[FairfieldLife] FFL Special -- Live from Spain: Mr Projection
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, this isn't really an official abstract of an official scientfic study, merely a subjective report on how SILLY (Self Important Losers Laugh- ably Yammering) Syndrome affects FFL reading time. not arty film people), the room was remarkably free of outsized egos trying to dominate the conversation and impose their POVs on others. All in all, it was a very pleasant evening, largely because no one seemed *over- shadowed* by doom and gloom visions of the coming apocalypse/financial meltdown/tough times ahead. The reason is that most of the posts I was reading, whether I agreed with what the poster was saying or not, were written by people who had become completely over- shadowed. The writers were so SERIOUS, so overwhelmed by and consumed by whatever they were writing about that any sense of Self seemed totally forgotten. In many cases even any sense of self seemed totally forgotten -- people were just spouting someone ELSE's overshadowed fears and obsessions because they were no longer creative enough to have their own. The mindset of the FFL posts was consistently This is what I am overshadowed by currently, and I'm going to talk talk talk about it until you are as overshadowed by it as I am. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Secession -- Roach Motel America -- As North Pole Melts
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: And despite the (false dreamland) view of many, the Constitution (of the US) is neither sacred, invoked from God, eternal or perfect. It was a good consensus agreement with many flaws worked out by many gentlemen farmer slaveholders to -- in Tom Jefferson's view -- to last 20 years or so until the next (positive -- in his view) cleansing revolution. There is nothing that prevents legislation or a new clarifying Amendment that explicitly establishes the rights of all states -- and municipalities -- to seceede and form more perfect unions that better promote the life liberty and happiness of its citizens (after paying an exit fee for their share of debt and federal assets in their state). My life, liberty, happiness, economic well being, are all literally threatened by this long overripe and failing union with the Red States. And my intelligence is daily insulted, an my heart daily broken, by their actions -- and I cherish the right at some point to disassociate with Nascar nation and all that they stand for. That's funny because you seem to be *supporting* 'Joe six-pack' Palin and McCain who *do* represent the Red States and the Nascar nation and all that they stand for. And what are the policies the you believe (misperceive) that I am supporting? Do you actually read my posts -- or simply rely on inner-world knowledge of reality as some of our astute members also do?
[FairfieldLife] Re: What's more scary?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Palin furthered our understanding about how her scientific mind works by twice asserting that she wasn't interested in discussing the causes of global warming, just git'n in thar an fix'n it all up. Palin's Joe Six Pack goes to the doctor: Dr. give me a whole bunch of pills cuz I've got a disease but I don't want to get into a discussion of what is causing it. Fortunately Sarah Silverman gets it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzDYxGHGoFc Speaking of Sarah, funny video of her breaking the news to bf jimmy kimmel on his show. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLG3S5WzHigfeature=related
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Betel Nuts'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a pretty mild stimulant. I would say that coffee is much more stimulating Is that from one quid? Indians -- in India -- I knew used it chewed all day long. They liked it so much, I can't believe they did so based on the effect of 1/4 cup of coffee. So perhaps the effect like drinking 40 cups of coffee a day. How much euphoria effect? Like 1 vicadin? 2? 1/2? This is really really important since, ya know, the bliss is gone -- and prayin to Jesus don't work either. Catching a betel user however should not be hard. Look for the incredibly gross red lips, gums and teeth. Or just follow the trail of bright red spit every few feet. so any banning (of the leaf only) is political football. But Indians who come to the US often plant the seed and grow the trees and trade the leaves. I've never heard of any of them being busted for the trees either. Robert wrote: Areca Catechu (Whole Betel Nuts)View Areca Catechu (Whole Betel Nuts) in more detail The most common use of these nuts (seeds) is in the ritual chewing of the betel-quid. This habit is very widespread throughout Asia, India and the Pacific, making it one of the most popular stimulants in the world. Generally the the betel-quid is a small morsel consisting of a quarter betel seed (cushed), a pinch of lime, spices like cardamom or nutmeg for flavour all wrapped in a betel leaf (Piper betle). On some Pacific Islands it is traditional for the men to also add tobacco into the package. This quid is chewed slowly over several hours, causing mild stimulation and a feeling of wellbeing. UNLIKE OUR OTHER SEEDS, THESE ARE NOT VIABLE! (1 oz) ARC-1OZ | Your Cost: $2.99 (4 oz) ARC-4OZ | Your Cost: $8.99 (16 oz) ARC-16Z | Your Cost: $24.99 Betel Nut Crushed SeedsView Betel Nut Crushed Seeds in more detail These Betel Nut Seeds are crushed from our fresh, whole Betel Nuts. The Areca Catechu seed is one tough nut, so we offer them crushed as an alternative to processing your own seeds. The oils are somewhat diminished in the crushed seeds, but they are still quite useful for a variety of things, including research and components for incense. WE NO LONGER SELL THESE FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION, AND OFFER THEM AS BOTANICAL SPECIMENS ONLY! (1 oz) BNC-1OZ | Your Cost: $2.99 (4 oz) BNC-4OZ | Your Cost: $8.99 (16 oz) BNC-16Z | Your Cost: $24.99 Betel Nut Chew (Parag)View Betel Nut Chew (Parag) in more detail This national, mild flavored, non-spicy chew of India has been shrouded in secrecy outside its homeland for ages, especially in the United States. It's a stimulating euphorant and importation of this product for human consumption has now been banned due to its arecoline content. Legal? - Yes. Importable? - No. For this reason, we offer this product only as a curiosity for education and research, and strictly not for consumption. We are selling out of our present stock; once it is gone, we will no longer carry these at the shop. Click image for full story... (1 pack) PAR-1 | Your Cost: $1.49 (3 packs) PAR-3 | Your Cost: $3.99 (10 packs) PAR-10 | Your Cost: $11.99 Betel Nut Chew (Rose)View Betel Nut Chew (Rose) in more detail This Rose Supari packet is less sweet, with a rose flavor added for those who don't care for the traditional Indian flavors. About the same size as orange label Parag packets. Contains sugar instead of saccharin. It's a stimulating euphorant and importation of this product for human consumption has now been banned due to its arecoline content. Legal? - Yes. Importable? - No. For this reason, we offer this product only as a curiosity for education and research, and strictly not for consumption. We are selling out of our present stock; once it is gone, we will no longer carry these at the shop. Click image for full story... (1 pack) RSE-1 | Your Cost: $1.49 (3 packs) RSE-3 | Your Cost: $3.99 (10 packs) RSE-10 | Your Cost: $11.99
[FairfieldLife] Re: What's more scary?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As for the global warming thing, I am disappointed that Palin even SLIGHTLY acknowledged that ANY global warming was man-made. Catastrophic man-made global warming is a myth, it is completely an unfounded scientific notion, and it has already lead to the death of many thousands of people. Talk about mixing science with religion, Curtis! My gosh, global warming is a fanatical radical religion far worse and extreme than anything Sarah Palin may believe in regarding dinasaurs. I Know! Everyone knows Global Warming is the result of a huge yagya performed by 10 million vedic gods -- and the heat is just due to the homa offerings into the fire. Plus since God made man, everything man makes is really made by God. So when man pollutes and produces carbon --- its all good cuz its Divine. And its Gods Will that the ice caps are melting, polar bears are losing habitat, going extinct, weather is going beserk, eco-systems are taking a huge dive an a billion -- mostly poor citizens of the world will lose homes and farmlands -- and those not killed start MASSIVE migrations and refugee camps larger than the World population a hundred years ago. And of course God created Al Gore -- so all of his efforts are ALSO DIVINE. Its all SOOO kewl. -- all preparation for the Rapture! Totally! I didn't get a BA from MIN like you Shemp, so I am not as much on the cutting edge of fundamentalist anti-science as you -- but I am doing my best to dig my head as deep into the sand as your education has done for you. I am truly glad that you, George Bush and Dick Cheney understand these things. Life is so much simpler when you can just ignore science and rational ways of life and get your world view from National Inquirer and Guns and Ammo. I only wished I had learned such a powerful paradigm like you -- right out of school. Jai the Middle Ages.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Naomi Wolf on the October 1st Coup
America -- as a nation state -- is not a divine, eternal, a prior, guaranteed entity. Liberty, choice, are certainly deeper, more towards eternal qualities than America. From the trailer and past interviews, Naomi wear earth tones, Al Wolf -- as other down-the-tubists -- appears to look as all of America sinking. There are other scenarios. If a combination of debt load, bail-outs, taxes, depression, substantial loss of liberty, police state inroads, foreign incursions, rising higher levels of militarism, anti-immigration, discrimination -- all unfold similtaneously -- and these things feed each other -- then a break-up of the US into cluster nations states seems plausible -- if not probable. At a minimum Red and Blue states will have strong forces towards splitting up. If and as crises, emergencies, disaster-leadership unfolds, states will take the option -- perhaps be granted it by mutual accord -- an opt out of the larger republic - and create unions of like minds and hearts. Red state can build a wall around their new nation, cut legal imigraion to a trickle, cut taxes to nothing, borrow 200% of gdp, jail doctors performing and women having abortions, behead drug users -- including pot -- lock up gays, look the other way when gangs smash and burn Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist and Islamic temples, ignore global warming and abolish all fuel and appliance efficiency standards, promote unsequestered coal, and nucluuyar energy, drill of oil 50 feet off all their coast lines, wire tap, and have 24/7 video surveilance on most everything and everyone, print money as fast as the presses will go, have standing armies and police forces -- interchangible -- integrated mandating 20% of the population serve, build up huge nucleeyur and poison gas arsonals, abolish public schools and let let kids be church or home schooled, end medicare and social security, deregulate everything, create loyalty oaths for all citizens, abolish all pollution laws, do away with the FCC, SEC, FTC and FDA, promote leaders by their qualities of style -- ignoring substance, repeal all anti-discrimination and voting rights legislation, bring back Jim Crow, make NASCAR the national sport, triple the number of jails, end all rehabilitation programs and simply lock up for life, and punish all the criminals as defined daily by the State, suspend habeas corpus, require gun ownership and allow citizens to own tanks, small nuclear bombs up to 2 kg, and attack helicopters ... The new Blue nation-state(s) will unfold their values a well. And we will see which state thrives, which stumble -- their economies, education an health levels per capita, competitivenes, foreign investment, and member of the family of nations. Parts of America may go down. Not necessarily all parts. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interview - Naomi Wolf - Give Me Liberty http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgkeTanCGI Wolf raises issues with the bailout and the threat of martial law if the bill didn't get passed (a totally unacceptable threat, people) and theocratic rule as statements by Sarah Palin suggest. She breaks down the steps to fascism and how deep we are already into it. Her upcoming movie (January 2009 may be too late though): http://endofamericamovie.com/ Disclaimer: I don't post information here to create fear but to be informative. Besides I would think most people here would have transcended fear a long time ago. Time to rise up folks, and take our country back.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Todd Palin's 7 year membership in radical 'hate America' AIP
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Keep this line of thinking going, Bongo. Because, by implication, your reasoning can be applied to Barky. Hmmm. Let's see. The founder of an organisation that the husband of the VP candidate belongs to expressed WORDS of hatred for America. You left out that the AIP still has secession as a goal and still honors the words of its founder and that Todd Palin has been a member for 7 years and that Sarah Palin introduced their 2008 convention. Neither one of them has, to my knowledge, ever repudiated those WORDS nor the basic tenets of the secessionist AIP. And why is discussion and even planning for sucession a bad thing? Why would repudiation of sucessionism be required or even lauded? Is America now like the Berlin Wall -- you need to fence free citizens in to keep them from staking out their own destinies? Yet Barky himself -- not his wife -- was intimately connected with and worked closely with a non-repentant self-admitted terrorist...not someone who expressed, through his freedom of speech, words of hatred of America BUT ACTUALLY BOMBED THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES. Obama was 8 years old when that happened and never had any association with Ayers in any way until decades later when he participated in a widely respected education project with a team that included a fully rehabilitated Ayers and others - all of whom had nothing at all to do with Ayer's' past. Yes, genius, keep this sort of thing up. It should bode well for the Obama campaign. I don't have any doubt that Obama's campaign will successfully weather the admitted last ditch desperate effort by the McCain people to resort to intense negative less-than-truthful smears. They simply cannot win any other way. Half-truths, misrepresentations, omissions, distortions, exaggerations and flat out lies are what characterize the claims *and integrity* of the right wing freaks and low-life slime trolls like Magoo. After having been burned so badly by the bullshit and lies of BushCo and its 'culture of corruption' rubber stamp GOP Congress, the American people appear to be more savvy lately than to accept more of the same in the form of a negative smear campaign by McCain/Palin and their surrogate noise makers who offer little if anything that's substantive real positive change for the nation and regular Americans at all - just a continuation of more of the same self-service and failures.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What's more scary?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bush and Cheney are on YOUR side now on the global warming question, new.morning. So it is YOU on the side of fanatics and cult- worshipping nonsense. I am on the side of science and reason. Pre-Aristotle science? Science taught at MIU in the core course? It must be exhilarating to be to the right, and more anti-science than Bush or Cheney. You are indeed a Maverick! Sarah Palin should pick you as her running mate! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: As for the global warming thing, I am disappointed that Palin even SLIGHTLY acknowledged that ANY global warming was man-made. Catastrophic man-made global warming is a myth, it is completely an unfounded scientific notion, and it has already lead to the death of many thousands of people. Talk about mixing science with religion, Curtis! My gosh, global warming is a fanatical radical religion far worse and extreme than anything Sarah Palin may believe in regarding dinasaurs. I Know! Everyone knows Global Warming is the result of a huge yagya performed by 10 million vedic gods -- and the heat is just due to the homa offerings into the fire. Plus since God made man, everything man makes is really made by God. So when man pollutes and produces carbon --- its all good cuz its Divine. And its Gods Will that the ice caps are melting, polar bears are losing habitat, going extinct, weather is going beserk, eco-systems are taking a huge dive an a billion -- mostly poor citizens of the world will lose homes and farmlands -- and those not killed start MASSIVE migrations and refugee camps larger than the World population a hundred years ago. And of course God created Al Gore -- so all of his efforts are ALSO DIVINE. Its all SOOO kewl. -- all preparation for the Rapture! Totally! I didn't get a BA from MIN like you Shemp, so I am not as much on the cutting edge of fundamentalist anti-science as you -- but I am doing my best to dig my head as deep into the sand as your education has done for you. I am truly glad that you, George Bush and Dick Cheney understand these things. Life is so much simpler when you can just ignore science and rational ways of life and get your world view from National Inquirer and Guns and Ammo. I only wished I had learned such a powerful paradigm like you -- right out of school. Jai the Middle Ages.
[FairfieldLife] Roach Motel America -- As North Pole Melts NorhtRe: Todd Palin's in radical AIP
Has America become the new Roach Motel of the world? You can check in -- but never check out. If Alaska wants to go it s own way -- and pay its share for federal debt, and buy all federal property in Alaska, and leave .. more power to them. It could be interesting. Being closer to Russia than the US, they might form various alliances with Russia -- trade and defense. And Alaska is destined to become a major trading center in the coming decades -- as the North Pole regions continue to melt and summer shipping lanes become free and clear (which his happening rapidly.) Scientific* American Sept 21 2007 ice-free summers in the Arctic may become the norm in the near future. At this point, I'd say the year 2030 is not unreasonable for a summer without sea ice in the Arctic, Serreze says. Within our lifetimes and certainly within our children's lifetimes. *Not to be confused with Vodoo Ostrich Science that Shemp endorses. Jun. 27 2008 12:59 PM ET CTV.ca News Staff For the first time in modern history, the North Pole may be iceless this summer. Scientists say it's an even bet that sea ice in the region will completely disappear in the next few months, perhaps as soon as August. Ice at the North Pole quickly and significantly melted away last year, and that may be causing further melting this summer. Scientists say the disappearance of long-term and thicker ice formed over the years has disappeared. Now, most of the ice that's left is seasonal ice, which melts away much more quickly during warm weather. The Northwest Passage, a normally ice-locked shortcut between Europe and Asia, is now passable for the first time in recorded history reports the European Space Agency. Leif Toudal Pedersen from the Danish National Space Centre said in the article: 'We have seen the ice-covered area drop to just around 3 million sq km which is about 1 million sq km less than the previous minima of 2005 and 2006. There has been a reduction of the ice cover over the last 10 years of about 100 000 sq km per year on average, so a drop of 1 million sq km in just one year is extreme.' Shipping companies are already planning to exploit the first simultaneous opening of the routes since the beginning of the last Ice Age 125,000 years ago. The Beluga Group in Germany said it will send the first ship through the Northeast Passage, around Russia, next year - cutting 4000 miles off the voyage from Germany to Japan. The pictures, taken two days ago and gathered using microwave sensors that penetrate clouds, were published on a website by scientists at the University of Bremen in Germany. They show the Northwest Passage around Canada opened last weekend and the Northeast Passage was free from ice a few days later. --- on secession: The group Republic of Texas generated national publicity for its actions in the late 1990s. There have been repeated attempts to form a Republic of Cascadia in the Pacific Northwest. The Hawaiian sovereignty movement has a number of active groupings which have won some concessions from the State of Hawaii. Founded in 1983, The Creator's Rights Party seeks to have one or more states secede in order to implement God's plan for government and is fielding political candidates in 2007 around the United States. Efforts to organize a continental secession movement have been initiated since 2004 by members of Second Vermont Republic, working with noted decentralist author Kirkpatrick Sale. Their second radical consultation in November of 2004 resulted in a statement of intent called The Middlebury Declaration. It also gave rise to the Middlebury Institute, which is dedicated to the study of separatism, secession, and self-determination and which engages in secessionist organizing. In November 2006 the same group sponsored the First North American Secessionist Convention which attracted 40 participants from 16 secessionist organizations and was (erroneously) described as the first gathering of secessionists since the Civil War. Delegates included a broad spectrum from libertarians to socialists to greens to Christian conservatives to indigenous peoples activists. Groups represented included Alaskan Independence Party, Cascadia Independence Project, Hawai#699;i Nation, The Second Maine Militia, The Free State Project, the Republic of New Hampshire, the League of the South, Christian Exodus, the Second Vermont Republic and the United Republic of Texas. Delegates created a statement of principles of secession which they presented as the Burlington Declaration.[32] The Second North American Secessionist Convention in October, 2007, in Chattanooga, Tennessee received local and national media attention.[33] Additionally some members of the Lakota people of Montana, Wyoming, and the Dakota region are also making steps to separate from the United States.[citation needed] The self-proclaimed Republic of Lakotah has made a point to say that their actions are not those of secession, but rather an
[FairfieldLife] Re: AIP -- Standard Conservative / Libertarian Stump Speech
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You left out that the AIP still has secession as a goal and still honors the words of its founder and that Todd Palin has been a member for 7 years and that Sarah Palin introduced their 2008 convention. Neither one of them has, to my knowledge, ever repudiated those WORDS nor the basic tenets of the secessionist AIP. And why is discussion and even planning for sucession a bad thing? Why would repudiation of sucessionism be required or even lauded? Are you attempting to justify this?: The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government, Vogler said in the interview, in which he talked extensively about his desire for Alaskan secession, the key goal of the AIP. And I won't be buried under their damn flag, Vogler continued in the interview, which also touched on his disappointment with the American judicial system. I'll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home. At another point, Volger advocated renouncing allegiance to the United States. In the course of denouncing Federal regulation over land, he said: And then you get mad. And you say, the hell with them. And you renounce allegiance, and you pledge your efforts, your effects, your honor, your life to Alaska. == Try selling that fringe crap to the American people, new morning. Clearly this does not need to be sold to the American people -- it needs to be sold to Alaskans. And if the American people beleive in freedom and liberty of all people -- they will wish the Alaskans good luck (after they pay their share of federal debt an property). If America has become a Roach Motel of authoratarianism -- then the will of the American people is irrelevant. They are all complicit co-dependent servants and slaves. Soften or qualify a few words and its a classic conservative stump speech. Coulda been Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, Ron Paul, most libertarians -- or goin back -- Tom Jefferson. The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the [the size and constraints to liberty of the current ] American government, the Conservative / Libertarian said in the interview, At another point, the Conservative / Libertarian In the course of denouncing Federal regulation he said: And then you get mad. And you say, the hell with them. And you renounce this regularoty jungle, and you pledge your efforts, your effects, your honor, to the freedoms and Liberty envisions by our Founders -- to their vision of the United States == === They would not go as far probably to publicly discuss secession-- though they may agree with the principle. However, per other posts -- I think that is the right of all states and free people. in which he talked extensively about his desire for Alaskan secession, the key goal of the AIP. And I won't be buried under their damn flag, Vogler continued in the interview, which also touched on his disappointment with the American judicial system. I'll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home. advocated renouncing allegiance to the United States.
