Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - kidcoyote

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 246
1
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 30, 2014, 08:55 AM »
Advice for Lar

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/54613/just_don_t_look/


Good strategy. Don't look at the devastating  effect of policies. Make believe you care despite results.

Liberalism vs. Blacks

2
OT / Re: OT: Movie Thread
« on: August 28, 2014, 02:55 PM »
Saw another Korean film, "The Man From Nowhere". The violence notwithstanding, the film is good. Pawn broker turns vigilante to save young girl, a neighbor. Turns out he's an ex-military guy, with all sorts of martial arts training. Over the top violent fight scenes. Like Oldboy. It's the genre, almost mandatory. Better than most. Korean films stepped up a bit the last few years and getting noticed. Everything better in terms of music, editing, panoramic shots, etc. Growing up, more sophisticated. Next up, The Election and Triad Election(a sequel). There's 3 or 4 hot directors.

3
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 28, 2014, 11:17 AM »
Although I was aware of corporate inversions, I didn't fully appreciate the common sense of doing it. It's far more advantageous to relocate outside the US. I see a stampede coming. Here's why: If a US company, like Burger King, makes $100 million overseas, they pay taxes there. If they want to take the after tax profits back to the US to invest here, they have to pay taxes again, on the money, not future earnings. We are the only country in the world who taxes these repatriated profits. It's stupid. But there's a way to avoid the US taxes and still get the money back into the US. Relocate to Canada, become a Canadian corporation. Under same scenario, BK makes $100 million overseas, pays taxes, brings the money back to Canada, pays no taxes, then as a Canadian corp invests in the US, and pays no taxes on the invested monies. CEO's who don't consider this should be fired. I can't see how this possibly can be stopped. You can't tax foreign corporations from investing in the US. That'd be suicide. No country does that. They all tax the earnings, not the investment. Only the US taxes the investment, but only on repatriated profits of its own companies, not foreign corps. Simple solution: don't be a US corporation. Be a foreign one. Save billions.

Does anyone have the other side of this argument as to what should/can be done? My solution: lower taxes and don't ever tax repatriated profits as they create jobs.
Warren Buffett's Tax Whopper

4
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 28, 2014, 08:13 AM »

This guy just doesn't understand capitalism, and why should he?


His understanding of capitalism is at least as strong as yours of liberalism, yet that never stops you from flapping your trap.

Really? Why don't you tell me how liberalism/socialism works. And please provide examples of success. At least I have an econ degree, not a music degree. I'm talking about economics and economic systems. Liberalism is anti-economic. It's parasitic in nature, weighing down economies with costs. It provides no growth and weakens entire systems, and bureaucrats take their 20% vig running it. The only reason socialism exists at all is because capitalist and free market economies can bear the burden, at least for awhile. But as you see in places like Argentina and Venezuela, they're on the road to being like Cuba, Soviet Union or Communist China. It always ends this way. And in places like Spain and Portugal, you have 50% youth unemployment from following socialist policies, so they're just behind in collapse, and will certainly need to change course. Youths are leaving those countries and going to former colonies in Africa to find work. As usual, you speak on a subject with scant knowledge.

You equate any liberal leanings to socialist regimes.  Following the same logic path, I should equate your right wing leanings to Fascist regimes.  It makes just as much sense.

Fascist regimes other than Franco were lefist regimes.


Debatable but if calling your right wing leanings Francoist floats your boat, so be it.

The point is that all liberals aren't communists, socialists, or whatever other far out label you want to attach to them.  But that's something that you refuse to acknowledge.   So from now on whenever you go on one of these weird socialism rants, I'll just call you a Francophile.
Franco floats my boat? You're nuts. If all liberals aren't socialists, and I imagine they don't want to be identified that way, how does one explain the infatuation of Piketty by the left? Piketty himself says he's not a socialist but then in the next sentence says we should tax wealth at 10% and Marx didn't go far enough. So, it matters little how he calls himself. It's his policy ideas which make him what he is. And Krugman is a cheeleader of his. Seems to me, the left is either disingenuous ir confused. Walter Duranty of the NY Times was an apologist of Stalin, Galbraith of Harvard was similar to the Sovief Union and Mao. Obama's former WH coounications director said Mao was one of her two favorite philosophers; Valerie Jarrett's father in law was a registered communist.

