patrick.net

Why does this thread disappear from the main page?

This is interesting

Robber Baron Elite Scum says

I'm still alive.

For now...

Bigsby says

RentingForHalfTheCost says

Shorts are long term my boy.

And getting longer and longer as the weeks go by. What is the market up by since you made up your fantasy claim of your biggest ever short, followed soon after with a claim of a double-down? It's about 3-400, isn't it?

Actually about even if you took the time to pay attention. 16K is my mark and one that will prove to be the peak in this fake market. Better have clean underwear and some vaseline handy.

This article is apt to this

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-19/charles-gave-gold-%E2%80%98deflation%E2%80%99-hedge

jazz music says

"Q: What do you call somebody who hangs around with musicians?

A: A drummer."

A man visits Africa. He has a guide who is showing him around. Everywhere they go, the man hears the sound of drums off in the distance. Finally, he asks the guide, "What is that constant drumbeat I'm hearing?" The guide says, "Drums good! When drums stop - very very bad." The next day, the drums are still playing. All of a sudden, the man can't hear the drums anymore. He frantically asks the guide, "Oh my god - the drums stopped! What's going to happen now????" The guide says, "Now bass solo starts."

Call it Crazy says

If their data is so useless, why did all the other financial news media
publish the same news release yesterday?? Surely, those financial news people
should know how useless the NAHB's data must be.

You apparently didn't read what I posted above.

And just how useful is data about February when February isn't even past yet? You posted it here on 2/18, so the rest of February is irrelevant then????

So they left out 10 days(probably more because of the time needed to edit and post/publish the 'report') worth of potential data, or 36% of their 'field' or the total days of the month, and that's not important?

But I forgot who I was responding to. LOL. You do yourself no favors.

Call it Crazy says

upisdown
says

But I forgot who I was responding to.

Yea, I forgot... The irresponsible one, per his wife...

LOL, mean and nasty coming from the p-ro fessional blogger. BTW, thanks for the spam mail, loser.

OOOHHHHH NNNNNNNOOOOOO, what will I do?

What's next on your schedule of useless BS, analyzing 2013 but conveniently leaving out Jan.- Oct.?

Call it Crazy says

upisdown
says

BTW, thanks for the spam mail, loser.

Spam mail.... ???? What???

Stay off of the porn sites and you'll won't get any spam..

Are you drinking early again today???

Same old shit with losers like you, isn't it. Maybe someday you'll get yourself out of that rut of meager existence and move on from being an internet bonehead. Apparently it returns a few more dimes than I thought, because you're still here spouting your usual nonsense (that's out of date a couple of years ago), but how you live beyond that is a wonder.

This bears repeating though, I'd have better luck trying to drown a fish than ever expecting and/or getting anything rational or useful from you.

Call it Crazy says

Nice ad hominem attack!! So adult of you!!!

Since you are totally unable to dispute the data in the OP, you resort to the
personal attacks...

Who needs to grow up here???

LOL, and he's/she's off to the races!!! Again.

Sigh. Redundancy isn't an admirable quality, and neither is trying to run me in circles again with your usual circle-jerk routine.

You REALLY need some new material for your act.

Call it Crazy says

Hey Ducky, does that answer your question??

How about this post of mine quite a way up towards the top:

upisdown says

Just as I thought, you haven't. Have you ever answered ANY of their
polls/questionaires? Doubtful, at best.

Is your NAHB membership still valid? LOL maybe you can show the parameters of how the data was collected and based upon what restrictions or by what definitions, right?

RentingForHalfTheCost says

Perfect attack on a topic and then when presented with facts you use the skill of diversion. Nice work. So predictable and becoming of you.

Wow... The hypocrisy in your statements are astounding.

Here's an example of the validity of your BS poll.