[FairfieldLife] Nailin Paylin
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/03/nailin-paylin-hustlers-pa_n_131581.html I can't find Turq's post to thread off of -- but here are some more details -- for all politico-porn-film-palinparody lovers
[FairfieldLife] Secession -- Roach Motel America -- As North Pole Melts
Good and informative post Shemp. See comments. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Being from Quebec I am somewhat familiar with secessionist movements and the various constitutional frameworks that surround jurisdictions that lean have advocated it. There was/is a movement amongst residents of the NorthWest United States and some of the Canadian western provinces who advocate Cascadia, if memory serves me correctly, which is a joining of those states and provinces in that area that would form a country/trading zone. It very well may contain Alaska...I'd be surprised if it didn't. more power to them you say in response to Bongo Brazil vis a vis Alaska leaving the United States. Some scolars -- such as Ben Stein - - would argue that that is precisely what the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution at the time of the civil war should have allowed, as a result of the residual powers of the constitution being given to the states; that is, any power not specifically given to the federal branch of power goes to the states...and since secession is no where named in the U.S. constitution, it must necessarily be vested with the states, NOT the federal government. Abe Lincoln obviously disagreed. And his actions led to the slaughter or maiming of over 2-3 million people -- and Jim Crow quasi-slavery for 100+ more years. Ben Stein sounds like far more like a compassionate gentle humanist than Lincoln. (Though some of Ben's view suck, he can be interesting to listen to) When Canada was formed in 1867, they did so immediately after the U.S. experience with their civil war. Also federation, the Fathers of Canada's constitution specifically gave the residual power to the central or federal level of government, specifically in order to avoid the same problem the Americans experienced. However, as you know, despite this Quebec has tried on several occasions through democratic means to secede from Canada. It got to the point where a reference was made to the Supreme Court of Canada about 10 years ago as to what the legal ramifications would be should Quebec ever have a majority yes vote in a separation referendum (we've had two in the past 28 years with the federal side winning both times). And despite the (false dreamland) view of many, the Constitution (of the US) is neither sacred, invoked from God, eternal or perfect. It was a good consensus agreement with many flaws worked out by many gentlemen farmer slaveholders to -- in Tom Jefferson's view -- to last 20 years or so until the next (positive -- in his view) cleansing revolution. There is nothing that prevents legislation or a new clarifying Amendment that explicitly establishes the rights of all states -- and municipalities -- to seceede and form more perfect unions that better promote the life liberty and happiness of its citizens (after paying an exit fee for their share of debt and federal assets in their state). My life, liberty, happiness, economic well being, are all literally threatened by this long overripe and failing union with the Red States. And my intelligence is daily insulted, an my heart daily broken, by their actions -- and I cherish the right at some point to disassociate with Nascar nation and all that they stand for. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: Has America become the new Roach Motel of the world? You can check in -- but never check out. If Alaska wants to go it s own way -- and pay its share for federal debt, and buy all federal property in Alaska, and leave .. more power to them. It could be interesting. Being closer to Russia than the US, they might form various alliances with Russia -- trade and defense. And Alaska is destined to become a major trading center in the coming decades -- as the North Pole regions continue to melt and summer shipping lanes become free and clear (which his happening rapidly.) Scientific* American Sept 21 2007 ice-free summers in the Arctic may become the norm in the near future. At this point, I'd say the year 2030 is not unreasonable for a summer without sea ice in the Arctic, Serreze says. Within our lifetimes and certainly within our children's lifetimes. *Not to be confused with Vodoo Ostrich Science that Shemp endorses. Jun. 27 2008 12:59 PM ET CTV.ca News Staff For the first time in modern history, the North Pole may be iceless this summer. Scientists say it's an even bet that sea ice in the region will completely disappear in the next few months, perhaps as soon as August. Ice at the North Pole quickly and significantly melted away last year, and that may be causing further melting this summer. Scientists say the disappearance of long-term and thicker ice formed over the years has disappeared. Now, most of the ice that's left is seasonal ice,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Secession -- Roach Motel America -- As North Pole Melts
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: However, Jacques Parizeau, a former separatist Premier of Quebec has very interestingly put that argument on its head. His assertion is: yes, it is only fair to expect us to pay our fair share of the national debt and the federal assets in Quebec upon our exiting Canada but we expect to be PAID for our share of federal assets in the other provinces of Canada. That has occurred to me too and I wrote that part with hesitation. For example, there are huge investments that every state has made to WA DC, and other high density Federal spots. On the other hand, some states have tons of Federal money invested in them -- more than others. Earmarks and pork, along with legitimate investments over the decades are not distributed evenly. Some sort of secession accounting could be developed whereby agreed upon types of national assets would be totaled in each state -- plus a per capita share of national assets. A netting would be done. Some states would get a check for departing -- others a bill. Some of that could extend to national debt -- or federal debt might be moot. It is the residue -- loans to invest in or create national assets. Some assets like the war in Iraq are pretty intangible -- or negative (world opinion etc). So there will need to be some judgement calls and consensus on how to split things up. BTW, such a model may have been better for Iraq than the current mess. Three countries. His reasoning is: the national debt exists as a result of our partnership in and participation in Canada since its inception. And the taxes that we, Quebecers, put into the federal system via federal taxes since then have contributed to the balance sheet that is Canada which includes not only all its debts -- which we are willing to pay our fair share of -- but all its assets as well WHICH INCLUDE NOT ONLY THE FEDERAL ASSETS IN QUEBEC BUT IN ALL OF CANADA. And if one were to add up all those federal assets (think tar sands in Alberta, oil in the artic, gold and uranium here and there, etc.), it is Parizeau's contention that those assets are worth so much and exceed by such a wide margin any share of the national debt that it is Quebec that will end up being paid by Ottawa and not the other way around. Can't say I agree with him completely but it is an interesting argument. My life, liberty, happiness, economic well being, are all literally threatened by this long overripe and failing union with the Red States. And my intelligence is daily insulted, an my heart daily broken, by their actions -- and I cherish the right at some point to disassociate with Nascar nation and all that they stand for. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: Has America become the new Roach Motel of the world? You can check in -- but never check out. If Alaska wants to go it s own way -- and pay its share for federal debt, and buy all federal property in Alaska, and leave .. more power to them. It could be interesting. Being closer to Russia than the US, they might form various alliances with Russia -- trade and defense. And Alaska is destined to become a major trading center in the coming decades -- as the North Pole regions continue to melt and summer shipping lanes become free and clear (which his happening rapidly.) Scientific* American Sept 21 2007 ice-free summers in the Arctic may become the norm in the near future. At this point, I'd say the year 2030 is not unreasonable for a summer without sea ice in the Arctic, Serreze says. Within our lifetimes and certainly within our children's lifetimes. *Not to be confused with Vodoo Ostrich Science that Shemp endorses. Jun. 27 2008 12:59 PM ET CTV.ca News Staff For the first time in modern history, the North Pole may be iceless this summer. Scientists say it's an even bet that sea ice in the region will completely disappear in the next few months, perhaps as soon as August. Ice at the North Pole quickly and significantly melted away last year, and that may be causing further melting this summer. Scientists say the disappearance of long-term and thicker ice formed over the years has disappeared. Now, most of the ice that's left is seasonal ice, which melts away much more quickly during warm weather. The Northwest Passage, a normally ice-locked shortcut between Europe and Asia, is now passable for the first time in recorded history reports the European Space Agency. Leif Toudal Pedersen from the Danish National Space Centre said in the article: 'We have seen the ice-covered area drop to
[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama's Terrorist Connection -- the Darkest Sleaziest Videos in the Universe
WOW! I just watched these clips. After taking a shower and scubbing for half and hour, some of the stench is still there. The propoganda machines of the third reich, Mao and Stalin would be right at home here. Actually, this is one great series of ads for Obama. Any sane person will walk away so repelled by the stench -- that it all falls back on McCain - and how desperate, unprincipled, and morally bankrupt he and his crew are. While McCain's ads are great ads for Obama -- making the case far better than any Dem ads that McCain is a lying, opportunistic, uninformed, spoiled fly-boy. And that the 2000 campaign was simple a good snow job. But thats nothing compared to the hyper sleaze and chilling darkness at the soul of in these five videos. They are shouting at voters -- do you want the sleaze, lying and manipulation of the past 8 years, squared? Then vote for McCain. If you are not insane or a total dirt bag, there is no way one cold endorse McCain after seeing these videos. Thanks for posting these. It makes the whole race crystal clear. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Villareal has created a unique YouTube with links http://tinyurl.com/4q9279 in the video to other videos that back up Gov. Palin's remarks about Obama's proven, long close association with Bill Ayers Sarah Palin hits Obama for palling around with terrorists -- VP nominee attacks Obama for his long association with Weather Underground figure William Ayers http://tinyurl.com/4q9279 Below is a link to the remarks made yesterday by Sarah Palin which connected Barack Obama with Obama's longtime friend and mentor Bill Ayers. Ayers is an unrepentant domestic terrorist who was involved with the seditionist Weather Underground organization that bombed both the Pentagon and the US Capitol. http://tinyurl.com/4q9279 What makes my version of this footage both a must-see and a very valuable resource going forward is that I have inserted 5 video link annotations into the production itself and I have put 19 links into the video description section. These links provide comprehensive, detailed visual and written evidence of the longstanding and intimate relationship between Senator Obama and radical anti-American Bill Ayers. Please take a look at the video when you get the chance. Favorite it and email it to those that you know so in the days to come all will have a one-stop location to answer the lies and half-truths coming out of the Obama campaign and its media arms as they try to innoculate Obama against his dangerous, extremist associates. These long-term mentors and friends of the Illinois pol expose Obama's stunning lack of judgment, his willingness to become close with those who hate our great republic and Obama's own nearly-unfathomable radicalism. Amidst two wars and the constant threat of a second 9/11, America's electorate deserves to know exactly what Barack Obama and his dangerous associates are all about as it prepares to vote in one of the most important elections in our country's history. Visit Paul's YouTube channel, http://tinyurl.com/4q9279 full of must-see informative videos. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: YouTube http://tinyurl.com/4emahm Despite the NYT's whitewash, Sarah Palin Hits Obama on Bill Ayers Relationship By SusanUnPC Remember this? Do you remember Barack's snide line about Hillary Clinton? Who does she think she is? Annie Oakley? Well, Barack. Here's another tough woman comin' at you. This Annie Oakley is sharp too, and she's taken aim at your long, close relationship with terrorist William Ayers that you've tried to conceal because, among many terrorist acts, he helped bomb the Pentagon. Sarah's job has become more difficult since the New York Times abetted your concealment with what Stanley Kurtz calls its irresponsible journalism in today's whitewash story. (Kurtz also refers to the exceptional research by Steve Diamond whose investigative stories are published here regularly.) Of course, at No Quarter, our readers already KNOW a great deal about Barack Obama's extensive ties to Bill Ayers. Read more http://tinyurl.com/4g468j
[FairfieldLife] Re: Intrade Prediction Markets
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Takes bets on election results, etc: http://www.intrade.com/ here is another major political exchange (in Iowa even) http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_Pres08_WTA.cfm Many prediction markets are open to the public. Betfair is the world's biggest prediction exchange, with around $28 billion traded in 2007. Intrade is a for-profit company with a large variety of contracts not including sports. The Iowa Electronic Markets is an academic market examining elections where positions are limited to $500. TradeSports are prediction markets for sporting events. The simExchange, Hollywood Stock Exchange, NewsFutures, the Popular Science Predictions Exchange, Hubdub and the Foresight Exchange Prediction Market are virtual prediction markets where purchases are made with virtual money. Bet2Give is a charity prediction market where real money is traded but ultimately all winnings are donated to the charity of the winner's choice. While there are some issues an problems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prediction_market these prediction markets tend to be more accurate than polls -- because investors are betting their hard earned money. They do so only when they have done some serious homework -- at last in concept -- and much in practice it would seem from the consistently accurate results over the years. Markets are powerful tools to setting prices and probabilities. (And don't do everything -- regulation is needed when they don't do it all)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The USA National Debt-- An Unaddressed Question
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2008 1:23 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] The USA National Debt-- An Unaddressed Question But who is brave enough to speak such words to the people? Ron Paul, but look where it got him. Well Ross Perot also in the 1992 election But, as in most things in life, you can't isolate one of many factors and draw conclusions about causation. That is, was there ANYTHING else about Paul and Perot that contributed to their losses? I think a lot. Some day -- a candidate will have the whole package -- and the courage to tell the truth about the budget deficits, national debt, foreign holds of debt, greenhouse gases and climate change, the need for energy independence and a REAL plan to achieve it, social security, medicare, etc ... Today we still are in the land of timid little sheep politicians. Some are a bit braver than others. But still sheep, not lions. Maybe when the public is educated sufficiently to understand it -- then the message will not be all dumbed down to 10 seconds sound bits -- and winks. And America (or its successors) will seriously look to competence, vision, integrity, facts and courage to tell them. And to proactively paint a real vision of the future -- not a reaction to polls.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The USA National Debt-- An Unaddressed Question
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of new.morning Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 9:46 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The USA National Debt-- An Unaddressed Question Today we still are in the land of timid little sheep politicians. Some are a bit braver than others. But still sheep, not lions. Could a lion get elected? Your following point illustrates why even the best politicians have to perform a balancing act between truth and pragmatism. Not at current time. The poorly educated, poor reasoning skills, high cognitive errors and bias of much of the populance points to how bad Americas education system is. And the need to dumb things down -- and to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Massive infusion of funding into education and in 20-30 years things will improve -- hopefully to the level below. (Work now for better schools and next time around -- we may get a far better education -- as well our peers.) Or massive shift in world consciousness -- whatever that is or means -- if it is real an substantive, Even then, education is critical I think. Maybe when the public is educated sufficiently to understand it -- then the message will not be all dumbed down to 10 seconds sound bits -- and winks. And America (or its successors) will seriously look to competence, vision, integrity, facts and courage to tell them. And to proactively paint a real vision of the future -- not a reaction to polls.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sarah Palin: the meltdown begins
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: This happened only about six weeks ago. The smear was undoubtedly given to her by one of her handlers to use as she saw fit. What on earth makes you think the McCain campaign cares if it's been debunked?? It screws up his off-the-cuff, ad hoc, inner-world, unsubstantiated, unresearched theory?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield and Iowa Christmas Cards
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 4, 2008, at 10:54 AM, Rick Archer wrote: http://beingandseeing.com/cards/index.htm Looks like Norman Rockwell on Prozac. Why all the pictures of the gazebo? What's so special about the gazebo? Sal It creates woo woo energy like the pyramids and SV homes. duh.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The USA National Debt-- An Unaddressed Question
What level of debt (%)to GDP do you feel is appropriate? 1) Total federal (public) debt 2) Foreign holding of federal debt And what % of federal debt per capita is OK? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To All: It's obvious to everyone that the presidential candidates today and the presidents of the past have failed to eliminate the USA national debt. Both of the GOP and Democratic candidates conveniently forget to address this question. Why? Because it's a growing cancer that cannot be cured by campaign promises of lowering taxes. President Clinton came close to solving the debt issue when his administration actually realized a budget surplus which helped reduce the national debt--but not by much. In his quest to be elected, President Bush promised more tax cuts which resulted in more deficit spending and eventual increase to the national debt. Someone has to deliver the message to the American people that the party is over. We have to face this problem now in order to eliminate the problem within this generation or the next. But who is brave enough to speak such words to the people?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The USA National Debt-- An Unaddressed Question
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: What level of debt (%)to GDP do you feel is appropriate? 1) Total federal (public) debt 2) Foreign holding of federal debt And what % of federal debt per capita is OK? The national debt is now about 13 trillion dollars, which is too much to bear for any country. Really? -- what about a country with a GDP of 500 trillion? Or a country with a billion people? There should be a goal to at least reduce the debt by half in about 25 years. Based on yur inner world guide to a sound economy? Once that's reached, there should be another initiative to reduce the debt burden to another half. By doing so, the US economy can remain robust and vibrant. So in follows that the economy will be strongest if there is no national debt? pay for all bridges, highways, schools, buildings, in cash. Pay as you go? That would produce a stronger economy, everything else being equal than one with some debt? Without doing so, the US economy and the dollar will surely collapse. You get big Palin points for skirting the question: What level of debt (%)to GDP do you feel is appropriate? 1) Total federal (public) debt 2) Foreign holding of federal debt Which is fine. Your points will go over big with hockey moms and Nascar dads everywhere. But you seem to be indicating that various debt levels as a % of GDP are all equally bad. It might be instructive to think about the questions and ponderif some levels of debt, at an appropriate level of GDP, might yield a more productive and robust economy, with higher income and wages than an economy with no federal debt. Do you favor no personal debt. Buy a house in all cash? And if building an apartment building to rent out homes for others -- this should be done in all upfront cash? Another question (which of course you don't need to answer -- but might be instructive if you try): is going into (more) debt ok or better than reducing debt, during a recession? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: It's obvious to everyone that the presidential candidates today and the presidents of the past have failed to eliminate the USA national debt. Both of the GOP and Democratic candidates conveniently forget to address this question. Why? Because it's a growing cancer that cannot be cured by campaign promises of lowering taxes. President Clinton came close to solving the debt issue when his administration actually realized a budget surplus which helped reduce the national debt--but not by much. In his quest to be elected, President Bush promised more tax cuts which resulted in more deficit spending and eventual increase to the national debt. Someone has to deliver the message to the American people that the party is over. We have to face this problem now in order to eliminate the problem within this generation or the next. But who is brave enough to speak such words to the people?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The USA National Debt-- An Unaddressed Question
Graph of national debt as % of GDP http://wasatchecon.blogspot.com/2007/05/us-national-debt-as-percentage-of-gdp.html http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/09/28/165539.php As I pointed out yesterday, the debt / GNP ratio was lowest (in modern era) under Carter. Was the economy strongest during the Carter years? http://zfacts.com/p/318.html --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: What level of debt (%)to GDP do you feel is appropriate? 1) Total federal (public) debt 2) Foreign holding of federal debt And what % of federal debt per capita is OK? The national debt is now about 13 trillion dollars, which is too much to bear for any country. Really? -- what about a country with a GDP of 500 trillion? Or a country with a billion people? There should be a goal to at least reduce the debt by half in about 25 years. Based on yur inner world guide to a sound economy? Once that's reached, there should be another initiative to reduce the debt burden to another half. By doing so, the US economy can remain robust and vibrant. So in follows that the economy will be strongest if there is no national debt? pay for all bridges, highways, schools, buildings, in cash. Pay as you go? That would produce a stronger economy, everything else being equal than one with some debt? Without doing so, the US economy and the dollar will surely collapse. You get big Palin points for skirting the question: What level of debt (%)to GDP do you feel is appropriate? 1) Total federal (public) debt 2) Foreign holding of federal debt Which is fine. Your points will go over big with hockey moms and Nascar dads everywhere. But you seem to be indicating that various debt levels as a % of GDP are all equally bad. It might be instructive to think about the questions and ponderif some levels of debt, at an appropriate level of GDP, might yield a more productive and robust economy, with higher income and wages than an economy with no federal debt. Do you favor no personal debt. Buy a house in all cash? And if building an apartment building to rent out homes for others -- this should be done in all upfront cash? Another question (which of course you don't need to answer -- but might be instructive if you try): is going into (more) debt ok or better than reducing debt, during a recession? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: It's obvious to everyone that the presidential candidates today and the presidents of the past have failed to eliminate the USA national debt. Both of the GOP and Democratic candidates conveniently forget to address this question. Why? Because it's a growing cancer that cannot be cured by campaign promises of lowering taxes. President Clinton came close to solving the debt issue when his administration actually realized a budget surplus which helped reduce the national debt--but not by much. In his quest to be elected, President Bush promised more tax cuts which resulted in more deficit spending and eventual increase to the national debt. Someone has to deliver the message to the American people that the party is over. We have to face this problem now in order to eliminate the problem within this generation or the next. But who is brave enough to speak such words to the people?
[FairfieldLife] Sarah Sarah Pants on Fire
But whats Truth got to do with it? Sarah Palin set a new standard Thursday night. I was in awe. Speaking right into the camera, smiling, winking, and gosh darn it blatently lying to the American people and world. With her skills she could easily be a corporate PR heavy pulling in over a mil a year. Lying skills like that are rare and well-prized. And she is soo much better a liar than Bush. With Bush -- its so clear he is lying. Palin adds some bubbly sweet mystery to it all. It does bring up the moral question: is it a lie if you say it but don't know its a lie? I think that is the case with Sarah. She can be (and not act) so sincere because she is just puking out what handlers have fed her. I don't think she knows she's lying. Does that make it OK? Or worse -- that she is so uninformed she can't distinguish a cooked-up lies from sanity and truth? (But she pukes in such a cute way -- reminds me of some gf's as I held their head over he toilet bowl -- she on her knees. Very endearing and cute. Except when she hit my shoes. ) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: [snip] I was talking to a friend today about debates and I mentioned the gaffe of Biden saying FDR on TV in 1929 (yes I was defending media treatment of Palin Shemp, as I often do --- up to a point.) My friend pointed out that FD Roosevelt was Governer of New York in 1929, and I found out that New York city did have regular TV broadcasting from 1928 on, and it is HIGHLY LIKELY that in the city where the stock exchange crashed that the Governere would go on radio and TV to make speeches about it. Sounds like Coulter is talking through her ass again, and Shemp is swallowing it hook line a sinker. Looks like Biden was right. OffWorld Yes, it's correct that there were regular broadcasts of what could pass as television in New York from 1928 on but only in the most limited sense of both words. They were one-inch screens and the whole enterprise was of an experimental nature. And the broadcasts were local, not state-wide. There is no evidence nor any documentation that FDR made any TV broadcasts (or radio broadcasts for that matter) in 1928 or 1929. However, an early kinetoscope of one of FDR's TV broadcasts has been making the rounds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvR3ilZAWHw
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bailout unfair to Canadians
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've read several reports in the Phoenix area over the last year that suggest that Canadians are responsible for anywhere from 10% to 20% of all real estate purchases in the area. This has been an ideal time for Canadians to purchase American second homes: (1) the Canadian dollar has never been stronger than at any time in the past 30 years; and (2) real estate prices are at very low prices. But the bailout may rescue the real estate market, bringing prices up, making purchases more expensive for Canadians. Gosh, I wonder whether this is a violation in any way of NAFTA? I'm only half joking when I say that because I know there are oodles of provisions in it and other trade agreements between the two countries regarding unfair subsidies. Would this be an unfair subsidy and, if so, is it prohibited under NAFTA? Funny point. But highlights a major problem with the bailout. it indirectly props up housing prices above levels consistent with the fundamentals. this imbalance with continue to create problems and haunt the economy and tax payer until housing prices are left to fall to fundamentals-based levels.
[FairfieldLife] Karma-- Coming Home to Roost for US -- or bush supporters?
B and or others said the US is in for it -- having started an invasion abroad -- etc. Assuming for sake of discussion that karma is a valid principal -- how does this work. Most here did not support Bush. In was both grand and subtle, we have fought against him and his madness for most of the decade. Why would the karma from his war come to us. Because our taxes -- mandated by the govt paid for it? Seems a weak link -- particularly since our taxes di not pay for it -- the chinese did. Will China go to hell in a handbasket for loaning themoney to fight the war? How much karmas national and how much individual (or perhaps group)? Bush and republicans have their karma coming due for lying and cheating into a war. And then managing it with disasterous ineptitude. Will those opposing the war receeve the same karmic blast -- simply because they are unfortunate enough to live in the same country as Bush and his devil friends? Seems thats suffering enough. Take it back a step -- and some say getting Bush as president is our karma. if so, is it a seed within a seed. We really f'ed up somewhere in the past so we got Bush as president -- and contained within that is all of the karma of Iraq? If some do good and great things, is the karma shared with all Americans? What if they are Californians? Is it shared mostly with them? That is -- there are many groups, boundaries, etc. Why is the American bucket (for karma) any more significant than any of the othr groups and subsets to which we are connected? By hosing Iraq, did we suddenly create the good karma to get an intelligent and considerate president in Nov?
