patrick.net

bgamall4 says

Tarpley must be listened to.

he he he Karl Roves famous last words.

Call it Crazy says

Rin says

If you recall the 1980 Lake Placid Hockey team, the idea any group of upstarts, if motivated, could beat the world champion USSR team, a.k.a. *Miracle On Ice*, is no longer a part of our culture.

You can't use a small subset as an example. There will always be a small minority group that will rise to the top. They are the exceptions, not the rule.

Culturally speaking, coach Brooks & that Lake Placid team inspired millions around the country. Now granted, they were clearly a minority subset, however, the fact of the matter is that they symbolized what a dedicated group of Americans could do. Without such role models, as a part of the general mythos, ppl will not rise up to the challenge in the years ahead.

In the world of engineering, the closest thing to that would be along the lines of the Navy Nuclear program, where intelligence, discipline, hard work, and team work are a part of the credo. Fortunately, this program is still around today & thus, there's a place for engineers to go, outside of corporate America & its world of outsourcing R&D.

And despite my current jaded feelings about corporate America, I still admire those who'd gone through the Navy Nuclear program and have served in it, as a career. Thus, I still have some role models out there.

Call it Crazy says

You've said you don't have kids, until you've been in the trenches dealing with them 24/7, you have no idea how tough the job is

I have a niece and I know what my sister and her husband go through, however, I don't see great things coming out of the young one. Despite my sister, not having achieved her dreams during her late 20s, at least she had some aspirations as a teenager, growing up. My niece, however, just wants to be liked and belong to something.

bgamall4 says

That would be absolutely true if the parents were not shown to be actors. But since they were actors, your analysis does not apply.

Would that be actors like the two women you said were one and the same but obviously weren't?

Try a bit of actual real proof before making such idiotic baseless assertions. And no, someone reading from notes and nervously laughing isn't evidence. Prove all the parents and relatives of every one of those 26 people are actors. Do it or just STFU.

That's your 'proof.' That's all you've got, isn't it? Dear, oh, dear.

Right. Simple question for you. Roughly how many people do you and your family know?

Roughly how many people do you and your family know?

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

Roughly how many people do you and your family know?

Roughly how stupid can you stoop to be? Infinitely stupid?

Just answer the question, or are you so stupid as to fail to see the point?

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

Roughly how many people do you and your family know?

Roughly how stupid can you stoop to be? Infinitely stupid?

Just answer the question, or are you so stupid as to fail to see the point?

I know them through their fake acting. I didn't personally know Liz Taylor, but I knew she was a great actress because she cried real tears. You continue to be an idiot. There were NO TEARS at Sandy Hook.

Following your logic then, it wouldn't make any difference if you saw 'real tears' or not - you'd still call them actors, wouldn't you? And how many people do you and your family know or do I need to spell it out to you why I'm asking?

bob2356 says

I bought a brand new VW rabbit (Golf) for $5100, same car today is 20k.

Not really. That $5100 VW Rabbit could not be sold as a new car today. The Rabbits of yesteryear are unreliable, cheaply built deathtraps, the "same car" to the Rabbits of today in name only.

In contrast the Rabbits of today are bigger, heavier and far more complicated yet also safer, cleaner, more fuel efficient, far more refined and reliable. If you were to take the Rabbit of today into a time machine and offer it without the VW brand in the 1970s I think it would sell in the same market niche as Mercedes if not be marketed as a Mercedes killer.

Think of it this way, as a buyer in 1976 with $18k in your pocket which would you have preferred:

This 1976 Merc 280 for an MSRP of $14296:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W114

Or this 2014 Jetta for an MSRP of $16895:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Jetta

Call it Crazy says

bob2356 says

I'm sorry, but people in college and in their 20's have a lot less opportunities and are facing a much lower standard living than when I was that age. All the people bitching just don't want to admit it,

The opportunities are there... They don't want to work for them. They feel they should be "given" to them because they "deserve" them... You know, the "everyone gets a trophy" generation....

My favorite example of this celebration of mediocrity are the bumper stickers which proudly exclaim "My Child was Recognized at xxxx School!

Hey look everyone, its Timmy!

Give that kid a bumpersticker!