From Fox:

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0LEV0IwjAZTNwcAW8BXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzcmE4b3FnBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDOARjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1NNRTMyMF8x/SIG=13gr0j5sj/EXP=1392966832/**http%3a//www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2014/01/16/home-builder-confidence-ticks-down-in-january/

And for the same month from Bloomberg:

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0LEV0IwjAZTNwcAVsBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEza2VlYjVxBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1NNRTMyMF8x/SIG=140cua6gk/EXP=1392966832/**http%3a//www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-16/homebuilder-confidence-in-u-s-held-in-january-at-six-year-high.html

And from your same source, Businessweek:

http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0LEV0IwjAZTNwcATcBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzMmd1dWFzBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1NNRTMyMF8x/SIG=137v1bal6/EXP=1392966832/**http%3a//www.businessweek.com/ap/2014-01-16/us-homebuilder-confidence-dips-in-january

All the 'news' sources used the same source for their story, the NAHB homebuilder confidence poll.

Throw in come garlic and anchovy paste and you gotcher self a decent Caesar salad dressing.

Reality says

1. Market depth. It's much harder to find the fool willing to pay up $930 for a used coke can than finding people willing to buy an ounce of gold at substantial price.

It wasn't that difficult seeing as he just put it on ebay.

Bigsby says

Reality says

1. Market depth. It's much harder to find the fool willing to pay up $930 for a used coke can than finding people willing to buy an ounce of gold at substantial price.

It wasn't that difficult seeing as he just put it on ebay.

Do you really believe the transaction is legit? Or if you have 1000 of those, you can retrieve nearly a million $'s stashed away in that vehicle?

Reality says

Bigsby says

Reality says

1. Market depth. It's much harder to find the fool willing to pay up $930 for a used coke can than finding people willing to buy an ounce of gold at substantial price.

It wasn't that difficult seeing as he just put it on ebay.

Do you really believe the transaction is legit? Or if you have 1000 of those, you can retrieve nearly a million $'s stashed away in that vehicle?

I think you need to wind your neck back in.

Bigsby says

Reality says

Bigsby says

Reality says

1. Market depth. It's much harder to find the fool willing to pay up $930 for a used coke can than finding people willing to buy an ounce of gold at substantial price.

It wasn't that difficult seeing as he just put it on ebay.

Do you really believe the transaction is legit? Or if you have 1000 of those, you can retrieve nearly a million $'s stashed away in that vehicle?

I think you need to wind your neck back in.

So you choose to weasel out of the issue instead by launching into personal attacks.

Reality says

Can dish out, but can't take it, can you? Your "wind your neck back in" comment could be construed as "up pop the weasel."

No, it can be seen for what it obviously was - you getting agitated for no reason about a jokey comment that didn't require a response. And if you think 'wind your neck back in' amounts to 'launching into a personal attack,' then you need to develop a thicker skin.

Reality says

You have been living in an echo chamber of your choice if you thing "everyone else" has the same prejudices as you do.

Sure. I'm a middle-aged man who has never personally known anyone to spout the sort of shite you come up with for your vision of the world. If that's what you take to be an echo chamber, then fine.

Reality says

No need to complain, just carrying on as usual, in a new thread.

Of course you are complaining. That is why you started a new thread to complain about what he was doing.

sbh says

Reality says

unless you consider the authors of Declaration of Independence to be "America's skinhead freeman." They were freemen all right, but they wore wigs, not skinheads, and yes they were quintessential Americans.

Whom you despise and consider fascists. They structured a nation around voting therefore to you they are fascists.

Where did you learn your American history? In the Soviet Union? No, the authors of the Declaration of Independence did not structure a nation. The American nation was born in trade amongst the colonies. The Declaration of Independence did not involve the establishment of any new government, but declared the independence of 13 colonies; i.e. the un-establishment of the British government over the 13 colonies.

sbh says

Reality says

What you are advocating is not nationhood, but state coercion.

Another bullshit diversion. Every patriotic statement I have made leads to your ejaculation "fascism". Nationhood in America is fascism. You own this. Eat it.

Nope. You have not made a single patriotic statement, but only scandalous faux pas trying to hide your ignorance in the last refuge of flag waving.

sbh says

Reality says

The very existence of the institution of slavery relied upon the government

No, it relied upon the pricing powerlessness of slaves and the violent pricing power the southern freemen.

What the heck are you talking about? Run-away slaves could find jobs in free soil states that were not enforcing slave-return laws.

Your North Idaho freemen cohorts would hold black slaves as legitimate firearm practice targets, and true to Austrian economics it would make perfect sense to buy them. True to the hypocrisy of such lunatics, they would lobby the government to give them a grant to do it. Your point is meaningless.

You are just making up shit as you go. You are the type of loser who lobby for government funding, and you are the type of losers who, if left to your own device, will end up at the receiving end of a firing squad, just like Eric Rhom, the former SA leader who got slaughtered during the Night of Long Knives. Some "national structure" all right!

Go to bed, or has your "model-grade sex partner" given you blue balls? Or has your "worshipful kid" gone on a bender and left you contemplating a new Skinner box timeout therapy?

Kids are doing fine, as are most former sex partners. The most recent one has to stew in her own juice as she managed to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

sbh says

You are actually the advocate for violent coercions

Your dick goes limp and you trot out "projection" again? Loser. Anarchy is "without structure".

So which government told you to have what for breakfast this morning? How about lunch and dinner? Did some government order you around to have your meals? Are you living in a prison? The market place has its own structure.

To you any national structure is fascism,

Nonsense! The American nation was born decades before even the Constitution was written.

and any advocate of that order is violent.

Again nonsense! The market place creates its own order through the freedom and liberty exercised by individuals. Coercion upon individuals to do things that they do not wish to do obviously is violent and violating the freedom and liberty of individuals, usually leading to chaos as individuals then seek to subvert such imposition.

Your blithering narrow mind is almost too dull to tolerate. The example of American freemen are the idiot anarchists who see themselves as sovereign nations unto themselves and drape swastikas across their livingroom.

You obviously know more about the neo-Nazi skinheads than you know about the authors of the Declaration of Independence, or for that matter what's in the Declaration of Independence. No wonder you would have mistaken anyone worshipping Swastika (presumably the Nazi variety, not the Bhuddist or pagan variety) as liberty loving; the Nazi Swastika is a symbol of "national structure" that you love so much.

What do they pay you as a consultant when they warm up the presses and build white-trash websites about assuming the true will to power? Do you feel powerful preaching to the toothless morons who hate America as much as you do?

Stop projecting. I'm not even white. You however do sound like trash, regardless of your skin color.

Bigsby says

Reality says

Can dish out, but can't take it, can you? Your "wind your neck back in" comment could be construed as "up pop the weasel."

No, it can be seen for what it obviously was - you getting agitated for no reason about a jokey comment that didn't require a response. And if you think 'wind your neck back in' amounts to 'launching into a personal attack,' then you need to develop a thicker skin.

Then why are you agitated by someone pointing out your weasel reference? Shouldn't you grow some thicker skin before asking others to do the same?

Bigsby says

Reality says

You have been living in an echo chamber of your choice if you thing "everyone else" has the same prejudices as you do.

Sure. I'm a middle-aged man who has never personally known anyone to spout the sort of shite you come up with for your vision of the world. If that's what you take to be an echo chamber, then fine.

Then you are just ignorant. There have been hundreds of books published by economists of the Austrian School, Public Choice School, etc. etc. If you think that are all "sort of shite" then you are just proving your own ignorance.

Bigsby says

Reality says

No need to complain, just carrying on as usual, in a new thread.

Of course you are complaining. That is why you started a new thread to complain about what he was doing.

No I did not. The thread was started with a repost of the post that he deleted, with a preface/forward added to the front explaining why a new thread became necessary.

Reality says

Then why are you agitated by someone pointing out your weasel reference? Shouldn't you grow some thicker skin before asking others to do the same?

I'm not agitated. I'm pointing out what you did and why it was an overreaction. And it was you who made the weasel reference, not me. I said you should wind your neck back in. Personally, I've never heard anyone use the expression 'up pop the weasel' before.

Reality says

Then you are just ignorant. There have been hundreds of books published by economists of the Austrian School, Public Choice School, etc. etc. If you think that are all "sort of shite" then you are just proving your own ignorance.

Disagreeing with you and your love of Austrian economics isn't ignorance, it's simply a fundamental disagreement with the views that you hold. And as I said, I have never met anyone who holds the views you promote on here. You called that living in an echo chamber, I said that I've simply never met anyone with your professed views despite 20+ years working around the world as an expat. That's my life experience. The fact a bunch of economists have written some books is utterly irrelevant to that. And when you quote someone, it's best to actually quote what they say rather than making up a comment.

Reality says

No I did not. The thread was started with a repost of the post that he deleted, with a preface/forward added to the front explaining why a new thread became necessary.

Based on the fact you were annoyed by his deletion. Perhaps you'd care to look at the title you used for the thread.

Bigsby says

Then why are you agitated by someone pointing out your weasel reference? Shouldn't you grow some thicker skin before asking others to do the same?

I'm not agitated. I'm pointing out what you did and why it was an overreaction.

I was not agitated. You made a weasel reference, so I pointed out that you were weaseling out of debate.

Bigsby says

Disagreeing with you and your love of Austrian economics isn't ignorance, it's simply a fundamental disagreement with the views that you hold. And as I said, I have never met anyone who holds the views you promote on here. You called that living in an echo chamber, I said that I've simply never met anyone with your professed views despite 20+ years working around the world as an expat. That's my life experience. The fact a bunch of economists have written some books is utterly irrelevant to that.

I doubt you actually expatriated (as in renouncing US citizenship) in any of those 20yrs. You worked around the world as a foreign worker, mostly with very close-knit local "expat"/foreigner chambers of commerce working closely with the local governments, seeking special privileges from the said governments.

"A bunch of economists," sure just so happens that several of them are winners of Nobel Prize in Economics. Obviously, economic theories, especially the free market variety, are of no interest to the chambers of commerce suckling on the teats of foreign governments.

Bigsby says

No I did not. The thread was started with a repost of the post that he deleted, with a preface/forward added to the front explaining why a new thread became necessary.

Based on the fact you were annoyed by his deletion. Perhaps you'd care to look at the title you used for the thread.

Annoyed? Yes, because I had to repost with a preface/forward added. Complaining? No.

Reality says

I was not agitated. You made a weasel reference, so I pointed out that you were weaseling out of debate.

Good grief. YOU made the weasel comment. I said wind your neck back in. What has that got to do with a 'weasel' reference?

Reality says

I doubt you actually expatriated (as in renouncing US citizenship) in any of those 20yrs. You worked around the world as a foreign worker, mostly with very close-knit local "expat"/foreigner chambers of commerce working closely with the local governments, seeking special privileges from the said governments.

Er, I'm British. I'm currently working in the Middle East and have done so for quite a while and nearly all my colleagues are Arabs and Indians. Before that I was in Japan, and there nearly every single person was Japanese, so... And I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'seeking special privileges' and working 'closely with local governments.' I am, however, impressed by the assertions you make based on zero knowledge of what you are talking about.

Reality says

Annoyed? Yes, because I had to repost with a preface/forward added. Complaining? No.

Oh right, so you were annoyed rather than complaining. Thanks for clearing that up.

Bigsby says

I was not agitated. You made a weasel reference, so I pointed out that you were weaseling out of debate.

Good grief. YOU made the weasel comment.

The "winding your neck back in" comment from you was a reference to child toy "up pop the weasel."

Bigsby says

Er, I'm British. I'm currently working in the Middle East and have done so for quite a while and nearly all my colleagues are Arabs and Indians. Before that I was in Japan, and there nearly every single person was Japanese, so... And I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'seeking special privileges' and working 'closely with local governments.' I am, however, impressed by the assertions you make based on zero knowledge of what you are talking about.

In other words, you did not expatriate (renouncing British citizenship in your case). What the heck do you think the local British Chamber of Commerce do in every place that you have been going? Seeking special trading privileges from the local governments.

Bigsby says

Oh right, so you were annoyed rather than complaining. Thanks for clearing that up.

You are welcome. What's that you are complaining?

Reality says

The "winding your neck back in" comment from you was a reference to child toy "up pop the weasel."

No, it wasn't. But it was kind of you to tell me what the expression doesn't mean.

Reality says

In other words, you did not expatriate (renouncing British citizenship in your case). What the heck do you think the local British Chamber of Commerce do in every place that you have been going? Seeking special trading privileges from the local governments.

No, I didn't, because, strangely enough, I like to have a passport and am happy to remain the citizen of the country I was born and grew up in. And I don't work with or for the local British Chamber of Commerce. And where exactly do you get off telling someone what they are doing or who they are working with when you haven't got the foggiest?

Call it Crazy says

upisdown
says

All the 'news' sources used the same source for their story, the NAHB
homebuilder confidence poll.

Hey Asshole.... Look a little bit closer to your links you posted
above...

LOL, see...................it's annoying as fuck, isn't it?

Apparnetly you don't like the same BS that you force on others, directed at you, do ya?

I never implied anything, I just posted the exact same article link that you did, and then said that they all used the NAHB poll as a source of info, which they did.

Bigsby says

No, I didn't, because, strangely enough, I like to have a passport and am happy to remain the citizen of the country I was born and grew up in. And I don't work with or for the local British Chamber of Commerce. And where exactly do you get off telling someone what they are doing or who they are working with when you haven't got the foggiest?

Stop the strawman tactic. I did not accuse you of working FOR the local British Chambers of Commerce. However, every major British company operating in a foreign country works closely with the local British Chambers of Commerce. That's where the term "expats" was invented for non-expatriated British subjects.

They should force him to donate his heart to a serial killer with heart failure.

That might be cruel and unusual punishment, however, (for the serial killer).

I suspect there are a fair amount of people like this Realtor who think they know how to game the system, and actually do try to game it.

Reality says

Stop the strawman tactic. I did not accuse you of working FOR the local British Chambers of Commerce. However, every major British company operating in a foreign country works closely with the local British Chambers of Commerce.

Strawman? I notice you stressed the FOR part after saying I worked WITH the chamber of commerce. Very convenient. This is what you wrote, and I quote:

Reality says

You worked around the world as a foreign worker, mostly with very close-knit local "expat"/foreigner chambers of commerce working closely with the local governments, seeking special privileges from the said governments.

The simple fact is you had no point in saying it, no reason to accuse me of strawman tactics, and no point in stating who you thought I worked with before that, did you? Let me spell it out for you, I don't work for a British company, and I work with and live around non-western people. Is that clear enough for you? Pretty much everything you've said has either been wrong, irrelevant or utterly obvious, so you can give your strawman comments a rest.

Reality says

No wonder you would have mistaken anyone worshipping Swastika (presumably the
Nazi variety, not the Bhuddist or pagan variety) as liberty loving; the Nazi
Swastika is a symbol of "national structure" that you love so much.

Many of the people in this forum have no idea how close they really are to this, ideologically speaking (especially those who are most likely to make the accusation against conservatives in general). The typical leftist forum member here would agree with much more of Hitler's typical populist, frequently anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist speeches, than any so-labeled conservative. They would agree with much more of his actual party platform (very much implemented) than any conservative. When they deny this is the case, that is evidence that they have not read or studied any of this information.

Sowell (who most angry, self-claimed anti-racist leftists in this forum will hate even more than they hate white conservatives) wrote an interesting piece on German culture and concluded that (paraphrased) 'If it could happen to the Germans, it could happen to anyone'. The rabid, angry leftists in this forum who are so ignorant of their similiarity supports this.

What's a "nitwit" ?

Is this name synonymous with the term "assclown" that Roberta used to employ so effectively ?

sbh says

Bigsby says

I think you need to wind your neck back in.

Reality says

Can dish out, but can't take it, can you? Your "wind your neck back in" comment could be construed as "up pop the weasel."

Yo Bigs, before you fall prey to the temptation to venture further down the rabbithole with Skinhead Realty (it's dead time, to be sure), bear in mine he is utterly ham-handed when it comes to normative grammar (up pop the weasel.....oh, please). He was raised by hyenas, and English is a second language. In his wretched universe everything is self-referential. He's a functioning sociopath with Asperger's. Enjoy.

Unfortunately we seem to have a few too many of these on Patnet.

New Renter says

Yes its is

Reality's response to that point is not there

Bigsby says

I notice you stressed the FOR part after saying I worked WITH the chamber of commerce. Very convenient.

The difference between FOR and WITH are quite obvious. I used the latter for a reason: most British subjects (companie and individuals) working abroad for decades work closely WITH the British Chamber of Commerce in the "expat" community. The British Chamber of Commerce came up with the term "expat" for those British subjects despite the fact that from a legal point of view they are not "expats" at all because they have not at all expatriated (renouncing their British citizenship)

Bigsby says

Let me spell it out for you, I don't work for a British company, and I work with and live around non-western people. Is that clear enough for you? Pretty much everything you've said has either been wrong, irrelevant or utterly obvious, so you can give your strawman comments a rest.

While I'm not infallible, the grossly over-generalizing statement at the end of the paragraph puts significant doubt into the validity of the previous sentence: while it is not uncommon for British "expats" to work with and live around non-western people even as they frequently show up at the local British Chambers of Commerce, and you may even be working FOR a non-British company now . . . both parts of the sentence may well be misleading from the more important facts:

1. You may well have started your overseas career at a British company;

2. You may well frequent events organized by the local British Chambers of Commerce, where you picked up the term "expats," a legally incorrect term describing British subjects who have not legally expatriated by renouncing their British citizenship.

These experiences and your self-admitted working with and living amongst foreigners in a foreign culture may well explain why you have not had much experience with in-depth discussions on economics, especially outside the schools that promote government sponsorship of privileged traders.

sbh says

Yo Bigs, before you fall prey to the temptation to venture further down the rabbithole with Skinhead Realty (it's dead time, to be sure), bear in mine he is utterly ham-handed when it comes to normative grammar (up pop the weasel.....oh, please). He was raised by hyenas, and English is a second language. In his wretched universe everything is self-referential. He's a functioning sociopath with Asperger's. Enjoy.

Keep projecting. You obviously know more about Swastika-worshiping Skinheads than you know about the Declaration of Independence. You consider the Swastika-worshiping skinheads as lovers of liberty, you are a fascist through and through.

Reality says

The difference between FOR and WITH are quite obvious. I used the latter for a reason: most British subjects (companie and individuals) working abroad for decades work closely WITH the British Chamber of Commerce in the "expat" community. The British Chamber of Commerce came up with the term "expat" for those British subjects despite the fact that from a legal point of view they are not "expats" at all because they have not at all expatriated (renouncing their British citizenship)

You are just bullshitting, trying to play stupid little word games. You made a direct comment about what I supposedly did without having a bloody clue about my employment, so you can give your shite a rest. And expatriate means outside the country NOT renouncing your citizenship to any normal person who isn't playing childish games.

Reality says

While I'm not infallible, the grossly over-generalizing statement at the end of the paragraph puts significant doubt into the validity of the previous sentence:

Really? I fail to see much if anything in your responses to me that was accurate.

Reality says

1. You may well have started your overseas career at a British company;

No.

Reality says

2. You may well frequent events organized by the local British Chambers of Commerce, where you picked up the term "expats," a legally incorrect term describing British subjects who have not legally expatriated by renouncing their British citizenship.

No, and again since when is that the common use of the word expat?

Reality says

These experiences and your self-admitted working with and living amongst foreigners in a foreign culture may well explain why you have not had much experience with in-depth discussions on economics, especially outside the schools that promote government sponsorship of privileged traders.

Yes, of course, because nobody ever discusses economics outside America. Are you a current college student who has read a couple of books and thinks they are an expert on everything by any chance?

The whole point of Reality's nonsense is that he wanted to start a fight about what the word expat means and its origin.

More childish antics.

Bigsby says

While I'm not infallible, the grossly over-generalizing statement at the end of the paragraph puts significant doubt into the validity of the previous sentence:

Really? I fail to see much if anything in your responses to me that was accurate.

Well, with over-generalization like that, you are giving up on convincing anyone of your written words.

Bigsby says

No, and again since when is that the common use of the word expat?

Ever since the concepts of governments regulating citizenships started.

Bigsby says

Yes, of course, because nobody ever discusses economics outside America. Are you a current college student who has read a couple of books and thinks they are an expert on everything by any chance?

No. However, I do have a lot of experience living in lands outside the country of my birth. In polite company with foreigners, most people do not engage in in-depth discussion on economics beyond the usual platitudes, especially if the people present might be beneficiaries of government granted privileges.