patrick.net

The best thing to do is to create a similar website to patrick.net, but dedicate it to politics and keep this original patrick.net website committed to it's original intent, RE.

Patrick,

I saw this discussion, read it all, and just want to implore you to keep doing what you're doing exactly as you've been doing it. Please don't censor yourself or be influenced by the original poster's request to bias the site one way or the other. I love that you take free speech seriously and let everyone talk, but I hope you ignore the people who want your site to reflect their biases, too. They can get their own site. This is your site. The outside room may help mitigate posters acting like congresspeople, but I hope your front page link quality stays right where it is. I know you go find these links yourself and this site takes a good deal of time and thoughtfulness to put together, and I've appreciated it for years.

I've been reading your site for years and have really loved the infographics and quantitative analyses I find daily. On fora, I never know what interests may be astroturfing, but I have come to trust that you're not. I've appreciated the way you haven't caved to animated ads and I realize that may hurt in revenue. I know you don't need to be told this but you're doing this right. Thank you. Please stay the course. All the people here are here because of what you've accomplished as a communicator--not because you acted the way they wanted you to act or communicated the messages they wished you'd communicate.

ashkon says

This was one site that I thought was a great resource for information unbiased by to politics.

Pretty much all his housing articles and info. have nothing to do with politics. The forums themselves have lots of political discussions in them but that is true everywhere you go.

I agree with everything everyone says since my original post.

But, I still suggest specializing in an area and sticking with it, identifying yourself to that one subject. Gradually, over many years of dedication to that subject, you will be the primary source of information in that area. Think of the influence you would have on public opinion then!

Your name would be synonymous to quality information about about RE, and other relevant topics.

You could also have a 2nd website that, again, specializes in a niche orientation, which would then develop to become synonymous with good pure political information, regarding either side of politics.

That is if efficacy is of any importance.

tts says

ashkon says

This was one site that I thought was a great resource for information unbiased by to politics.

Pretty much all his housing articles and info. have nothing to do with politics. The forums themselves have lots of political discussions in them but that is true everywhere you go.

ashkon says

I still suggest specializing in an area and sticking with it

For me, the value of the site has been Patrick's identification of facts about the real estate market. Starting quite a few years ago I was skeptical (as evidently was Patrick and others) about the information being provided by the mediastream media and even from "official" sources. Especially at the time, I suspected that the MSM was merely parroting cherry-picked "facts" offered up by such organizations as the NAR, and that the MSM was not doing much fact checking much less true investigative journalism. In the beginning, Patrick's job was difficult as there seemed to be a lot of spin from the NAR and others, but occasionally there was an underlying data point that suggested that some of the information was spin. I appreciated Patrick's occasional reasoned arguments, but it was the identification of facts that was the important part for me. Back then, there was little "politics" or ideology on the main part of the site.

So where to from here? There are several other areas that I am skeptical that I'm getting the full factual picture from the mainstream media. Perhaps, Patrick, you'd be interested in broadening to one or more of these other areas:

1. The Dollar. Like the supply and demand for RE, it's difficult to get an accurate picture of the supply and demand for the U.S. Dollar. What exactly is the Fed doing? How does that interact with the U.S. Treasury? How does that impact taxpayers? What's the interaction with foreign currencies? What "games" are Wall Street and others up to. Lots of other *factual* questions.
2. Healthcare. Where does the money go? What percentage of the money "in" goes to doctors? How much do they pay for malpractice insurance? Why when I go to a doctor can't (really!) the providers tell me in advance how much the services will cost including what my insurance company will have to pay, as opposed to just my co-pay. In this regard, why is it so unlike any other product or service I buy. For medicare and medicaid, what percentage of the money "in" goes to doctors. Do people in Canada and the U.K. really have it "better?" Do many Canadians really come to the U.S. for medical services when they can? Do others worldwide?
3. Entitlement programs. Lots of factual questions here.
4. Unions. How much are union members paid? What do their pensions look like? For that matter, are the MSM numbers of median household income accurate? I read those numbers now and think of similar data that used to be provided for RE. Is there really a difference between states that have right-to-work laws and those that don't?
5. Individual vs. Government Activities and Rights. Lots of factual questions here. E.g. can individuals and small businesses really do a better more efficient job than large corporations or the government? In the short term? In the long term? Comparing countries, what are the quality of life differences? Is that a factor in immigration/emigration?
Etc.
Etc.