But you're missing the bigger point. Most of these ideas start with good intentions, but as Sowell states, often don't work, but the left, stuck in ideology, despite the facts, just plow on. Eventually, this leads to coercion. Do you believe in Piketty's wealth tax? If so, how will this be accomplished without coercion? So , if you want to be known as liberal, be liberal in the strictest sense, and stop the coercion. Coercion is what totalitarian regimes do, not what the US should do. Piketty is advocating coercion.

5
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 28, 2014, 07:52 AM »
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/aug/26/global-warming-irreversible-un-panel-report


The Guardian quoting the UN, with a photo including IPCC head, Pachiuri, a railroad engineer. If it's irreversible, why do anyfhing? Hanses started this scaremongering back in 1988. When is armagaeddon  coming now? I'd like to prepare.

6
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 27, 2014, 10:50 PM »
Lar, I was thinking about your comment about me linking all liberals with socialist regimes, communist regimes, etc., and you're right, I do. I do this because this is where it leads.


And all conservatives naturally become white supremacists.   ::)


When you have no argument, I guess you stoop to stupidity. You prove my point. I'll turn this argument over to Thomas Sowell. You should read him. You might learn facts. Or stick with Piketty and Krugman, and learn nonsense, dangerous nonsense. Facts are stubborn things.

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2013/01/15/liberalism-versus-blacks-n1489212/page/full

7
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 27, 2014, 01:58 PM »
Sounds like every other Bill O'Reilly segment.  ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Sometimes I wonder if you read much, or understand what you read. I'm not an O'Reilly watcher, but do see him occasionally, maybe once a month, usually a home I'm in has it on. I don't tune in, ever. I like Fox, but not his show. I do like Bret Baier's show, but not usually home early enough. I do watch Fox News Sunday. And I don't watch Megan Kelly, but like her, catching it occasionally. I'm not really a TV watcher. Fox News Sunday is a regular, with two cups of coffee. Gets my day going. Rest of the time I'm on the, with a wide variety of new; Drudge, Powerlineblog, RealClearPolitics(really the best one, IMO, has all links to all sides of an issue). That's where I get my news.

My views are really less government, more freedom, less regulation, less taxes, less mandates, restricitions, edicts, etc. As far as I know, O'Reilly doesn't ever speak on those things. I find him a bufoon, and boorish. I don't listen to Rush either, but I heard he calls O'Reilly, "Ted Baxter", and that's about how I feel. 

8
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 27, 2014, 07:51 AM »

This guy just doesn't understand capitalism, and why should he?


His understanding of capitalism is at least as strong as yours of liberalism, yet that never stops you from flapping your trap.

Really? Why don't you tell me how liberalism/socialism works. And please provide examples of success. At least I have an econ degree, not a music degree. I'm talking about economics and economic systems. Liberalism is anti-economic. It's parasitic in nature, weighing down economies with costs. It provides no growth and weakens entire systems, and bureaucrats take their 20% vig running it. The only reason socialism exists at all is because capitalist and free market economies can bear the burden, at least for awhile. But as you see in places like Argentina and Venezuela, they're on the road to being like Cuba, Soviet Union or Communist China. It always ends this way. And in places like Spain and Portugal, you have 50% youth unemployment from following socialist policies, so they're just behind in collapse, and will certainly need to change course. Youths are leaving those countries and going to former colonies in Africa to find work. As usual, you speak on a subject with scant knowledge.

You equate any liberal leanings to socialist regimes.  Following the same logic path, I should equate your right wing leanings to Fascist regimes.  It makes just as much sense.

Fascist regimes other than Franco were lefist regimes.


Debatable but if calling your right wing leanings Francoist floats your boat, so be it.

The point is that all liberals aren't communists, socialists, or whatever other far out label you want to attach to them.  But that's something that you refuse to acknowledge.   So from now on whenever you go on one of these weird socialism rants, I'll just call you a Francophile.

Lar, I was thinking about your comment about me linking all liberals with socialist regimes, communist regimes, etc., and you're right, I do. I do this because this is where it leads. This is what "The Road to Serfdom" is about, that choosing a progressive path leads to totalitarianism. Forget whether it's true or not(I believe it is) for a moment. But let's take a recent example. Piketty. Tim has posted maybe a dozen pieces on it, reviews, etc., from Krugman and others. In one interview of Piketty, he states, "Marx didn't go far enough." So, is supporting Piketty liberal, socialist, or Marxist? What's the difference?