Call it Crazy says

bob2356 says

Today's generation is being crushed by the burdens placed on them the self indulgent baby boomers (ashamed to say my generation).

Nope, today's generation is too lazy to step up and take personal responsibility for their actions and future.... To them, it's always some else's fault.....

I blame Republicans and FOXnews for that.

When they go into "blame withdrawal", their eyes glaze over, they stare blankly at the horizon and they go into a catatonic freeze condition known as "personal responsibility".

Without blame and guilt trips, there is nothing, no reason to live.

New Renter says

My favorite example of this celebration of mediocrity are the bumper stickers which proudly exclaim "My Child was Recognized at xxxx School!

Hey look everyone, its Timmy!

Give that kid a bumpersticker!

What about the 'My kid beat up your honors student' decals?

tatupu70 says

Look harder. The gain in the stock market isn't solely due to inflation.

No, YOU look harder. If growth is already "built in" to the DOW, that's all the more reason to consider that any movement will be only at the top half. So, for the third time, I will ask you the question that you have yet to answer: If movement in the DOW in this century only occurs above the 5,000 level, how would it make sense to consider it as a percentage of the ENTIRE range, all the way from zero, when zero is a virtual impossibility?

Let me put it this way: Say you are standing on top of Mount Everest, and you jump in the air. It wouldn't make sense to say that you jumped 29,000 feet. You only jumped a couple of feet, because you were ALREADY 29,000 feet up when you started. Any of this sinking in yet?

I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, but I'm saying you have yet to address the issue. You have not demonstrated that percentage change is a good measure.

tatupu70 says

Regardless, the point has nothing to do with inflation:

False. The value of the index is based on the monetary value of the stocks represented, so to say it has NOTHING to do with inflation is complete bullshit.

tatupu70 says

DJIA is at 16,154

S&P 500 is at 1,839

If both went down 100 points, would it affect investors the same?

That's just stupid. The DOW and the S&P aren't measuring the same thing. On a typical day where the DOW changed by 100 points, the S&P would likely change by a much smaller amount. The scenario you describe, both indices dropping exactly 100 points at the same time, would never happen, barring an extremely unlikely freak coincidence.

See, here's your problem, Tatapu: You keep discrediting the use of absolute values in analyzing index movement, as though that somehow PROVES that using percentages is valid, by default. But it DOESN'T prove that. Saying "X is bad" doesn't prove that Y is good. Capiche?

Homeboy says

No, YOU look harder. If growth is already "built in" to the DOW, that's all the more reason to consider that any movement will be only at the top half. So, for the third time, I will ask you the question that you have yet to answer: If movement in the DOW in this century only occurs above the 5,000 level, how would it make sense to consider it as a percentage of the ENTIRE range, all the way from zero, when zero is a virtual impossibility?

I don't accept that it's an impossibility any more than it would be an impossibility for the Dow to go to zero when it's at 250. The odds of both happening are (basically) the same. All the companies on the index would have to go bankrupt in both cases.

By that logic, when the Dow is at 500, you should only consider the percentage above 250.

Homeboy says

tatupu70 says

Regardless, the point has nothing to do with inflation:

False. The value of the index is based on the monetary value of the stocks represented, so to say it has NOTHING to do with inflation is complete bullshit.

Well, it's a good thing that's not what I was saying then. I'm saying the purpose of using percentages doesn't depend on inflation. It's a basic concept.

Homeboy says

That's just stupid. The DOW and the S&P aren't measuring the same thing. On a typical day where the DOW changed by 100 points, the S&P would likely change by a much smaller amount. The scenario you describe, both indices dropping exactly 100 points at the same time, would never happen, barring an extremely unlikely freak coincidence.

It's not stupid--it's illustrating a point that you are clearly doing your best not to understand.

Homeboy says

See, here's your problem, Tatapu: You keep discrediting the use of absolute values in analyzing index movement, as though that somehow PROVES that using percentages is valid, by default. But it DOESN'T prove that. Saying "X is bad" doesn't prove that Y is good. Capiche?

No--that's not my problem at all. I've shown why percentages are valid, but you somehow can't understand it.

Rin says

New Renter says

My favorite example of this celebration of mediocrity are the bumper stickers which proudly exclaim "My Child was Recognized at xxxx School!