This is the type of information that I would find useful.

Perhaps We Agree says

o where to from here? There are several other areas that I am skeptical that I'm getting the full factual picture from the mainstream media. Perhaps, Patrick, you'd be interested in broadening to one or more of these other areas:

1. The Dollar. Like the supply and demand for RE, it's difficult to get an accurate picture of the supply and demand for the U.S. Dollar. What exactly is the Fed doing? How does that interact with the U.S. Treasury? How does that impact taxpayers? What's the interaction with foreign currencies? What "games" are Wall Street and others up to. Lots of other *factual* questions.
[2-5 omitted]

So basically your solution to get the politics off the site is to add more political subjects? That seems highly disingenuous. Your questions have an ideological slant.

LarryPatrickMaloney says

I've been a fan of patrick.net, since 2006 or 2007? The early days.

I thought patrick.net's been around since 2005. I could be thinking of the housing bubble blog, though. That's been around since 2004. Either way though, you're comment makes me feel old. 2004 doesn't seem that long ago. Damn it, the 1990s don't seem that long ago.

LarryPatrickMaloney says

Every day, it's 70-80% of left leaning, political rhetoric.

If this site seems left leaning to you, it might be that you are tilted to the right. Try standing straight.

I know what leftist politics sounds like. And I haven't heard any communists or smelly hippies -- and I hate hippies like Eric Cartman does. But if you think that watching PBS and reading newspapers and nonfictional books is "left leaning", then well what can we do?

LarryPatrickMaloney says

I have seen a tragic downturn in the quantity, and quality of real estate postings over the past few months.

The housing bubble is continually deflating. As such its getting less news coverage as time goes on. It still gets a lot of press, but not like in 2007. As the housing bubble deflates to nothing, this site has been moving into other, but related, areas such as politics and economics in general. This is a good thing because it means that this site will survive past the housing burst. It's called "patrick.net", not "housingbubbleblog.org" so there's no reason it must die with the end of the bust.

My dirty secret (shhhh) is that I'm actually quite the little capitalist, but little capitalists like me and you have no chance against the big ones who defeat the free market every day and get bailouts when they fail in their rigged market anyway. Their secret? Lobbyists!

Likewise. I'm a capitalist, not a corporatist as Ron Paul would say. I believe in the free market, but my definition of the free market is the common-sense one. A free market is one that is not ridged by anyone. I.e., the market itself is free, not necessarily the players in it. I don't care who ridges the market, government or corporations, the result is the same. A ridged market is grossly inefficient and stifles innovation. It is the greatest evil in our economy.

LarryPatrickMaloney says

The true populist road, leads back to the constitution, and people like Ron Paul.

Please don't insult Ron Paul by calling him a populist. He's a libertarian. To a large extent, so am I except that I believe in game theory and the concept of public property. So I call myself a "rationalist" instead. But there is a lot of overlap between my politics and Libertarianism. Populism is completely incompatible with Libertarianism though.

Also, if you take the extreme left and the extreme right and bend the graph around a circle (like the hue dimension of the HSB space), you'll see that the extreme left and extreme right are closer to each other than either is the center. Nazism and communism, although supposed opposites, have much in common when put in practice. Neither can tolerate questioning of their ideas.

In contrast, most American are close to the center but those in the right extreme now view the center as if it were leftist because they themselves have moved so far to the right.

Hey Patrick, Bug report

If I enter an image tag like <image src="..."/> instead of <image src="..."> then the src attribute is dropped on submission.

I frequently make this mistake because I have such a strong preference for XHMTL strict over HTML. I have to keep forcing myself to drop the ending slash.

Dan8267 says

you'll see that the extreme left and extreme right are closer to each other than either is the center

Exactly. In some ways, this is why the Teabaggers are far more like Occupy Wall Street than either will admit.

But it's also a great example of something else I said -- Ron Paul is more libertarian, but is also more right on many issues than most Republicans.