Equating my views to fascism doesn't hold water. Fascism requires government control, govèrnmment domination of society, regulating all aspects of the economy. Do I support that? Which side in America today wants more government control of the economy?  I believe in free markets, people making their own economic choices. Marxism, socialism, communism all started out as noble ideas, but end up requiring increasing levels of coercion, mandates, edicts, executive orders, regulations, all with taxes to fund fhese things and enforce compliance.

9
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 26, 2014, 04:51 PM »
Maybe I'm one of those conspiracy folks, but I honestly belive that Buffet's talk about it being OK to tax the rich was just a kiss-up to Obama, so that he would return the favor and fight things like the Keystone pipeline.


Buffet's a lifelong Democrat, presumably meaning he's temperamentally opposed to paying a 15% tax rate on the earnings from his job while his assistant pays a 38% tax rate in his/hers (I forget her gender, and assume he's paying pretty well). Or just sides with his partisan side - like the Tea Partiers and seniors who hate gummint but keep your hands off my medicare - and now Obamacare.

But so long as we're talking conspiracy theory, just came on this one today, from the Libertarian site reason:

The Trouble with Conspiracy Science


I agree, Mark. I've followed Buffett's career for over 30 years, and while he's socially a Democrat, he does all in his power to reduce his Berkshire tax bill. In fact, he bends the rules. With the sale of the Washington Post stake, which he owned since Watergate, he had it structured so to not pay tax. I read his letter for 20 years, and he's obsessive about not paying taxes. And he doesn't pay 15% tax on earnings from his job, but he pay is only $100,000 and has been for years. His 17% rate is because a big amount is from dividends. But that's him, avoid taxes. I think he paid $7.5 million in taxes in 2012, so that'd be 15% of $50 million in dividends. Raise it to 30% and he'd pay another $7.5 million. Big freakin' deal. He's worth $50 billion. Ask how he feels about a Piketty wealth tax, of 10%, so it'd cost him $5 billion, and he'd go nuclear.

Just take one Buffett example. In 2009/2010, he purchased Burlington Northern. Prior, BNI paid taxes on earnings, then paid dividends, a pretty good one. Buffett hates that, as the dividend is taxed twice. That's why he hates them. And efficiency wise, he's right. Then, when he takes over, the corporate tax is still paid, but now the extra cash, what used to be used for dividends, passes to Berkshire, with zero tax. Buffett's a genius, but a master tax avoider. People should learn more about what he does, and how he acts, not what he says. His corporate site has his annual letter. People would be surprised to know that insurance is where he's really knocked it out. He loves the float, or premiums received before claims and expenses paid.

10
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 26, 2014, 04:37 PM »

This guy just doesn't understand capitalism, and why should he?


His understanding of capitalism is at least as strong as yours of liberalism, yet that never stops you from flapping your trap.

Really? Why don't you tell me how liberalism/socialism works. And please provide examples of success. At least I have an econ degree, not a music degree. I'm talking about economics and economic systems. Liberalism is anti-economic. It's parasitic in nature, weighing down economies with costs. It provides no growth and weakens entire systems, and bureaucrats take their 20% vig running it. The only reason socialism exists at all is because capitalist and free market economies can bear the burden, at least for awhile. But as you see in places like Argentina and Venezuela, they're on the road to being like Cuba, Soviet Union or Communist China. It always ends this way. And in places like Spain and Portugal, you have 50% youth unemployment from following socialist policies, so they're just behind in collapse, and will certainly need to change course. Youths are leaving those countries and going to former colonies in Africa to find work. As usual, you speak on a subject with scant knowledge.

You equate any liberal leanings to socialist regimes.  Following the same logic path, I should equate your right wing leanings to Fascist regimes.  It makes just as much sense.

Fascist regimes other than Franco were lefist regimes. The National Socialists? Hitler was just racist, believing it had to be German socialism, not global. When a government controls production, it's socialist, when it orders it what to do/make, etc., it's fascist. The distinction is minor. In fascism, there's no responsibility, just benefits of production. Forcing banks to do certain things not written in law, or ordering people to buy certain products, or companies to make certain things, rather than the free market do it, is fascist.

