invite response« First « Previous Comments 203 - 224 of 224 Search these comments
Peter P
2006 Aug 10, 2:38pm
I’m getting awfully jumpy and defensive from many years of other people characterizing my positions as “fringe†or “extremeâ€.
What is your position on ceramic knives again? :)
The US better just keep Musharrif in place. At least he's not posturing in an openly hostile manner and might be persuaded to help with the right inducements. He also seems a bit better for the Pakistanis than his predecessors.
"What is your position on ceramic knives again? :)"
I'd still go with a set of MAC knives or nicer Japanese knives, maybe a ceramic vegetable peeler. Ceramic knives appear to be too fragile as ordinary kitchen knives.
Randy H
2006 Aug 10, 2:45pm
astrid, sfwoman, sp, et al
I am not drawing any moral equivalency between your statements here and Bap33's. I find anyone who is willing to dismiss any group as a stereotype pathetic and dangerous. There are always exceptions. Often it is those very "exceptions" that are the great people who accomplish great things if they aren't killed or imprisoned first. Bap33 might find his own faith is based upon such an exception if he'd stop looking for "libs" hiding in the closet.
astrid,
I'm not sure I agree with your dismissal of the effect of "the other side", as you put it. These are the same people convincing parents to not immunize their children, managed health care to include aromatherapy and fringe homeopathy on insurance plans while well baby care gets cut, governments not to invest in GMOs which could feed millions in Africa, and policy makers not to hold a reasoned debate about solving our energy problems for fear that someone might say the taboo word 'nuclear'.
I think everyone on the fringe is doing plenty of damage to our country.
the libs are pissed because:
#1) no Americans or Christians or non-Arabs got killed
I hear that Conservatives are pissed because
#1) no Americans or Christians or non-Arabs got killed
Now there's no justification to nuke Iran - they're probably as much involved as this as Iraq was on Sept 11th.
Randy,
When we move out of political or militaristic fringes, then I'm a bit more uncomfortable with the assumption. A lot of the problems you mention stem from people's spiritualism and superstition, and it's an area that I, as an atheist, am extremely uncomfortable addressing. They also seem less than fringy to me, I seem to meet more people who are against nuclear energy than I meet people who are for nuclear energy. Ditto GMO crops, even though the econlogical dangers are exaggerated and the ecological advantages (less fertilizer, less pesticide) are proven.
The more general problem with the public (that I am comfortable talking about) is that very few social activists have any systematic knowledge about economics, statistics, or history, or even have the curiosity to try. Thus, they're constantly setting up false dichotomies to help their case, while condemning the other side as heartless kickers of puppies.
Peter P
2006 Aug 10, 3:04pm
A lot of the problems you mention stem from people’s spiritualism and superstition, and it’s an area that I, as an atheist, am extremely uncomfortable addressing.
So you think astrology is superstition? :(
"So you think astrology is superstition? :("
I know the Romans, the ancient Greeks, the Ancient Egyptians, the ancient Chinese, etc, all treated it as a serious science.
Though when I mentioned superstition I was addressing people who refused to immunize their children on a tiny chance that it might increase their chance autism, or put their month old baby on a raw food diet. Those are obvious cases where people exaggerate one kind of danger while underestimating another kind of danger.
Peter P
2006 Aug 10, 3:48pm
put their month old baby on a raw food diet
Sashimi at that age?
I know the Romans, the ancient Greeks, the Ancient Egyptians, the ancient Chinese, etc, all treated it as a serious science.
It is indeed quite amazing. I am surprised there are so few serious books on Chinese astrology compared to Hindu astrology.
Ha Ha,
The author is not exactly an unbiased source of information.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Schweizer
Furthermore, just because Gore do more doesn't mean his points are untrue or unimportant. And distinguishing between carbon credit paid by Gore and carbon credits paid by the studio (who wanted Gore to fly the jet to promote his film) is pointless quibbling. While I found plenty wrong with Gore's film (mostly because it's overly optimistic and doesn't off real world solutions to the problems presented), the evidence he did present are backed by peer reviewed climate scientists and decades of data. The article debunked nothing and amply demonstrates GOP's strategy of demonize, trivialize, and marginalize any fact based dissent.