Hey look everyone, its Timmy!

Give that kid a bumpersticker!

What about the 'My kid beat up your honors student' decals?

Right up there with My Dachshund is smarter than your Stanford graduate.

Wow, I am amazed at the lack of simple math skills on display. Some remedial education is clearly called for.

Curious2; "Many countries, probably most, do not have single payer" Really??? .

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/06/heres-a-map-of-the-countries-that-provide-universal-health-care-americas-still-not-on-it/259153/

curious2 says

OK, let's start by clarifying "world" vs "1st world." I read a bit about the various definitions of 1st world countries, and the most neutral seemed to be countries with the biggest GDP. The top three are USA, China, and Japan.

Reasonable people define 1st world by GDP per capita not gross gdp. China doesn't qualify by that standard.

So by your definition places Luxembourg, San Marino, Norway, Vatican City, Iceland, New Zealand, Bermuda, Finland aren't first world because they have very small gdp's. I'm sure these countries will be very surprised to learn that..

curious2 says

The government regulates provider prices, and prohibits insurance companies from taking a profit on basic medical insurance. Everyone can buy insurance via either their employer or municipality. In theory, everyone is required to buy insurance, but there is no penalty for the 10% of individual persons who choose not to buy it.

Where did you get this 10% number from? The wiki article (that you so disparaged) says this, but the sources cited by wiki to back it up don't mention it at all.

bob2356 says

Where did you get this 10% number from? The wiki article (that you so disparaged) says this....

Where did I "disparage" the Wikipedia article? I have said repeatedly, as Wikipedia says itself, that Wikipedia is not a source. Do you count that as disparagement?

Anyway the 10% number is in the WHO article that I linked to, in addition to the Wikipedia article that you accuse me of disparaging.

New Renter says

Not really. That $5100 VW Rabbit could not be sold as a new car today. The Rabbits of yesteryear are unreliable, cheaply built deathtraps, the "same car" to the Rabbits of today in name only.

What a load of horseshit. I bought the car in 1980 (not 1976) and drove it 300k. It was quiet comfortable and very reliable. It was very well built and wasn't substantially less strong than the modern version, look at the impact ratings. From your wiki aritcle "In crash tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Mark 1 received five out of five stars in a 56 km/h (35 mph) frontal crash test for both driver and passenger protection". Not exactly a deathtrap it seems.

Modern cars have gotten quieter as engineers used computer simulations to work on NVH (noise, vibration, harshness) and electronics have much improved mileage and driveability, but many things really haven't changed that much. Brakes, steering, suspensions, exhaust, basic body structure really aren't much different, just more refined with 30 years of ever more sophisticated computer aided design. I've done all my own repairs for 40 years now and have seen the changes up close and personal.

The modern rabbit/golf version is superior, but also considerably bigger over 5 inches longer and 1000 lbs heavier. You are right, today's Rabbit isn't in the same class, it's very much upscale. So if there were a downscale model to compare to what would it run 14-15k? That's still almost triple.

Check out oppositelock''s list of the best cars of the 80's. Number one is Volkswagon Rabbit GTi. http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/the-10-best-cars-of-the-1980s-587587782 From the aritcle.

"The Golf GTI is the best car of the 1980’s because it’s built like a Panzer and combines the handling a golf-kart, the power of a sports car, the utility of a small wagon, and the operating costs of a moped. It was quite possibly one of the best-handling FWD cars of all time and had a very smooth, forgiving and durable manual transmission – which was great, since I learned to drive stick on a friend’s GTI, and so it was nice not to have to pitch in for a new clutch plate.

This was the hatch that launched a thousand ships: a classic formula that has been copied ever since. For North Americans, this was our first introduction to the hot hatch concept, and we’ve been buying them ever since. A major reason for this car’s popularity, then and now, is that it was economical to run, as it shared many parts and all of its body panels with its humbler Golf siblings, and its potent little four-banger was good on gas.

The one to have is the 1986-87 or later model with the 16-valve 2.0L engine from the Passat and Corrado. Double the amount of inlet valves as previous models, it was such a big deal that Volkswagen stuck a “16v” badge on the back of the car. Much like the BMW ‘M’ badge, lots of 8-valve GTI’s had this badge slapped on to compensate for their inferiority: buyer beware."

New Renter says

Or this 2014 Jetta for an MSRP of $16895:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Jetta

If I had 18k in my pocket then I would have bought a Porsche 944, and laughed at the jetta.

bob2356 says

What a load of horseshit. I bought the car in 1980 (not 1976) and drove it 300k. It was quiet comfortable and very reliable. It was very well built and wasn't substantially less strong than the modern version, look at the impact ratings. From your wiki aritcle "In crash tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Mark 1 received five out of five stars in a 56 km/h (35 mph) frontal crash test for both driver and passenger protection". Not exactly a deathtrap it seems.

By 2014 standards it IS a deathtrap.

No Airbags
No ABS
No ESC
No Side impact beams
No "advanced high-strength steel"

http://www.worldautosteel.org/new-volkswagen-golf-lightens-up-with-high-ultra-high-strength-steel/

1980 tires (as OEM)

Take your 1980 VW Rabbit and a 2014 Jetta and ram them together at 60 MPH. Which would you prefer to be in?

As to reliability I had a mid 80's VW myself. Not bad mechanically but lots of vibration (GTI engine), exhaust noise, the seat cloth ripped easily, and it was plagued by electrical gremlins. I was glad to be rid of it at 180k

bob2356 says

If I had 18k in my pocket then I would have bought a Porsche 944, and laughed at the jetta.

To each his own I guess.

tatupu70 says

It's not stupid--it's illustrating a point that you are clearly doing your best not to understand.

God are you ever retarded. We understood your point that a 100 point change would be a different percentage if the total index value were different. Understood, commented on, and moved on, like about a year ago. Now, would you care to move on to the POINT?

tatupu70 says

I've shown why percentages are valid,

You have done nothing of the sort. And obviously you never will.

tatupu70 says

I don't accept that it's an impossibility any more than it would be an impossibility for the Dow to go to zero when it's at 250.

Well good thing I never said it was impossible, then.

The odds of both happening are (basically) the same. All the companies on the index would have to go bankrupt in both cases.

Not very likely.

tatupu70 says

By that logic, when the Dow is at 500, you should only consider the percentage above 250.

Well, no - I never advocated an arbitrary cutoff. I am merely asking you to explain how it makes sense to use the percentage of the ENTIRE index value, when the movement up or down only occurs at the upper reaches of that value. You still haven't explained it.

I guess there is no way of getting through to you. I am not advocating a system; I am suggesting that the system of percentages is not logical, and asking you to explain why that isn't true. But you continue to knock down straw men rather than address the issue.

Call it Crazy says

bob2356 says

If I had 18k in my pocket then I would have bought a Porsche 944, and laughed at the jetta.

And this relates how to the OP??

Not at all, what's your point?

New Renter says

No Airbags

No ABS

No ESC

No Side impact beams

No "advanced high-strength steel"

Learn to drive instead of relying on electronic nannies.

This kind of speculation is ridiculous. I think I'd find better investment advice from tarot cards.

New Renter says

Take your 1980 VW Rabbit and a 2014 Jetta and ram them together at 60 MPH. Which would you prefer to be in?

That's moronic. A 1900 lb car vs a 3100 lb car. Since 50% more weight doesn't matter then why don't we run my 4400 lb e32 750 deathtrap (no airbags, no esc, no side impact beams, no advanced high strength steel, does have abs but I would prefer it didn't) into your jetta and see how things work out.

tatupu70 says

Facebooksux says

I would LOVE some deflation.

Who doesn't want a new Porsche 911 for $20,000, or a mansion in New York or Beverly Hills for $100,000?

It won't much matter because you'll be unemployed and broke.

Like almost half of this country now? Interesting...

bob2356 says

New Renter says

Take your 1980 VW Rabbit and a 2014 Jetta and ram them together at 60 MPH. Which would you prefer to be in?

That's moronic. A 1900 lb car vs a 3100 lb car. Since 50% more weight doesn't matter then why don't we run my 4400 lb e32 750 deathtrap (no airbags, no esc, no side impact beams, no advanced high strength steel, does have abs but I would prefer it didn't) into your jetta and see how things work out.