11
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 26, 2014, 01:33 AM »
I used to read Berkshire's annual report, from about 1981 through maybe 2000, slacking off since then. In many of the chairman's letters he wrote, he always stressed minimizing taxes, stating the government would eventually get the money, much more, but much later, if he invested it before he gave it to them. Of course, now that he's pledged it to the Gates Foundation, it wasn't true. The government isn't getting their 'fair share' after all. Anyway, I always chuckle when he talks of the rich paying taxes, as his entire life was spent avoiding paying them, even now we see, on his death. So, this is not surprising. Wonder what the WH feels about this.

For those who think this immoral or unpatriotic, what Burger King is doing, keep in mind they've been through bankruptcy in the past, have had several owners, taken private more than once, once owned by General Mills, and they couldn't make a go of it, after buying it from spirits maker, Diageo, who also couldn't make a go of it, and after years of struggling(the left think business is easy) against the likes of McDonald's and competing with Wendy's, now battle Chipotle, Moe's, Panera, Taco Bell, KFC and on and on and on. If they can save a few $100 million, why not? Will make them tougher. This trend, inversions, will turn into a stampede if US corporate taxes aren't slashed. Jacob Bernstein can jump up and down all he wants. He's clueless to reality. Corporations like Burger King, can't survive if they don't do this. They're at a competitive disadvantage. How can a company paying 35% corporate tax compete vs one paying 15%? Impossible. We need politicians who grasp this reality, not social welfare buffoons. Best way to improve social welfare? Create jobs, not kill them. From tax rates, Obamacare, permitting and things like Keystone, and anti-fracking in places like NYS, it's like the Keystone Kops are running things.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/warren-buffett-to-help-finance-burger-kings-takeover-of-tim-hortons-1409012196

12
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 26, 2014, 01:16 AM »

This guy just doesn't understand capitalism, and why should he?


His understanding of capitalism is at least as strong as yours of liberalism, yet that never stops you from flapping your trap.

Really? Why don't you tell me how liberalism/socialism works. And please provide examples of success. At least I have an econ degree, not a music degree. I'm talking about economics and economic systems. Liberalism is anti-economic. It's parasitic in nature, weighing down economies with costs. It provides no growth and weakens entire systems, and bureaucrats take their 20% vig running it. The only reason socialism exists at all is because capitalist and free market economies can bear the burden, at least for awhile. But as you see in places like Argentina and Venezuela, they're on the road to being like Cuba, Soviet Union or Communist China. It always ends this way. And in places like Spain and Portugal, you have 50% youth unemployment from following socialist policies, so they're just behind in collapse, and will certainly need to change course. Youths are leaving those countries and going to former colonies in Africa to find work. As usual, you speak on a subject with scant knowledge.

13
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 25, 2014, 06:25 PM »
Well, that didn't take long. I thought it'd be Krugman, but it's the master musician and PhD in social welfare who takes on Mankiw's piece. Clueless as ever.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/upshot/cutting-the-corporate-tax-would-grow-other-problems.html?mabReward=RI%3A16&module=WelcomeBackModal&contentCollection=The%20Upshot&region=FixedCenter&action=click&src=recg&pgtype=article

Here's a bright comment from our cello player.

Creating a new way to shelter business profits violates both of those simple ideals, which is probably why every other advanced economy has a corporate tax.

Does he realize that every advanced economy has a lower corporate tax? Does he realize that Ireland has a 12.5% rate, not 35%. Does he realize that even Russia has a flat tax? I think it's 10%.

This guy just doesn't understand capitalism, and why should he? A master's in music and a PhD in social welfare? He's better qualified to speak on music. When you tax something more, you get less of it, when you tax something less, you get more of it. You want more business and more jobs and more people on the payrolls(who pay taxes), then reduce corporate taxes. 

Forget inversions for a moment. What about new business formation? If it's more profitable to operate in China, Russia, Ireland, E. Europe, Canada, essentially everywhere, why would anyone open a business here if they weren't forced to? Patriotism? I get this sort of logic when some friends diss Walmart, as they say it abuses its workers, and they want to help people, you know, liveable wage, yada yada. But these people shop on Amazon. Let's look at the numbers, and drop the ideology.