If you're going to start this line of representing personal attacks as critique on public policy, would you also like to talk about Bill Bennett's gambling addiction or Rush Limbaugh's drug addiction and divorces or Ralph Reed's ties to Abramoff?
Peter P
2006 Aug 10, 3:50pm
I still think most people overestimate the effect of "free will". Fate is actually incredibly powerful.
In many ways it's not surprising that we as Americans could not remember that housing prices don't always go up.
September 11 -- what year? 30 percent of Americans don't know
Some 30 percent of Americans cannot say in what year the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against New York's World Trade Center and the
Pentagon in Washington took place, according to a poll published in the Washington Post newspaper.
Ouch. Fortunately, the article did point out that 95% of the participants remembered the month and date. Phew!
I'll always remember - I used to have lunch there a lot.
Peter P
2006 Aug 10, 5:01pm
My best friend was just a few blocks away from WTC on that morning. Thank God he was all right.
It was a sad day.
Maybe I can venture a speculation about FBs becoming a rich ground for recruiting domestic terrorists and criminals. That’s certainly happened in the 1930s, when massive numbers of foreclosure lead to more bank robberies.
hmmm, yes, it's all connected... capitalism contains the seeds of its own destruction ;)
went to a very funny talk tonite by a national political newspaper cartoonist at the politics in the pub series -- he drew the wackiest cartoons on an OHP drawing together the threads of politics, modern life, and materialism, etc, including pictures of people having to pull dwindling resources out of the ground, etc. Just funny extemporising and drawing, very tangential but still connected, a good change from the more solemn speeches at that forum...
I had woken up just when the first two planes crashed into WTC and they didn't know for sure whether it was an accident or a terrorist threat. I just knew it was a terrorist threat and felt like this is America's wake up call to the sort of threat faced by the Brits, the French, the Peruvians, the Columbians, etc.
I was actually surprised by how relatively few people had died and how orderly NYC was after the fact.
Didnt the English have the Pakistani's under control and nuclear free in the 30's? Anybody know what happened to these peaceful people?
Randy H
2006 Aug 12, 1:14am
America is not a “democracyâ€, but it is a “republicâ€
The USA is governed as a democratic republic. Democracy is the ideological governmental basis; republic is the mechanism of that governance. There are also parliamentary democracies, autocratic republics, etc.
While conveniently ignoring GOP hypocrisy and the fact that GOP hypocrisy is a lot more destructive than the average Democratic hypocrisies... You're showing superior middle management skillz already.
Democrats don't support illegal immigration or open borders, the labor unions would see to that. Individual Democratic politicians in border states would know better than to utter such words, because they'd run out of town if they did.
Many Democrats simply believe (clumsily believing that doing so would win them favors amongst recent legal immigrants or rebuilt a grateful voting electorate akin to blacks) that amnesty is a better and less disruptive solution than sending them all back. The mainstream Republican solution is to make those illegals into second class citizens, who would still be paid very little and still strain the local government resources, but as a pliable labor force that would force down the low end wages.
I don't agree with either solutions. But saying Democrats support illegal immigration per se is truly ignorant.
tinyurl.com/hxeqa
Using computer resources to harass, assault, slander or libel another person, sexually or otherwise, is untenable, and may constitute a violation of University policy and State laws. Harassment may include correspond ing with another when you have no University business with them and they have asked you to cease, regardless of the nature of correspondence. Public display of offensive materials in any medium is considered harassment.
I.E., troll shall have my fucking size 13 boot right the fuck up his ass.
Oh, goes without saying that it shall be "sans lube", of course.
No kissing or fondling either, that's reserved for HARM.