Dan8267 says

I believe in the free market, but my definition of the free market is the common-sense one. A free market is one that is not ridged by anyone. I.e., the market itself is free, not necessarily the players in it. I don't care who ridges the market, government or corporations, the result is the same. A ridged market is grossly inefficient and stifles innovation. It is the greatest evil in our economy.

This is one of those things a lot of libertarian types screw up. The question is how do you make a "free market"? Libertarians NEVER have an answer to this. They just say "well, if you would open your mind and embrace our philosophy, it would just happen." It's bullshit.

A " free market" can mean different things to different people. To some libertarians, it essentially means anarcho-capitalism (no regulation whatsoever), but that's basically feudalism and leads to monopolies and oligopolies. On the other side, people say government also creates monopolies and oligopolies.

That means the real answer is likely somewhere in the middle. Even the Heritage Foundation acknowledges this by having a multi-part test for free markets:
http://www.heritage.org/Index/ranking
http://www.heritage.org/Index/explore

Some amount of government regulation is required to ensure that markets are free. For example, the government sometimes must engage in anti-trust action, which anarcho-capitalism necessarily creates. The government must also use the rule of law to prevent mafias and gangs that would result under anarcho-capitalism. The government can create distortions, but the government can also repair distortions that anarcho-capitalism creates.

Dan8267 says

Hey Patrick, Bug report

If I enter an image tag like instead of then the src attribute is dropped on submission.

I frequently make this mistake because I have such a strong preference for XHMTL strict over HTML. I have to keep forcing myself to drop the ending slash.

Thanks for telling me!

You can actually just enter the image url without any tag, and as long as the URL starts with http: and ends with one of gif|jpg|jpeg|png|bmp then the tag will be put in automatically and it will show up as an image.

You could also use the "Upload Image" function, which should be pretty easy.

I definitely need some better way to let people edit than typing in HTML, but it never makes it to the top of things that need to be done.

In a way, what we all clamor for is objectivity. I think that, since the country has been dominated by right-wing rhetoric and economic philosophy (and convinced that it works, despite the evidence to the contrary) it's difficult to settle on what objective really means.

Elsewhere, we mentioned the Laffer curve. If one can objectively view the curve as highlighting that there is a point at which taxation becomes self-defeating (taxing at 100% is a given) or too low to support Government services (0% here) then objectively we can determine that the correct amount is somewhere in between.

The Right infers that we are taxed too heavily, no matter where we are at on that curve which is objectively false. Can the Right be rational enough to admit this obvious fact?

Conversely, I don't believe that the Left inherently believes in dogma regarding taxation. If we could have a magic fairy wand that produces revenue without taxation, the Democrats would support that as well (if for not other reason, to secure their place with wealthy donors) As of now, that magic only exists on the right---which makes the Democrats the de facto "tax and spend" party.

This is just one example of where there is little room for discussion with the republican right. There is no tax rate low enough to be deemed too low, and that's not math or economics--it's ideological fantasy.

So, what should objective Patrick do? To "compromise" would inherently mean agreeing with their dogma that we're on the other side of the curve than reality dictates.

If corporate tax rates were objectively too high, I'd support lowering them. If income taxes were too high, I'd say to lower them as well. I'm not opposed to temporary tax cuts to stave off the depression.

Would the Right ever agree to a tax increase---even a modest one? Even if the goal was to stop a meltdown?

How can you work together when one participant denies the very framework within which we argue?

I can testify that this site appears to be partially designed to persuade the general public to sympathize with the Third Way party, also known as communitarianism (first documented in the UN's own literature). It's Fabian socialism, with a UN Agenda 21 focus. This party is neither left or right, as there are factions on both sides that are aligned with it. Niki Raapana has documented and researched the Third Way party extensively.

The goal of this party is to establish social, religious, economic, political, consumption and agricultural changes worldwide, on behalf of the central bankers who are financially supporting this (they also originally created it).

This post will be sure to either be banned outright, or vehemently attacked for telling the truth. The Fabian socialists believe that the ends justify the means -- lying, ridicule, and manipulation are typical methods to achieve what they believe are truly worthy goals.

That these goals were outlined and are financially backed by unelected central bankers does not appear to phase them in any way.