Walmart does 6X the business of Amazon but has 17X the employees. And Walmart pays taxes in every state, and their employees pay taxes. Last year Walmart paid $8.1 billion in income taxes, Amazon paid $161 million. So, Walmart does 6X the business but pays 50X the taxes. And Walmart consumers pay local taxes in any state with sales tax. Amazon does not. Yet, ask a progressive if they shop at Walmart or Amazon, you'd probably hear Amazon. Walmart has 2 million full time employees, Amazon, 117,000. Who covers more people's healthcare? Shouldn't progressives love Walmart and hate Amazon?

This is not going to stop. And legislation which makes it more onerous will do little but expedite these maneuvers, or similar ones. The only answer is to lower corporate rates. Other countries are operating on common sense, but not the US. Hey, socialists and redistributionists, game over. Wake up. And listening to music majors with PhD's in social welfare comment on economics is dangerous to your understanding of economics. Like the minimum wage, liveable wage, and corporate taxes, everything that raises the cost of doing business will result in less of it being done, which results in less jobs. Does anyone doubt that Amazon is successful because it has the lowest labor costs, and the lowest sales tax rates,  in all of retailing?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-more-u-s--companies-will-flee-to-canada-170750190.html

14
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 25, 2014, 12:02 PM »
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/upshot/one-way-to-fix-the-corporate-tax-repeal-it.html

My concern is that those advocating a consumption tax are too glib about its regressive nature, but if that can be addressed, it would be a cool thing.


I'm surprised the NY Times published it. I bet Krugman will be out with a counter piece. Taxing corporations has always been dumb, as they always just pass on the costs. You'd think someone on the editorial board would recognize that, and not have to have someone like Mankiw attempt to educate their readers. Certainly, government has to be funded somehow. The problem I have with the left is that it's always endless, having no limits.

Perhaps the boldest and best response to corporate inversions is to completely rethink the basis of corporate taxation. The first step is to acknowledge that corporations are more like tax collectors than taxpayers. The burden of the corporate tax is ultimately borne by people — some combination of the companies’ employees, customers and shareholders. After recognizing that corporations are mere conduits, we can focus more directly on the people.

I think Mankiw goes off the rails a bit here. I mean, is he just looking to raise more revenue? If so, how does this help? If one is looking for just another way to raise revenue, it's going to come from one of two places, corporations or individuals. But if it comes from corporations, it ultimately, as he suggests, comes from individuals. So, how does his solution help? I mean, is not raising revenue advocating taking more money from people? It's the level of spending that's always been the problem, not where the money to pay for it comes from, as it's always, 100% of the time, on the backs of Americans, either in higher taxes, unfunded debt to be paid, or higher prices(like the 50 cents per gallon at the gas pump of state and federal taxes). Why is this such a difficult concept to understand? I mean, why doesn't he just change his "has proved a remarkably efficient way to raise government revenue" with "has proved a remarkably efficient way to take more people's money"?

So here’s a proposal: Let’s repeal the corporate income tax entirely, and scale back the personal income tax as well. We can replace them with a broad-based tax on consumption. The consumption tax could take the form of a value-added tax, which in other countries has proved to be a remarkably efficient way to raise government revenue.

15
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 21, 2014, 02:31 PM »
This is no leader. Ukraine, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Libya, this and Ferguson, and he has to vacation and play golf? This guy's a narcissist...in spades. A 5 minute teleprompter speech and off to the links. Hollow man.


16
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 20, 2014, 11:06 PM »
Because a cop shot and killed the kid.  I get why it's a story.  I just don't understand why some media have decided that the cop was definitely in the wrong before the investigation is complete.


Agreed. But patience and understanding does not exist today and the people who tune into the 24/7 news channels want all the latest information, which is why those stations are such jokes because they print so much incorrect information. No one would tune into CNN/MSNBC/FOX if they didn't talk about it or if they said, we are awaiting further details of the investigation. I'm sure Nancy Grace has been a treat during these events.

Think I read an article today saying that the cop had a fractured orbital bone, though I don't know if that's in relation to the events that led to him killing Michael Brown.


Don't you think it a little unfair to include Fox in this? Whether you agree with their views or not, I don't recall them ever convicting someone before the evidence in. What Wolf Blitzer did was outrageous, and MSNBC also. I was listening to NPR today, and had to turn it off. It was surreal. All they had on were people saying how awful blacks are treated, and how it's shoot first, ask questions later. It was appalling. They weren't convicting the cop in this incident, but the whole show focused on Ferguson and racism, insinuating this was racism, plain and simple. This just doesn't match the facts of this case. Nor is this a national problem. There are more gun deaths in Chicago annually, primarily blacks killing blacks(about 500) than there are cop shootings of people nationally annually(about 400). 50 states vs 1 city? Sure it's an issue, but not a priority, not by a long stretch.

If I'm wrong on the Fox inclusion, show me an example where Fox has or is creating a lynch mob mentality, like CNN, MSNBC and NPR(awful) have done with this. Your inclusion of them with what the others have done in this matter is unwarranted. Tarring them in the same way is a nice trick of spreading the blame of coverage, but not true.

Here's an example of what Fox is saying. You may disagree, but it's not the same as the others. The others have a Duke Lacrosse mentality. Fox doesn't. And Eric Holder is not making it better in any way. The WH should focus on their responsibilities, not local police matters, nor playing golf.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/20/missouri-cop-was-badly-beaten-before-shooting-michael-brown-says-source/

17
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 20, 2014, 10:45 PM »
Who'd a thunk it? Better late than never. Next thing we'll find out is Tim is doing something similar. ;)

Plouffe For Free Markets

18
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 20, 2014, 01:43 PM »
A good example of why states and cities should not give incentives to companies. They should have a consistent policy of taxes, regulations, utilities, etc. No handouts. This is a plan by then Governor, Charlie Crist. In short, he gave $30 million of state funds, and the city of Port St. Lucie committed almost $40 million to build an animation studio specifically for Digital Domain, which did much animation work, including winning an award for "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button". Well, guess what? Prior to opening, DD declared bankruptcy, the building is empty, the city is on the hook for $40 million in bonds, which taxpayers will have to cover. The building has been for sale for over 2 years, and as yet, no acceptable bids. The city risks downgrades by the rating services. Charlie Crist, running for governor(again) was the driving force, and is being hounded by this in ads by his opponent. Once again, government in over their head trying to do things best left to the private sector. Maybe Crist should foot the bills personally. Is it too much to ask to just run city and state government, police, fire, etc., and allow the private sector to take risks with their own money, rather than luring them with taxpayer money?

http://www.wptv.com/news/region-st-lucie-county/port-st-lucie/digital-domain-port-st-lucie-closing-timeline-of-digital-domain-media-group-events

19
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 20, 2014, 11:53 AM »
Why is Ferguson even a story?


Because a cop shot and killed the kid.  I get why it's a story.  I just don't understand why some media have decided that the cop was definitely in the wrong before the investigation is complete.

I get why it's a story too. But should it be a story? I just think 40 black kids killed last month in Chicago, primarily by other black kids, should be a much bigger story. This Ferguson story is a story, not because it's so common, but because it's so rare. I think I saw a stat that there are 400 cop And violent crimes by blacks vs whites is 15 to 1 vs the other way. You're right, the media is making this a lynch mob mentality.

The biggest violent crime story in the country is black vs. black crime, but that doesn't fit the liberal narrative of racism, so they have no interest in it. This violence, black vs. black,  is far worse than in 1960. Was poverty and racism less back then?

http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/18/wsjs-jason-riley-unloads-on-obama-black-leadership-and-the-media-over-ferguson-video/

20
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 20, 2014, 11:27 AM »

I'd say 'falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus' fits here. When someone is so wrong, makes such a false statement, one at such odds with reality, why believe another word? Would you believe another word from one who believed babies came from storks? This guy deserves the same treatment.



Funny.  That's exactly the view I have of you.


Except you can't find any examples. Not big ones anyway. In that guy's piece, one of his central points is wrong. Loose money and inflation doesn't hurt the rich. They have assets which appreciate. He's an idiot. It's the poor and middle class, those without homes and assets who are most hurt, and those on fixed incomes, like retirees. People who don't know this should not comment on economics or inflation. It appears Paul Volcker got Krugman fired, and whether or not that's true, what Volcker states is true: the main function of a central bank is price stability. That requires defending the currency against debasement. This author is harping on the last 5 years, as if that's a legitimate time period for certainty. There are at least 2 millennium to demonstrate the disasters that follow currency debasement.

There's another aspect of inflation which people misunderstand. It does not require an overheated economy to cause price spikes. Look at Argentina today, or Venezuela. Argentina's inflation rate is expected to be 30% this year, Venezuela's is running at 57%. Their economies are not strong, just the opposite. Venezuela's is a disaster, and printing money is not helping. Just the opposite. Here are the worst inflation's in history. None have to do with a strong economy. All have to do with printing money to reduce debt burdens.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41532451/page/1


21
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 19, 2014, 08:37 AM »
The media didn't incite either of those things.  They might be fanning the flames a little at this point, but if anything they were late on the Ferguson stuff and most of the guys I've heard talking about Stewart have said just the opposite of Cowherd.

Don't confuse the 24/7 News Cycle's self-made obligation to hang on every little story for the same thing as 'inciting the masses'.  These are both big stories that deserve the coverage they are getting.

The Stewart thing is only a story because he's a champion driver from the biggest circuit in the country.  Insert a no name guy into that car, and nobody is even talking about it outside the sprint track racing community.  And I've heard more than just Cowherd make similar comments.  I've read a couple articles as well.  Seems irresponsible to place blame before any blame is factually established. 

You might be right about the media getting to Ferguson late.  But all I saw last week and into the weekend was the media playing up how many times the guy was shot and a couple of witnesses suggesting Brown did nothing wrong.  And because of this, all cops are now evil.

Of course I'm exaggerating some, but I'm just getting tired of the media deciding how people should view events (perhaps calling a talk show host "media" isn't fair either).

I don't think you're exaggerating, though I haven't followed the Stewart, so I'll stick to Ferguson. Let's stick to some basic facts:

1. Black on white crime vs white on black crime is 15 to 1.
2. Last month, 40 people, primarily black youths, were gunned down in Chicago.

Why is Ferguson even a story?

22
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 19, 2014, 08:25 AM »
Fiat money talk:

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2014/08/monday-delong-smackdown-the-wellsprings-of-bad-monetary-economics-in-goldbugism.html

Not sure where you get all this stuff. "The rich fear inflation, because they're the creditors and they have the megaphones"?  Is this a joke? Everyone, at least those with common sense, and some knowledge, know that the rich hold assets, stocks, real estate, art , etc., and in many cases, have used debt to finance those purchases. So , they benefit more than anyone, by far,  from loose monetary policies. It's those without the ability to accumulate assest, those on fixed incomes, those struggling to get by and are living hand to mouth who are most hurt by a debased currency. Read Paul Volcker, for goodness sakes. This is exactly why Krugman is out at Princeton. His loony ideas criticized by alum Volcker.

I'd say 'falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus' fits here. When someone is so wrong, makes such a false statement, one at such odds with reality, why believe another word? Would you believe another word from one who believed babies came from storks? This guy deserves the same treatment.

23
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 15, 2014, 02:20 PM »

Old Boy and Dragon Tattoo from this list.  But I think you pointed out a couple others that I also checked out.  Not sure which, since others were also recommending movies too.  Old Boy was so bizarre until the ending, when it all became clear.  One of the best movies I've ever watched.

Oldboy definitely was unique. A well read guy in my office said it was a ripoff of "The Stranger", "The Count of Monte Cristo" and maybe another, but as I don't read that much of that anyway, I loved it. But did you see the 2nd and 3rd part of Dragon Tattoo movies? Not as complex as the first, but good in their own rights. In the second, she goes after her father, and the third is a courtoom drama, as she's on trial.

Of that list, City of God and The Lives of Others are really something. And if you like Hitchcock, Headhunters is in that genre, cat and mouse. Pretty intense for about 45 minutes, with no relief, right til the end. Corporate headhunter married to beautiful woman gets in financial squeeze and he resorts to art theft to keep up his lifestyle. But it's his headhunter job which gets him in trouble.  Great story, Jo Nesbo book. Funny, daring, exciting, edge of your seat kind of stuff. I've watched it 3 or 4 times. Some jump out of your seat scenes. Vivid. I just saw New World, so it being fresh, I might be overrating it. But best thing I've seen in probably 2 years. And Korean films have really improved, musically, cinematography wise, acting, everything. Much more polished. Yet they still retain that rawness evident in Oldboy. Foreign films more real, earthy, gritty, with less special effects, more about the human condition. Here, we get so many superhero and comic book movies, it's kind of tired. I like some of them, but still. There's an execution type scene in New World, at which I found it tough to stay seated. Not gory, just intense, sad, gripping. And a wicked twist in the end.

24
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 14, 2014, 04:28 PM »
Maybe I should become a music advisor?


Or perhaps a movie critic.  I have checked out some of your recommendations and think you've been mostly spot on -- especially with the foreign films.


Thanks, bud. And kudos to you for the dietary recommendations. I don't always eat that way, but I know it's right. I'm going for pork tenderloin tonight. It's so soft, you can pull it off the bone with a flimsy plastic fork.

Not sure which foreign ones you saw, but one thing I really like about foreign films is that they're so different from each other. Like, I like martial arts movies, and Hero was great. There's another, I can't remember the name, also good. But currently, I'm very focused on Scandinavia(always) and I now like Korea, whose films have really become much more polished. New World is pretty slick, a big upgrade from Oldboy. Not that Oldboy wasn't great, but New World has better cinematography, music, scene changes, etc. Scandinavian movies and shows are funny, as it's always the same actors. And it seems there are like 15-20 of them. It's kind of funny. Mads Mikkelsen, his brother Lars, Sophie Grabol, Kim Bodnia, the blonde editor in The Dragon Tattoo, the sidekick in Forbrydelsen, the killer in Headhunters(Jamie Lannister in Game of Thrones) can usually be found in multiple films, whether Danish or Swedish.

Really new stuff, which I'm trying to get into, are Turkish films. The Cannes film festival Palme D'Or winner this year(best pic) was Winter Sleep, in Turkish, Kis Uykusu. But I can't find it. I looked up the director's prior films, and watched the most current, and it wasn't very good. Too long, in need of major editing, like cutting an hour out. I really just look at lists. Here's a list of 50, supposedly the last decade. I've seen the following:

1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,12,18,19,20,23,31.

I may download some of the rest, as I don't know them.

I'd say 1,2,3,4, 10, 12 and 20 are must sees. And 8, as it's the creepiest thing I can recall, child vampire, and 31, Russian, along with its second film, Daywatch, pretty good. Number 8, has a woman infected by a vampire, and the cats sense it, and attack her. It's a wild scene, as 10 cats are hanging off her as she fights them off, spinning and screaming. Pretty well done. As Russian, without special effect capabilities, Nightwatch and Daywatch a bit rough, but worth seeing. I'd add Headhunters(danish), New World(Korean) and the Forbydelsen TV series(Danish). The Eagle(Danish, Ornen) also pretty good series. But Frobrydelsen has great female lead. And the music is slick, very well done. I might watch it again. I'd say, Lisbeth Salander(Noomi Rapace, Dragon Tattoo), Beatrice Kiddo(Uma Thurman, Kill Bill) and Sarah Lund(Sophie Grabol, Forbrydelsen) are best female roles ever, if you like strong women. The second and third of the Dragon Tatto series have to be seen, The Girl Who Played With Fire and The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest. IMO, best trilogy ever. Amelie, French, a feel good, must see movie. Audrey Tatou a real beauty, and the film is magical. She's like a French Audrey Hepburn in her youth. What can be better than that?

http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/foreign-films/18706/the-top-50-foreign-films-of-the-last-decade

25
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: August 14, 2014, 01:39 PM »
Pretty much all media, Fox, Washington Post, The Tribune Company, National Press Club, National Photographers Association, McClatchy and on and on, have come out against Michael Mann and his lawsuit, by filing an amici curaie brief with the court, in defense of free speech. Big stuff. If Mann loses, remember he's been countersued, for I think $20 million. As I've stated before, this is going to be another headache for PSU. The BOT better be on top of this. Remember, Spanier did the investigation of Mann. But of 4 questions/topics to be covered, Spanier only covered 2, and the investigators were all PSU employees. Of the other 2 topics, he said something like, "there was no reason to consider them." Pretty similar to his handling of the JS affair. Snuff it.

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2014/08/13/press-groups-file-amici-curiae-brief-in-mann-v-steyn-defamation-lawsuit/


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 246