« First « Previous Comments 203 - 224 of 224 Search these comments
If there's one thing that distinguishes your average Patrick.net blogger from your typical robotic SDCIA.com perma-bull, it's the ability to consider your opponent's P.O.V. and to see things from others' perspectives. This thread is dedicated to this proposition. I want you to put yourself into the mind of a F@cked Borrower.
Peter P has already suggested this concept --in jest-- with his thread, "A cry for help". I would like this one to be approached from a more serious mindset. Image for a moment that you --as our hapless friend from the SDCIA-- find yourself saddled with 14 underwater properties, all bought on margin with exotic financing, and are now unable to make the ARM-reset payments on your night manager's salary from Taco Bell. Never mind that you could have avoided your unsavory predicament by merely applying a modicum of logic, some cursory market research and a dash of high school math to the dubious principle of "it always goes up". It's too late for regret now --you let your greed get the best of you, and so here you are. You now have a "diversified" portfolio of 14 equity-negative properties in different states, and all of them are heading in one direction: down.
So, let's assume you've gotten past the denial, anger, bargaining and depression stages, and have picked yourself up off the floor (after spending several days there whimpering in the fetal position). You've finally reached "acceptance" and are ready to rationally assess your sorry situation with cold, hard-eyed reason, and you must determine a course of action before events progress to the point where your creditors begin making all your decisions for you.
At this point, you have basically three options, none of them particularly good from your P.O.V. Which one do you take?
1. Confront your creditors (MBS shareholders) and request permission to start making "short sales" (i.e., selling the property for less than the amount owed).
This option has a number of attractive advantages, particularly the ability to avoid bankruptcy and/or liens and legal actions against you, as well as the ability to be quickly rid of those 14 "equity alligators" before they eat your alive. If your creditors agree to this, it amounts to a non-BK debt forgiveness, and you will not owe any money after the sales.
It also carries a few drawbacks: (a) Exactly whom do you negotiate with? Your loans got bundled up as MBSs and sold off before the ink even dried. Do you call Fannie Mae, Fredie Mac, the Bank of China, Fidelity, Vanguard, CalPERS --other? (b) Your creditors will undoubtedly require you to bring your entire life savings to the closing table in order to minimize their own losses. Of course, being a reckless speculator who used other people's borrowed money, you're not likely to have much anyhow, so no biggie. But there's another drawback: (c) your creditors will have to report the amount forgiven to the IRS as "cancelled debt", which will be taxable as income. Given your 14 underwater properties, this amount may be quite large. Bailing on your creditors? Relatively easy. Bailing on Uncle Sam? Not so easy.
2. Leave 14 sets of keys on 14 granite kitchen counters and walk away.
Pros: Perhaps your creditors will eventually realize you have no money, no reasonable chance of paying off the debts, and just write them off and leave you alone. To borrow a phrase from J. Paul Getty, “If you owe the bank $100, that’s your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that’s the bank’s problem.†Even better, if all of your mortgages are "firsts" (no refi's) and you live in a non-recourse state (CA), then your creditors basically have to eat the loans. You'll still be on the hook for tax on the cancelled debt, however.
Cons: Aside from trying to sue you for any current assets and garnish your future earnings (assuming any of your mortgages were refis/recourse loans), your creditors may also try to intercept your tax refunds, ruin your credit (ha-ha, I know --like you care!) and generally harass you and try to make your life miserable.
3. File for Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
Pros: Means a "clean start" no more debts, and no tax liabilities --if you can get it.
Cons: Thanks to the new creditor-friendly Bankruptcy "reform" law, you have to qualify for means-testing and prove you did not commit fraud to obtain the loans in the first place. Uh-oh. That last part could really bite you in the a$$. How much did you inflate your Taco Bell night manager's salary to get those 14 $0-down NAAVLPs? Don't remember? Better consult with an attorney first. If you can't qualify for a Chapter 7 under the new rules, then your only option is to file for Chapter 13 (repayment plan --not good) or reconsider options #1 & 2.
Discuss, enjoy...
HARM
#housing