Dan8267 says

A free market is one that is not ridged by anyone.

ridged --> rigged

For some reason I have a crossed neuron in my brain that always substitutes ridged for rigged. Don't know why. Hopefully, my comment was clear anyway.

You could also use the "Upload Image" function, which should be pretty easy.

True, but why waste your disk space copying an image you can just as well link to? Plus it keeps your bandwidth costs down since the web browser gets the image, which is much larger than all the text in a thread, from a different server.

I definitely need some better way to let people edit than typing in HTML, but it never makes it to the top of things that need to be done.

Here's what I would do. Put a row of small buttons right above the text area control for things like bold/italics, escaping HTML tags, and other common functions.

For anchor and image tags, you could reuse the text box next to the "Browse..." button and change the "Upload Image" button to a hyperlink control labeled "Upload or link image or page shown on left". When that hyperlink is pressed, determine if the text entered refers to a local file or a non-file URL. Then either upload as before or append the appropriate HTML text to the text area.

Here's a mockup.

Before

After

corntrollio says

Exactly. In some ways, this is why the Teabaggers are far more like Occupy Wall Street than either will admit.

what is your derogatory expression for the lefty loon anti-American dirty pinko deviant hippies blocking the workers and businesses on Wall Street?

Tim Chesterson says

I can testify that this site appears to be partially designed to persuade the general public to sympathize with the Third Way party, also known as communitarianism (first documented in the UN's own literature). It's Fabian socialism, with a UN Agenda 21 focus. This party is neither left or right, as there are factions on both sides that are aligned with it. Niki Raapana has documented and researched the Third Way party extensively.

WTF? I'm pretty sure that most people here have no idea what you are talking about. Communitarianism? Shit, even I had to Google that one. I'm pretty sure I haven't heard of it, so I'm also pretty sure I'm not advocating it, whatever it is.

And Fabian socialism? What's that? Socialism by this guy?

By the way, I hope that gets more female readers for Patrick. Here's an equally gratuitous picture for the guys.

Really, that picture just made me say WTF again. What's with that chair? I know, "what chair?" But seriously, that's a freaky chair. Who would buy such a thing. I just stumbled on the image when I typed in Fabio into Google image search and found this page.

Italian designer Fabio Novembre has created the Chaise Him and Her chairs, the most comfortable sheet of molded plastic that’s constructed to be a fine piece of ass. An essential piece of furniture for any man’s residence.

Yeah, a man who doesn't want a girlfriend. Seriously, that chair has to be chick repellant.

Bap33 says

corntrollio says

Exactly. In some ways, this is why the Teabaggers are far more like Occupy Wall Street than either will admit.

what is your derogatory expression for the lefty loon anti-American dirty pinko deviant hippies blocking the workers and businesses on Wall Street?

Wallbaggers

as long as you are taking feedback:

Please please do NOT make your site like the Irvine housing blog: Distracting pictures, cartoons, mixed with dumb lyric/poems, and videos. It makes the articles absolutely impossible to read and most of them are not funny and terribly corny.

I'm sure the author have some really insightful things to day, but everytime I click on the link, I can't bare to finish the article.

I'm fairly right leaning. I think Patrick hits the nail on the head... over and over again. We love you Patrick!

underwaterman says

There is a website I use already for this:

http://dollarcollapse.com

Thanks. Seems to have a slant and possibly a little more exaggeration than I'd like, but otherwise it does seem like the old patrick.net oriented to the U.S. Dollar rather than real estate. Now I just need sites covering the other topics I listed above. Ideally, they'd have facts that the MSM isn't covering, with occasional reasoned argument.

Fabian socialism comes from the Fabian society that helped create the labor party in the UK after WW 1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society

Personally I find that it is hard to detach any argument that talks about the economy without eventually talking about politics (and vice versa)

I can disagree with someone but I'm mature enough to agree to disagree. Sometimes there can be discussions where agreements are made between those that otherwise would be at each others necks.

For a number of years I was (kinda still am) on one board and I argued with this socialist. We both agreed that the EU would fail...that was around 2002. we didn't know at the time how correct we were.

Dan makes a good point in that it is generally accepted we had a housing bubble and it burst (granted everyone here knew beforehand)

CL says

If we could have a magic fairy wand that produces revenue without taxation, the Democrats would support that as well (if for not other reason, to secure their place with wealthy donors)

Technically there is...just deficit spending. If government spending was only dependent on tax revenue (and thus the federal must tax and spend like states and local governments) then a deficit wouldn't logically exist. If there was a gold standard then a debt ceiling is not able to exist.

the ultimate problem I see with taxes is this...who exactly has to pay?

Sales taxes are regressive and hurt more of the poor. But those can be avoided by shopping online. There are ways around needing a credit card/debit to shop online. Coinstar allows the purchase of gift certificates and there are many merchants that sell gift cards in stores which you can buy with cash. Taxes on specific items can lead to underground markets for them. NYC has the highest taxes on tobacco and it is more profitable to smuggle in than narcotics!

Income taxes are progressive which means you pay a higher percentage (granted it is marginal) than those that make less. But eventually with wealth you cross a rubicon and money starts to work for you (investments). So income taxes really do not make a difference. Capital gains taxes are the larger aspect but even then if someone has "enough" then they don't have to sell their investments or work. We do not have a direct tax on wealth except the estate taxes but those can be avoided with estate planning.

Meanwhile with companies they can simply not must move but incorporate in other countries so that makes it much harder to tax them or at least their income. When the DoJ went after microsoft in the late 90's there were rumors they'd just drive up to Vancouver (just a few hours on I-5N anyway)

Those on the left want government to provide goods/services to people because they feel if the market does not provide that people are missing things that are needed say healthcare and shelter etc. But the problem with this is that if such things are provided it can create a system of dependency. When Clinton changed welfare there were those that were against it but they never specifically stated when someone should get off of it.

On the right they support various subsidies that frankly have little payoff. If a business cannot survive on their own then it should frankly just close or get bought out. Ethanol from corn does not make real sense.

Meanwhile government has largely replaced religions and families as a support system.

If we had more of a closed environment then I think liberals might have a better chance but it is hard to argue for them now.Technology and globalization I believe have eroded many of their arguments.

There is a more cynical view which frankly just looks at the battle and not the end results. Simple Hegelian dialectic would show that tension would tend to build bases from the conflict and from there you have support. The less difference someone has with another in office the less of a reason to vote for them.

mdovell says

Technically there is...just deficit spending. If government spending was only dependent on tax revenue (and thus the federal must tax and spend like states and local governments) then a deficit wouldn't logically exist.

But nobody on what passes for "the left" in America thinks that deficit spending pays for itself, yet as far as I can tell, the entire right, without exception, believes that tax cuts do.

The left is acknowledging that things are not good, and that our choices are between bad and worse. The right believes that if we only recede more, the recession solve itself.

Further, the attack abortion rights, unions, environmental laws, promote corporations as people, money-as-speech political contributions, etc.

Rationally, unless one is a willing pawn, these items have very little to do with healing a broken economy, but are simply a right-wing wishlist masquerading as such.

It's okay to have a different philosophy, but one must call bullshit on their own party when the party practices bullshit, n'est-ce pas?

Patrick and his website have made and saved me much $money$ in helping me make my own informed Real Estate decisions. Instead of being an 'upside down' statistic, let's just say I am much better off. Thanks Patrick!

CL says

But nobody on what passes for "the left" in America thinks that deficit spending pays for itself, yet as far as I can tell, the entire right, without exception, believes that tax cuts do.

The Repubilcans for the past 30 years have believed that deficit spending is good.

Bap33 says

what is your derogatory expression

Why is Teabagger derogatory? The people within the movement referred to it as a Tea Bag movement first. It sounds like you are the one putting a derogatory connotation on it, not me. Overcompensating much?

Tim Chesterson says

This post will be sure to either be banned outright, or vehemently attacked for telling the truth. The Fabian socialists believe that the ends justify the means -- lying, ridicule, and manipulation are typical methods to achieve what they believe are truly worthy goals.

An ignorant first-time poster is insulting people on this site with no facts or evidence? Shocker -- it happens all the time. Not worth responding to -- it's pretty obvious that this site is overall anti-bankster. We now know who the manipulator is, and his name is Tim.

Tim Chesterson says

The Fabian socialists believe that the ends justify the means -- lying, ridicule,

He predicted you'd ridicule him! Nostradamus!

You are wondering who was/is Fabian I bet.

Fabian is still singing "Turn Me Loose" and "Tiger" and other hits he had back in the '50s, but in county fairs and nostalgia venues. Just thought I'd mention this to the younger folks who don't remember Fabian.

Yes, he was very politically active, and his leftist writings were responsible for him being called a "Fabian Socialist." He, like Bob Dylan, is now apolitical, having given up on changing the world.

Bap33 says

Oh, by the way, you have my join date as sometime in '09. I humble suggest I was here long before that, with HARM and Surfer and PeterP and folks like that ..... way back on the old site from long ago. Not sure what year that was. I know it was way before the peak. Anyways, I was just wondering if my veteran status could be checked into.

OK, it's set back to 2006. At some point I deleted your account when you were less polite. The date was then when you re-joined.

Dan8267 says

Yeah, a man who doesn't want a girlfriend. Seriously, that chair has to be chick repellant.

Exactly.

Serpentor says

Please please do NOT make your site like the Irvine housing blog: Distracting pictures, cartoons, mixed with dumb lyric/poems, and videos. It makes the articles absolutely impossible to read and most of them are not funny and terribly corny.
I'm sure the author have some really insightful things to day, but everytime I click on the link, I can't bare to finish the article.

Oh, amen. All that gunk! HARD to read even if it is interesting. I have all these thoughts about that. Is that person a really smart person who is having a mental break down? An adult in a teenager's body? Why have my "favorite song" mixed in? One cartoon, fine. But four or more mixed into the article, bletch! It is like the articles are written on the post-it notes of a very smart mad-man stuck to the walls of his shanty house. Good content, with VERY problematic presentation on that site. His bounce rate has to be very, very high.

CL says

But nobody on what passes for "the left" in America thinks that deficit spending pays for itself, yet as far as I can tell, the entire right, without exception, believes that tax cuts do.

The left is acknowledging that things are not good, and that our choices are between bad and worse. The right believes that if we only recede more, the recession solve itself.

Further, the attack abortion rights, unions, environmental laws, promote corporations as people, money-as-speech political contributions, etc.

Rationally, unless one is a willing pawn, these items have very little to do with healing a broken economy, but are simply a right-wing wishlist masquerading as such.

It's okay to have a different philosophy, but one must call bullshit on their own party when the party practices bullshit, n'est-ce pas?

Some might argue that deficit spending pays for itself..Paul Krugman would come to mind. He is now saying it is like 1937 when FDR pulled back.

Unions and corporations are in the same bag. The whole citizens united conclusion gave companies and unions the same basic freedom of speech rules. I'm not anti union but some of their logic just does not work. Verizon went on strike for two weeks this past summer. They went back to work but didn't gain anything..so why go on strike? Certainly it can be said that companies have power but unions can as well. If a union votes to go on strike and you are a member you pretty much have to do what they say.

There are issues that have generally been dropped by parties. I'd say that outside of Chicago most democrats have dropped gun control as an issue. They cannot really win votes for pushing for it...maybe in the 80's but not now. Eventually if we see more of a libertarian plank develop in the right we can see the same with abortion. Hopefully both parties will drop the concept of the war on drugs.

Sometimes people in power change stances. Ted Kennedy was actually prochoice prior to roe vs wade. He had to change his mind to get reelected.

....and, Patrick is back in his agenda form.

Just THREE out of 15 articles, have topics regarding real estate are posted today.

Bap33 says

Oh, by the way, you have my join date as sometime in '09. I humble suggest I was here long before that, with HARM and Surfer and PeterP and folks like that ..... way back on the old site from long ago. Not sure what year that was. I know it was way before the peak. Anyways, I was just wondering if my veteran status could be checked into.

OK, it's set back to 2006. At some point I deleted your account when you were less polite. The date was then when you re-joined.

Thanks.

LarryPatrickMaloney says

....and, Patrick is back in his agenda form.

Just THREE out of 15 articles, have topics regarding real estate are posted today.

Did you really think he's going to listen to you? Who the fuck are you?

Its a PRIVATE blog site, owned by an INDIVIDUAL.

HE can post what ever the fuck kind of news he wants.

If you want news that you like, there are plenty of other sites.

Say What? I am a Capitalist Pig and love this site. This is where I discovered Max Keiser and G.I.A.B.O. Global Insurrection Against Banker Occupation. There is NOTHING about REAL capitalism that supports fraud, theft, murder and war mongering. There is nothing about REAL capitalism that ONLY TAKES and never Gives back. Read Adam Smith; "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth Of Nations" (1776)
The productivity of free exchange, Social order based on freedom, The psychology of ethics, Self-interest and VIRTUE AND NOT only profit.

"The Wealth Of Nations" is no endorsement of economic greed, as sometimes caricatured. Self-interest may drive the economy, but that is a force for GOOD – provided there is GENUINELY OPEN COMPETITION genuinely open competition and no coercion. And it is the poor that economic and social freedom benefits most.

Capitalism is about returns to society. "Selfishness" is not MURDER and MASS DESTRUCTION. Just because Cheney wanted more bucks for his Halliburton....tens of thousands are murdered by declaring war against Iraq for OIL.

That is NOT real capitalism...that's a war crime punished by death. Now the banks have the rights of humans.

When will we EXECUTE THE FIRST BANK for the murders it proudly commits?

LET'S GO AND G.I.A.B.O. STOP THE BANKSTER OCCUPATION.....! Drive them away...and send them back to the sewer with the other rats.

I removed "Real Estate News" as the label on the home page and elsewhere. Now it's just news with an emphasis on real estate.

Anyway, the real estate and politics are all of a piece. Being interested in how we got such a bubble let me to the politics of how money corrupts our laws in DC.

And everyone in the 99%, right, left, or other dimensions, should agree that corruption of our laws is a bad thing.

Being interested in how we got such a bubble let me to the politics of how money corrupts our laws in DC.

I was going to say real estate bubble leads to other things which are also equally important.

It is silly to think that real estate bubble occurred in isolation.

underwaterman says

Here's a clue to being civil: talk about the issue, not the persons character and leave out the inflammatory swearing, serves no purpose but to inflame.

Serpentor didn't attack LPM, he asked a question. Sure, he swore, but he actually asked Larry this same question 2 weeks ago - and Larry declined to answer. So he doubled up.

Welcome back again Larry! Didn't you swear you'd never read my site again several times now?
I'm flattered you think my super-leftist powers are capable of changing the world! If not, why keep protesting?

As Patrick pointed out in the past, this ain't your kiddie's site. Many of us have sworn, and it hasn't been a problem. I do feel bad that you are offended, but what can you expect from a guy whose icon says "GTFO?"

underwaterman says

if you can not be civil and discuss the issues in a reasonable manner you should go elsewhere to post your irrational attacks

That's what the Outside forum is for!

http://patrick.net/outside/

Swear as much as you want there, be uncivil and irrational, and have a great time.

Thanks underwaterman! That wouldn't be too hard to do. OK, it's on my list.

underwaterman says

Really, not an attack. Please. Stop for a moment a pretend I said this to you. Still not feel like an attack?

I still don't feel like it was a personal attack. Maybe I'm thicker skinned - having lived thru OTS, Shrek and the boys...

underwaterman says

Do I imply a want a kiddie discussion site? Really? How do you get that from wanting a civil forum site?

In the past Patrick has said that swearing was okay because it's not a child-oriented site - hence my statement that this is not a kiddie discussion site. I would go back over the multitudes of posts to find the exact quote, but - nah.

underwaterman says

Really? I'm not offended. I was feeling sorry for Larry that the guy was attacked so viciously for a simple remark

Again, there have been vicious attacks on this site and imho this one didn't even rate as an attack, much less a vicious one. But that's my opinion - and I don't speak for the masses.

underwaterman says

I do feel patronized by your remark however if you want to know what I am really feeling.

I have no control over the way that you feel. I certainly didn't mean to be patronizing, and sincerely felt a twang of sorrow that you were offended. However since you say that you weren't offended, your lack of offense is duly noted.

My expression of sorrowful compassion at your perception of the statement made by serpentor is hereby rescinded.