Shut the fuck upQuote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday
Printable View
Shut the fuck upQuote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday
Educating the masses is pretty liberal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday
But what if that random virgin was you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
Edit: With a public option we wouldn't have to sacrifice Mr-K to a dragon.
That's right. I've never had sex before.
You probably only make love.
faggot
Am I still a virgin if I only do it with knives or dried corn husks?
Transparent NPO's are a great alternative, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
My Ferrari will be so lonely. They're like puppies. Buy in pairs if possible.
Hey guys, the government finally stopped banks from making student loans in its name and Republicans are fiercely against it. Why? Motherfucker, it's guaranteed money on top of the interest gained for private banks. Why would we want to allow private banks to keep that shit? I can see interest rates getting slashed because of this.
Fuck you, banks.
Dick Morris isn't against it. He said that its about time for this to happen.
Can't wait for when I'm sick I need the IRS to approve it. And by wait I mean 2014, since that's when it goes into effect.
Yoshi is reading this. I expect piss, vinegar, and semen.
Never said I was for it either.
My problem with it was it was not a separate bill. It was included with the Healthcare Bill.
Who gives a shit. It needed to happen. The student loan industry is a scam. Getting rid of it saves taxpayer money and is good policy. It's not like the GOP was going to vote for it ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
It's the cheapest loan anyone is ever going to get. How the fuck is it a scam?
Banks charged a 7% interest rate on guaranteed money. No matter what happened they were getting that money back. They stuck it to students to get even more out of it. On top of that they stopped consolidating loans in 2006/2007. Ever try paying your student loans when you have a payment due for each semester at about 7% each? I know people who have to work two or three jobs to pay off almost $1k a month because the banks refuse to consolidate. I'm not going to cry because they're losing profits.
I'm thankful I was able to do it before they took that option away. Here's hoping the U.S. brings it back.
Do you have any concept of how congress works?Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...lis-claim.html
:lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Obama was less inclined to be so conciliatory. He immediately presented Mr Netanyahu with a list of 13 demands designed both to the end the feud with his administration and to build Palestinian confidence ahead of the resumption of peace talks. Key among those demands was a previously-made call to halt all new settlement construction in east Jerusalem.
When the Israeli prime minister stalled, Mr Obama rose from his seat declaring: "I'm going to the residential wing to have dinner with Michelle and the girls."
As he left, Mr Netanyahu was told to consider the error of his ways. "I'm still around," Mr Obama is quoted by Israel's Yediot Ahronot newspaper as having said. "Let me know if there is anything new."
That's amazing. Maybe now we'll pull support because Israel gives us NOTHING of value.
What a fucking douchebag. And people were defending Congress' passing of that meaningless statement re: Turkey, because we need allies in the region?
I guess Obama even realizes that he's a lame duck and is acting like a second term President.
ok. So there was a change long after mine were locked in. That makes more sense, because I had no complaints about mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
Israel is a pretty shitty ally, especially with Netanyahu in charge. Fuck that guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
You're an older gentleman. I thought if you had any you had taken care of it a long time ago. Kids going to college now are fucked. Instead of taking loans out for grad school I'm just saving up so I can pay up front. That's how dire it is.
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
:confused:
:cry:
I can't wait for the conservative meltdown when he's elected to his second termQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
He'll be neutered the rest of this term, since he's going to lose both houses of Congress in November. Then the job will be finished in 2012.
Too bad people were so stupid in 2008 that now the economy has been further wounded by a bloated, poorly though out health care plan that is going to cause further increases in unemployment and, thus, cost even more than estimated.
Rebulicans would have to gain 10 senate seats and 40 House seats? The House is a good game but the Senate is not likely (It's Class III this go which is already a majority Republican and 1 more Pub than Dem is retiring as well) I mean the Dems are fuckin' this up, sure, but thinking it will be a blow out is just silly!
Good thing you don't pay attention to factual news and just sit around in your FOX cave.
In order to progress some sectors are going to have to lose jobs. It's the way of life. The longer we keep delaying change the more behind we'll fall in technology and health care services.
I am not saying what I want to see. I'd like all the incumbents to lose, personally, something to really shake up the status quo.
I'm just saying Bush/Rumsfeld wasn't that long ago and their side of the pillow ain't cold enough for America, just yet.
I actually watched about 10 minutes of Hannity last week, which is the first time I have watch Fox News since maybe before the election. Thanks to the Olympics, I've even watched MSNBC more than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday
?? Election was a bitch, huh? What do you do then, sit around and watch re-runs of Hellcats of the Navy on TCM?
I DVR Numb3rs, The Mentalist, Supernatural, Law & Order, Castle, and stuff I am probably forgetting and approach 40,000 posts on TNL. I play a game every once in a while too.
Can you please explain to me in nice elaborate details how Obamacare will guaranteed exacerbate unemployment? You're one of the few people I hear raving about a universal health care plan destroying jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Democrats want everyone on welfare.
So if a Democrat votes for a bill, you can be sure that it will kill at least one job.
Simple. It raises costs for businesses. They have two ways to respond: Pass the cost to their consumers in terms of raised prices, which may not be feasible, or reduce health care and other costs by reducing their work force. Moving jobs overseas works here too. So when someone you know gets replaced by an Indian, send Obama a thank you card. He just made that choice easier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
This is obviously an editorial, but it also helps expand on the point: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...402986422.html. This one is more focused on retiree benefits, which will also be under attack.
Sorry, I'm not giving Rupert a hit.
Hahaha
Well, it isn't THAT simple. They only have to pass costs on to consumers if they can't operate at the higher costs to them (I think health care average profits is around 4%, so there is a bit of wiggle room). And if they could send jobs overseas for the same amount of service, they would have already done so. If health care companies were to shrink in size, new ones would pop up because demand is now relatively fixed as well. It is certainly not all doom and gloom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I swear to God, my mother said this to me last night.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday
Post-romance.
I'm not talking about health care companies specifically.Quote:
Originally Posted by Destin
AT&T is already changing its health plan for retirees in preparation for contract negotiations in 2012. Impending doom or a way to start twisting pharmaceuticals to lower the price of drugs?
The WSJ editorial page is just Hannity in word form.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Jesus Fuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Type Ryan
You can't be serious. You do realize that, if the goal of making allies in the mid-east is to get some kind of peace in that region, playing kissy-face with Israel is the stupidest way to go. It's like being deathly allergic to bees while hanging with the kid who's never found a hive he could resist poking with a stick.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Plus if Israel doesn't get over it, that's a couple billion in annual allowance we don't need to spend any more.
James
There are some pretty cute girls in Israel. And some cute ones in Turkey too.
So, what is all this crap about student loans? Am I going to have to do old man stuff now and go down to a bank and bug them for a loan?
Fuck you guys.
And now Congress is going to play the "shoot the messenger" game by making these companies testify about the effects of their own horribly designed bill. Nevermind the fact that it should have been obvious to everyone what would happen. And I think it was. The Democrats just thought it would take longer for the shit to the hit the fan. However, the SEC requires companies to restate P & L based on projections of retiree costs, which are now going to explode. So these companies are following the law and getting treated like witches for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
This pretty much nails it:Hell, it worked for Clinton with the mortgage crisis. No one wants to admit that he and his cronies created the banking problems by forcing banks to sign up for loans that the burdens on society can't afford to repay.Quote:
The Democratic political calculation with ObamaCare is the proverbial boiling frog: Gradually introduce a health-care entitlement by hiding the true costs, hook the middle class on new subsidies until they become unrepealable, but try to delay the adverse consequences and major new tax hikes so voters don't make the connection between their policy and the economic wreckage. But their bill was such a shoddy, jerry-rigged piece of work that the damage is coming sooner than even some critics expected.
Does Fox news pay you to repeat whatever their (R) talking heads tell you to?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
The recent economic problems stem from a poorly thought out republican bill (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) back in the 90's allowing banking firms to become investment firms. It was also ratified by a republican majority if my research is correct. Clinton ratified it for whatever reason but to claim it was all Clinton admin's ideas is a good 'Pub falsehood.
Perhaps the Washington "forced" some unsavory loans which would certainly make the situation worse but the bigger issue was allowing banks to both save and invest money that wasn't theirs to begin with. It was a separation that was forced for economic good back in the 30's that was for some reason rejected in the late nineties. If you can some how prove that loaning some bad mortgages to some poor people caused mass economic collapse I'd love to hear it.
Back to Obamacare, I read the WSJ article you posted and w/o doing mass research to verify the corporate complaints it just sounds like some pissing and moaning. Perhaps some frictional unemployment and unintended consequences may happen but we'll adjust society and the laws as needed. The bigger issue is a forced shake up of an industry that's increasingly failing to serve the needs of those who are dumping billions into it. Very important and urgent needs at that.
No, this health care reform really only helps people that WEREN'T dumping billions of dollars into it.
Exactly. The naivety in this thread continues to amaze me. If you have insurance today, this bill is going to fuck you within the next 3-5 years. I personally think it'll be as early as late this year when people have to re-up their plans for 2011.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
Try reading the thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bojack
If banks are unable to invest money that "isn't theirs," how do you think people are going to earn interest on their savings accounts, CDs, etc.? The whole point is that you are loaning the bank money so that they can make a profit and then pass some of that profit back to you in terms of interest.Quote:
The recent economic problems stem from a poorly thought out republican bill (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) back in the 90's allowing banking firms to become investment firms. It was also ratified by a republican majority if my research is correct. Clinton ratified it for whatever reason but to claim it was all Clinton admin's ideas is a good 'Pub falsehood.
Perhaps the Washington "forced" some unsavory loans which would certainly make the situation worse but the bigger issue was allowing banks to both save and invest money that wasn't theirs to begin with. It was a separation that was forced for economic good back in the 30's that was for some reason rejected in the late nineties. If you can some how prove that loaning some bad mortgages to some poor people caused mass economic collapse I'd love to hear it.
They aren't complaints in any way, shape, or form. They are SEC-mandated adjustments to their future liability. These companies are following federal laws and taking this disaster into account. Their options for retiree benefits is to cut them off, thereby increasing the taxes needed to fund those same people through Medicare, or to destroy their profits.Quote:
Back to Obamacare, I read the WSJ article you posted and w/o doing mass research to verify the corporate complaints it just sounds like some pissing and moaning. Perhaps some frictional unemployment and unintended consequences may happen but we'll adjust society and the laws as needed. The bigger issue is a forced shake up of an industry that's increasingly failing to serve the needs of those who are dumping billions into it. Very important and urgent needs at that.
Do you have health insurance today? Because if you do, you're going to be paying more for it tomorrow, period.
If you don't like WSJ, ask CNN/Fortune about it.
Yep. It's just what type of investment activity do you want the banks engaged in, not the practice itself. Glass-Steagall arose from the Depression and now we see a modern incarnation potentially in the form of The Volcker Rule should it pass. What type of activities should too big to fail banks be allowed to engage in to arb their deposit and reserve base? Is a steep yield curve and prudent lending (at usury rates) enough or should the scope be allowed to remain expanded to financial innovation products and proprietary trading?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I personally think that various products should be available with full disclosure to the consumer. So if I want a savings account with a 10% yield, I can go for the riskier product. But if I am happy with 2%, I can play it safe. As long as the cards are on the table, it should be up to the consumer to protect himself, not the government. The government's job is to get the cards on the table.
But you are making the assumption that consumers may be as informed and educated as you may be. We live in a world of stupid, ignorant people with an eggregious sense of entitlement and irresponsibility. To expect banks to ethically realize this and disregard a pursuit of profits (no greed, no avarice) is unrealistic. And the larger the participants, the greater the systemic risk as we have recently seen and will continue to see, unfortunately.
It is the consumer's job to educate himself. If a sense of entitlement gets in the way of that, then he can reap what he sows. I agree with you that the hippie generation started this downward spiral of personal responsibility, but the only way out is to get the plane's nose pointed back up... and to toss extra weight out the back.
I don't disagree at all. But the goal of politicians is to balance the interests of the populace in order to maintain social stability and consequently their platform of power, even if the solutions are short-sighted. I don't disagree with you at all, but realize the reality of the situation.
The bottom line is that there are more socialists than capitalists, and more people who will cry bloody murder when they lose the zero sum game they should never have engaged in because, to put it bluntly, they had no business being at the poker table in the first place. The sense of entitlement is a main driver of this.
Agreed. When people figure out how to vote themselves money, democracy fails.
Isn't this how banks already work right now? Their off-the-street savings account may suck. But there are dividends, GIC's and other kinds of accounts you can open to get back a certain amount of interest per year. I have 3 different accounts with different yields.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
You can't make a horse drink, but you can certainly show it the river.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I have and have stayed fairly level headed and skeptical of Obama and his ideas and tried to be as non-partisan as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Um, banks should be allowed to loan mortgages and take cash in for CD's and savings etc. and profit from the spread. This is apart from a massive stream of fee based revenues. What they should not be able to do is merge with an investment firm that engages in risky ass investments with what is still other people's money.Quote:
If banks are unable to invest money that "isn't theirs," how do you think people are going to earn interest on their savings accounts, CDs, etc.? The whole point is that you are loaning the bank money so that they can make a profit and then pass some of that profit back to you in terms of interest.
The moral hazard of the risk as Gooch pointed out is absurd.
Them's the breaks apparently. There is still a third option of finding an insurance carrier that will give equal or near equal coverage for a new lower cost that will offset the increases in retiree benefits. This may be a sneaky plan of the Obama admin. I know it's giving them quite a benefit of the doubt but it could be the case.Quote:
They aren't complaints in any way, shape, or form. They are SEC-mandated adjustments to their future liability. These companies are following federal laws and taking this disaster into account. Their options for retiree benefits is to cut them off, thereby increasing the taxes needed to fund those same people through Medicare, or to destroy their profits.
I used to have insurance and even having it health care expenses still nearly bankrupted my budding family. Perhaps Obama care won't work correctly. In that case, in a few years or so new Senators and a new president can campaign against it and repeal it.Quote:
Do you have health insurance today? Because if you do, you're going to be paying more for it tomorrow, period.
Never said I don't like WSJ or what it says just that that particular article didn't say much beyond "Obamacare will bankrupt the whole galaxy". The CNN article is a little more detailed but still not by that much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
How does clamping down on denial of coverage at the whim of the insurers and aiding those with pre-existing condition etc. only helping those who aren't paying into the system? I fail to see the doom/poverty correlation you're presenting here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
WHAAAT? This is such total horse shit, easily the biggest big lie perpetuated by the GOP during this crisis. I really didn't think you would be stupid enough to buy that crap. The real reasons are well understood and known.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Wouldn't part of this problem rectify itself over time if you put the cards on the table and allowed folks to make bad choices for themselves?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch
It's like...if a kid puts his hand on a stove when its on, yes he's gonna get hurt but he'll learn not to do that again. Being risk-averse and shielding others from risk doesn't make for hardier, smarter people.
Edit: Nevermind, you're already covering those points. Totally agreed too!
Gooch is way smart.
This. This right here is why I'm a Republican. If we could get back to this and knock it off with the crazies and the evil, I'd be quite happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I'm a Republican because I want to see the United States turn out more like Mexico, with a smaller central government, limited or no environmental restrictions, limited or no regulations on commerce, the church have a larger influence on politics and the support of the poor, no walefare, so we export the working class to neighboring nations and reep the money in return, oh... and only nationals can own land!
That was quite possibly the best advertisement for Mexico ever.
So Russia has two terrorist attacks this week. Does anyone know if this was because of political protestors or Muslim bullshit?
Something to do with Chezh islamic rebels.
Good as soon as the Muslim extremists become a more prevalent worldwide threat the better it'll look when we erase them off the map.
That's a great solution. It's worked so well throughout history.
Japan says hi.
Japan is still around. It ended a war that was caused by an overreaching emperor. It had nothing to do with religious beliefs.
You really are the dumbest Dominican I know.
I may only internet know you but that's bad enough.
Did Yoshi really just blame the financial meltdown on banks letting poor people take out subprime mortgages on the same page he basically said that all fraud should be legal and the only regulation should be 'caveat emptor'?
lol I didn't say it wasn't around anymore or that their defeat had anything to do with religion. I'm just saying it stopped their bullshit.
If we nuke the middle east we're going to further escalate the war. I want nothing more than world peace but dropping a nuke on a sovereign country won't help anything.
It'll help boost sales of American flag t-shirts.
Which were made in Vietnam of Indian cotton, printed in China, and sold at your local Wal-Mart.
There's some Holy War bullshit going on, but that's not as important as Russia and Chechnya having a nasty history. It's way complicated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
It was Obamacare.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
Chechen militants. Their leader claimed responsibility for the attacks today (can see Doku Umarov on YouTube).Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
That was easy, but the better question is why now?
1) Like the timing of past attacks, these took advantage of the spring thaw to increase attacks.
Qui bono?
1) Opposition to Putin (many in this camp). Takes the blame for the recession, and now this shows that Putin is not capable of keeping Russians safe. Vladislav Surkov?
2) Putin himself (longshot). This takes focus off the recession and provides enough reason to go up north and crush the militants for good.
It may also be an attempt to taunt him with the recent agreement to reduce nuclear arms. I don't know anything about them, but the fact just a few days after the agreement was announced to reduce arms they attack is sort of a slap in the face.
Chechens have been blowing shit up in Russia for a long time. At least they've been getting the blame for it!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
I think it may be a lot simpler than you think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch
Aren't these "Chechan Rebels" also Muslims anyway?
So what?
Protip: not everybody who is of the same religion is the same. It's in Dick Cheney's best interest to lump every Muslim together but it's inaccurate and misleading.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto Man
Yeah, that's exactly what I said. I now fully understand why you support half the bullshit you do. When you read it, you interpret it in some way that is mutually exclusive with reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave is ok
And you believe everything some right wing nutbag tells you on TV/radio.
And you believe that dave is ok.
Protip: Unless it's Christians and you're looking to score political/social points. In which case, bonus points for lumping them all together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Dick Cheney did not make it to the top of the Galactic Empire by kissing every PC gone mad ass, you know!Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
I'm so sick of Christians acting all persecuted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero
Our main dude was hung on a cross as a giant fuck you for being different. Fuck that noise we deserve some justice.
It's been 2000 years and you are the majority of America.
Shut the fuck up.
Icarusfall, do you have Jesus in your life?
Christians still can't get everything we want passed. You evil fucks with your abortions, capitalism, and gays are demolishing the morals of this country. That and those stupid fucking heebs are getting their noses deeper and deeper into our assholes.
Don't forget gun control. If God didn't want us to shoot shit, he wouldn't have given us Charlton Heston.
GODDAMN ZOGS!
You're Jewish?Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon