is...trading (occasionally), trying to improve our political system (persistently) and just hangin' out.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Hey, Yo, Shelllllll
Heah I am, ovah heah on WEB3
It ain't whut I'd call fast. I mean, Yeah, I've seen worse ... but not much.
Fred
Whoops!!! I beg yo' pahdon. I'm on WEB4.
How'd dat hoppen?
I sweah I wuz on -3 befo.
Well ... WEB4 it is ... and I'm a dummy
flg
EDIT
Now it's -3 again, and the speed is OK
Good Morning, Shelly
I, too, use Firefox. Right now, I'm on WEB4 without a problem, but last Friday, also on WEB4, the reported slowness hit me ... BAD. I closed my browser and restarted it, hoping to come in on WEB3, but kept coming back on WEB4, so I quit trying and went on to other tasks.
Since that incident, I've come up on WEB4 several times, without the problem.
If I get slammed again, I'll report it.
Fred
EDIT: I'm on WEB4 right now, with no problems. flg
Oh, my goodness
Please accept my apology.
I see it has been deleted, but that doesn't change anything.
I'm sorry for sticking my nose in and giving offense.
Fred
Wonder what they try to sell to folks that don't browse much ... caskets?
Fred
Very well, thank you, dear ...
After all, I'm still here
Hey!!!
Should I take that and try to make a riotous rhyme out of it??? ... (Or do I mean 'righteous'?)
If I did a good job, it might cause your lips to rise at the tips and make you smile for a while.
Oooooooo, wouldn't that be nice.
Fred
Awwwwww, G'wan, Smile ...
Fred
I think it's mostly so we can find out who the biggest whiners are.
Control your own conduct ... ADMIN will take care of the rest.
Fred
They ain't agonna git it ...
And ... until we learn to select the best of our people for positions in our government instead of the trash we put in office now, things won't change.
* All of us know about 'party bosses', 'pork barrels', 'party loyalty', 'slush funds', 'party whips', and the whole lexicon of political manipulation.
* We know the corruptive nature of soliciting funds to finance a campaign, which gives control of politicians to their financial backers.
* We know the corrosive effect campaigning has on candidates; they gain expertise in avoiding direct answers to questions and diverting attention from unwelcome topics.
* We know campaigning is a training course in the art of deception.
* We know candidates are incessantly lionized by their supporters while they repeatedly proclaim their own rectitude; they are narcissistic clowns.
* We know these things debilitate politicians, and, since morality is a top-down phenomenon, and we know that choosing political leaders through a campaign process controlled by politicians is destroying our society.
It is frustrating that we know these things but have come to believe them unavoidable. If we wish to improve our political system, we must call attention to the adverse effects of campaign-based politics and devise a better way to select our political leaders.
Fred Gohlke
I disagree ...
They care, but they lack the organization and leadership to do anything about it. (Of course, 'organization' and 'leadership', they got their own thing goin'.) Ranting at Town Meetings won't get it done.
Fred
Boo-Hoo!
Fred
Maybe ... just maybe ... we'll find another Great Communicator to rally the troops.
Fred Gohlke
I think I understand your point, but I would state it differently.
It is not that "I" (or you, or any other individual) has the answer. It is that the answer is among us. Our difficulty is that we have not yet devised the means to achieving it.
We have proven that the idea of parties ... i.e., sets of vested interests ... vying with each other for power is not good for humanity. But, so far, we've failed to conceive an alternative. That alternative, when it comes, will find a way to elevate the best of those among us to positions of leadership rather than the worst, which is the essence of partisan politics.
Fred Gohlke
And THAT is extremely well said ...
Thanks, nlightn
Fred Gohlke
re: "Nothing more need be done other than the complete rejection of Republicans and Democrats everywhere at every level of government."
The question, of course, is how to accomplish that ... we have no reason to believe it will happen at the ballot box. Civil disobedience ... distasteful as it is to me (and many others) ... may be the only way to rally enough people to make a difference.
Where are our young folks when we need them?
Fred Gohlke
I think you're absolutely correct.
Maybe the outrages we are enduring will inspire someone with a knack for communication to rally the rest of us. Unfortunately, that's a talent I lack. I realize this situation is tailor-made for a demagogue, but even that might be better than what we're enduring, right now.
Fred Gohlke
Unfortunately, the idea that "I'm Mad As Hell and I'm Not Going To Take It Anymore." will not accomplish anything (except, maybe, a heart attack).
Unless we can define, very specifically, the changes we demand, our rage will accomplish nothing.
It might be possible to incite a tax revolt ... but only if its objective were clear enough that the vast majority of our peers would join the effort (Of course, it is easier to talk about a tax revolt than it is to actually incite one ... after all, the vast majority of our taxes are withheld or otherwise embedded in our daily transactions. How can we avoid paying them?)
Perhaps a million-man-march on Washington would be more effective ... provided we could formulate precise demands ... but, even then, would you march?
Fred Gohlke
Good Morning, MisterEC
I agree ... Single Term Limits for all elected officials!!!
As to the five "Arguments Opposed" you listed, I offer the following:
1. Terminates the good politicians along with the bad.
That's not exactly accurate; it terminates good politicians before they have an opportunity (and the experience) to become bad.
2. Instead of term limits, a reform of Congress' procedures would be easier.
Those who claim it would be easier to reform the procedures are those with experience at subverting reforms.
A couple of years ago, in my state, a lawyer worked on the wording of a law to prevent "Pay to Play" (where those who have contracts with the state donate to the politicians who approve their contracts.) Later, the lawyer sent a memo to one of the political parties describing the loopholes he'd put in the law so the politicians could continue the practice after the law was passed. The memo was uncovered and reported in the local newspaper. As far as I know, the law was never amended to close the loopholes.
3. Reduces range of voter choice.
On the contrary, it increases the range of voter choice. Instead of choosing between an incumbent and a challenger, we get to choose between two challengers.
4. Loss of knowledge and experience.
We've learned (to our sorrow) all the 'knowledge and experience' an incumbent gains is in the art of deceit, used to benefit the incumbents and their cronies at the expense of the public.
5. Increases the power of staff, lobbies, and bureaucracy.
As to staff, eliminate them. We do not elect 'legislative assistants' to study the laws under consideration, we elect our representatives to do that. In many (if not most) cases, our representatives don't even read the laws they vote on, they simply follow the recommendations of their 'legislative assistants' ... that's one of the outrageous travesties among our elected so-called 'representatives'.
As to lobbies, their power is not increased, it is sharply decreased. Their politicians don't stay bought. The lobbyists must start their attempts to corrupt our representatives anew, after each election.
As to bureaucracy. it may raise their power, but it also raises bureaucracy's susceptibility to examination and review. New representatives are less likely to accept the status quo than those who have retained their seats for years.
Fred Gohlke
As I said in my previous post, the Goldman Sachs situation is appalling.
However, shouldn't we keep in mind that it was our elected representatives that first gutted, and then repealed, Glass-Steagall?
Have you noticed that, in spite of the outrages perpetrated by our banks ... apparently bringing our nation to its knees ... we hear not one word about re-enacting Glass-Steagall or its equivalent?
Never mind the current rash of nonsense about compensation in the banking industry and reforming the SEC to do its job. That's all hogwash, designed to sound good without correcting the problem.
When you see Glass-Steagall (or its equivalent; something that will break up immense banks) put back in force, there will be some hope for our country ...
... but don't hold your breath.
Fred Gohlke
I agree, nlightn. The Goldman Sachs situation is appalling.
On June 06, 2007, Bullwinkle posted an article from the Daily Telegraph citing anxiety in Italy about Goldman Sachs control of the Italian Government. The article mentioned, among many other things, an inquiry into Goldman Sachs involvement in corrupt activities over a 15-year period. You'll find Bullwinkle's post at:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=20218326
Meanwhile, as I said once before,
"We, here in the U. S., secure in our smug self-satisfaction,
have been too blind to see our own Goldman Sachs alumnus, our
Secretary of the Treasury, engineer the incredible financial
debacle we're enduring. Then, nincompoops that we are, we
applaud when he uses our money (about 100 billion dollars of
it) to buy the votes of the filth we've elected to represent
us in our government, so he can give his alma mater and a few
of his compatriots on 'the street' 700 billion of our dollars
to consolidate their hold on our existence."
The pervasiveness of the problem is frightening. Our New Jersey Governor, Jon Corzine ... a former Chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs ... appointed Gary Rose, of Goldman Sachs Investment Banking Division, to the specially-created position of Chief of the Governor's Office of Economic Growth, where his power is immense. The Star-Ledger (Newark, NJ) of June 10, 2007, reported it this way:
"Gary Rose is widely considered the second-most powerful
official in New Jersey State Government -- right behind Gov.
Jon Corzine.
While he's never run for office and works far from the public
eye, Trenton insiders describe Rose as Corzine's de facto
lieutenant governor.
Holding a Cabinet job created specifically for him, Rose has
authority over all or parts of two dozen state agencies,
including every important state panel dealing with economic
growth.
In short, he controls virtually every dime the state is
spending to boost the economy."
For completeness, we have to add Corzine's choice of Brad Abelow, who was head of global operations at Goldman Sachs, as the New Jersey State Treasurer.
Note that these folks took the same positions in New Jersey as they took in Italy ... positions that give them control of the flow of money.
This is the crew that tried to strip New Jersey of its assets, seeking to sell the New Jersey Turnpike and the state lottery to the financial industry. These are hugely productive state assets. They pour hundreds of millions of dollars into the state treasury. Corzine and his Goldman Sachs crew have found an innocuous term to cover the theft. They call it "monetization", but it's the same asset-stripping practiced by all corporate raiders.
This is not a hidden conspiracy, it's happening right in front of our eyes. The question is ...
HOW THE HELL DO WE STOP THEM!!!!!
I'll tell you what ... I don't believe we can ... unless we find some way to put decent people in our state legislature ... and that's not going to happen with our present political system.
The Star Ledger does not allow direct links to its articles, but if you'd like to check this, you can try ...
http://www.nj.com/starledger/stories (Enter "go-to guy for talking business" in the search box)
Fred Gohlke
re: "... but what is our remedy ?"
Change the way we select the people we put in public office!!!!
Eliminate the corrosive effects of the campaign process. Even worse than the inherently corruptive nature of soliciting funds to finance a campaign, which invites demands from the financial backers, is the destruction of the candidate's psyche caused by the pandering required to attract votes.
Candidates must appear to stand for something but, to attract support, they continually adjust their assertions to appeal to the diverse groups whose votes are required for their election. Their personal beliefs must be subordinated to the interests of their audience. They gain expertise in avoiding direct answers to questions and diverting attention from unwelcome topics. Thus, campaigning is just training in the art of deception.
Campaigning is the antithesis of open inquiry, it is one-way communication centered on deceit, misdirection and obfuscation rather than integrity and commitment to the public interest. That is why the term 'politician' is pejorative. The process of campaigning produces people adept at appearing to champion some idea while standing for nothing but the success of their party.
To make matters worse, candidates are incessantly lionized by their supporters. This, coupled with the insidious effect of repeatedly proclaiming their own rectitude seduces them into believing their own press clippings. These things have a debilitating effect on the candidate's character, and, since morality is a top-down phenomenon, choosing political leaders by this method destroys society.
It is frustrating that the people already know these things but have come to believe them unavoidable. If we wish to improve our political systems, I think it important to call attention to the adverse effects of campaign-based politics and devise a way to select the best among us as out political leaders, rather than the worst.
Fred Gohlke
Oh, Oh!!!
Dylan Radigan's price must have just gone up. I, for one, stopped watching when they switched to the lovely young lady.
Before that, I tolerated the teenager they had punching the Whoooosh button. After that, it wasn't worth it.
Fred
Didn't we once have a limit on how many times your alias could be changed? Was that discontinued?
I changed my alias, once.
I made it my real first name.
Boy, was that a disaster!
Nobody knew me, so I changed it back.
Besides, it's best that way ... Love's Zephyr (Koikaze) suits me, perfectly.
Fred
How about a tax that works for the benefit of the humans among us ...
Tax absolute gross receipts
less amounts paid for supplies, materials and equipment used in the taxpayer's business, to entities in which the taxpayer has no financial, administrative or managerial interest of any amount or kind, and
less amounts paid in wages or salaries, but not including bonuses or allowances, to full-time employees for which the taxpayer provides adequate health insurance and retirement benefits (amounts paid to part-time and contract employees are not a deductible expense)
Use a base tax rate of 2% on the first $10.00 of gross receipts, and increase the rate by 2% each time the absolute gross receipts increases by a factor of 10, thus ...
Absolute Gross Receipts, Annually Tax Rate
$10 2%
$100 4%
$1,000 6%
$10,000 8%
$100,000 10%
$1,000,000 12%
$10,000,000 14%
and so forth
Yeah, but ... (as my kids used to say) ... in her case, she must maintain her decorum.
Fred
Given the folks she deals with every day, Shelly probably has a greater problem suppressing her humor than expressing it.
I mean, c'mon, the temptation to laugh at some of the iHub tribe must be enormous.
Fred
Thanks, Bruce
I finally managed to get it done.
Fred
Well, if Bob's a Cobra, I don't want summa dat.
Fred
OK, Rosie Dear, I got it.
Fred
I want to, Rose, I'm hung up in a deadly embrace trying to register.
Fred
Why?
Did the union agree?
Fred
Does anyone remember when 'Gross Revenue per employee' was a commonly-discussed stock valuation metric? It was a measure of how effectively companies were adopting automation. We don't hear much about it anymore.
Since machines aren't noted for contributing to the economy through consumption, I think the humans among us would be best served if this particular metric were used as a basis for taxation.
Our legislators are talking about hitting us with a 'new' tax to fund their 'health care initiative'. Let them hit the parasites who have so little regard for their customers that they won't even answer their telephone.
Fred
If you say I'm shady
I must disagree
My sunny disposition's
Here for all to see
Fred
Thank you kindly, Suh
Now ... delete the thing. It's off-topic
Fred
Ya got me there 'cause there ain't no biz
What's got a code that's ... like ... Gee-Whiz
So lemme 'splain what it really is
'Cause it's only me splashin' smiley fizz
There are times when I've naught to do
That I come messin', as I ought not to
For here's a place for members who
Come seekin' he'p from iHub's crew
And they get it, too, the best on earth
Though it's often given with little mirth
So I come tryin' to make up that dearth
But unlike Paulie's, mine're of little worth
Fred
Gee,
It looks like buying Gee-Whiz wasn't any better than buying Gee-E or Gee-M. Even worse, mebbe.
Well, you know the old saying: Buy in haste, repent at leisure.
Fred
Not a bad idea.
It beats what I was going to suggest ... and is easier, too (for folks like me, who don't have to do it.)
Fred
Yeah, but ...
Where'd he get my picture?
OK, if that's too much to ask, how about displaying Paulie's name in a bright yellow and green banner so I don't miss any of his posts when I'm skimming through the "How come youse guys is discriminating against me???" posts?
Fred
Ahhhh, M&M's
Fred
I gave up on CNBC when they replaced Dylan. I've always wondered if he was dumped because he was too outspoken and forthright.
They could improve that site if the producer would let his kid go back to kindergarten instead of playing with all the little flash buttons on the console.
Investing is serious business. The childishness of trying to give the reporters little monikers does nothing to enhance the content.
Fred