Ok, let's make it even. Each car into a concrete wall. Would you prefer your loved ones be in the rabbit, jetta or your airbagless E32?

bob2356 says

New Renter says

No Airbags

No ABS

No ESC

No Side impact beams

No "advanced high-strength steel"

Learn to drive instead of relying on electronic nannies.

Get a horse!

Here's one more Debbie Downer on the next generation.

One of the brighter young adults I'd known in some time ... you know, the type with a 140 IQ/photogenic memory, wins essay contests, and all that jazz, well recently, he's disclosed his dream in life and that's to blog about Boston sports teams.

I mean WTF?! I do that on my free time and sometimes, even on the job.

Sure, he's not in the pipeline for the entry level management consulting (MC) or investment banking (IB) careers, like others with his academic accolades, but really, that doesn't qualify in my book as an aspiration in life.

So what's with this crowd? The guys with grades want to work for MC/IB or the Facebook/Google fluff 'net crowd. And if they're not in line for the fake monied careers, they opt to become another slacker.

Homeboy says

Well, no - I never advocated an arbitrary cutoff. I am merely asking you to explain how it makes sense to use the percentage of the ENTIRE index value, when the movement up or down only occurs at the upper reaches of that value. You still haven't explained it.

My lord. I don't know how many ways to explain this.

1--the movement doesn't only occur at the upper reaches. Look at post 4 from BAO. Did it only occur at the upper reaches in 1929?

2--If you want to compare stock indices over two time periods to see if they are behaving similarly, then you should use percentages. That's the best way to normalize gains/losses. The goal is to see how the value of an investment has changed over a time period, and percentages tell that story.

3. You obviously use the entire index value because you are comparing to a set starting point. You want to see the change from that index starting point value.

Honestly--I can't believe you are calling me retarded when you can't even grasp this most simple of concepts.

It's high comedy

He may not be as silly in his decision as you think. If his talent is in content generation ("wins essay contests"), he may well be able to sell his popular blog in bits (via ad stream) or in whole for more money than punching in time every day at FB/Google.

IMHO, today's MC/IB jobs are just like the engineering jobs a generation or two ago: past rapid growth is no guarantee of future growth, contrary to many schools implying the promise while churning out thousands of candidates to bid down labor price in the field.

New Renter says

Ok, let's make it even. Each car into a concrete wall. Would you prefer your loved ones be in the rabbit, jetta or your airbagless E32?

E32 by far, it's a tank. Airbags aren't a cure all. Being properly belted in is the best defense, airbags are a supplement that may or may not help or can actually hurt.. Airbags were implemented primarily because ralph nader's handmaiden joan claybrook at the NHTSA wanted to show she could order car makers around and congress saw it as a way to look like they were doing something about auto safety while avoiding mandatory seat belt laws.

Here's a pretty good ariticle on the cost benefit of airbags, although somewhat out of date. http://www.scienceservingsociety.com/ts/text/ch12.htm. From the article:

"The total number of driver and right-front passenger fatalities in cars and light trucks remained relatively unchanged from 1994 through 2002 even as the percent of drivers with airbags increased from 13% to 60% and the percent of passengers with airbags increased from 3% to 50%."

Where are all the lives saved by airbags? Going from almost no airbags to half of the people having them didn't make any difference that anyone can measure.

New Renter says

By 2014 standards it IS a deathtrap.

No Airbags

No ABS

No ESC

No Side impact beams

No "advanced high-strength steel"

You really don't need any of these. I survived the 80's just fine without them. No cellphone either. I should have the option of not buying all this overpriced crap in a new car.

New Renter says

Ok, let's make it even. Each car into a concrete wall. Would you prefer your loved ones be in the rabbit, jetta or your airbagless E32?

I've managed to drive since 1980 without bashing into a concrete wall being an issue. I suspect that the overwhelming majority of drivers never happen to bash into concrete walls either.

Was E32 750 really 4400lbs? Is that with passengers? Did the extra bank of 6-cyl bring another 1000lbs? I had an E28 5 series for many years, and it was only 2850lbs, about the same weight as the Z3 roadster that I leased for an employee in the late 1990's.