[FairfieldLife] Re: -Clueless
Dana Perino -- the presidents press secretary -- is a more subtle paradox. She appears articulate, smart, well informed, is attractive and vibrant -- and seems nimble and fast on her feet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dana-perino-02.jpg I find her enticing to watch -- even when defending and spinning Bush and Bush policies. But it appears to be a its a veneer -- http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://toohugeworld.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/dana-perino.jpgimgrefurl=http://toohugeworld.wordpress.com/2007/12/12/short-memory/h=321w=451sz=35tbnid=j8zG7eWhKAEJ::tbnh=90tbnw=127prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddana%2Bperinohl=enusg=__N0LS1zcU5PkodN1wNCLI5gdENzI=sa=Xoi=image_resultresnum=2ct=imagecd=1 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I wonder how many people actually fall for Palin's nonsense. More than one would like to think, I imagine. It really is fantastic, that she can go around saying, in effect, that every time she reveals herself to be an ignorant fool, it merely shows that she is not part of an elite. She is certainly right about that. My bet, however, is that she honestly believes that she IS a part of a very small and very important elite -- God's elite. ** I don't see her as a zealot, but just a lightweight with hazy thinking who gives lip service to standard Christian right thinking. This writer suggests that her good looks help promote the sale of that thinking in the marketplace of ideas: ...Sarah Palin represents the state-of-the-art version of a particular type of womanlet's call her the Sexy Puritanthat's become a familiar and potent figure in the culture war in recent years. Sexy Puritans have been around for a while. Anita Bryant, the Miss America runner-up turned anti-gay crusader in the 1970s, was an early exemplar of the trend. The young Britney Spears, provocatively dressed and loudly proclaiming her virginity, is a more modern version, though that didn't turn out so well. Elisabeth Hasselbeck, the most conservative member of The View, has a bit of the Sexy Puritan about her, as does Monica Goodling, the former aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales who admitted to engaging in improperly political hiring practices, including the dismissal of a career prosecutor Goodling believed to be a lesbian. (Puritanical footnote: Goodling is reputed to have been responsible for the draping of nude statues at the Department of Justice.) Sexy Puritans engage in the culture war on two levelsnot simply by advocating conservative positions on hot-button social issues but by embodying nonthreatening mainstream standards of female beauty and behavior at the same time. The net result is a paradox, a bit of cognitive dissonance very useful to the cultural right: You get a little thrill along with your traditional values, a wink along with the wagging finger. Somehow, you don't feel quite as much like a prig as you expected to. http://www.slate.com/id/2200814/
[FairfieldLife] I confess -- I graduated from U of Calif and there were radicals there. Ban Me!
I assume you are satirizing the loony logic of some of our other astute posters here. Ayers is a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Does this imply that all graduate of U of I should be banned from being president because of the Ayers connections? You went to an University whose name sake, president and chief scientists are nuts -- or at least say very nutty things. And the goofiest thing -- you flew everyday at this so called university. Should people who deal with you on insurance matters be told the truth about you! I went to the University of California. Angela Davis taught there. Herbert Marcuse taught there. both avowed Communists and radicals. Eldridge Cleaver, Tim Leary, Abbie Hoffman, Tom Hayden, Jerry Rubin all spoke there. Students spoke at rally's and advocated open revolution. It was the hotbed and leading wave of student and natioanl protests, People took drugs there. Martin Luther King spoke there and he advocated strong resistance against the government. Heck, Ronald Reagan was governor of an head of the Board of Regents when I was there -- when no attacking we students from his helicopters filled with tear gas -- and apparently he caused the meltdown of the US economy. Bobby and Jack Kennedy spoke there -- and they palled around with mobsters, and started the (serious part of) the war in Vietnam -- which became an immoral and political/economic disaster. Should I and all other graduates of UC be banned from being president because of the Davis/Marcuse/Revolutionaries/Drug/Reagan/mobster/Kennedy connection? (And Peter, like Marcuse, advocated fucking as a solution to society's problems. He must have read Marcuse. You traded posts with Peter and were associated with him for years on FFL. Clearly we should ban Peter from FLL for such radical connections, but then should we ban all of us for our connections to Peter?) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At least someone in this campaign has some balls. This to me is one of the main reasons this man cannot be president...and the ties to William Ayers run deep. Talk about vetting. Who the hell vetted Obama during the primaries about this? What I'd like to know is: how many Americans are actually aware of the William Ayers connection? Is it a large or small percentage? And of those that know about it, how many will NOT vote for Obama because of it? If it's a large percentage, you can bet that a whole lotta money will be spent informing the public of the connection. And please don't retort with: Oh, having a connection with William Ayers is something that mainstream people in Chicago have been doing for years; why Mayor Daley has worked with Ayers. Well, two wrongs don't make a right. And, besides, Barky is supposed to be different; he's supposed to be change we can believe it...a leader who doesn't do things just because everyone else in the crowd is doing it. If Barky is just going to be one more run-of-the-mill politicians, why do we need him? What we need is a REAL leader; someone who would have had the courage and fortitude to say: I don't care how many of my fellow Chicago politicians approve of and work with this self- admitted terrorist, I won't have anything to do with him. But, no, Barky is NOT a unique thinker, he is NOT someone who will go AGAINST the crowd; he is a go-with-the-flow kind of guy who will, obviously, give in to peer-group pressure. This is not a leader; this is a follower. We need a leader as president. As Palin says: This is not a man who sees America as you see America and as I see America. Barky is, simply, unacceptable to be president. --- Palin says Obama 'palling around' with terrorists Oct 4 03:32 PM US/Eastern By JIM KUHNHENN Associated Press Writer 'America Needs to Know This' ENGLEWOOD, Colo. (AP) - Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin on Saturday accused Democrat Barack Obama of palling around with terrorists because of his association with a former 1960s radical, stepping up the campaign's effort to portray Obama as unacceptable to American voters. Palin's reference was to Bill Ayers, one of the founders of the group the Weather Underground. Its members took credit for bombings, including nonfatal explosions at the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol, during the tumultuous Vietnam War era four decades ago. Obama, who was a child when the group was active, served on a charity board with Ayers several years ago and has denounced his radical views and activities. The Republican campaign, falling behind Obama in polls, plans to make attacks on Obama's character a centerpiece of presidential candidate John McCain's message with a month remaining before Election Day. Palin told a group of donors at a private airport, Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Sarah Sarah Pants on Fire
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: According to factcheck.org, both Biden and Palin are guilty of getting their facts wrong in the debate. Here's their full fact check on the debate: http://tinyurl.com/4fpela A lot of the fact misstatements are due to ineadequate time to explain context and the fuller issues. Short cut statments need to be made in 90 seconds. I didn't hear anything from Biden that was applaulling or which could not have been clarified with more time. I did from palin. She made BOLD FACED lies. Winking and smiling and darn tootin it up as she did so. He is less scrupulous than a used car salesman in a navy town when the ship is in. 1) She repeated said Obama would raise taxes on regular people, the middle class. Thats a bold, bald-faced lie if you define middle class as making under 250k a year. (I know MCain defines it as making less than 5 mil -- but that speaks for itself. Obama proposes a tax cut for those making under $125 k. She was lying through her teeth -- but maybe its ok -- she winked. (which is NOT blinking mind you) 2) She said McCain would lower taxes for everyone in the audience. He is not lowering their marginal tax rate for personal income -- which her words imply. He does propose lowering business taxes and capital gains / dividends. That is NOT what her statement said or implied. (Actually, I am for a subset of that -- to eliminate double taxation. Tax income once -- either a business tax or dividend tax; and income or capital gains made from saved income -- but not both.) 3) Energy policy -- some bold faced lies about the obama energy plan -- and the merits of the mcCain plan. 4) Having a time table for Iraq is the white flag of surrender -- I guess Bush and the president of Iraq are raising the white flag of surrender then. There were more. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: But whats Truth got to do with it? Sarah Palin set a new standard Thursday night. I was in awe. Speaking right into the camera, smiling, winking, and gosh darn it blatently lying to the American people and world. With her skills she could easily be a corporate PR heavy pulling in over a mil a year. Lying skills like that are rare and well-prized. And she is soo much better a liar than Bush. With Bush -- its so clear he is lying. Palin adds some bubbly sweet mystery to it all. It does bring up the moral question: is it a lie if you say it but don't know its a lie? I think that is the case with Sarah. She can be (and not act) so sincere because she is just puking out what handlers have fed her. I don't think she knows she's lying. Does that make it OK? Or worse -- that she is so uninformed she can't distinguish a cooked-up lies from sanity and truth? (But she pukes in such a cute way -- reminds me of some gf's as I held their head over he toilet bowl -- she on her knees. Very endearing and cute. Except when she hit my shoes. ) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: [snip] I was talking to a friend today about debates and I mentioned the gaffe of Biden saying FDR on TV in 1929 (yes I was defending media treatment of Palin Shemp, as I often do --- up to a point.) My friend pointed out that FD Roosevelt was Governer of New York in 1929, and I found out that New York city did have regular TV broadcasting from 1928 on, and it is HIGHLY LIKELY that in the city where the stock exchange crashed that the Governere would go on radio and TV to make speeches about it. Sounds like Coulter is talking through her ass again, and Shemp is swallowing it hook line a sinker. Looks like Biden was right. OffWorld Yes, it's correct that there were regular broadcasts of what could pass as television in New York from 1928 on but only in the most limited sense of both words. They were one-inch screens and the whole enterprise was of an experimental nature. And the broadcasts were local, not state-wide. There is no evidence nor any documentation that FDR made any TV broadcasts (or radio broadcasts for that matter) in 1928 or 1929. However, an early kinetoscope of one of FDR's TV broadcasts has been making the rounds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvR3ilZAWHw
[FairfieldLife] Re: LisaNova does the debate
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thats a good one. IMO, the woman playing Palin was exceptional. Even better than Tina Fey -- who has been fantastic. With Tina, you know its Tina -- the woman on Utube -- she almost morphs into and channels Palin (in a satiric way). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRCBsFaUz_Yfeature=user Love will swallow you, eat you up completely until there is no `you,' only love. - Amma
[FairfieldLife] Re: The USA National Debt-- An Unaddressed Question
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: What level of debt (%)to GDP do you feel is appropriate? 1) Total federal (public) debt 2) Foreign holding of federal debt And what % of federal debt per capita is OK? The national debt is now about 13 trillion dollars, which is too much to bear for any country. Really? -- what about a country with a GDP of 500 trillion? Or a country with a billion people? Some economists like to play the numbers game by taking ratios for analyses. Holy shit. you are out palining Paling. My hats off to you. yea I mean like all ratios in economics are games. meant to decieve and not clarify, You are SO right on. How did you figure out this conspiracy against hard workin americans perpetrated by economists? You are one smart brainiac! For my taste, debt is a debt no matter how you take it. The ideal situation is to have zero debt. Welcome to the caveman economy. Can't wait to har your grand theories on savings and investments. There should be a goal to at least reduce the debt by half in about 25 years. Based on yur inner world guide to a sound economy? Once that's reached, there should be another initiative to reduce the debt burden to another half. By doing so, the US economy can remain robust and vibrant. So in follows that the economy will be strongest if there is no national debt? pay for all bridges, highways, schools, buildings, in cash. Pay as you go? That would produce a stronger economy, everything else being equal than one with some debt? Ideally, yes. But in the real world one has to borrow money to pay for big ticket items--those that are essential. Without doing so, the US economy and the dollar will surely collapse. You get big Palin points for skirting the question: What level of debt (%)to GDP do you feel is appropriate? 1) Total federal (public) debt 2) Foreign holding of federal debt I proposed to cut the national debt in half at first to relieve the debt burden. You can figure out the ratio to around 30 percent or so. Once that goal is reached, the debt ratio can be reduced to 15 percent. The idea is to reduce the excessive debt that the US has now. The ideal is zero debt. IMO, the US was able to function without any debt in its past economic history. Which is fine. Your points will go over big with hockey moms and Nascar dads everywhere. But you seem to be indicating that various debt levels as a % of GDP are all equally bad. It might be instructive to think about the questions and ponderif some levels of debt, at an appropriate level of GDP, might yield a more productive and robust economy, with higher income and wages than an economy with no federal debt. Do you favor no personal debt. Buy a house in all cash? And if building an apartment building to rent out homes for others -- this should be done in all upfront cash? Personally, I would prefer NOT to have any debt. If you don't have the money to buy a house, you can borrow the money. But you should make sure that you can pay for the mortgage payments. It's common sense. Another question (which of course you don't need to answer -- but might be instructive if you try): is going into (more) debt ok or better than reducing debt, during a recession? At the national level, the principles become more complicated. The government has the responsibility to stimulate the economy. This was done in the past by work projects, such as those made during the Great Depression Era. As such, it was necessary to incur debt to stimulate the economy. Currently, the situation is similar. However, the indebtedness is made upfront, before the entire financial institutions collapse. So, in short, I am in favor of the bailout plan that was passed by Congress. Nonetheless, there should be an overall goal to reduce the national debt sometime in the near future. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: It's obvious to everyone that the presidential candidates today and the presidents of the past have failed to eliminate the USA national debt. Both of the GOP and Democratic candidates conveniently forget to address this question. Why? Because it's a growing cancer that cannot be cured by campaign promises of lowering taxes. President Clinton came close to solving the debt issue when his administration actually realized a budget surplus which helped reduce the
[FairfieldLife] Peter Fuckin Stuphen for President
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: (And Peter, like Marcuse, advocated fucking as a solution to society's problems. He must have read Marcuse. You traded posts with Peter and were associated with him for years on FFL. Clearly we should ban Peter from FLL for such radical connections, but then should we ban all of us for our connections to Peter?) ...the fucking solution would be a reason to vote FOR Peter for president. I think that is a winning idea. We have a grass routs org here on FFL. We can set up regional offices tomorrow. And start the campaign for 2012. He won't need any coaching. He has all the fucking answers totally down. Q: Dr S, what is the solution to the continuing economic crisis -- still ongoing since 2008? A: More fucking. Q More fucking what? A: More fucking. Q: Moving on to the next question. We have been bogged down in Irag for almost 10 years now. What are your plans for withdraw? A: I never withdraw prematurely. Q: um ok, What about the Social Security crisis: A: Seniors should fuck more. Q: And the education crisis: A: Students should fuck more. Q: And how do you plan to pay for all of this fucking? A: Fucking money. My Secretary of Internal Affairs and Global Fucking, Mr Curtis Blues, is drawing up a budget. Every man and woman over 16 will get a fucking stimulus check to jump-start and vigorously pump up the economy thrusting us into a new age of prosperity an pleasure. My platform is the Politics of Pleasure. And in Celebration of that platform -- new platform shoes for all the ladies. Q: How can the fucking money be spent? A: Under the Fucking Emergency Act of 2012, we are nationalizing all escort services, strip clubs, and internet porn sites. The fucking money we give the fucking people will be accepted at all of these nationalized fucking businesses. Q: Is it a big fucking budget? A: Without passing this budget we are all fucked. Q: Isn't that what you are advocating? A: Getting fucked, and getting Fucked are two different things. Q After you win the election what will you do? A: Eat a chicken salad sandwich.
[FairfieldLife] Re: God this is Painful!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Chadwick jochadw1@ wrote: But the read out there is that she didn't fall down and die. Be sure that we won't be hearing from her unscripted for the rest of the campaign. She's a fool but has a nice smile and all the right simple, fundie christian views that the americans like. Oh for gosh tooting, you are so darn right, here Nabs. All of us big clumsy, lumbering retarded Americans, every single one of us, just adore superficiality and fundie views. We all believe dianasours roamed the earth 6000 years ago, and that, gosh darn it, America would be justa a gal' darn super place if those darn old regulators and tax collectors would get out of the way of the all all of the ingenuity and energy of all us grand and great americans. Ya know, I was happily surprised a European was bright enough to see this so clearly, gosh darn it. Gee whilickers, cuz ya know, all the other, every last one of them, Europeans are godless, with no values, liberals I think they call 'em, sex-crazed, foreigners. As my neighbor Billy-bob-Johhny-Joe said when he and his wife Sally-Jean-Madge-Sue-Ellen said when they went to Europe -- sur has some pretty buildings and all -- but would be a much nicer place if there weren't all them foreigners around. n many ways she reminds me of Vaj and the Turq here at FFL; great rethoric and no substance. If she is lying also as these two gentlemen remains to be seen. Don't be surprized if Palin becomes your next president. I seriously doubt that intelligence and vision will bring anyone into the White House in this generation. Meanwhile the americans should simply get used to being the laughingstock of the rest of the world as even their dear capitalism they so aggresslivly have exported to much of this planet is falling apart. Now that communism is gone the next to go is capitalism. - Maharishi I am not criticizing anyone. I am telling the people that the world has been lived by the individual on a wrong level of knowledge, very wrong knowledge. And therefore, it is the time now that the night is ending. The dawn is dawning. - Maharishi
[FairfieldLife] Re: Depression or socialism?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can we say that is wrong in their culture, for them? Do we know that it is? You are darn tootin right there bud_litened_one. If an ancient culture wants to be bigoted and discriminatory based on heredity -- and place severe economic and social restrictions on em, gosh darn it -- that's there god give right. Even if they do pray to a false god. I mean its just like us us thick headed- fundie lovin americans who love superficiality and Nascar. We don't like them spiks and mexicans and blackies -- and we let them know it gosh darn it -- by making it as difficult as possible for em and not inviting them to our clubs or homes, ya know. We keeps most of them in jails. Not for rehabilitation -- ya can't rehabilitate from your heredity. Ya just gatta punish the, goll'durn it. So I say let them indians get down with their racism, discrimination and massive social biases. Its what makes India great (well it counter balances he fact that they have false gods and are foreeigners) and makes Americia -- the greatest nation ever seen on the face of the earth -- even greater. So viva la difference -- jus keep it away from us white folk who are makin America so gosh darn great.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Obama Admires his Underpants
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds like you need a man real bad, raunchy. I am prepared to volunteer as long as I can wear a blindfold and use earplugs. And don't forget the raincoat, my friend. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Obama's Crotch Shot Video http://tinyurl.com/574qp5 Obama's Crotch Shot Photo Opt http://tinyurl.com/4el585 Obama's aggressive diplomacy Inspired by History of the Codpiece http://tinyurl.com/4axur Legend has it that Edward III, king of England from 1327-1377, had the codpiece of his armor enlarged to astounding proportions because he had heard that strength and military prowess were correlated with a man's endowment. As he was in the midst of the Hundred Years' War with the French at the time, it would not be surprising that he would try to seek any possible advantage available to him. He then ordered that the nobility and knights do the same to their armor. The legend goes on to say that the gullible French (from the nobility all the way down to the peasantry) were scared to death by the advance of the well-equipped men Illustrated History of the Codpiece http://tinyurl.com/4y4j2 George Bush's Codpiece http://tinyurl.com/4asbme Obama Admires his Underpants Women fainting and swooning Chanting and mooning Obama! Obama! Please, oh please Give us a tease Just one little glance Of your fine underpants Yes, I can I'm your man Titillate your tastes Without any haste I have a collection And fly predilection Of rare underwear Exotic or mundane Edible or bunchy All drive you insane My story begun Indeed I'm well hung So take a look bitches And dig my cool britches Designer made Gucci Warms my tight tushy Silk I'm smooth talking Swag cotton I'm walking Burlap for rough days Studs hype my butch ways Truth stretching Spandex Lifting thong brand X Don't mind my intruding With gonads protruding Panties bunch up into my crack Sturdy jockstrap or G-string snap Whether sneezing or hiccup Suspension holds my dick up Republicans are cocky Conservatives wear Jockeys Loincloth for fakirs Hang left heart breaker Hang right feel sleazy Boxers keep my boys easy Inauguration day If I have my way Everyone swaying Ludacris playing Be sure to salute My patriotic snoot I'm sporting presidential Adoration is essential Stars and strips are taking a chance Billowing from my fine underpants I'm just getting started And rising to power he farted.
[FairfieldLife] Re: God this is Painful!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: pranamoocher wrote: Palin keeps trying to stick to her notes, while Biden is pointedly making Palin's statements look inaccurate. THE FACTS: Biden voted for 1999 deregulation that liberal groups are blaming for part of the financial crisis today. The law allowed Wall Street investment banks to create the kind of mortgage-related securities at the core of the problem now. Gee, Solomon Bros and Drexel created these instruments in the 80's -- and the business, as well as the wider derivative business flourished in the later 80's and 90s. How exactly did the 1999 repeal of Glass-Steagall Act allow investment banks to begin to create these instruments? By the way, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with derivatives. They have not caused the crisis. What caused the crisis was massive over investment in real estate, wholesale speculation by small time flippers and individuals trying to make a quick buck before the market crashed (as everyone knew it would) -- all fueled by excessive and very cheap money from repeated Fed interventions -- and the non-enforcement or bending of lending laws (liar loans etc) -- and lack of due dilligence on the part of many got-to-buy- NOW home-buyers. The law was widely backed by Republicans as well as by Democratic President Clinton, who argues it has stopped the crisis today from being worse. Read more: 'Some facts adrift in veep debate' By Calvin Woodward Associated Press, October 3, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/43o4sq
[FairfieldLife] Foreign Debt Crisis was Re: We're Screwed Now:
I am not a fan of the level of current foreign debt, It can serious future repercussions. However, a little perspective is necessary. Current total US foreign debt is the highest in the World and the highest it has ever been. Is the boogyman right outside our door? Total debt is not the thing. Its foreign federal debt as a % of GDP. Just like with a bank, your credit line or loan facility is based on your earning power. Scroll down and see a graph of Current Account to GDP. Its currently at its highest level around 5+% but not much higher than the Reagan years. The ratio was at its lowest, even negative under Dems -- Carter and Clinton. http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/Issuebrief203 The current account is the broadest measure of a nation's balanceof income payments with the rest of the world, and it is the difference between a nation's receipts (exports and returns on domestic holdings of foreign investment) and its payments (imports and returns on foreign holdings of domestic investment). And foreign debt per capita. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt On a comparative per capita basis, the US has pretty low ration of foreign debt to GDP. Lower than UK, Spain, France, Germany, Suisse, Norway etc. And Federal debt (foreign and domestic) as % of GDP. It has shrunk under Bush relative to Clinton. And is lower now than 1930-1965 -- the golden years of the dollar. And ratio was lowest in Carter years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:USDebt.png --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Be a patriot and throw a monkey wrench in the works wherever you can. Maybe we need a national strike? Get over it, dude. This country will continue to thrive inspite of your dire predictions. It's been thriving? Bet that's news to a lot of people. Earth to John, the pundits aren't going to save the US. Neither are bun bouncers at the dome. Do you understand karma? The US started an illegal war in Iraq. We have to pay for that. There *will* be blow back. We have been living high on the hog, consuming 25% of the worlds resources though we're only 7% of the population. The bill has become due. Do you understand what we're really doing is bailing out the foreign bankers in Riyadh, China, etc? Did you even bother to look at the bill? (I won't hold you to reading the whole damn thing). This video will help you understand the situation we're especially with the dollar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n3g5lUgkWk And this one about the fear mongering that went on to get it passed: http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/vidLink.php?b=1223003217e=1223004417n=1 Have a nice day! :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Depression or socialism?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 2, 2008, at 10:21 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: The fear of a depression is what is being dangled in front of us as the consequence of not approving the bailout bill. Well, I'm wondering what is better: a depression or the inherent socialism of the bailout. Perhaps it is better to bite the bullet and take the depression. There's no free lunches and I have to assume there will be consequences to, once again, allowing the sticky little fingers of regulators and government intervention to solve this problem...especially since the very people who caused it and were supposed to be overseeing everything are now the ones telling us that we have to do this. Regulation and socialism got us into this mess...why in the world would we think that it would somehow get us out of it? De-regulation is what got us into the mess--starting with Reagan. Actually, it started with at least Carter -- and in some ways Nixon -- taking us off Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates -- do you still want a monetary system pegged to gold?. Are you against all de-regulation? Telephone company -- did you like just having Ma Bell as the single provider and paying $3/min for long distance? Airlines -- no cheap flights, no Southwest, trucking, railroads, SEC that did away with fixed commissions and ushered in E-trade, etc and all the discount brokers. Regulation can be to tool of vested interests. Or it can out live its usefulness. Good then, not so good now. One box does not fit all. What about market solutions within a regulatory framework? Against them? Pollution actions have decreased Sox and Nox levels to miniscule %s of their starting points. What deregulation in the Reagan era bothers you the most? Some regulation is very needed and productive. Certainly not all -- in all times.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Depression or socialism?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On Oct 2, 2008, at 10:21 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: The fear of a depression is what is being dangled in front of us as the consequence of not approving the bailout bill. Well, I'm wondering what is better: a depression or the inherent socialism of the bailout. Perhaps it is better to bite the bullet and take the depression. There's no free lunches and I have to assume there will be consequences to, once again, allowing the sticky little fingers of regulators and government intervention to solve this problem...especially since the very people who caused it and were supposed to be overseeing everything are now the ones telling us that we have to do this. Regulation and socialism got us into this mess...why in the world would we think that it would somehow get us out of it? De-regulation is what got us into the mess--starting with Reagan. Actually, it started with at least Carter I don't know if you saw my post on Carter last week, but I am rethinking my dislike for him. Turns out Carter very well may have done more for free market capitalism than Reagan ever did. See message#191318. Yes I saw it. It was a good post. Alfred Kahn wrote THE text on regulatory economics. And Carter hired him to deregulate airlines, etc. He was a SERIOUS deregulator -- not like others who bring in hacks. I think far more deregulation occurred under Carter than Reagan -- but would need to draw up a list and magnitude --- that would be an interesting study. http://books.google.com/books?id=x01ew7Emw0MCdq=regulation+kahnpg=PP1ots=Mzdl9a6FAOsig=TQFRDGmnZipmvfFRyWKy1GYrwE4hl=ensa=Xoi=book_resultresnum=14ct=result -- and in some ways Nixon -- taking us off Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates -- do you still want a monetary system pegged to gold?. Did you you like having non-jewelry gold ownership banned? Gold pegged permanently at $35 / oz? Are you against all de-regulation? Telephone company -- did you like just having Ma Bell as the single provider and paying $3/min for long distance? Airlines -- no cheap flights, no Southwest, trucking, railroads, SEC that did away with fixed commissions and ushered in E-trade, etc and all the discount brokers. Regulation can be to tool of vested interests. Or it can out live its usefulness. Good then, not so good now. One box does not fit all. What about market solutions within a regulatory framework? Against them? Pollution actions have decreased Sox and Nox levels to miniscule %s of their starting points. What deregulation in the Reagan era bothers you the most? Clinton era may have also done more deregulation than Reagan -- repeal of Glass-Steagall, Nafta, communications, FCC, etc. Again, what deregulation in the Reagan era bothers you the most? (Cutting the 70-90% marginal tax rate was not deregulation. Though certainly a highly productive move in terms of the economy.) Some regulation is very needed and productive. Certainly not all -- in all times.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Depression or socialism?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: I don't know if you saw my post on Carter last week, but I am rethinking my dislike for him. Turns out Carter very well may have done more for free market capitalism than Reagan ever did. See message#191318. When Carter was elected, Maharishi commented in this way; The americans elected a peanutfarmer for president ? As if He did not think it would be possible for any nation to sink that low. But the americans did, and even allowed themselves to be tricked into having Bush not only once, but as we know twice ! How, with a collective consciousness as dire as the american could Obama even dream of being elected ? He will not, unless the next few weeks will drive USA into a historical financial collapse. That could stir ordinary americans to understand that extraordinary situations will need extraordinary minds. Now that communism is gone the next to go is capitalism. - Maharishi, 1989 From the view of history, his predictive powers from 1989 on -- perhaps much sooner -- were not particularly strong.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'It's All About Interest, stupid!'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the old days, the old Jewish Law... Was that you were not to charge interest on money lent. So, perhaps the grand days of interest on interest is gone, forever... People have wised up, on this Interest thing. Interest on interest started with during the 'Reagan Years', and MBA mentality Learning skilled ways of charging interest on interest... Interest...but whose interest, my house, your house, their houses. Why can't we lend money for no interest...how would that work. Yeah! Lets make money free. Stands to follow -- Seequweeter style, that the, why stop there. Lets make all things free. Like Nature Man. Mother Nature doesn't charge me nothing for sleeping in the park Man. So Screw The Man! S Grooovy, This is what we have done with the Banks, we loan them money at no interest. This is what we do with the Saudi's, we give them money with no interest. This is what we do with the military, we give them money with no interest. ~It's All About Interest, Stupid! R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'It's All About Interest, stupid!'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: In the old days, the old Jewish Law... Was that you were not to charge interest on money lent. So, perhaps the grand days of interest on interest is gone, forever... People have wised up, on this Interest thing. Interest on interest started with during the 'Reagan Years', and MBA mentality Learning skilled ways of charging interest on interest... Interest...but whose interest, my house, your house, their houses. Why can't we lend money for no interest...how would that work. Yeah! Lets make money free. Stands to follow -- Seequweeter style, that the, why stop there. Lets make all things free. Like Nature Man. Mother Nature doesn't charge me nothing for sleeping in the park Man. So Screw The Man! S Grooovy, And drugs, Man. They should be free. Like not just legal, but free. Pursuit of happiness man. Its right there in the constitution. Big huge garbage cans full of primo bud, man, like on every street cornor. And we should just get rid of money man. Money sucks. Like everyone should just do what they are doing, and take what they need, and leave the rest behind. Like if me and my ol' lady,man, like get tired of sleeping in the park,man, like we can just move into some big ol mansion, like for free, dude -- because -- you know -- there will be no money and its all like free, man. Anything you want is free. And like if Putin marches across the border into Alaska, like dude, we will just put out those huge cans of primo shiva dank bud on the road man. Those russian soldiers will get so stoned, man -- they will only be able to make love not war. Duude! And like no ownership, man. Everything thats mine is yours man. And everything that is yours is like mine. (including that bodacious ol lady of yours). Like it works out kewl man, I own nothing all ready. I am on the vanguard of the revolution man. And I will help you unload your stuff man. You got some groovy things man. So screw The Man, man. And Screw money. Power to the people. We will take whats ours.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Have a stompin' good time at Navaratri!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Didn't someone say something about Indians being like Americans on drugs? * At the TM-TTC at Humboldt State College during Aug 1970, I heard MMY say that the average Indian is like an American on drugs, by way of explaining why India was/is so full of dirty cities, poverty, violence. More recently, 58 minutes into the press conference of 8Dec2004 at mou.org, Maharishi, saying that he gets excited talking about India, puts the blame where it belongs: India is the greatest enemy of the world because its leaders, educated in Britain and slaves of foreign influence, are ignoring India's Vedic tradition. Maharishi goes on at one hour and 21 minutes to say that If India was India the world would have been heaven. -- for years I am working in India, but the people there are stupid -- but [paraphrasing] it's all right, because India has seen many dangerous times and this is just another one of them. (Note: The 8Dec2004 press conference replay has been removed from the mou.org archives, but the press conference of 2Mar2005 contains many strong denunciations of the Indian govt. by Maharishi). If India and Indians are so great, smart and awesome, how did they get subjugated by the mogals for centuries and then the British for centuries. MMY bragging about the superiority of India and Indians reminds me of of boasting of Scots and Scotland.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Congratulations, Corporate Crime Fighters! Coup Averted for Three Days! ...from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Friends, Everyone said the bill would pass. The masters of the universe were already making celebratory dinner reservations at Manhattan's finest restaurants. Personal shoppers in Dallas and Atlanta were dispatched to do the early Christmas gifting. Mad Men of Chicago and Miami were popping corks and toasting each other long before the morning latte run. But what they didn't know was that hundreds of thousands of Americans woke up yesterday morning and decided it was time for revolt. The politicians never saw it coming. Millions of phone calls and emails hit Congress so hard it was as if Marshall Dillon, Elliot Ness and Dog the Bounty Hunter had descended on D.C. to stop the looting and arrest the thieves. The Corporate Crime of the Century was halted by a vote of 228 to 205. I know! All those corporate lackies who voted for it got their due: Waxman, Waters, Berman, Frank -- all those right wing nuts in the hip pocket of Wall St. It was rare and historic; no one could remember a time when a bill supported by the president and the leadership of both parties went down in defeat. That just never happens. A lot of people are wondering why the right wing of the Republican Party joined with the left wing of the Democratic Party in voting down the thievery. Forty percent of Democrats and two-thirds of Republicans voted against the bill. Here's what happened: The presidential race may still be close in the polls, but the Congressional races are pointing toward a landslide for the Democrats. Few dispute the prediction that the Republicans are in for a whoopin' on November 4th. Up to 30 Republican House seats could be lost in what would be a stunning repudiation of their agenda. The Republican reps are so scared of losing their seats, when this financial crisis reared its head two weeks ago, they realized they had just been handed their one and only chance to separate themselves from Bush before the election, while doing something that would make them look like they were on the side of the people. Watching C-Span yesterday morning was one of the best comedy shows I'd seen in ages. There they were, one Republican after another who had backed the war and sunk the country into record debt, who had voted to kill every regulation that would have kept Wall Street in check -- there they were, now crying foul and standing up for the little guy! One after another, they stood at the microphone on the House floor and threw Bush under the bus, under the train (even though they had voted to kill off our nation's trains, too), heck, they would've thrown him under the rising waters of the Lower Ninth Ward if they could've conjured up another hurricane. You know how your dog acts when sprayed by a skunk? He howls and runs around trying to shake it off, rubbing and rolling himself on every piece of your carpet, trying to get rid of the stench. That's what it looked like on the Republican side of the aisle yesterday, and it was a sight to behold. The 95 brave Dems who broke with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were the real heroes, just like those few who stood up and voted against the war in October of 2002. Watch the remarks from yesterday of Reps. Marcy Kaptur ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32ds ), Sheila Jackson Lee ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwysnA7ZmE8 ) and Dennis Kucinich ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaF_MZVWM3E ). They spoke the truth. The Dems who voted for the giveaway did so mostly because they were scared by the threats of Wall Street, that if the rich didn't get their handout, the market would go nuts and then it's bye-bye stock-based pension and retirement funds. And guess what? That's exactly what Wall Street did! The largest, single-day drop in the Dow in the history of the New York Stock exchange. The news anchors last night screamed it out: Americans just lost 1.2 trillion dollars in the stock market!! It's a financial Pearl Harbor! The sky is falling! Bird flu! Killer Bees! Of course, sane people know that nobody lost anything yesterday, that stocks go up and down and this too shall pass because the rich will now buy low, hold, then sell off, then buy low again. But for now, Wall Street and its propaganda arm (the networks and media it owns) will continue to try and scare the bejesus out of you. It will be harder to get a loan. Some people will lose their jobs. A weak nation of wimps won't last long under this torture. Or will we? Is this our line in the sand? Here's my guess: The Democratic leadership in the House secretly hoped all along that this lousy bill would go down. With Bush's proposals shredded, the Dems knew they could then write their own bill that favors the average American, not the upper 10% who were hoping for another kegger of gold. So the
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'It's All About Interest, stupid!'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Robert babajii_99@ wrote: In the old days, the old Jewish Law... Was that you were not to charge interest on money lent. So, perhaps the grand days of interest on interest is gone, forever... People have wised up, on this Interest thing. Interest on interest started with during the 'Reagan Years', and MBA mentality Learning skilled ways of charging interest on interest... Interest...but whose interest, my house, your house, their houses. Why can't we lend money for no interest...how would that work. This is what we have done with the Banks, we loan them money at no interest. This is what we do with the Saudi's, we give them money with no interest. This is what we do with the military, we give them money with no interest. ~It's All About Interest, Stupid! R.G. You also were not supposed to lend out 120 times what you own. Most of the banks would take $1 that they owned, lend it out 120 times to 120 people. If the interest charged in one year was only 5%, then the profit would be $6 on the dollar, per year, if everyone paid. So you could make $5 a year for every dollar you owned. So if you have $1 million you could make at $5 million a year on 5% interest only. And all you have to is sit on your ass and pay fairly low wages to maybe 1 or 2 people for every $1 million loaned. For you to lose, you would have to have 75% of the people default on the loan before you are not making money. Jeezus !that can't be right...must have screwed up the math !...or maybe we should start a bank ! OffWorld It doesn't really work like that Off. Though its common misunderstanding. Following is a blurb that describes it -- or expanded versions can be found in any introductory macro economics text. The expansion of a country's money supply that results from banks being able to lend. The size of the multiplier effect depends on the percentage of deposits that banks are required to hold as reserves. In other words, it is money used to create more money and is calculated by dividing total bank deposits by the reserve requirement. Investopedia Says...The multiplier effect depends on the set reserve requirement. So, to calculate the impact of the multiplier effect on the money supply, we start with the amount banks initially take in through deposits and divide this by the reserve ratio. If, for example, the reserve requirement is 20%, for every $100 a customer deposits into a bank, $20 must be kept in reserve. However, the remaining $80 can be loaned out to other bank customers. This $80 is then deposited by these customers into another bank, which in turn must also keep 20%, or $16, in reserve but can lend out the remaining $64. This cycle continues - as more people deposit money and more banks continue lending it - until finally the $100 initially deposited creates a total of $500 ($100 / 0.2) in deposits. This creation of deposits is the multiplier effect. The higher the reserve requirement, the tighter the money supply, which results in a lower multiplier effect for every dollar deposited. The lower the reserve requirement, the larger the money supply, which means more money is being created for every dollar deposited.
[FairfieldLife] Re: What's the official word on the financial crisis?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Any word from Messrs. Morris or Hagelin regarding the current state of world finance? Given the high dome numbers, I would think the University would be positioning the trouble as what in natural healthcare is called a healing crisis - an intensification of the ills that are on their way out. In a recent Global Family Chat (I don't recall the date, several months ago), Bevan said that he had no idea what Nature was doing (this was after the floods in Iowa), so I presume this attitude continues as far as the bank panic goes. There certainly hasn't been anything that could be regarded as good news since Bevan scratched his head. Two weeks ago Hagelin rhapsodized about the LHC debut, but that's also in the toilet (melted magnets). Perhaps we are close to the Second Coming, the Rapture, the sustained appearance of Maitreya, the Islamic Mahdi (Muslims believe the Mahdi will rid the world of error, injustice and tyranny alongside Jesus.), the Jewish Messiah, sustained flying, Peace on Earth .. .
[FairfieldLife] Re: Financial woes: market amok, or gummint interference?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: New Morning, I have to ask, given the extensiveness of your views on this topic - is this your work? A hobby? Education, parts of my career, reading -- books and lots of mags/journals, CNBC, investments and trading, lots of web meandering and queries, friends. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: Yes thats a pretty good synopsis -- and adds some good examples. A problem, IMO, is that people think in dichotmous black or white terms. This or that. All good or all bad. The crises is not a total regulatory failure -- but neglect in carrying out laws on the books (Greenspan) -- and failure to require disclosure and transparency for derivatives and hedge funds was a colossal legislative failure. The traditional securities markets are already heavily regulated. There is not a need for massive new regulations there. The rhetoric of the right and left is at times prone to this black or white thinking: all regulation is bad on the right, all regulation is good on the left. Or markets are all good, markets are all bad. Markets are quite powerful and efficient in setting prices and allocating resources in productive ways. But they are not sufficient by themselves in many cases. They do not always produce, by themselves, everything that is needed for smooth functioning. Such as information and transparency. They don't handle externalities such as pollution well. They aren't as efficient in cases of natural monopolies such as electric and gas companies -- primarily their distribution systems (its inefficient to have competing distribution systems, so they are granted monopoly status and then heavily regulated.) However, given the strong merits of regulation is some areas -- over-regulation is counter productive. We live in mixed-states -- not laissez-faire economies. We have for over 100 years. The key is correctly fitting sound regulation to specific deficiencies in the market. And reassessing and readopting over time. Not 100% regulations (aka fascism and authoritarian states) nor canning all regulation. IMO, the genesis of this crises was the Fed. Though structured to be somewwhat buffered from political decisions, and full of bright and shiny doctorates (a good thing in most regards) -- they have made large errors with devastating effects. The solution is not further politicalization of the Fed, a freer reign, or abolishment of the Fed. How to counter their excesses and errors will be a major regulatory issue in the coming years. And size does matter. Too big to fail is to big to exist. Part of the legitimate emerging legislative mandate will be to limit firms size to small enough to fail. There are economies of scale -- and competitive advantages to size -- particularly in global markets with state-sponsored players. But those efficiencies are overshadowed by the costs, direct and indirect, of providing absolute gov't backing to private firms that make engage in foolish pattern of errors and corporate culture. Limits on size yield more layers -- more diversity. Diversity is generally a good thing. One of the sad outcomes of this crisis is that the financial markets are far more concentrated than before. Five investment banks gone. B of A -- its scary to think how big they are -- given how incompetent they have become at the customer level. The assets of Countrywide, AIG Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns, Lehmans -- and soon Wachovia-- all absorbed by bigger players. More consolidation to come as more firms fail. (This solution will not stop all insolvency). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: The New York Times seems to make a straightforward case in a recent editorial aimed squarely at the right's talking points. http://tinyurl.com/49ndpv Don't Blame the New Deal Published: September 27, 2008 This year's serial bailouts are proof of a colossal regulatory failure. But it is not the system that failed, as President Bush, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and others who are complicit in the calamity would like Americans to believe. People failed. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/opinion/28sun1.html?hp --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Has anyone read a good discussion of the debate that's shaping up between the right and left regarding the causes of our current credit crisis? The left is saying the problem is a failure of the free market. Not a particularly insightful or focused argument, IMO. The repeal
[FairfieldLife] Nice Elitist Characture, Judy Re: Non seequweeter defined for nm
Nice gag Judy. Playing along, Taking my response as serious and therefore needing a serious school-marm pendantical response from you. Its a great characture of an elitist -- one who has a stick so far up their butt that they have no clue when others are goofin -- ignoring their quite divergent spelling, style, logic and all. Brilliant. You nailed the elitist thing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: (snip) Using shame (shame of being female, shame of being racist) rather than offering benefit is a tactic that may intimidate some, and perhaps win some over who would rather be part of the pack that attacks than one who is attacked, but mostly it engenders resentment. Uh, Robert, that would be a big fat non sequitur. I sur don't know what a non seequweeter is -- sounds like some hi falutin words that some fancy elitist might use --- but there is something mighty strange in the logic BillyBob uses here. Out here in the real america, where there are real women -- they don't get shamed by no philandering husband. Everyone knows hes the shithead. Making it all about the wife -- well thats shear hoccum pig shit. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Uh, Robert, that would be a big fat non sequitur. Sorry you can't come up with a better response. I sur don't know what a non seequweeter is -- sounds like some hi falutin words that some fancy elitist might use... (Robert, non sequitur is a common Latin phrase meaning It does not follow.) A non seequweeter is where one person in a discussion (the more flexible one, able to make associations that are not necessarily linear and confined to a prewritten or pre- programmed internal script) makes a logical leap to a subject that seems to them directly related to the discussion. However, Robert's comment wasn't directly related to the discussion, as Barry would know if he had actually read my post. As Robert indicated in his follow-up, he didn't understand what the blogger I quoted was talking about, hence his non sequitur. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Uh, Robert, that would be a big fat non sequitur. Sorry you can't come up with a better response. I sur don't know what a non seequweeter is -- sounds like some hi falutin words that some fancy elitist might use... (Robert, non sequitur is a common Latin phrase meaning It does not follow.) A non seequweeter is where one person in a discussion (the more flexible one, able to make associations that are not necessarily linear and confined to a prewritten or pre- programmed internal script) makes a logical leap to a subject that seems to them directly related to the discussion. However, Robert's comment wasn't directly related to the discussion, as Barry would know if he had actually read my post. As Robert indicated in his follow-up, he didn't understand what the blogger I quoted was talking about, hence his non sequitur.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is raunchydog really Sarah Palin?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Love will swallow you, eat you up completely until there is no `you,' only love. Tina Fey said this? She was speaking to her friend's angry portion. And why in God's name is it always about sex with you??!! Don't you know that the Hurricane in Texas was a sign of God's wrath at the sexual perversion and hysteria poisoning the collective consciousness of Texas? And I am not gay. Not interested. Bugger off. --- On Sun, 9/28/08, gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Is raunchydog really Sarah Palin? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, September 28, 2008, 8:58 AM Here is the exact text of one of Sarah Palin's quotes from her interview with Katie Couric. Note that Tina Fey didn't have to change a word of it when she included it in her recent SNL skit: My God, I watched SNL and had no idea what Tina Fey was saying was not an absurd parody. Love will swallow you, eat you up completely until there is no `you,' only love. - Amma --- On Sun, 9/28/08, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Is raunchydog really Sarah Palin? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, September 28, 2008, 5:13 AM Here is the exact text of one of Sarah Palin's quotes from her interview with Katie Couric. Note that Tina Fey didn't have to change a word of it when she included it in her recent SNL skit: Like every American I'm speaking with, we're ill about this. We're saying, 'Hey, why bail out Fanny and Freddie and not me?' But ultimately what the bailout does is, help those that are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy to help...uh... it's gotta be all about job creation, too. Also, too, shoring up our economy and putting Fannie and Freddy back on the right track and so healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reigning in spending...'cause Barack Obama, y'know...has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans, also, having a dollar value meal at restaurants. That's gonna help. But one in five jobs being created today under the umbrella of job creation. That, you know...Also... [ sic...not a word changed ] And here is the exact text of the last sentence of one of raunchydog's recent posts. Notice a similarity in the style and content? Notice a similarity in the speakers' command of the English language? Notice a similarity in the ability to hold a train of thought? Notice the similar amounts of coherence? Since his past will follow him to the White, associations is asking questions aboutstill baffles me that his supports are not the least bit [ sic...not a word changed ] A case of great minds think alike, or something more nefarious? You decide. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'How to Solve the Financial/Housing Crisis'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: snip If all of these mortgage companies, who made bad loans, why can't they just lose money like the rest of us would. Here is a nice concise synopsis by Paul Krugman. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/opinion/22krugman.html Because the mortgage lenders sold the loans to investment folks, who packaged thousands of the loans and then sold the packages to investors, who sliced them up and sold them to still other investors. Any given single mortgage loan may have been chopped into many pieces, each one of which is now owned by a different investor after having been sold and resold many times over. And the investors own packages of these pieces. The problem now is that a lot of the loans have gone bad--the borrowers have been unable to make payments--but there's no clear trail from what was borrowed to who owns it now, because the loan has been resold and chopped in pieces over and over. So nobody knows what these investments are worth, which means investment companies don't know the value of their assets, which shuts down their ability to make trades or to make loans to or borrow from others. The investment market's ability to do business is based on confidence in the value of assets. When that's lost, the market seizes up. Investment banks hold onto their cash, so there's no liquidity. Interest rates go way up because nobody knows what the risks are. Commercial short-term loans that regular businesses depend on to operate become very hard to obtain, and they have to lay off workers. Banks become insolvent. Credit-card rates soar and people can't make those payments either. Bottom line, it's a massive domino effect, and it's global. What the bailout is primarily designed to do is to establish a value for all these toxic loan products by purchasing them, a process called price determination. Once the investment companies have gotten rid of the toxic loan products, they have a much clearer idea what their assets are, and confidence is presumably restored in the markets. Actually it's far, far more complicated than I've described, but that's the basic idea. The mortgage lenders were off the hook once they sold their loans to investors, so it isn't a matter of letting them go out of business. If anybody's interested, the Chicago NPR station did an excellent radio program on all this back in May. There's a transcript here: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/extras/radio/355_transcript.pdf And here's what's called a tick-tock from the Wall Street Journal that describes what happened a week ago Wednesday when it first became evident that a real financial catastrophe was about to take place: http://tinyurl.com/5yfhlm
[FairfieldLife] Re: Casino Nation -- NYT: McCain's Gambling Problem
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://tinyurl.com/arqxh (direct link to the NYT site only works sometimes) Since McCain's ties to gambling are in the News, and since I'm on a Jackson Browne kick today, here is his song Casino Nation, as background to an excellent video editorial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nggyni6bee4 In case you don't like the song enough to stick around and read the statistics at the end, here they are: And in 2008 taxpayers will/have take(en) on a $trillion to bailout (whats left of) investment banks, commercial banks and homeowners who over paid in hopes of flippin the house next year to a bigger sucker. If we add that to the cost of our Patriots heroic struggle in Iraq against those terror lovin terrorist s who hate us because of our freedom -- that would pay for 150 times as many nuklur bombs -- and make America strong again. 200 times as many jet fighters -- so show-off fly boys can crash 5-10 each. 250 times as big an anti-ballistic missle defense -- and we can use it also to protect the borders from ileegals, Or we could buy health care for 360 million buy 6 million fire trucks (painted bright red and I get to honk the horn on all of them) 400 million house vouchers -- we could even build houses in Mexico and Erroraq and the refuggee camps in Dafur and around the world Or about 400 million kids in head start -- around the world -- that is educate the red states out of illiteracy -- and all them iraqkey and arab islamic terrorist maddrasses used to brainwash terrorists kids. Nah, if we did that people would lose respect for us around the world -- and not fear our Big Guns. We are the Big Swinging Dicks of the world and we are going to keep it that way. (See Liar's Poker for a great look at the Big Swinging Dicks at the Investment Banking firms that started the whole mortgage backed securities business in the 80's (one guy actually) and a good / funny look at the culture that got us to this stage.) http://www.amazon.com/Liars-Poker-Rising-Through-Wreckage/dp/0140143459?tag=particculturf-20 In a single year, taxpayers in the U.S. will pay... * $15.7 billion for nuclear weapons * $10.4 billion for jet fighters * $8 billion for ballistic missile defense The same amount of money could have purchased: * health care for 6,080,838 people * 151,112 fire trucks * 5,101,327 housing vouchers * Head Start placement for 4,745,615 children The Pentagon's annual budget is 250% larger than the annual budget for: * HUD * The Department of Education * The Environmental Protection Agency * and all government-sponsored job training and food assistance ...combined The United States accounts for over 40% of the worlds total for military spending. 17% of all children in the U.S. live in poverty. Change the world. Vote.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Neuroscientists Identify Brain Regions Responsible for Warding off Negative Emotion
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: cc: John Cindy McCain, Darth Cheney Neuroscientists Identify Brain Regions Responsible for Warding off Negative Emotion . . . Thirty healthy subjects were recruited into the study, conducted inside an MRI lab at Columbia's Neurological Institute of New York. Participants' brains were monitored while they wore video goggles showing a series of 48 aversive photographs, such as a mutilated human hand and a malnourished child. Participants viewed each image for eight seconds. Moments before viewing half of the photographs, participants were instructed by a researcher to use cognitive reinterpretation techniques that protect the body from adverse visceral reaction. Each subject practiced these techniques during a training session beforehand. If a subject viewed an image of a sick man in a hospital bed, for example, he could prevent a negative reaction by telling himself the bedridden man wasn't sick, but resting. While I find this article fascinating, and thank Vaj for posting it, as a writer and as a practitioner of mindfulness techniques, I cannot help but take exception to the for example above, and point out why it's a bad example. Used as an example of the McCains and Cheney's always-wear-your-rose-and-money-colored-glasses approach to perception, it's a good example. And it may even be a good example of the techniques the researchers used in the study. But allow me to change one word in the example above and feel the difference: If a subject viewed an image of a sick man in a hospital bed, for example, he could prevent a negative reaction by telling himself the bedridden man wasn't sick, but recovering. One word -- resting becomes recovering. Both could be equally true of the sick man, but one allows aversion to the sick man and somewhat of a denial of why he's in a hospital, and the other implies that they have a positive and mutually- beneficial relationship. The hospital is enabling the sick man to become well. Because many TMers really don't have a CLUE what mindfulness entails, I just wanted to make this distinction to point out that it is NOT about making up an internal story that *averts* the negative image, and in the process averts reality. It's more about finding a way to perceive the negative image clearly, but with compassion, and without judgment. As Charlie Chaplin said, Life is a tragedy in close-up, but a comedy in long shot. Or as my man Bruce Cockburn said: Little round planet In a big universe Sometimes it looks blessed Sometimes it looks cursed Depends on what you look at obviously But even more it depends on the way that you see Mindfulness isn't moodmaking away the bad stuff or pretending that it doesn't exist. It's about focusing on something larger than the surface view of the bad stuff, something less tiny and superficial, and looking at it in long shot, so that you can see that only the tininess and the superficiality made the image appear to be negative. I am not trying to be a pissant here (I know - one can't try to change one's innermost nature). My comments are actually a serious inquiry into how to finding a way to perceive a negative thing clearly, but with compassion, and without judgment -- without sound dopey, panglossian or pollyanish. (Believe it or not, years ago in the dawn of FFL, Peter told me to quit being so polite and to get real. Its my nature -- in life -- to be polite and considerate. In posting, that can come across as hollow, vapid or numb to hollow, vapid or numb comments being made. I have over time, explored the other part of my nature -- the sarchastic, snide, snarky side. To me, at times, that is more real than the considerate side. There is a balance -- and sometimes one/I can get the best of both worlds. To the point, cut through the BS, yet in non-combative ways. Best, for me, when a point can be satirized -- yet the target and others can laugh along with it, see the point, but can remain far enough and detached from the characture to give some breathing space -- and not feel threatened. (The ego being such a delicate sensitive prissy little snot). An observation: of any poster, you at times appear to lash out at, point out, even exaggerate, the negative qualities of others -- individuals and societies -- without reframing it into a broader compassionate view that recognizes what is -- but also the larger context of things. Judy and America/Americans are two examples. I fall into the same trap. At times, a sharp comment seems apropos to cutting through a (perceived) pile of BS. But it instills anger or spit in others -- and invokes a negative -- if not nasty response. And an ENDLESS cycle of retribution. An example this morning. I responded to what I
[FairfieldLife] Re: Casino Nation -- Now Palin Wedding
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard Williams willytex@ wrote: Hey Willy have you seen this? Inside John McCain's campaign the expectation is growing that there will be a popularity boosting pre-election wedding in Alaska between Bristol Palin, 17, and Levi Johnston, 18, her schoolmate and father of her baby. It would be fantastic, said a McCain insider. You would have every TV camera there. The entire country would be watching. It would shut down the race for a week. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4837644.ece Well it's about time that pot-smoking redneck kid made an honorable woman out of that beer-loving slutty palin girl. Yes sir, nothing says family values like a good old fashioned shotgun wedding. And seeing as Wasilla is the meth capital of Alaska that reception should make for good reality show TV viewing. PS - why is it that the mccain campaign wants to keep shutting down the campaign and have the nation focus on dramas rather than issues John's a drama queen? John's a closet queen who loves a good (soap-opera) drama? A legacy fly-boy who his whole career has opportunistically manipulated his way towards the top? The Republicans are Runnin on Empty? The Republican base and target independents are near brain dead?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Neuroscientists Identify Brain Regions Responsible for Warding off Negative Emotion
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: Am I missing a higher logic and subtext where you are actually reframing things into a broader compassionate view that recognizes what is -- but also the larger context of things? Yes. Can you elaborate on how your (sometimes) apparently cutting, vindictive, shallow, distorted, mean-spirited jabs at Judy (and I am not saying she doesn't provide ample material deserving some 'clarifying response) are actually a refreshing and cognizant reframing things into a broader compassionate view that recognizes what is -- but also the larger context of things?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Financial woes: market amok, or gummint interference?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Has anyone read a good discussion of the debate that's shaping up between the right and left regarding the causes of our current credit crisis? The left is saying the problem is a failure of the free market. Not a particularly insightful or focused argument, IMO. The repeal of the Glass-Stegal act in 1999 allowing commercial and investment banks to merge was not a particularly good move -- but the reasoning reasonable -- that US C and I banks could not compete with the global banks that allowed such consolidation. Some on the left claim that the financial markets are not-regulated -- that is a laissez-faire love fest. A pipe-dream rant -- blows against the empire mentality. Hardly true. The security exchanges are among the most highly regulated in the world. (and is one reason the US securities market is trusted more than others). And SOx -- Sarbanes Oxley requires a huge amount of disclosure from public companies -- beyond what is optimal many can and do argue with some merit. What IS a travesty is that the entire derivatives market (of which mortgage backed securities -- MBS are one of many), and hedge funds (until recently) have had little if any reporting and disclosure requirements. That lack of transparency has had serious negative repercussions. However, to use this lack of needed regulation in one segment of the markets, should not be a clarion call to massive new regulations in parts of the financial system that is working OK. And should not be used as an excuse or justification for totally counter productive, head in the sand, assinine and loony measures such as the ban on short selling. The right is saying the government caused the problem by encouraging loans to people with low credit scores. Well, the Fed under Greenspan did make money almost free to borrow -- and pumped massive amounts into the system -- to prevent or mitigate a recession after 9/11. While monetary policy and theory has complex elements, the basic truism holds that pumping more money into the system, over a sustained period, more than corresponding productivity (goods and services) will lead to inflation. For various reasons, the asset of choice in this hyper-surplus free money era was real-estate. Thus, amongst other factors, real estate prices shot up -- beyond any credible like to (real-estate) market fundamentals -- particularly income and rents in relation to mortgage costs. Claims that CRA or illegal loan practices are bogus IMO. If loan practices were illegal -- the criminals should be thrown in jail. What seems to have occurred is that there were a lot of fast talking, even misleading loan sales agents (what else is new) -- AND some naive, new or inexperienced buyers who did NOT read or understand their contracts -- and bought the hucksterism of the sales agents without any due diligence. Not a good thing -- and the reputation of firms promoting such -- such as Countrywide and WaMu should pay the price in diminished reputation and business scale. And they have been dissolved - taken over. Good riddence to them. But when someone takes out a loan it is THEIR responsibility to understand what is in the contract they are signing. I'm curious to read a reasonable discussion of both arguments. It's really difficult to make a good argument for the right's position if you actually look at the relevant facts. Here's a concise, nontechnical rebuttal from Andrew Leonard, who writes Salon's How the World Works column, in response to the claim by McCain that you cite above: http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/09/18/mccain_and_fannie_and_freddi e/ http://tinyurl.com/3nap66 http://dir.salon.com/topics/andrew_leonard/2.html If you find anything you think legitimately counters Leonard's argument, I'd love to see it! Thursday, Sept. 18, 2008 12:53 PDT McCain: How not to explain a meltdown Except: Fannie and Freddie did not cause the subprime mortgage crisis. The private sector, acting on its own initiative, serenely confident in its own financial manipulations, spawned the greatest Wall Street conniption since the Great Depression. Fannie and Freddie got into the game late, after watching in dismay as their market share in the lucrative business of originating and selling off pools of mortgage-backed securities began to shrink. Correct. There are many bit players in this drama who bear blame, from home-buyers to government regulators, but the two biggest culprits live on Wall Street. First: The innovative financial products that allowed bankers to pool together risky loans into packages that could earn high enough credit ratings so as to be sold to investors who would normally deem risky loans made to people with bad credit, well, risky. == B INCORRECTO! The i) securitization of mortgages and their
[FairfieldLife] Re: Neuroscientists Identify Brain Regions Responsible for Warding off Negative Emotion
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Sep 28, 2008, at 11:47 AM, new.morning wrote: Am I missing a higher logic and subtext where you are actually reframing things into a broader compassionate view that recognizes what is -- but also the larger context of things? Yes. Can you elaborate on how your (sometimes) apparently cutting, vindictive, shallow, distorted, mean-spirited jabs at Judy (and I am not saying she doesn't provide ample material deserving some 'clarifying response) are actually a refreshing and cognizant reframing things into a broader compassionate view that recognizes what is -- but also the larger context of things? No. :) Sal gets it. Judy had the same response. It would follow that she has a similar view as Sal. Surely they both are supportive of your style I could write volumes True. And you do. Conciseness is a virtue. Better in my opinion to just write and allow the writing to stand on its own. Which unfortunately seems to be about 3 seconds. You don't appear to walk your talk. A big theme of yours in the past -- but I understand your right to denounce that virtue in the moment and be as freely inconsistent and contradictory as your mind and virtue will allow. Which is probably a good exercise and even a productive style -- in some buddhist, non-attachment, sort of way. Taking inconsistency, apparent hypocracy, and self-contradiction to its limit is sure to break some large boundaries somewhere. Discussion is a valid and useful thing. A long tradition at FFL. If you don't care to discuss any of the points I made, elaborate on yours, contribute to mutual understanding, thats your style and perogotive. Personally, I find unilateral, inconsistent, monolouges -- well, not so much. I don't really have an FFL posting philosophy. I just write what I feel like writing. I Know! Why think when you can just FEEL what is good and true. I just write it. I don't defend it. Get used to it. And no need to get used to it. I have seen such people throughout my life. Walk opposite from talk. And no dialogue necessary. In fact, we have a president just like that. And a Veep candidate who appears to be your soulmate. Good luck with the eternal monologue. And rest assured -- we will welcome you back to the human race any time you choose to change course and carry on regular ol' discussions -- back and forth -- give and take -- trying to gain greater insight, understanding, and even compassion for /with others and their perspectives. (And really no response is necessary -- I hate to drag you off your pedastal.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Neuroscientists Identify Brain Regions Responsible for Warding off Negative Emotion
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 28, 2008, at 1:15 PM, new.morning wrote: I could write volumes True. And you do. Conciseness is a virtue. Better in my opinion to just write and allow the writing to stand on its own. Which unfortunately seems to be about 3 seconds. You don't appear to walk your talk. A big theme of yours in the past -- but I understand your right to denounce that virtue in the moment and be as freely inconsistent and contradictory as your mind and virtue will allow. Which is probably a good exercise and even a productive style -- in some buddhist, non-attachment, sort of way. Taking inconsistency, apparent hypocracy, and self-contradiction to its limit is sure to break some large boundaries somewhere. I can't say exactly why Barry or anyone else comes on FFL, but for me it's a way of relaxing, getting in a few jokes, making a few sage (as opposed to, say, parsley or rosemary) observations. I imagine the same *might* be true for Barry and many others here. So, in that spirit, new, if you don't like or agree with someone or their posting style to the degree that you appear not to, why not just skip those posts? Sal Why would agreeing with someone, or not, be a reason no to engage in dialogue? Or even their style. I often ignore Turq's and others that I find unproductive. However, I liked the points he made in the post I commented on. In my original post I went out of my way to try to promote a dialogue. I got self-absorbsion in response. Which I found funny -- like you -- I enjoy FFL for a few jokes. Turq was such a flaming set of contradictions, it was hard to pass up -- in my second post. Prolly should have -- but glaring set-ups like his are somehow, perversely I suppose -- enticing. If some don't care for my humor -- by all means do the rational thing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Debate
This whole mind set of winning and losing arguments is quite telling and funny. Is it really third-grade deja-vu all over again? There are all sorts of mind games, feelings of insult, choosing sides, us vs them mentalities -- if one is contained within, localized, to a win/lose mentality. In life and in the discussion of ideas. Regardless of the angle: I won, You can't admit you lost, I never claim I won. My dad is stronger than your dad! Fragile ego-games. Mind-games. Is it about proving oneself? Or about learning, acquiring different and wider POVs? Why would win/lose ever enter into ones mind? or heart? in a discussion of ideas? I assume most people are a bit grounded and engage in discussions and walk away from the sharing and give and take -- with some more insight -- either by working through an idea, or absorbing views or information from others. Or the firing of new synapses and ah ha from simple engaging in new territory. But third grade had it charms. Look -- he pee'd in his pants. I'm better, bigger, faster, smarter than you are! (So there! I am better! I WIN! Aren't I marvelous!) I guess I sort of get it why the urge to fight third-grade battles over and over again. Then again, as the 4-year old prodigy said, This bores me. Have you EVER seen Judy Stein admit to having been bested in one of the arguments she starts? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip As Ruth pointed out yesterday, political debates merely provide a mechanism whereby those who have already made up their minds and are locked into a particular set of beliefs reinforce those beliefs. Unless one of the debators actually pisses his pants and cries on camera, declaring one of them the winner has as much meaning as Judy Stein declaring herself the winner in all the arguments she starts here on FFL. Has anybody here ever seen me declare myself the winner of an argument on FFL? Or is this one of those things that only Barry sees? Have you EVER seen Judy Stein admit to having been bested in one of the arguments she starts? Have you EVER seen *Barry* admit to having been bested in one of the arguments *he* starts? For that matter, have you ever seen *anybody* on FFL admit to having been bested in an argument? (There are probably a few instances, but they're very few and far between.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Financial woes: market amok, or gummint interference?
Yes thats a pretty good synopsis -- and adds some good examples. A problem, IMO, is that people think in dichotmous black or white terms. This or that. All good or all bad. The crises is not a total regulatory failure -- but neglect in carrying out laws on the books (Greenspan) -- and failure to require disclosure and transparency for derivatives and hedge funds was a colossal legislative failure. The traditional securities markets are already heavily regulated. There is not a need for massive new regulations there. The rhetoric of the right and left is at times prone to this black or white thinking: all regulation is bad on the right, all regulation is good on the left. Or markets are all good, markets are all bad. Markets are quite powerful and efficient in setting prices and allocating resources in productive ways. But they are not sufficient by themselves in many cases. They do not always produce, by themselves, everything that is needed for smooth functioning. Such as information and transparency. They don't handle externalities such as pollution well. They aren't as efficient in cases of natural monopolies such as electric and gas companies -- primarily their distribution systems (its inefficient to have competing distribution systems, so they are granted monopoly status and then heavily regulated.) However, given the strong merits of regulation is some areas -- over-regulation is counter productive. We live in mixed-states -- not laissez-faire economies. We have for over 100 years. The key is correctly fitting sound regulation to specific deficiencies in the market. And reassessing and readopting over time. Not 100% regulations (aka fascism and authoritarian states) nor canning all regulation. IMO, the genesis of this crises was the Fed. Though structured to be somewwhat buffered from political decisions, and full of bright and shiny doctorates (a good thing in most regards) -- they have made large errors with devastating effects. The solution is not further politicalization of the Fed, a freer reign, or abolishment of the Fed. How to counter their excesses and errors will be a major regulatory issue in the coming years. And size does matter. Too big to fail is to big to exist. Part of the legitimate emerging legislative mandate will be to limit firms size to small enough to fail. There are economies of scale -- and competitive advantages to size -- particularly in global markets with state-sponsored players. But those efficiencies are overshadowed by the costs, direct and indirect, of providing absolute gov't backing to private firms that make engage in foolish pattern of errors and corporate culture. Limits on size yield more layers -- more diversity. Diversity is generally a good thing. One of the sad outcomes of this crisis is that the financial markets are far more concentrated than before. Five investment banks gone. B of A -- its scary to think how big they are -- given how incompetent they have become at the customer level. The assets of Countrywide, AIG Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns, Lehmans -- and soon Wachovia-- all absorbed by bigger players. More consolidation to come as more firms fail. (This solution will not stop all insolvency). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The New York Times seems to make a straightforward case in a recent editorial aimed squarely at the right's talking points. http://tinyurl.com/49ndpv Don't Blame the New Deal Published: September 27, 2008 This year's serial bailouts are proof of a colossal regulatory failure. But it is not the system that failed, as President Bush, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and others who are complicit in the calamity would like Americans to believe. People failed. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/opinion/28sun1.html?hp --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: Has anyone read a good discussion of the debate that's shaping up between the right and left regarding the causes of our current credit crisis? The left is saying the problem is a failure of the free market. Not a particularly insightful or focused argument, IMO. The repeal of the Glass-Stegal act in 1999 allowing commercial and investment banks to merge was not a particularly good move -- but the reasoning reasonable -- that US C and I banks could not compete with the global banks that allowed such consolidation. Some on the left claim that the financial markets are not-regulated -- that is a laissez-faire love fest. A pipe-dream rant -- blows against the empire mentality. Hardly true.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Chavez says, US Capitalism has Failed'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chavez, who is one of Washington's fiercest critics, calling Capitalism will eat itself up from within. - Lenin Now that communism is gone the next to go is capitalism. - Maharishi Capitalism has gotten out of balance with itself. Observe the recent news reports regarding the investment banks that they are too big to let fail. Well if that is the case as many have observed they are too big to exist. Look for a big house cleaning once Obama takes office. Obama is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Capitalism isn't to blame here. Left to itself, the banks/lenders would have NEVER lent their money to sub-prime rated clients. Bullshit. They made most of their loans to non CRA clients. They were flooded with cheap, almost free money. They had people lined up around the block wanting to pay a large premium for their free money. They had poor regulation behind them that enabled liar loans -- non-disclosure loans. They had an increasing gullible, unsophisicated market. And they had securities markets and quasi-govt entities (FMFM) more than eager to buy up their loans as fast as they could make them. It was a low risk, high volume, good margin game. What did they rationally do: pumped the shit out the loan market -- signing mortgages as fast as they could. By their own volition. Not by gov't mandate. As you would have if mortgages an not insurance was what you were selling. Good example of my adjacent post. Black and white thinking. Markets all good. Regulation all bad. Christ is our one and only Savior. You are either for or against the terrorists. They were put into that position BY REGULATION...and the lawyers like Obama took banks to court when they would NOT lend money to people who should never have gotten loans. Lenders who otherwise would have discriminated AGAINST people who didn't qualify for mortgages were, by regulation, forced to lend to them. THAT created the problem, NOT capitalism. We need to reinstate anti-trust regulation and break up not only banks, but the phone companies again, cable companies, MSM, Microsoft and a lot of other things are that are too big to exist. Not much harm done and when you break up you actually create more jobs as the jobs that were discarded due to duplication of departments during the acquisitions come back again. Investors could choose which parts they want to invest in. I think we need to restore the rules about corporations what were in effect prior to the Civil War. Corporations could only last 40 years, had to primarily proved they existed to serve the community and were limited in size. In India you can only have two stores, so there are only two Wal-Marts in India. Maybe we need to do something like that. After all over the last ten years we've so changed the way companies operate. They don't have to build everything them selves. They can get what they need on demand and assemble just in time. That's the way things operate nowadays not the 18th century model some believe.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMers: Do You Space Out?
Only when Michael gives me some of his (Super Shiva Dank Wonder) Ayur-Ved weed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMers: Do You Space Out?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lack of fucking will make you spacey. Good fucking makes you very centered and present. Also an occasional chicken sandwich before or after fucking will make you grounded too. What about bad fucking? (opps I spaced out -- there is no such thing.) On a slightly more serious note, SSRS said a couple of things about sex that I found interesting. One he asked, You know people who have lots of sex? They are generally not so creative. Well sex may be grounding but does not make one sparking with ideas and insights -- in my experience. YMMV. And I have found, at times, sex can make me spacey. (Maybe its being with airheads, i don't know.) Maybe its a AV type thing. I am pitta - kapha. I am guessing you (Peter) are pitta vata. Maybe sex grounds vata and spaces out kapha types. And (a lot of ) sex can make me tired. Grounded but dull? Another thing SSRS said was Bramacharya is not a practice, its a happening. (Probably not referring to the Be-ins of the 60's). There is a certain mode, I have found, where sex does become irrelevant. Its an in the zone thing. Bright, happy, creative and energetic. But sex is elsewhere, Its not an aversion or denial or lack of desire. its just not there. Its over there, if at all, and not relevant. My experience is that is not a spacey state at all -- but quite grounded, sparky, creative, together, flowing, rapid results kind of state. I assume SSRS, SBS an others are in some zone like that and much more. And didn't need sex or chicken sandwiches for grounding. They say Einstein was a hound dog though. (Want to come up to my flat and see my equations?) On the other hand, I have found (prolly too small a sample to be significant) that a band or artists first CD is the most creative. Of first 1-3. After that, they may mature stylistically and in their craft, but that awesome originality and creative spark is missing. All that sex now available to them after they make their big break -- could be a factor. --- On Sun, 9/28/08, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] TMers: Do You Space Out? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, September 28, 2008, 7:51 PM It may well be that many great Indian saints who were said to go into spontaneous samadhi were just spacing out. We know how Indians are and they'll make such overblown observations. Brigante said a while back that on his TTC that Maharishi said Indians were like Americans on drugs. I think, unless they have been exposed and have had to adapt to western culture (such as Indians who attend universities her to get advanced degrees) they often have the emotional maturity of an 11 year old. But that also suggests a vata disposition. Meditation of any kind, as ayurveda states, usually increases the ether element. It is to help you rise about the muddy earth element. But what if you are already a space case. I would lay the spaciness more to bad vegetarian diet or having such a diet if it is inappropriate for your constitution. Remember that many Indian yogis use ashwaganda and brahmi in conjunction with their practice which helps tone the nervous system and ground out. Yogis know the importance of grounding out whereas too many western meditators just want to fly away like a leaf. How many TM'ers you know need lots of rest indeed up to 10 to 12 hours of sleep? Whereas I see progress if I only need 4 to 6 hours of sleep. I also wonder if westerners because of their dispositions accomplish just as much in a fraction of the time meditating that an Indian does? BTW, of that list I'm sure you'll find a lot of aging boomers who have never meditated relating to those symptoms. Maybe it's the fluoride in the water? They're known as senior moments and sometimes by balancing the doshas they start to go away. Vaj wrote: Great article from John Knapp. Transcendental Meditators: Do You Space Out? Posted by John M. Knapp, LMSW at 9/25/2008 03:46:00 PM Transcendental Meditation Dissociation In my cult counseling practice, I'm often asked about dissociation. Many people don't know what it is. Or if they experience it. In TM, we called it spacing out, blissing out, being a space cadet, or many other dismissive names. But what did we mean? And what's the big problem with it? A lot of people enjoy blissing out. Basically, dissociation is any gap in the major identity or cognitive functions: awareness, memory, conscious thought, certain language abilities, and of course identity itself. We all dissociate sometimes. We daydream, get lost in thought, stare off into space, forget for a moment where we are, or lose track of our surroundings when deeply involved with a
[FairfieldLife] Re: How to figure out who won the debate
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Mistakes matter, but only some of them. Probably the worst mistake in the Democratic primary debates was Hillary's famous non-answer to a question about drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants. But it wasn't a big mistake because people care deeply about the issue. (When is the last time you've heard driver's licenses mentioned on the campaign trail?) It was important because it fit into a pre-exisiting narrative about Hillary that had been developed by her opponents for some time. Namely, that Hillary is politically calculating and dishonest. Since it reinforced a pre-exisiting narrative it caused Hillary immense damage and sent the campaign into a tailspin from which it never fully recovered. During the next debate in Nevada, Obama was asked a similar question about drivers licenses for illegal immigrants and gave a similarly meandering answer. Yet, he paid no political price. The reason is simple: no one believed at the time that Obama was dishonest or politically calculating. So a mistake that was debilitating for Hillary was a non-issue for Obama. IMO, thats the classic struggle between not be swallowed by confirmational bias (automatically seeing what conforms to your POV, not seeing that which does not ) vs. identifying patterns and themes in what one observes -- and using such as a (partial) model of how things work. Both dynamics rely on filtering and 'lenses (of varying shades). The result of each dynamic is that one tends to give to some the benefit of the doubt -- to others you give far less. How to resolve and balance the two forces stay (more so) connected to truthiness? Particularly when the effects of these forces can be multi-layered and multi-dimensional. And each prone to be used as rationalizations for and against a given proposition. For me, its the regular reassessment and reassignment of probabilities as to the truthiness of a particular perception. For example, over the past month or more, McCain has managed to erase any and all memories of his 2000 campaign -- straight talk express an all -- with his series of lying, massively distorting and manipulative ads and ploys. Every time I see a lying, short-sighted, or clueless ad by McCain -- and then him (smirking?) I'm JM and I approve this ad -- I cannot deny the evidence right in my face: JM is a lying, opportunistic weasal (that clearly does not put country first and all such talk is shallow attempts at manipulation and oozing hypocricy.) The evidence is so clear, and so often repeated, its hard not to assess a pattern to such behavior -- and to make an assessment of his core character. And the having identified this pattern, its natural for a degree of confirmational bias to emerge. Or is it simply a filter that cuts through the BS? If I have to assess every JM statement for truthiness, from the gitgo, I will miss the overwhelming pattern. However, having seen the pattern, does the subsequent filtering of what he says cause distortion? The debate illustrated this dilemma. I found evidence that McCain was not as shallow, opportunistic and manipulative as his ads may suggest. Hardly a saint -- or a worthy candidate IMO, but still not as one dimensional as my internal model would predict. Constant reassessing and reassigning probabilities as new data emerges is towards a solution. But perhaps only for anal analyzers such as myself. How do others deal with balancing these two dynamics: confirmational bias and pattern seeking?
[FairfieldLife] Re: If Jesus Ran For President . . .
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJ1L4eeu5KI Thats a great one. Feed anything into the McCain / Rove attack machine and see, predictably, what you get. Evry time. While looking at above link, I saw and played this. Brilliant -- of sorts. OOH, seeing a believer poke holes in their non-christian religion seems so obvious -- for the mature viewer, it forces one to examine inconsistent religiously beliefs of their own family/cultures' faith (if any). The bad news -- for the immature viewer -- red state nation may have a high density quotient here -- such might conclude -- islam -- ha -- see its a total fraud -- unlike our true religion from our lord and savior. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_RaCTBZPtMfeature=related
[FairfieldLife] Re: If Jesus Ran For President . . .
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJ1L4eeu5KI Thats a great one. Feed anything into the McCain / Rove attack machine and see, predictably, what you get. Evry time. While looking at above link, I saw and played this. Brilliant -- of sorts. OOH, seeing a believer poke holes in their non-christian religion seems so obvious -- for the mature viewer, it forces one to examine inconsistent religiously beliefs of their own family/cultures' faith (if any). The bad news -- for the immature viewer -- red state nation may have a high density quotient here -- such might conclude -- islam -- ha -- see its a total fraud -- unlike our true religion from our lord and savior. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_RaCTBZPtMfeature=related Another good one (serial linking of videos -- one leads to another -- like kleenex) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTObJ9Iwd2Ufeature=related God Loves Me Best
[FairfieldLife] Re: Using shame vs. offering benefit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: (snip) Using shame (shame of being female, shame of being racist) rather than offering benefit is a tactic that may intimidate some, and perhaps win some over who would rather be part of the pack that attacks than one who is attacked, but mostly it engenders resentment. (snip) The really ironic thing her is that her husband Bill Clinton shamed Hillary more than anyone else could. Uh, Robert, that would be a big fat non sequitur. Sorry you can't come up with a better response. I sur don't know what a non seequweeter is -- sounds like some hi falutin words that some fancy elist might use --- but there is something mighty strange in the logic BillyBob uses here. Out here in the real america, where there are real women -- they don't get shamed by no philandering husband. Everyone knows hes the shithead. Making it all about the wife -- well thats shear hoccum pig shit.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Using shame vs. offering benefit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: (snip) Using shame (shame of being female, shame of being racist) rather than offering benefit is a tactic that may intimidate some, and perhaps win some over who would rather be part of the pack that attacks than one who is attacked, but mostly it engenders resentment. (snip) The really ironic thing her is that her husband Bill Clinton shamed Hillary more than anyone else could. Uh, Robert, that would be a big fat non sequitur. Sorry you can't come up with a better response. I sur don't know what a non seequweeter is -- sounds like some hi falutin words that some fancy elitist might use --- but there is something mighty strange in the logic BillyBob uses here. Out here in the real america, where there are real women -- they don't get shamed by no philandering husband. Everyone knows hes the shithead. Making it all about the wife -- well thats shear hoccum pig shit.
[FairfieldLife] Flash Flaws -- Any Insights?
My Flash player gets easily corrupted (I know - its prolly the porn). But almost daily, u-tube and other videos run on Flash stop playing. No sound. And usually the video just freezes. The temp fix is to re-install Flash. Tht takes 10 seconds. But to do that, I have to shut donw Foxfire, And with 30 tabs open -- it does take some time to reload. So, not the biggest problem in the world -- but does anyone have similar experience -- and / or have a more permanent solution?
[FairfieldLife] Letter to NY Times -- Root of Housing Crisis
Regarding: Housing Help by Chris Mayer Published: September 26, 2008 I strongly disagree with Mayer's view that the first step to solve the current financial crisis should be to reduce mortgage interest rates. low interest rates have been the root of the crisis: a massive lowering of interest rates and infusion of excess money into the financial system. The result was not a mystery -- strong inflation in the housing sector, a drastic overpricing of housing relative to fundamentals, an over-investment in housing stock, and worst -- locking millions out of the housing market -- mostly have-nots -- young, first time buyers. Towards a solution is not to repeat the cause of the crisis by lowering rates again. The solution will include letting housing prices re-align with the fundamentals (income, rents and mortgage costs) -- and opening the housing market to millions -- currently shut out by policies that created and are sustaining massively mis-priced housing assets. === Article === Housing Help By CHRIS MAYER Published: September 26, 2008 At the heart of the financial crisis is an unprecedented decline in house prices. Yet the government response so far has been to try to prop up insolvent financial institutions while doing nothing about the underlying housing problem. The proposed Wall Street bailout would not stop the next wave of defaults, which are coming from the rapidly rising delinquencies in near-prime mortgages. The government needs to directly stabilize the housing market. This is equivalent to treating the infection with antibiotics, instead of applying a cold compress for the fever. Both the fever and the infection need treating. The first step should be to reduce mortgage interest rates. In a normal mortgage market, rates are about 1.6 percentage points above the interest rate for 10-year Treasury notes. Recently, the difference has been closer to 2.5 percentage points. The government is in a great position to cut rates by about a point: Through Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration, it now controls nearly 90 percent of all mortgage originations. These lower rates would apply to most home buyers who take out a loan under $729,750 for a house that they will live in. Along with lower rates, the government should provide temporary down-payment assistance for buyers. The government could, for example, match the amount of money that buyers use for a down payment, up to $15,000. Because the government now controls the bulk of all mortgage financing, this money could be provided directly at closing. Homeowners who refinance their current mortgages could also receive assistance, allowing them to avoid foreclosure. Programs like these would draw buyers into the housing market and reduce the backlog of unsold and vacant homes. Investors and speculators would be ineligible and would face the full cost of their mistakes. By stabilizing house prices, these programs would benefit the bulk of Americans, who own a home but did not get involved in the subprime mortgage market. Price stability would more directly achieve the goals of the Wall Street bailout: increase the value of mortgage-backed securities (by increasing the value of the underlying houses) while injecting government capital into the financial system. Some in Congress have suggested allowing homeowners to go to bankruptcy court to lower their mortgage payments. But this would only make credit more expensive by reducing the willingness of companies to lend money. It would also worsen the current problems by letting bankruptcy judges reduce mortgage balances imposing even greater losses on the owners of the mortgages, whose problems are at the heart of the financial crisis. Such a program would also be limited to only the most indebted and, in some cases, financially irresponsible homeowners. Some might argue that propping up house prices is what got us into this mess. But with the recent decline in house prices, my calculations suggest that the cost of owning a home today, relative to renting, is about 10 percent lower than its average over the past 20 years. The credit crisis will not be over until house prices stop falling. Direct assistance for home buyers and homeowners is the best, and the fairest, way to make that happen. Chris Mayer is a professor of real estate and the senior vice dean of Columbia Business School.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Flash Flaws -- Any Insights?
Thanks. That may be the cause. It does seem more probable than Flash getting corrupted every day. I will try it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: My Flash player gets easily corrupted (I know - its prolly the porn). But almost daily, u-tube and other videos run on Flash stop playing. No sound. And usually the video just freezes. The temp fix is to re-install Flash. Tht takes 10 seconds. But to do that, I have to shut donw Foxfire, And with 30 tabs open -- it does take some time to reload. So, not the biggest problem in the world -- but does anyone have similar experience -- and / or have a more permanent solution? The issue may not be related to Flash per se but to its sensitivity to available memory. The clue may be in your mention of 30 tabs open. Every time you open a tab, Firefox assigns an area of memory to it; no other application can use that area of memory. And an interesting flaw in Firefox is that it doesn't release the memory when you close the tab; you have to exit from Firefox alto- gether to release all assigned memory. This is one of the things that Google's Chrome browser is supposed to fix. I could be completely off-base about this, but try exiting from Firefox periodically during the day and restarting it, and see if Flash continues to misbehave.
[FairfieldLife] Letter to NY Times
Regarding: Housing Help by Chris Mayer Published: September 26, 2008 I strongly disagree with Mayer's view that the first step to solve the current financial crisis should be to reduce mortgage interest rates. low interest rates have been the root of the crisis: a massive lowering of interest rates and infusion of excess money into the financial system. The result was not a mystery -- strong inflation in the housing sector, a drastic overpricing of housing relative to fundamentals, an over-investment in housing stock, and worst -- locking millions out of the housing market -- mostly have-nots -- young, first time buyers. Towards a solution is not to repeat the cause of the crisis by lowering rates again. The solution will include letting housing prices re-align with the fundamentals (income, rents and mortgage costs) -- and opening the housing market to millions -- currentky shut out by policies that created and are sustaing massively mis-priced housing assets. === Article === Housing Help By CHRIS MAYER Published: September 26, 2008 At the heart of the financial crisis is an unprecedented decline in house prices. Yet the government response so far has been to try to prop up insolvent financial institutions while doing nothing about the underlying housing problem. The proposed Wall Street bailout would not stop the next wave of defaults, which are coming from the rapidly rising delinquencies in near-prime mortgages. The government needs to directly stabilize the housing market. This is equivalent to treating the infection with antibiotics, instead of applying a cold compress for the fever. Both the fever and the infection need treating. The first step should be to reduce mortgage interest rates. In a normal mortgage market, rates are about 1.6 percentage points above the interest rate for 10-year Treasury notes. Recently, the difference has been closer to 2.5 percentage points. The government is in a great position to cut rates by about a point: Through Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration, it now controls nearly 90 percent of all mortgage originations. These lower rates would apply to most home buyers who take out a loan under $729,750 for a house that they will live in. Along with lower rates, the government should provide temporary down-payment assistance for buyers. The government could, for example, match the amount of money that buyers use for a down payment, up to $15,000. Because the government now controls the bulk of all mortgage financing, this money could be provided directly at closing. Homeowners who refinance their current mortgages could also receive assistance, allowing them to avoid foreclosure. Programs like these would draw buyers into the housing market and reduce the backlog of unsold and vacant homes. Investors and speculators would be ineligible and would face the full cost of their mistakes. By stabilizing house prices, these programs would benefit the bulk of Americans, who own a home but did not get involved in the subprime mortgage market. Price stability would more directly achieve the goals of the Wall Street bailout: increase the value of mortgage-backed securities (by increasing the value of the underlying houses) while injecting government capital into the financial system. Some in Congress have suggested allowing homeowners to go to bankruptcy court to lower their mortgage payments. But this would only make credit more expensive by reducing the willingness of companies to lend money. It would also worsen the current problems by letting bankruptcy judges reduce mortgage balances imposing even greater losses on the owners of the mortgages, whose problems are at the heart of the financial crisis. Such a program would also be limited to only the most indebted and, in some cases, financially irresponsible homeowners. Some might argue that propping up house prices is what got us into this mess. But with the recent decline in house prices, my calculations suggest that the cost of owning a home today, relative to renting, is about 10 percent lower than its average over the past 20 years. The credit crisis will not be over until house prices stop falling. Direct assistance for home buyers and homeowners is the best, and the fairest, way to make that happen. Chris Mayer is a professor of real estate and the senior vice dean of Columbia Business School.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Honey
Clear evidence that M Honey and/or TMO programs cause (massive) magical thinking. Yea, like this 1950's level sappy ad is going to get to get on most viewed list. Unless its viewed as a cautionary tale Mother's don't let your kids grow up to be siddhas --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Help Sell/Popularize Maharishi Honey TODAY Go go Youtube, the #3 most popular website in the World http://www.youtube.com http://www.youtube.com/ http://www.youtube.com/ / Then go to this video link below and comment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q7ffGdfbqs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q7ffGdfbqs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q7ffGdfbqs Sign up, only takes a few minutes, to comment. This will put world attention on this video and Maharishi Honey. Millions of people go to this website everyday, and the ranking of this video will soar and it will create a huge buzz for selling and making popular our dear honey. Help it show up on Youtube's ranking as the MOST VIEWED and MOST COMMENTED for today, or this month.. Someone has put this video on this most popular site, so let's take advantage of this opportunity to comment and make this a huge international event on the internetif we work together we can do this. Just going to the video and starting to watch will hugely push up its ranking. (The honey website is: maharishihoney.com) Please, let's forward this to our friends.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Debate
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any inclination to vote for McCain left when he selected Palin. She is an absolute moron. Does that mean she has obtained an absolute body?
[FairfieldLife] The Whores of Congress
Most members of Congress are whores of the housing industry -- and their own investments. Candid interviews have revealed that in private discussions on whether to the maintain housing interest deductibility -- most representatives and senators quickly do a calc in their head to see how much it will hurt them personally. A clear conflict of interest. In the current debate on the financial crises, few if anyone is talking about -- as part of the solution -- letting housing prices fall to levels consistent with its underlying fundamentals -- that is, the ratio of income to mortgage costs (affordability) and monthly total homeowner costs to rents. Its hard to imagine that John McCain does not think about the value of his 13 homes when considering solution paths to the current financial crises. As most in Congress are doing -- thinking about the value of their own inflated homes -- and supporting policies that will support the inflated prices of their homes. A clear conflict of interest. Some have argued that to solve the current financial crisis the gov't should ease credit to reduce mortgage interest rates. This is pandering, self-serving economic policy. Low interest rates have been the root of the crisis: a massive lowering of interest rates and infusion of excess money into the financial system. The result was not a mystery -- strong inflation in the housing sector, a drastic overpricing of housing relative to fundamentals, an over-investment in housing stock, and worst -- locking millions out of the housing market -- mostly have-nots -- young, first time buyers. A path to cultivating health in the housing and financial markets is not to repeat the cause of the crisis by lowering rates again. The solution will include letting housing prices re-align with the fundamentals (income, rents and mortgage costs) -- and opening the housing market to millions -- currently shut out by policies that created and are sustaining massively mis-priced housing assets.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How did Secretary Paulson come to the $700 Billion bailout amount?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- On Thu, 9/25/08, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: It's not based on any particular data point, a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. We just wanted to choose a really large number. http://www.forbes.com/home/2008/09/23/bailout-paulson-congress- biz-beltway-cx_jz_bw_0923bailout.html or: http://tinyurl.com/3fc92x Good God!!! Those clowns are in charge of the financial interests of the American people??? I just heard the same on the news driving home. What a bunch of clowns. Picked right out of the air. At least they'll only get 1/3 of it before President Obama has a say in what to do with the rest. Good GRIEF, you people are uninformed. Haven't you been reading anything at all about this? OF COURSE it's not based on some data point. How *could* it be? Do you not have *any* idea of what its purpose is? Essentially, they did indeed pick a number out of the air, but that's a feature, not a bug. This isn't a situation in which, if a bunch of experts just sat down and set to figuring, they could come up with a more accurate number. What they picked is a number they thought would make it clear to all concerned that the gummint has the biggest financial dick on the block and *will be able* to do what it says it's going to do. The plan won't work unless the financial folks are confident the gummint is going to be able to follow through. Which was Paulson's exact strategy in securing the funds bail out Fannie and Freddie to be used ONLY AS a LAST RESORT. His whole theory was that having the big stick ()and not having to blow the wad) would calm the markets. It did the opposite. It accelerated the demise of FF. Paulson I am sure is a bright guy -- but he has clearly been wrong on his prior solutions. He is winging it. He has lost most of his credibility. His 700 mil big stick will accelerate not mitigate the problem. Krugman -- and others -- have a far more sane approach in solving the debt to capital ratios that underly this crisis. Increase the capital portion of the equation by buying 20% + stakes in the ailing companies. At current, or negotiated lower than, (stock) market prices. debt ratios ill decrease, no illiquid MBSs, and a strong equity stake in the recovering financial companies. (Schumer's warrants proposals as tacked onto the current plan has promise -- but will probably be only a pittance. And hard to value or size correctly. So Paulson and Bernanke picked a number that they thought would be well above the most it could possibly cost--sort of like placing a bid on eBay. If you're absolutely determined to win the auction, you enter your top bid for significantly more than you think anybody else would be willing to shell out--a really large number--knowing you won't be outbid, and that you'll most likely end up paying well below that amount. That's what the spokeswoman meant. Her phrasing, of course, was jocular, possibly even a bit sarcastic, since anybody who thinks the $700 billion was arrived at by some clever formula hasn't been paying attention. The clowns here are the people who would rather bitch and moan and mock than make the effort to inform themselves about the worst financial crisis in a century.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Flash Flaws -- Any Insights?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: My Flash player gets easily corrupted (I know - its prolly the porn). But almost daily, u-tube and other videos run on Flash stop playing. No sound. And usually the video just freezes. The temp fix is to re-install Flash. Tht takes 10 seconds. But to do that, I have to shut donw Foxfire, And with 30 tabs open -- it does take some time to reload. So, not the biggest problem in the world -- but does anyone have similar experience -- and / or have a more permanent solution? The issue may not be related to Flash per se but to its sensitivity to available memory. The clue may be in your mention of 30 tabs open. Every time you open a tab, Firefox assigns an area of memory to it; no other application can use that area of memory. And an interesting flaw in Firefox is that it doesn't release the memory when you close the tab; you have to exit from Firefox alto- gether to release all assigned memory. This is one of the things that Google's Chrome browser is supposed to fix. I could be completely off-base about this, but try exiting from Firefox periodically during the day and restarting it, and see if Flash continues to misbehave. This is happening in Windows too? Yes, -- I am using Vista Home Premium. And while I am at it -- another Windows or perhaps Bios problem): I have accumulated a lot of USB hubs -- daisy chained and direct connects to my motherboard 4 ports. The 4 slot Kingston hubs lock up the boot sequence. I have to unplug them, boot up, replug them -- and then wait 5 min while Vista sorts out the new hardware. How lame. Anyone have similar problems and/or solutions. It happens with Ubuntu but most people think it's a problem with Adobe being lazy about the Linux version. I hadn't heard it was happening with Windows. I installed an add-on called Flash Block in Firefox which keeps Flash videos from opening automatically. This helped a lot. It displays an icon where the Flash object, such as a video, is supposed to be and you can click on it if you want see it. This has been saving me a lot of lockups though it can still happen if I watch a video or listen to streaming audio.
[FairfieldLife] F*cking A Theist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU6vAjoPxbUNR=1
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Craiglist
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Sep 25, 2008, at 7:52 AM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: And if you need ideas about what to say, here is what I wrote: Hi! I have just moved to Fairfield, Iowa, which is about an hour south of Iowa City, ... This community is so amazing and unique. There are thousands of people practicing Transcendental Meditation twice daily here, This is good, but I think you should add something about the scienfific reseach backing up TM. Try also add something about the ME. It wouldn't hurt to mention that Fairfied actually has MORE than 1% of its population.0meditating. You might want to mention the murder on campus last year and the recent floods in Iowa as a further example of the efficacy of the ME. Personally I would NOT bring in SV, or TMSP, or Ayurved at his point, but I will leave that up to you. How about THP, THMD, the MSAE or the CIA? I mean, as long as we're playing with acronyms... And, since Craig's List first became popular as a dating/personals site, I suggest creating a sub-category of the Fairfield community listing called Fairfield Fillies, on which lonely TM women could write ads like: On The Program 50-ish charmer seeks affluent, gullible TM man to court me, fall in love with my one-pointed desire for enlightenment, pro- pose marriage (celibate, of course) to me on our first date, and then support me in the style to which I'd like to become accustomed. Have Dome Badge, will share it with even a lowly Citizen Siddha if you keep the course payments coming in on time. And a corresponding Fairfield Flyguys board on which Fairfield men could write ads like: One-pointed Raja seeks companionship with an attractive woman who would be content walking several paces behind me at official functions. Must look good in a sari and look way fuckable, but in reality have a low or non-existent sex drive. No redheads should respond, because the Vedas say to avoid them and the Vedas rule. Ability to receive telepathic messages from Maharishi from beyond the grave a plus. http://losangeles.craigslist.org/search/ers/?query=m4w I can't even imagine what might be posted under Erotic Services in the FFCL.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fairfield Craiglist
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: One-pointed Raja seeks companionship with an attractive woman who would be content walking several paces behind me at official functions. Must look good in a sari and look way fuckable, but in reality have a low or non-existent sex drive. No redheads should respond, because the Vedas say to avoid them and the Vedas rule. Ability to receive telepathic messages from Maharishi from beyond the grave a plus. http://losangeles.craigslist.org/search/ers/?query=m4w I can't even imagine what might be posted under Erotic Services in the FFCL. Personally anointed by Raja John Hagelin (many times). Let me personally anoint you into the wonders of infinite joy. Explore the Ved in every part of my body. Superfluidity! Tonight! Let me balanace your chakras. Tired of that same old self-referral? Come and enjoy infinite correlation. Fully connect to Shakti-power! Enjoying?, hmm? Full-on tantra. Let me fulfill your special tantra needs. (Certified Life-coach) Have lingim, will travel. Total Joy Unify Duality -- embrace 200% of life. Call Heather and Alicia. Hot asanas! Private showings. Naked truth! MD will reveal ankle -- donations accepted Group program Let me show you how bad girls play. Scorpion-land Lady String theory. String Bikinis
[FairfieldLife] Morphing Paul and Sanders -- Re: Billions for Bailouts! Who Pays?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its noteworthy that a socialist (Sanders) and a extreme libertarian (Paul) have some of the more productive views views on this massive financial unwinding -- relative to the hysteria in Washington. I think elements of both are the clearest and most productive path out of this mess. The course that Poulson is taking us down may bankrupt government, destroy the dollar -- as he essentially nationalizes major parts of the financial, insurance and housing sectors. Which ultimately may lead to the break-up of the US as some regions opt out of the massive debt and create new, sounder currencies and financial systems. The current financial crisis facing our country has been caused by the extreme right-wing economic policies pursued by the Bush administration. While the Bush administration is deplorable on most fronts, the class-warfare vision Bernie is picture tries to paint did not create this crisis. Cutting marginal tax rates across the board did not create this crisis. Bush certainly missed the boat on regulating hedge funds and the huge derivatives markets -- but that was hardly a extreme right-wing mistake. Mr. Treasury -- former chairman of Goldman Sachs -- the pre-eminent investment bank -- and Mr Fed -- mainstream guys -- were all for that. Actually the current crises was, in good part due to the strong interventionist (left-wing) policies of the Fed. Bernie may have actually applauded this at the time. Paul was not a fan. The Fed / Greenspan created the dot.com bubble with massive infusions of easy money. This however was a learning curve venture. The fed got even better at juicing up the economy and created a really massive spectacular speculative bubble in real estate -- strongly fueled by cheap, even free money with the massive intervention of the Fed after 9/11. Too much money chasing too few sound investments -- the surplus splashed into real estate and made homes unaffordable to 80-90% of new buyers in many regions. And that created an economy on meth so to speak -- driven in the last years of the boom by home equity loans on phantom home values. continued .. adjacent post
[FairfieldLife] Morphing Paul and Sanders -- Re: Billions for Bailouts! Who Pays?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Its noteworthy that a socialist (Sanders) and a extreme libertarian (Paul) have some of the more productive views views on this massive financial unwinding Sanders: In my view, we need to go forward in addressing this financial crisis by insisting on four basic principles: Specifically, to pay for the bailout, which is estimated to cost up to $1 trillion, I disagree with the focus on bailouts. Buying toxic mortgages will be boosting and supporting the current extensive overvaluation of housing -- and locking many people out of the housing market. Many have been waiting patiently for prices to come down to level supported by the fundamentals. The Treasury Department and Congress are seeking to prop up artificially high prices and lock a majority of non-homeowners out of the housing market. This is a bailout of i) bad practices on Wall Street, ii) aggressive -- bordering on fraudulent -- lending practices, and iii) new or trading-up homeowners who made a risky big bet, trying to make a bundle in the real estate market. They bet wrong. (I bet wrong in the dot.com bubble but didn't and don't expect a bailout). While there is a lot of talk of the destruction of wealth -- wealth is not real if its based on bubble psychology and complex financial instruments that hide the lack of value. This puffed up false wealth needs to be wrung out of the economy. A bailout will only prolong it. Prices of all assets need to adjust. No one in congress, and certainly not the White House, has the knowledge to direct this. Only the market can unwind this huge bubble of false wealth. Its hubris to think congress can direct this unwinding. huge bailouts will distort, and slow the complex unwinding that ultimately must take place. However, there will be large disruptions, relocations and adjustment as the economy unwinds the huge mistakes and bad bets of both common folk and players. I favor letting the necessary undwinding and asset value correction take place. And use the t rillon dollars earmarked for wall-street to provide massive retrainng and educational grants and loans to those whose lose careers and jobs as things unwind. the government should: a) Impose a five-year, 10 percent surtax on income over $1 million a year for couples and over $500,000 for single taxpayers. That would raise more than $300 billion in revenue; I think this is fair. Normally, I am in favor of low marginal tax rates as a key to rapid economic growth. But a 300 billion / year, 1.5 trillion over five years, seems an appropriate price for the winners of the shake-out to pay as an entrance fee. They will hardly starve. And restructuring, not growth is the key theme for the next five years. b) Ensure that assets purchased from banks are realistically discounted so companies are not rewarded for their risky behavior and taxpayers can recover the amount they paid for them; and This is part of the bail out -- but I advocate no bailout of bad investments and loads. The phantom wealth and vacuousness of the economy unwind. (The Ron side) And similtaneously provide a large safety net -- in educational and re-training grants (including living expenses) for those squeezed out of the job market during the transition. (The Bernie Side) But if any bail out occurs, Bernie is correct. Purchase assets only at steep discounts. c) Require that taxpayers receive equity stakes in the bailed-out companies so that the assumption of risk is rewarded when companies' stock goes up. Making the government a speculator doses not solve the fundamental problem. (2) There must be a major economic recovery package which puts Americans to work at decent wages. Among many other areas, we can create millions of jobs rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure and moving our country from fossil fuels to energy efficiency and sustainable energy. On top of the 1.5 trillion education / retraining fund / safety net during the shakeout, an aggressive revenue neutral carbon tax, starting today. All carbon taxes re-invested in New-Energy -- transforming the way we produce and use energy to the core. Fund the transfomation of solar, wind and biofuel (algae, switchgrass, not-corn etc))industries. 50% reduction in greenhouse emissions in 20 years. 40% increase in vehicle, appliance and building energy-efficiency. Aggressive loan programs to all new-energy companies and start-ups. Eliminate capital gains taxes on all New-Energy renewable / efficiency energy ventures over the next 10 years (investment funds from around the world will flood in). No more transfers of wealth to oil producing religious fanatics and authoratarian regimes (Defense and homeland security costs can then be cut in half, or quartered). Let the real-estate asset bubble and the massively mispriced energy markets and
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democrat supporting McCain on CNN stopped by host
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OTOH we are in a shitstorm so going with whoever you think has the brainpower and perspective to lead us through it makes sense. Compare Solutions to Financial Crisis: Warm and Fuzzy Non-Specific Obama: http://preview.tinyurl.com/43dolg Strong and Specific Hillary: http://tinyurl.com/4ervw5 Hillary took to the floor of the Senate today to lay out her plan for halting the economic meltdown, and her Senate staff has the video of her speech up online. She's speaking about what needs to be done NOW to address the economic meltdown taking place up on Wall Street this week. She talks in detail for over 20 minutes and dammit, it just breaks my heart that someone this capable and brilliant isn't headed to the White House this fall. Alegre http://tinyurl.com/4cy7ur on Hillary's statements. Sorry, I don't get it. Clinton's proposals, while good intended, simply put band-aids on gaping wounds. And actually support and fuel the core problem -- phantom asset valuation. They don't solve it -- they simply delay an inevitable future, expanded, crisis, IMO. Clinton's proposals: * Create a new entity to buy up and quarantine toxic mortgage securities that are dragging down the markets which would allow the markets to stabilize. Last spring Senator Clinton was among the first to call for a new entity modeled after the successful Depression-era Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) or the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) created after the Savings and Loan crisis. --- Buy them up with non-existent government funds, by a gov't already 10 trillion in debt. Popping another 2 trillion debt, the gov't may actually sink. The dollar may go down the toilet. Strong inflation leading to hyperinflation may follow as the government pumps more phantom dollars into the market to pump up pahntom real estate prices. All to pump up housing prices, or sustain them at over-inflated, speculative bubble values. This is not a solution, its a continuation of the problem. Prices which by the way, lock 10's of millions of citizens and families out of the housing market. Clinton's proposals perpetuate housing at inflated prices for the elite haves. Leading perhaps, eventually, to real class-warfare. * Place a temporary moratorium on the most abusive stock transactions, many of which involve the short-selling of stocks. Yesterday, Senator Clinton wrote to the Securities and Exchange Commission urging such a moratorium, saying it would provide breathing room for the markets to recover, for investors to make accurate assessments of companies and for regulators to assess what trading practices should be permanently banned. - This is idiotic populism. Banning short-selling is the equivalent to banning the sale of stocks. Sorry, we can't let you sell that stock in that poorly run, worthless asset swamped firm, because, hey it will lower the price of their stock and put in more in line with the actual value of the company. This is lunacy. And populist pandering. And displays a shocking ignorance of financial markets. However, if she only means full disclosure of short sales, limits on x % of short sales by any one fund, and elimination of naked shorts 9already illegal -- just enforce the law -- then her proposal is one of common sense. * Convene an emergency economic summit to show the American people their government is working together. Bringing together leaders in the administration and Congress with lenders, consumer advocates, non profits, financial institutions, and all stakeholders will allow a coordinated response to the crisis. --- Talk is good. To a point. But summits are often pandering and positioning. Formation of a coherent strategy in abundant consultation with all stakeholders is better. * Aggressively pursue and encourage mortgage modifications. Senator Clinton has introduced legislation to remove barriers to mortgage modification and to encourage lenders to voluntarily work with borrowers to keep them current on payments and in their homes. What is mortgage modification code for? This sounds like a a bailout of Wall Street who foolishly bought packages of sophisticated yet high risk loans, aggressive -- bordering on fraudulent -- lending practices, and new or trading-up homeowners who made a risky big bet, trying to make a bundle in the real estate market. They all bet wrong. Being a mommy and daddy to all the kids who made foolish decisions -- or calculated ones motivated by quick profits -- is not a solution. The only sustainable solution is to let these complex financial instruments, and housing valuations, to unwind and reach true value. There will be disruptions. The 2 trillion of bailout funds would be far better used as a direct safety net for those who go belly-up due to bad decisions, or lose jobs as the economy unwinds. the safety net in the form of aggresive education
[FairfieldLife] Morphing Paul and Sanders -- Revenue Neutral Carbon Tax
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: [snip] On top of the 1.5 trillion education / retraining fund / safety net during the shakeout, an aggressive revenue neutral carbon tax, starting today. [snip] Does any sane person still believe in catastrophic man-made global warming? How many more of the world's poor do you want to kill with your insane policies? An aggressive revenue neutral carbon tax, starting today would be a huge boon to the economy even if it was found that man-made carbon has nothing to do with global warming ((which is as probable as pigs flying out your ass- but stranger things have happened (emerged) I am sure. )) An aggressive revenue neutral carbon tax would allow for aggressive tax reductions in other areas. Not quite sure where this kills anyone -- other than in your fantasies. I favor tax breaks for the renewable and energy-efficiency technologies. The payback in the reduction of defense costs, homeland security costs, strengthening the weak dollar (which is a hidden and very toxic tax), reduction in more mainstream pollutants (Sox, Nox, PM10 etc, would be massive. The proceeds which could then actually help substantially solve world hunger and poverty. However, its reasonable to discuss other revenue neutral targets for the carbon tax revenues: 1) eliminate capital gains and dividend taxes and/or 2) eliminate / reduce the payroll tax and/or 3)lower marginal income tax rates and/or 4) massive investment in education and retraining at all levels. In the US and abroad. and/or 5) reducing the root causes of world hunger. and/or 6) even coherence techologies and/or 7) hookers and drugs for everyone (I want to capture the Curtis wing of the party)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democrat supporting McCain on CNN stopped by host
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: ON the face of it, your proposal makes at least some sense. Howsabout you post it on your TPM blog (ts free to sign up) Thanks for the tip. Just signed up. Looks like and interesting sight. Somewhat familiar -- perhaps wandered there before. and ask someone with connections to forward the link to Obama so he could read it for himself? Who / How would I ask that ? I did send another piece -- similar themes -- to Harry Reid (my senator), Dean Heller, my rep, Nancy P., Barack, Joe B, Hillary. TPM is read by a very large and diverse group of people, includign liberal presidential candidates, policy advisors, etc. Who? How do you know they read it? At least some of them would be in a better position to offer valid feedback to this than those of us on FL, most of whom do NOT have the economic background to argue your points sensibly. At least I don't. Hey, not having knowledge of a subject rarely stops anyone from vigorous arguments and critiques on FFL. :) Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democrat supporting McCain on CNN stopped by host
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: * Create a new entity to buy up and quarantine toxic mortgage securities that are dragging down the markets which would allow the markets to stabilize. Last spring Senator Clinton was among the first to call for a new entity modeled after the successful Depression-era Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) or the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) created after the Savings and Loan crisis. --- Buy them up with non-existent government funds, by a gov't already 10 trillion in debt. Popping another 2 trillion debt, the gov't may actually sink. The dollar may go down the toilet. Strong inflation leading to hyperinflation may follow as the government pumps more phantom dollars into the market to pump up pahntom real estate prices. All to pump up housing prices, or sustain them at over-inflated, speculative bubble values. This is not a solution, its a continuation of the problem. None of what's being done or contemplated now, in my understanding, Buying up mortgages that no one will touch has the effect of propping up over-valued property prices. Prices will remain higher / over-valued -- and out of the reach of 10's of millions of americans - if these mortgages are bought up. More money will be pumped into to the system that will increase sales at still inflated prices. And foreclosures will be reduced with this buy-out of toxic mortgages. Forclosures are sad -- but if somone bet wrong on a bubble market, hoping for quick profits -- and lost their bet, moving to a smaller house or the horror an apartment -- is not inappropriate. And foreclosures are a quick and efficient way of getting prices back to values in line with fundamentals (income to mortgage levels, rent to mortgage levels) Do you think buying to toxic mortgages is going to reduce home prices to equilliibruim / fundamentals-based levels? has anything at all to do with propping up housing prices. That's a big fat red herring. In you mind perhaps. snip * Place a temporary moratorium on the most abusive stock transactions, many of which involve the short-selling of stocks. Yesterday, Senator Clinton wrote to the Securities and Exchange Commission urging such a moratorium, saying it would provide breathing room for the markets to recover, for investors to make accurate assessments of companies and for regulators to assess what trading practices should be permanently banned. - This is idiotic populism. Banning short-selling is the equivalent to banning the sale of stocks. Sorry, we can't let you sell that stock in that poorly run, worthless asset swamped firm, because, hey it will lower the price of their stock and put in more in line with the actual value of the company. This is lunacy. And populist pandering. And displays a shocking ignorance of financial markets. Apparently you're not aware that this has already been done. Short selling was banned on Friday. I am quite aware of it. Having had a short trade on Thursday frozen with a pending forced sale within three days. Currently its a two week ban. Bad idea. A two week ban is lunacy. And populist pandering. And displays a shocking ignorance of financial markets. However, HC wants to explore what practices should be permanently banned -- I assume short-sales ar e on the table. Did I mention, this is lunacy. And populist pandering. And displays a shocking ignorance of financial markets. * Aggressively pursue and encourage mortgage modifications. Senator Clinton has introduced legislation to remove barriers to mortgage modification and to encourage lenders to voluntarily work with borrowers to keep them current on payments and in their homes. What is mortgage modification code for? Adjusting the mortgages so that people can afford to make payments on them and won't lose their homes. Paid by whom? If you want to bail out a relatively new-homeowner who over-extended themselves, many lied on liars loans, so that they don't have to move to a smaller house or an apartment -- well more power to your wonderful and compassionate heart. I may do the same locally. But it is not prudent for a gov't that is 10 trillion in debt to take on trillions more to avoid this inconvenience to many who were seeking quick profits and made bad bets. Or who signed contracts without knowing what was in them. We are not talking about people who have owned their homes for 7,10, 20 years. Not retirees who are living in original home. We are talking about people who moved into a bigger better house several years ago and many whom hoped for big profits in doing so. That they have to move again -- Sorry I have more pressing human tragedies to worry about.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democrat supporting McCain on CNN stopped by host
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip The only sustainable solution is to let these complex financial instruments, and housing valuations, to unwind and reach true value. There will be disruptions. There will be global economic catastrophe. You obviously have no concept of how serious this is. At this point it's an insolvency and credit crisis that threatens to bring down the whole economy. It's a major, major emergency that has to be addressed *immediately*. I should add that the current plan appears to have huge problems, but something drastic has to be done even if it hurts the taxpayers--because letting things unwind will hurt them far, far worse. It simply isn't an option. Lay out your case in details. i don't make trillion dollar investments based on arm waving and sparse words.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democrat supporting McCain on CNN stopped by host
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip The only sustainable solution is to let these complex financial instruments, and housing valuations, to unwind and reach true value. There will be disruptions. There will be global economic catastrophe. You obviously have no concept of how serious this is. At this point it's an insolvency and credit crisis that threatens to bring down the whole economy. It's a major, major emergency that has to be addressed *immediately*. I should add that the current plan appears to have huge problems, but something drastic has to be done even if it hurts the taxpayers--because letting things unwind will hurt them far, far worse. It simply isn't an option. Several criticisms and suggestions similar to offworld's appear here: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/ Lawson Reed Hundt(former FCC chair)) makes my point: A closing note: far less than a trillion dollars of taxpayer cash would suffice to fund the public works projects that could end forever our national dependence on carbon-emitting energy, without raising the cooling, heating or transportation bills for any of us. Tom Friedman makes similar points.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democrat supporting McCain on CNN stopped by host
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip The only sustainable solution is to let these complex financial instruments, and housing valuations, to unwind and reach true value. There will be disruptions. There will be global economic catastrophe. You obviously have no concept of how serious this is. At this point it's an insolvency and credit crisis that threatens to bring down the whole economy. It's a major, major emergency that has to be addressed *immediately*. I should add that the current plan appears to have huge problems, but something drastic has to be done even if it hurts the taxpayers--because letting things unwind will hurt them far, far worse. It simply isn't an option. Lay out your case in details. i don't make trillion dollar investments based on arm waving and sparse words. Poulson sems like a great guy -- personally. And he is smart and expereinced. However, Paulson can speak in terms that intimidate many. But think a moment. Several weeks ago . Poulson was given $100's of billion in authorization -- to use as a big stick -- to halt the crisis in confidence and restore market order. That was his pitch. And he openly admits he was surprised to the bone that this authorization only accelerated the crises and forced him to quickly spend the big stick. Mr. Paulson does not have the best judgment based on his recent track record. Don't be intimidated by manipulative talk of financial meltdown. Use your abundant common sense to see what is and what is not. Demand that he lay out the case for total financial meltdown. Clearly, before the short sale ban on Friday, Goldmans Sachs (Poulson is former chair) was headed towards a meltdown. Please ask Mr. Paulson for a clear definition of financial melt down. Does he mean a meltdown of the careers and some of the multimillion dollar wealth of his Wall Street colleagues and his former Goldman Sachs associates? Without the totally abrupt, no warning shut down of short trades on Friday morning -- Mr Poulson temporarily prevented a meltdown of his former company GS -- and his peers careers. By meltdown does he mean that the economy is simply going to stop and all savings, homes and jobs will be destroyed? I believe he is using a very scary term to manipulate to manipulate people into thinking the latter when it is much more the former. if the asset bubble is left to unwind -- as only the market can do -- congress cannot unwind it -- all assets will remain. Houses, factories, cars, server farms, PCs, intellectual capital. None of it will be destroyed. What will be melted away is the fluff, distortion and sludge from many bad decisions that is strangling the economy.
[FairfieldLife] Unwanted FFL Posts Sent to my e-mail
- Original Message From: michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: raamraj [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 3:34:13 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Indigenous groups embrace Maharishi's programmes Michael, I prefer to read posts on-line. Please take me off you list. I would write to you directly, but your e-mail address is bogus. Thank you.
[FairfieldLife] Palin's Journey
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDY2I5pni90 == Just a small town girl, living in a lonely world She took the midnight train going anywhere Just a city boy, born and raised in south Panama He took the midnight train going anywhere A zinger in a smokey room, a smell of wine and cheap perfume For a smile they can share the right It goes on and on and on and on Strangers, waiting... speaking trash with no regard Their shadows searching the darkest right Street fights... foolish people Living just to find emotion Hiding somewhere on the right Working hard to right now drill, everybody wants a thrill Betting anything to roll the dice just one more time Some will win, some will lose Some are born to sing the blues oh the movie never ends It goes on and on and on and on Strangers, waiting... speaking trash with no regard Their shadows searching the darkest right Street fights... foolish people Living just to find emotion Hiding somewhere out on the right Don't stop... believin' hold on to that feeling Street fights... foolish people Don't stop... believin' hold On Street fights... foolish people Don't stop... believin' hold on listen to your feeling Street fights... foolish people Dont stop
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bailouts Will Push US into Depression
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [ The end result of the global economic slowdown may be the U.S. announcing national bankruptcy as the government cannot afford the bailouts that it promised and the market will not bail out the government, Martin Hennecke, senior manager of private clients at Tyche, told CNBC on Thursday. We expect a depression in the United States. We expect a depression, very possibly, also in Europe, Hennecke said on Worldwide Exchange. ~~Full article and video at: http://www.cnbc.com/id/26656750 So what should a person of modest means do to prepare for a depression? Learn to speak chinese. While a depression is sustained large, negative growth, of the economy, two other things have a high probability of arising under those conditions: 1) the tanking of the stock market -- while not the defining characteristic of a depression,-- would most-likely occur as its value -- driven by earnings expectations -- tank 2) the insolvency of the US govt. Bailouts could swamp the US with massive and spiraling debts, the dollar would tank (more), foreigners would try to unload their 3 tril of Treasury securities, tax revenues plummet -- US govt going insolvent has huge implications -- including the dissolving of ties to the federal govt by some/many states. Looking at the level of foreign ownership of the US market -- and thus its companies -- could soar. Not saying this will happen, but some perspective on the quantities of the numbers involved is insightful. US market capitalization is about $15 tri (US public debt close to 6, total paper debt near 10). The depression of the 30's saw the stock market plunge 80% within several years from pre-crash 1929 level -- though fluctuated around 50% for much of the 30's. For perspective, if the stock market went to mcap of 3 tril, same percentage as 30's decline -- and then Chinese holdings of US Treasury securities --currently at .5 tril (same as Japan) -- if doubled as US tries to borrow its way out of crisis -- China and Japan would each have liquid dollar-based securities of 1/3 US market cap. Total foreign holdings of US securities 3 tril now, would be some multiple of this after crises borrowing. Enough in concept to buy all public US companies. The above is for perspective -- not a prediction. China and Japan getting out of 1-3 (or 6 tril as govt trying to borrow out of crises could create) trillion of US treasury securities would not be easy or quick. The value would plummet as they try to sell large chunks, as interests SOAR to unimaginable levels, the government becomse totally insovlvant, the economy would tank, tax revenues plummet, etc. all part of the downward death spiral of which would be driving the market crash. And of course the Chinese economy would be tanking with no exports to US. Any number of scenarios could unfold -- the more probable would be a weathered crises, and then on with things in several years as the financial and real-estate markets unwind. However, Bear Stearns, Lehman and Merril Lynch and Fannie / Freddie going under or absorbed was not on the radar of most 3-6 months ago. China owning 20-30% of US companies in 10 years? Not unthinkable. So -- learn chinese.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bailouts Will Push US into Depression
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any number of scenarios could unfold -- the more probable would be a weathered crises, and then on with things in several years as the financial and real-estate markets unwind. However, Bear Stearns, Lehman and Merril Lynch and Fannie / Freddie going under or absorbed was not on the radar of most 3-6 months ago. China owning 20-30% of US companies in 10 years? Not unthinkable. So -- learn chinese. And of course it might no longer be the US markets. If the govt becomes insolvant, and its currency crashes, some states may choose to opt out. Send a check to DC for its share of federal assets in the state -- and form their more perfect union. Hence China might buy up large chinks of companies in the newly formed PacifaMtDesertia, Red-Neckia, GreatLakshia, and Newenglandovia. (In PacifaMtDesertia, Nancy Polosi will be on the conservative wing of the national politics -- as progressives see a chance for substantive initiatives: doubling the education budget and focus, universal health care, high carbon tax, low payroll tax, large tax incentives for renewables and electric plug-in cars, a humanistic foreign policy, choice, a ban on guns, elimination of drug laws, Redneckia, where Newt Ginrich will be considered a flaming liberal, all schools will be privatized,no health care, christian based schools teaching creationism, 5 guns per capita, banned books, military operations in 4 areas -- and bases in 200, death penalty for many felonies including drug use and pre-marital sex, sustained public beatings and torture for the rest, persecution of gays, no abortions under any conditions, tax incentives for SUVs,mobilehomes, 4000, f homes, hunting for anything, anywhere, no building codes, environmental laws, professional licenses, securities exchange commission, energy or other standards, or other red-tape bureaucratic wasteful regulation, a gold-base currency, etc. Let Red and Blue nations compete in the world market, form their own foreign alliances, etc. See if there are national security and economic consequences of particular policies.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Living with the American IAPOI legacy as an ex-pat
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a bitch. For six years now I've lived in France and in Spain, and traveled elsewhere in Europe, and it's taught me a great deal about America and its image worldwide. I'd love to believe that I fit in here, and that no one would mistake me for an American, but sadly that is not true. If nothing else, my accent gives me away every time, no matter how much I practice my French or Spanish or Catalan. Things will be going along swimmingly with some new person I've just met at a cafe or a dinner party, and then I'll fail to pronounce Rouen the way Dave Barry learned it should be pronounced, Woon, and the other person's 'tude towards me will change abruptly. Instead of assuming that I am possessed of above- average intelligence, which they thought a moment ago, they now assume that because I am an American, I am stupid. And not only stupid, but Ignorant And Proud Of It. THAT, my friends who live in America and don't travel much outside it, is the legacy of modern America. THAT is how the world is going to perceive you when you travel, because that is how the vast majority of the people in your country act. They have voted for people who they *know* told them lies about why their country invaded Iraq, and they have voted for them TWICE. Because they wanted the lies to be true. They may have *known* inwardly that the Iraq war was a lie, but they wanted to believe that it *wasn't* a lie so strongly that they voted for someone who just kept repeating the same lie over and over again. They didn't *want* the truth; they wanted the ignorance. They prefer the ignorance of Global warming is a hoax to the truth of Global warming and our contri- bution to it as a nation is going to kill our own children. They prefer the ignorance of We have the highest standard of living on the planet to the truth that We are unhealthy and live in a constant state of fear because we are as bankrupt and living on credit as our nation is. They prefer ignorance. Period. And they're *proud* of thinking this way. And I get lumped in with them almost every time some- one figures out that I'm from America. And it pisses me off and I'm tired of it. Or you could embrace it and not have to relive it in the Bardo. I'm tired of having to go back and waste a couple of hours of remedial education with these people to clue them into the fact that I don't think like this, even though I'm an American. But that's just the advance PR that comes with you as baggage when you're an American living or traveling abroad. It's what people assume about you because you're an American, and it's all that they expect you to live up to, or down to. I, for one, wish that the country of my birth would dump this Ignorant And Proud Of It 'tude about life, and just fuckin' smarten up. For once, America, do something RIGHT, so that those of us out here in the bigger world don't have to keep apologizing for you and trying to distance ourselves from you. We'll do our best not to embarass you anymore. (but we still have Curtis-- so no guarantees). But thanks so much for being so dependent on us for your happiness and well-being. It makes us back here feel needed. Elect someone smart for a change. Please. Gosh, we'll knuckle down and try! I just hope I don't get all dumb again like in the last elections. You know how dumb that us dufuses can get.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Painful to watch - Gibson interview: Palin On 'Bush Doctrine'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- On Fri, 9/12/08, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...unreflective self-confidence that only the truly ignorant and stupid can possess. You said it right there, feste. Its bad enough to instigate and promote lies as does the current administration. But its truly scary when a VP candidate -- or anyone on national level -- actually believes the lies -- and cannot distinguish the crap they are fed from actual truth. As Krugman said this morning: What it says, I'd argue, is that the Obama campaign is wrong to suggest that a McCain-Palin administration would just be a continuation of Bush-Cheney. If the way John McCain and Sarah Palin are campaigning is any indication, it would be much, much worse. = September 12, 2008 Op-Ed Columnist Blizzard of Lies By PAUL KRUGMAN Did you hear about how Barack Obama wants to have sex education in kindergarten, and called Sarah Palin a pig? Did you hear about how Ms. Palin told Congress, Thanks, but no thanks when it wanted to buy Alaska a Bridge to Nowhere? These stories have two things in common: they're all claims recently made by the McCain campaign and they're all out-and-out lies. Dishonesty is nothing new in politics. I spent much of 2000 my first year at The Times trying to alert readers to the blatant dishonesty of the Bush campaign's claims about taxes, spending and Social Security. But I can't think of any precedent, at least in America, for the blizzard of lies since the Republican convention. The Bush campaign's lies in 2000 were artful you needed some grasp of arithmetic to realize that you were being conned. This year, however, the McCain campaign keeps making assertions that anyone with an Internet connection can disprove in a minute, and repeating these assertions over and over again. Take the case of the Bridge to Nowhere, which supposedly gives Ms. Palin credentials as a reformer. Well, when campaigning for governor, Ms. Palin didn't say no thanks she was all for the bridge, even though it had already become a national scandal, insisting that she would not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that's so negative. Oh, and when she finally did decide to cancel the project, she didn't righteously reject a handout from Washington: she accepted the handout, but spent it on something else. You see, long before she decided to cancel the bridge, Congress had told Alaska that it could keep the federal money originally earmarked for that project and use it elsewhere. So the whole story of Ms. Palin's alleged heroic stand against wasteful spending is fiction. Or take the story of Mr. Obama's alleged advocacy of kindergarten sex-ed. In reality, he supported legislation calling for age and developmentally appropriate education; in the case of young children, that would have meant guidance to help them avoid sexual predators. And then there's the claim that Mr. Obama's use of the ordinary metaphor putting lipstick on a pig was a sexist smear, and on and on. Why do the McCain people think they can get away with this stuff? Well, they're probably counting on the common practice in the news media of being balanced at all costs. You know how it goes: If a politician says that black is white, the news report doesn't say that he's wrong, it reports that some Democrats say that he's wrong. Or a grotesque lie from one side is paired with a trivial misstatement from the other, conveying the impression that both sides are equally dirty. They're probably also counting on the prevalence of horse-race reporting, so that instead of the story being McCain campaign lies, it becomes Obama on defensive in face of attacks. Still, how upset should we be about the McCain campaign's lies? I mean, politics ain't beanbag, and all that. One answer is that the muck being hurled by the McCain campaign is preventing a debate on real issues on whether the country really wants, for example, to continue the economic policies of the last eight years. But there's another answer, which may be even more important: how a politician campaigns tells you a lot about how he or she would govern. I'm not talking about the theory, often advanced as a defense of horse-race political reporting, that the skills needed to run a winning campaign are the same as those needed to run the country. The contrast between the Bush political team's ruthless effectiveness and the heckuva job done by the Bush administration is living, breathing, bumbling, and, in the case of the emerging Interior Department scandal, coke-snorting and bed-hopping proof to the contrary. I'm talking, instead, about the relationship between the character of a campaign and that of the administration that follows. Thus, the deceptive and dishonest 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign provided an all-too-revealing preview of things to come. In fact, my early
[FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ha ha! It's quite a joke when all the mental constructs about pure consciousness and Realization confront the absolute experiential reality of no-content, no-self, no-boundary, pure absence of any-thing. Ah, Being and Nothingness. Someone ought to write a book. --- On Thu, 9/11/08, ddeadlus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: ddeadlus [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Spiritual Enlightenment To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, 6:48 PM Well, I was feeling pretty good and Enlightened and such, and then the individual vanished. Poof. Total wholeness, nothingness, or silence. Deep rich nothingness silence wholeness. This is it...Cannot be unfulfilled anymore... This experience (for lack of a better word) is every description of Brahman I've ever heard of, from Maharishi or otherwise. The personality is certainly having some upheaval getting used to it, but in an incredibly awesome way. It's hard to describe, which I suppose is the point - if it were purely describable, then it wouldn't be completely whole... Still I've heard that this group is wonderful for talking about it, and poking people. I would love to have either...answering questions about it, or hearing challenges, or whatever. If you poke something long enough, the underlying truth falls out. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Enlightenment
Yeah, I watched Jon Stewart and I thought he was pretty funny also. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ddeadlus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, I thought it was pretty funny also. :) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: Ha ha! It's quite a joke when all the mental constructs about pure consciousness and Realization confront the absolute experiential reality of no-content, no-self, no-boundary, pure absence of any-thing. --- On Thu, 9/11/08, ddeadlus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: ddeadlus [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Spiritual Enlightenment To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, 6:48 PM Well, I was feeling pretty good and Enlightened and such, and then the individual vanished. Poof. Total wholeness, nothingness, or silence. Deep rich nothingness silence wholeness. This is it...Cannot be unfulfilled anymore... This experience (for lack of a better word) is every description of Brahman I've ever heard of, from Maharishi or otherwise. The personality is certainly having some upheaval getting used to it, but in an incredibly awesome way. It's hard to describe, which I suppose is the point - if it were purely describable, then it wouldn't be completely whole... Still I've heard that this group is wonderful for talking about it, and poking people. I would love to have either...answering questions about it, or hearing challenges, or whatever. If you poke something long enough, the underlying truth falls out. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ddeadlus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow, a bit bitter aren't we? Cheer up, it's a brand new morning. I find Jon Stewart is funny -- I found your I laughed Too comment to be funny and I find your response funny. Yet you see bitterness. Do you see bitterness in lots of people? It's not that it's hard to be what we really are (do we have a choice?). No, and I suppose if one sees bitterness its not a choice. Examining them is extremely painful though, and I don't think anyone would really do it unless they didn't have a choice. Ah yes. The mind is always attracted to deeper levels of pain. I sincerely wanted this and did the work, went through the pain or however you want to phrase it, but when it came to actually letting huge chunks of myself go, I couldn't want it, but it happened anyway because I set myself up and it hurt way too much not to let it go. Boy what a dilemma: painful to do, painful to let go. Well, I was feeling pretty good and Enlightened and such, and then the individual vanished. Poof. Total wholeness, nothingness, or silence. Ever wonder how and why you got mixed up in the first place? What is more natural -- boundaries or unboundedness. At some point you chose boundaries. Then felt relieved when you let go of them. Why didn't just start and stay in the more natural state? Deep rich nothingness silence wholeness. This is it...Cannot be unfulfilled anymore... Yet yoo see bitterness in strangers. Interesting. Perhaps its a cleansing bitter -- like bitter greens. This experience (for lack of a better word) is every description of Brahman I've ever heard of, from Maharishi or otherwise. And why are you relying on others to define and label your experience? Seems less than unbounded. The personality is certainly having some upheaval getting used to it, but in an incredibly awesome way. So the bounded personality is identifying with something else, elsewhere. Seems like there are still some big boundaries. It's hard to describe, which I suppose is the point - if it were purely describable, then it wouldn't be completely whole... Then what is the compulsion to try? Still I've heard that this group is wonderful for talking about it, and poking people. I would love to have either...answering questions about it, or hearing challenges, or whatever. If you poke something long enough, the underlying truth falls out. What is inside a(n empty) cup? If you poke at it long enough does it fall out?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vote for Keith Olberman
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Sep 11, 2008, at 12:46 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: What pissed me off enough to get involved is her and her sister in PUMAhood claiming to be concerned about the Democratic Party while ACTING LIKE REPUBLICANS. Their strategy is the same as McCain's and Rove's -- every time someone here brings up one of the actual issues, they try to pull the discussion off into a diversion about misogyny. A common tactic these days, when that's all that's left. Except, of course, that isn't what we do. Sal is hallucinating along with Barry-- Hey share the drugs guys! Sal, you really should refrain from betting on your intuitions, 'cause your intuition muscle is awfully flabby. But really fit and buff elsewise.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ddeadlus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really tell me how it is. Tell me the story of how I must be pretending to be Enlightened because no one who was actually enlightened would want to talk about it. Oh, I get it. So if others are enlightened AND talk about it .. Ergo then you must be TOO! Its all becoming so clear. Anyway, I don't know why you would say Act III or IV. It's only been a day or so. And here I thought it was timelessness. Oh, and Enlightenment doesn't make someone a better person either. And the value is?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Painful to watch - Gibson interview: Palin On 'Bush Doctrine'
The Repugs sure know how to pick em. Sal Sparks an interesting panoramamic view: Cheney, Quayle, Bush Sr., Rockefeller, Ford, Agnew, Nixon,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Spiritual Enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 12, 2008, at 9:46 PM, new.morning wrote: Oh, and Enlightenment doesn't make someone a better person either. And the value is? It looks good on your resume. If you have one, that is. Sal Should it be embossed in gold? Or use the flashing banner option in Word? Does it automatically come with multi-media -- the sound of trumpets -- a flash of lightening? Does the lettering get up and dance? Any preceding adjectives -- Truly E, Awesomely E, Humbly E, Oddly enough, E, Dancing in the rain E, Ever E, Fabulously E Pretenously E?
