Are you making the claim that Bush was the major advocate and supporter of this law. or that Richard Nixon was the major advocate and supporter of starting the Environmental Protection Agency, because he signed that law?


I think both parties realized that leaving bleeding accident victims and women in labor on the street if they couldn't pay wasn't consistent with our nation's value system.

I seem to remember Bush Sr. talking about a "Kinder and Gentler" America. I'm not saying he (or Reagan) was a "major advocate and supporter of this law" but they certainly agreed with it enough to sign it.

Just like Clinton signed the law repealing Glass-Steagall (which in retrospect was a mistake).

Adenovir

Print the post Back To Top
Author: HoracePuckey Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19015 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 5/31/2009 6:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"Now look all around you, look at our economy and the global economy, and then explain to us all just how well laissez faire capitalism has proven itself to be as a "self-regulating" mechanism. "

It's one heck of a lot better than the Russian system.......

Wow! What a zinger! Kneel, folks! We are in the presence of a mental giant.

Such a mentality is wasted here in RELE land.

Horace

Print the post Back To Top
Author: HarryHope Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19030 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 6/1/2009 12:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I acknowledged that my statement is fairly regarded as a matter of opinion. But just as an example Democrat mandates for emergency rooms to provide services to people who can't pay is one of many examples of how Democrats have supported government actions which raise health care costs.

If I never made an effort to provide facts to back up my opinion, please explain which facts were made up?

Seattle Pioneer


Let's start now. What are the Democratic mandates requiring ERs to treat people who can't pay? Every time I've been in an ER the first thing they did is verify my insurance. I'm not saying the mandates don't exist but I'm not aware of them and if they exist, I'd like to know exactly what they are and which democrats enacted them.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: alan81 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19031 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 6/1/2009 1:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
What are the Democratic mandates requiring ERs to treat people who can't pay?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and...
Signed into law by that libeal pinko Ronald Reagan.
--Alan

Print the post Back To Top
Author: HarryHope Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19034 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 6/1/2009 2:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
What are the Democratic mandates requiring ERs to treat people who can't pay?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and......
Signed into law by that libeal pinko Ronald Reagan.
--Alan


Thanks for the laugh Alan. Always a pleasure to see truth uncloak another of the right wing's urban myths.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19044 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 6/1/2009 4:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
From alan 81s link:

<<The cost of emergency care required by EMTALA is not directly covered by the federal government. Because of this, the law has been criticized by some as an unfunded mandate.[4] Similarly, it has attracted controversy for its impacts on hospitals, and in particular, for its possible contributions to an emergency medical system that is "overburdened, underfunded and highly fragmented".[5] More than half of all emergency room care in the U.S. now goes uncompensated. Hospitals write off such care as charity or bad debt for tax purposes. Increasing financial pressures on hospitals in the period since EMTALA's passage have caused consolidations and closures, so the number of emergency rooms is decreasing despite increasing demand for emergency care.[6] >>


I think my point that Democrats have worked to increase costs is amply supported by the impact of this law.

Ronald Reagan signed this law just as Bill Clinton signed the wealfre reform law ---- as the product of an opposition Congress and not something that was his political initiative.



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: BretBaughn One star, 50 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 19055 of 59135
Subject: Re: The last 20 posts Date: 6/1/2009 9:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Actually, it was a Republican Senate. The Democrats still had the House, but they can't pass bills, much less overturn a veto by themselves.

Nice try.

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (62) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement