Thread for orphaned comments
invite response
2005 Apr 11, 5:00pm 171,358 views 117,730 comments
by Patrick ➕follow (60) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 45,810 - 45,849 of 117,730 Next » Last » Search these comments
New Renter
2014 Apr 30, 4:42am
Gas prices went down a lot more than $0.50 gallon and yes it does make a difference.
make a difference.
If you've got nothing, somethign that costs $1.00 looks the same as something that costs $100.00
But if you have a dollar you can buy that something but if its $100 you can't.
Sterling was probably set up
Even if he was set up which is not out of the realm of possibilities what he said was still repugnant and damaging to the league and he must take responsibility and accept consequences for it.
He did not use the N-word anywhere in the recording. He hardly even make sweeping statements on blacks. All he said was acknowledging social prejudice against blacks, and it is beyond his ability to change that prejudice. He even said he loves blacks. He did not use any racial slur. If anyone ever said anything like that or worse have to be escorted out of the stadium, do you think an NBA game would have many people left in the audience or on the court?
He mentioned how he didn't want his chick to bring them to the games and pose with them on instagram and mentioned several times why she "really had to do that?" He also basically conveyed that in the "culture" that he is part of associating with black people brings negative attention and stated how in israel black jews are treated like dogs vs white jews "150%" and again referenced that "we live in the culture." Sports is supposed to be bringing people together (well uness one is a fan of st petersbugh zenith soccer team lol) and what he said is extremely divisive when heard by general public and does not go along with a society that's supposed to strive for absence of racism or post-racial society.
He mentioned how he didn't want his chick to bring them to the games and pose with them on instagram and mentioned several times why she "really had to do that?" He also basically conveyed that in the "culture" that he is part of associating with black people brings negative attention and stated how in israel black jews are treated like dogs vs white jews "150%" and again referenced that "we live in the culture." Sports is supposed to be bringing people together (well uness one is a fan of st petersbugh zenith soccer team lol) and what he said is extremely divisive when heard by general public and does not go along with a society that's supposed to strive for absence of racism or post-racial society.
Did you miss the part that his girlfriend IS black? Can you bring people of two different races closer together than genital contact and/or oral-genital contact / over-lapping?
He was also recorded on her tape as saying she could sleep with the black athletes all she wanted; i.e. he was willing to share his girl with black athletes. How about that for inclusiveness? and open-mindedness?
He just did not wish that fact to be known in public and be embarrassed among his other friends and business associates. How is a man not wishing to be known as cuckled and made a public spectacle of suddenly a racist?
You liberals don't know too many foreigners or minorities do you?
Want to find out how they think? It may take some effort to move among them depending on your location and other factors.
I know some of American minority people, and they generally attribute the "social injustice" of "income inequality" to white males. They are racist but it's not that terrible. They actually believe that there are fat white guys in suits smoking cigars planning to ruin them somehow.
Foreigners are different, they see things not through the lens of American guilt over slavery. They have some racist tendencies but we call it a cultural trait if it's a Japanese or Chinese or Korean or Mexican, he gets a pass.
What mystifies me is when someone who is American and financially secure actually has such a muddled brain as to attribute racism to everyone who doesn't share their political beliefs.
bubblesitter
2014 Apr 30, 5:05am
I was strolling west cliff drive yesterday afternoon, saw some whales, checked out this little house for sale. My friend grabbed the flyer.
950 West Cliff Drive, Santa Cruz CA $3.2 million
3 bd, 3.5 baths, etc.
It was sold in 2002 for $1.6 million.
Some Netflix or similar employee with stock options will probably buy it, but it was interesting to see.
1 bd condos just a few hundred feet away were $500K but who knows what the monthy fees are?
Lotta whales out.
Tried to sell since 2010. It'd probably sell as long as investors don't see any hope of return anywhere else.
We got a good deal. If we put it on the market now, PK believes we can sell it for $575k.
That price seems very low for $2800/mo in rent.clambo says
950 West Cliff Drive, Santa Cruz CA $3.2 million
3 bd, 3.5 baths, etc.
It was sold in 2002 for $1.6 million.
The place went pending in 2012 but dropped out, I guess. Overpriced house in an overrated town, despite the ocean view. Santa Cruz was ground zero for bubbliness during the boom years. And at least some of the people who thought they'd be happy living in the boonies eventually got tired of driving over the hill to work. The more things change, the more they stay the same...
tatupu70
2014 Apr 30, 5:42am
If I were any guy, I would tell the girl the same thing, assuming she wanted to continue taking my money for borrowing her pussy.
That's fine. But, by doing so, you forfeit your ability to own an NBA team.
tatupu70
2014 Apr 30, 5:44am
Only people with excess money (e.g. rich) own stocks. People living paycheck to paycheck (e.g. poor) do not own stocks.
Correct. But he has it backwards (as does Reality). Inequality is not cause by rising stocks--they are both caused by the prevailing economic conditions: taxes, power of labor vs. capital, etc.
tatupu70
2014 Apr 30, 5:46am
But if you have a dollar you can buy that something but if its $100 you can't.
OK--but I think you get the point. Prices falling 10% really doesn't make a hill of beans difference if you lose your job.
Tenpoundbass
2014 Apr 30, 6:09am
Does it make sense that someone who developed a 1980s technology is still rewarded even though he has not participated in any innovation since then and may have tried to suppress new technologies?
Well not if he managed to hang onto that Atari Pong money.
He shouldn't have to be innovative, if he isn't trying to produce.
I'm saying without banks paying savers a safe and dependable return on their nest egg. The classic notion of being "Set for Life" is a thing of the past. Now it is like you say, you have to keep plenty of financial bullets and be a marksman to pick off the Indians and to keep the wolf away.
That is proabably how my question wraps up, is you can't. ANd if you're not savvy, then the old adage will apply. "A fool and his money will soon part ways."
Then you consider Madoffs customers, some of the worlds most brightest and creative minds in the world got taken for a ride. So even being savvy enough to hang on to your cash, is getting harder for the smart folks just as much so for the the naturally dumb folks.
That is why its wise to hire a financial planner and have them do the work for you.
Disagree. A lot of financial planners just try to sell you overpriced high-fee insurance products. You could do just as well in the stock market by reading Bogleheads for a few weeks.
You are looking at stock indices themselves with dividend reinvested without taking into consideration transaction costs. Index funds are not the same as indices with dividends reinvested. Funds have transaction cost and tax cost when trying to track indices, which have very different stocks over a long period of time.
I've always gotten dividends reinvested for free. If you are not getting this, stop using your current shitty broker and find a better one. As for transaction costs when tracking indices, if you are buying a shitty index fund, you are buying a shitty index fund. This is almost a non-issue if you are buying low-fee funds from someone like Vanguard.
I wouldn't even care about NAV fluctuations at that point since the worst that this fund has done over the last 10 years is a little over 11% loss and this was in 2008.
Agree, NAV fluctuations are easily made up in a relatively short time via interest rates. Bond prices go down when bond yields go up, and the increased yield will eventually offset the price decrease.
With a $10 million windfall, you could easily and I mean really easily purchase a multisector bond fund and make over $330,000 per year at todays rates. Yes, you would need to pay your fed taxes no matter what at regular rates and depending on the state that you reside in you may need to pay taxes there as well
In recent years, several bond funds have been doing even better than the 3.3% you quoted over the last 5-10 years.
Another alternative is munis, although the returns are typically similar to bonds with similar risk when you account for tax benefits.
FortWayne
2014 Apr 30, 6:52am
Gas prices went down a lot more than $0.50 gallon and yes it does make a difference.
make a difference.
If you've got nothing, somethign that costs $1.00 looks the same as something that costs $100.00
But if you have a dollar you can buy that something but if its $100 you can't.
Speaking of gas prices, what the hell is with the 4.67 / gallon lately? And Obama, got no balls to stand up to oil companies to get this addressed.
Gas prices went down a lot more than $0.50 gallon and yes it does make a difference.
make a difference.
If you've got nothing, somethign that costs $1.00 looks the same as something that costs $100.00
But if you have a dollar you can buy that something but if its $100 you can't.
Speaking of gas prices, what the hell is with the 4.67 / gallon lately? And Obama, got no balls to stand up to oil companies to get this addressed.
Inflation running rampant paired with the upcoming summer holiday season. This is what the Fed calls "subdued inflation" - LOL!
APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says
Maybe he is just organizing a program to attract neonazi tenants.
Isn't that just called marketing?
They needed another site:
FortWayne
2014 Apr 30, 8:07am
Even if he was set up which is not out of the realm of possibilities what he said was still repugnant and damaging to the league and he must take responsibility and accept consequences for it.
But he didn't do anything that was damaging the league. Private conversation isn't damaging.
What made it damaging, was making that conversation public by whomever. Probably Johnson was involved, since he is interested in buying the team.
FortWayne
2014 Apr 30, 8:08am
Except the taxpayers seldom give the McDonalds free land, and foot the bill for a massive complex; nor does the McDonalds charge $20 for a Big Mac and $10 for a Coke - unless it's in a Public-Private Partnership stadium.
Most healthcare corporations are registered non profit. McDonalds got a special deal with Obamacare too. They are all sleeping in the same bed with the same politicians.
tatupu70
2014 Apr 30, 9:08am
But he didn't do anything that was damaging the league
Of course he did. Did you see every advertisement in the Staples Center was covered for the last playoff game? You don't think that hurts the league??
Someone should start more than black owned leagues while they're at it.
Have 4 leagues: black owned BBA (black basketball assoc.), NBA, NTBA (no thug basketball assoc.) and GBA (gay basketball association).
Have I covered it? Any more league suggestions?
I thought of the TBA (transgender basketball assoc.) but I think there just aren't enough of them to make a good league.
Strategist
2014 Apr 30, 9:15am
Magic Johnson: ‘I will be owning an NBA team some time’
“We’ll see what happens. I will be owning an NBA team some time,†Johnson said. He added the prospect of the Clippers being put up for sale is a long way off, but he might consider a purchase with his associates at Guggenheim Partners.
Hmmmmm.... I wonder what Johnson promised Stirling's mistress for her "help"???
Fame, fortune, and a big black dick.
I don't mean to stop the circle jerk here, but She-Man cannot claim to have 5.5 million in assets. That's horseshit since he's levered multiple times over and better pray that this laughable 0.1% rise in GDP isn't a harbinger of things to come(which it is).
Once you can post the deeds to your complexes free and clear, then we can bow down in admiration.
I actually have some respect for her. She did what other females with no real talent, brains or looks do, she leveraged what she had into some fame and dough.
I prefer her to Michelle Obama, Michelle's champagne wishes and caviar dreams are paid for by you and me.
That's how it had always worked and will be more so in the future. Assets are used to acquire more assets and housing is a function of too much savings. That is why income/price ratio is as unimportant as ever when valuing assets.
No, it's function of leverage (plus special deductions/exemptions) where it has clearly an edge over other vehicles.
Housing is a tax sheltered assets for most and tax deferred assets for others. When the combine that with prop 13, step up basis, and forever ownership in a stable country, it is a class of assets to hold forever and accumulate. The liquidity risk is easily mitigated with cash out available to the rich at less than 2% and 4% to most.
makes sense?
Sure, but housing is no different from other bubbles (except for its great leverage and crony exemptions/deductions) and people will be destroyed with the next housing bust for the benefit of those who got in earlier. It is not meant to fluctuate like this and being used as a highly-leveraged vehicle chasing maximum yields, and that's why the boom/bust cycles are more frequent. It's like stock speculation on steroids. These policies and the subsequent bailout-scrambles are exactly responsible for the rising inequality and unpredictability of the economy.
ttsmyf
2014 Apr 30, 10:15am
WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!
Say hey! This was in the Wall Street Journal on March 30, 1999. Note "... how much it will buy."
Holy cow/interesting/compelling ...!
And where is it up to date??? Right here ... see the first chart shown in this thread.
Recent Dow day is Wednesday, April 30, 2014 __ Level is 104.8
WOW! It is hideous that this is hidden! Is there any such "Homes, Inflation Adjusted"? Yes! This was in the New York Times on August 27, 2006:
And up to date (by me) is here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1219038&c=999083#comment-999083
WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!
And "ThePublic Be Suckered"
http://patrick.net/?p=1230886
That's hogwash, as their incomes are decent but the real issue is that they have been taxed to the hilt by the Obama administration since inception under the guise of class warfare (usually referred to as wage-slaves), instead of taxing the 0.1%-1%. Taxes are way too high on these income brackets (200K+) and the Democrats are responsible for it (doesn't mean the Republicans would have done it vastly differently).
This is a good point. There are many people in the top 5% who are getting hosed on taxes relative to people in the top 0.5% or the top 0.1%. The AMT, as an example, hits these people the hardest. Many of the tax benefits that apply to most of the population are completely phased out for these folks. Most of the people in the bottom 4.5% of the top 5% tend to be wage-slaves, whereas the top 0.5% tends to have the majority of their income as capital gains.
The solution? Change the capital gains tax rate to be the same as the ordinary income tax rate as it was under Reagan, which will allow rates to be lowered slightly on the bottom 4.5% of the top 5%.
I prefer her to Michelle Obama
Yeah, I mean, Michelle Obama only went to Princeton and Harvard Law, then worked for a major law firm, the city of Chicago, and the University of Chicago (and made almost 2X then-Senator Obama's salary there).
She's completely inferior to this stupid whore whose main claim to fame is fucking pro athletes and having a sugar daddy. What the fuck is wrong with you?
anotheraccount
2014 Apr 30, 11:20am
makes sense?
Makes sense until it does not. SFAce, you are pretty smart logical guy, so you can always come up with a thesis. Look at JCP and Yahoo. When I read your posts on those, they also made sense, until the trend changed.
Leveraged asset accumulation worked so well during crazy population growth that we experienced since WW2. I think we are at the peak of population growth. Developed world is already done. It's only a matter of time before emerging markets follow. Leveraged asset accumulation might not work as well in the next decade.
Nothing is wrong with me, what the fuck is wrong with you?
I don't give a shit where michelle "let them eat paella" went to school, nor what seat warming job she got at a hospital.
I have no respect for Michelle because she is like Marie Antoinette, she spends my and others money for her lavish junkets. Her China mystery tour cost us a fortune, in addition to her other junkets using our money.
marcus
2014 Apr 30, 11:41am
I have no respect for Michelle because she is like Marie Antoinette, she spends my and others money for her lavish junkets. Her China mystery tour cost us a fortune, in addition to her other junkets using our money.
This is moronic. The first lady has subtle PR responsibilities. She's supposed to act like the first lady. I'm sure the security and entourage part of it are just as annoying to her as it is to you.
But as I said, it's moronic. The morons of the other party (not nearly everyone in the other party) come out for every President to talk about how much golf they play, or how many vacations they take, or how much the first lady spends redecorating.
Whatever, man.
I'm proud to say that when I criticized Bush or Reagan it was NEVER about that kind of bullshit.
Can't you see how much of an asshole you are ?
Any White Rep/Con/Tea that watches or participates financially in any way(buying tickets & sports crap) with any sports team at any level that has black players might be a N-lover.
Let "those" people get rich on your hard earned dollar. How you like it,White Rep/Con/Teas?
Take those targets off your asses ,they are too big & easy to kick. roflmao
marcus like lots of lefty liberals can't resist getting nasty and name calling. Why?
Michelle flying around the place having junkets, going to China, Spain, Africa with her mother and her daughters wasn't a job or diplomacy.
This is why I respect Sterling's girlfriend more, she at least isn't blowing the taxpayers money, rather Sterling's.
elliemae
2014 Apr 30, 1:06pm
The news said that now they can enter a period of "healing." Give me a fucking break.
yeah I don't pay to watch sports ever and of course basketball is one of the most mind-numbing of them all to watch.
Once in a blue moon going to a game has been fun, but the last time I was at the stick I decided I would not go back there.
of course, the other irony of the woman in question is she was badly treated by Mexicans for having a black father.
So are we allowed to talk about Mexican racism or is that also "racist"?
It wasn't just I thought they would. They actually did! Because market prices for everything else dropped even faster than wage decline: gasoline went from $4/gallon in 2007 and early 2008 to nearly $2/gallon at bottom in 2009. Median house prices went from near $300k to below $200k.
New employers with reduced debt load would be able to bid up wages more, not necessarily in nominal terms but certainly in purchasing power parity terms.
No, they didn't! When you are umemployed, it really doesn't matter if gas prices went down by $0.50/gallon now, does it?
The vast majority of workers are still working even in the onset of depression. Unemployed are the relatively small minority, and they would only stay unemployed by choice if the government is paying them to stay unemployed (like extended unemployment benefits) or banning them from working via laws like raised minimum wages.
New employers pay the market rate for labor. That rate is set by supply and demand. And when demand is down, as control point rightly stated, price will go down as well.
Nominal price go down, but purchasing power go up. You are forgetting the very rationale for Keynes' entire theory: wage is sticky, and more sticky than other goods and assets being re-priced.
What do you mean by "weight of value of AAPL in the overall corporate market place"? Do you just invent stuff on the fly? Market capitalization is what it is.
Is the weight of AAPL in the S&P 500 equal to the weight of AAPL's market cap in the overall market cap of the country? Even just talking about the stock market - the S&P 500 is not the entire stock market, after all.
You are changing topic, but I will play along with you. The Willshire 5000 dropped even more. Are you so out of touch as not realize small caps have higher Beta (volatility) than large caps?
The current market cap of the S&P 500 is about 16.8 trillion. Current outstanding US treasuries held by the public is 12.4 Trillion. The S&P fell 50%+. The market value of treasuries didn't fall anywhere near 50%. Someone owns those debt instruments, and they add to that entities net worth.
Then advocate for government default during next recession. Notice, government debt is an entirely government enforced identity theft scheme on the rest of the population.
All of this is to say that comparing the percentage drop in value of a partial segment of the country to income is useless. Especially in the middle of an enormous deleveraging event. Incomes are not leveraged, market caps are
The rich are more leveraged than the working stiff. Deleveraging event is proportionally more injurious to the rich than to the working stiff. That's why government intervention to counter deleveraging has exacerbated the wealth disparity.
But if you have a dollar you can buy that something but if its $100 you can't.
OK--but I think you get the point. Prices falling 10% really doesn't make a hill of beans difference if you lose your job.
Prices fell far more than 10% in a recession. Think 50% or more for commodities, like in 2008. Your steady-state mindset is killing you. Losing a job means transitioning to a new job in the absence of government meddling incentivizing unemployment and preventing employment.
marcus
2014 Apr 30, 1:57pm
Speaking of gas prices, what the hell is with the 4.67 / gallon lately? And Obama, got no balls to stand up to oil companies to get this addressed.
Hahahahaha,...ohhhh. You crack me up. Like the President can control the price of oil.
Ohh man. If only you had the slightest clue.
« First « Previous Comments 45,810 - 45,849 of 117,730 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,236,907 comments by 14,791 users - ElYorsh, Kepi, Onvacation, Patrick, stereotomy online now