discussion comment
16 years ago
"I think the Govt. may have postponed the envitable a few years but the loans/printing press will eventually collapse."
Technology can still save the day, imho. For example, I don't believe there is an energy crisis. No not some horrible conspiracy to keep cheap, clean, wonderful fuel from the masses. Rather it is a question of blindness and cheap oil ($20 per barrel pre-Bush?). I read this editorial piece by a Nobel winning economist who aggressively asserted FREE fuel would have negligible impact on economic well being. Yep, that is what the learned moron claimed. Oh, he supported the idiocy showing how the cost of most products was comprised of 10% or 20% in fuel costs. Therefore, Bright Eyes says FREE fuel is the equivalent of people getting a 20% raise. Not a big deal in the big picture. Apparently, even Nobel winners can gaping blind spots. FREE energy changes the game in ways people can even begin to comprehend.
Anyway, higher gasoline prices put all types of formerly more expensive options on the table; if the government doesn't get in the way innovation is spurred and conservation is put in place. Maybe liquid coal will be the replacement. Or, the hydrogen fuel cell. Sounds silly, but maybe solar will continue to get more efficient. Remember the first computers were a joke and now BANG lots of power on the desktop or laptop.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Yes, one can definitely blame the U.S. government. Not only for printing money that leads to buy now before it gets more expensive fear, but also for backing these loans and requiring banks to have a certain number of "red area" loans.
The mortgage brokers just suddenly got greedy? :) Yeah, right. No, the rules of the game changed. And, the rule writer was the U.S. government. President Clinton pushed for greater home ownership; not a bad thing, imho, even if it increases risk. The question is when re-writing of reinterpreting federal rules what are the forseeable results?
I know realtors, home builders, mortgage brokers, investors, and among the folks in the business that I knew it wasn't any deep dark secret that the rules had changed. And, changed for many reasons, such as President Clinton's push for greater home ownership.
The investors that I spoke with thought the pop could go either way i.e. a market crash with foreclosures or a dollar collapse where just thank you lucky stars as the dollar collapses to peso levels or lower. These was years before the market collapsed, btw. Dr. Ron Paul was talking about the possibility of a free fall of the U.S. dollar---may never happen or could be another replay of what happened to the Soviets.
discussion comment
15 years ago
![]()
popCleverly disguised as a responsible adult
"But then I read in the paper that she didn't think cops should be chasing after someone for merely having crack cocaine because she didn't think that was a crime. Not a crime? She is crazy."
Not a crime at all. Stripping and prostitution are more real crimes than crack cocaine. Before I hear whimpering that it is addictive----you can do the same sensationalism with alcohol. My family on my mother's side has alcoholism that is just as bad or worse than crack addiction.
BTW, if you look at the numbers and love government it makes a whole hell of a lot of sense to ban alcohol and smoking. And, you think crack cocaine is a crime, then alcohol for damn sure is under that type mentality. No, I've never tried crack cocaine----it seems like there is a genetic problem. Whites (I'm white) seem almost universally not to have fun with the crack---they don't like it. Legal bs isn't the issue for the whites that I know because they happily do other illegal drugs. Just because other whites didn't like crack kept me from trying? Not at all, but it was an influence. I've tried cocaine and didn't like it at all---it is nasty even when people you know are loving it telling you how wonderful it is. Not everyone reacts to drugs in the same manner. I'd pay NOT to take cocaine---it is like bad food---just put it in the garbage.
Fear of addiction? Gee, I got to see addiction first hand repeatedly. That for me, it is a zero deterrence because just as I can see addicts left right and center I also see people who aren't addicted even a little. Want to jump on the government's one size fits all train? Be my guest. Want to jump on the government's fear train? Be my guest. I say that because unfortunately most people, imo, are far better off letting their government do the thinking for them----you know a statesman such as Senator Kennedy or even an imbecile such as President Bush.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Anyone remember Long Term Capital Management and some of its juicy tid bits? Federal Reserve again came to the rescue of extremely wealthy individuals. Hey, it is only book keeping entries and those entries i.e. printing of money, may very well be saving your greenbacks from resembling pesos. :)
If you have to give Bill Gates and friends a trillion dollars isn't that a small price to pay if it keeps the dollar from collapsing. Forget the idiotic class warfare for a moment. It isn't about fairness or what is right or wrong, when it comes to protecting the wealth of the masses is it acceptable to giveaway trillions of dollars to save billionaires?
discussion comment
16 years ago
From what I saw the "common man" was more often the victim than not. I hear this filth about how the "common man" shouldn't have bought the expensive home. Pure poppycock. Here in Miami at onset of the fraud you had young families and surprise surprise these young families wanted a little security and ownership. Truly criminal desires if you hear the government lovers tell their story. :(
So young family was saving and waiting to buy their first home. But, prices start to climb. Their savings while growing from pitiful interest decreases in real value (as far as owning a home) every month so fear sets. Well, some smarty pants shows them how they can afford the "expensive" home. It is more than a little scary, but dang the scenario of relentless rent increases don't look so hot either. :( So, you do the best you can: roll the dice and pray the inflationary spiral truly goes bonkers to the point the debt on the "expensive" home looks like pocket change. That happened in the 1970s. You either play the government game or you risk watching your paper money be joke as far as buying a home.
Those who didn't play the game paid a hell of price in rent for the many years of the fraud. In *theory*, those lucky ones who didn't borrow *should* be in prime to position to buy a home assuming the rent increases during the fraud didn't bankrupt 'em. My bet is the banks have made it extremely difficult for the "common man" to borrow for a home right about now. Sad, to say but pretty much the government just needs to come in and run the whole show. And, not just as far as homes. Put the criminals in charge of everything.
As far as blaming the "common man" generally speaking that "common man" even if intelligent (normally not the case) is given 2 choices neither of which is so attractive. Heaven forbid he tries to get a little security and ownership of real assets for his family.
discussion comment
16 years ago
"by continuously electing incompetent and corrupt Congress Critters."
Even if you could wave a magic wand so that only competent and non-corrupt individuals could serve in Congress, I doubt very much whether there would much improvement if any improvement. It might even be worse due to core moral values. Remember the communist maxim: Property is theft.
Milton Friedman said most people want a dog that meows or a cat that barks. :) Too true. BTW, although I think Milton Friedman was the greatest his explanation for why the dollar has value was disheartening. Either he had a monumental blind spot or he didn't think people could handle the truth.
discussion comment
16 years ago
I was watching Dr. Ron Paul (I think it was CNN) last night. He reminded me of a childhood science experiment that took me by surprise. I had 2 ounces of liquid A and 2 ounces of liquid B (can't remember what the hell they were except clear) and my thinking was that by combining them I should get 4 ounces of something; the old 2 + 2 = 4 fallacy.
Dr. Ron Paul asserted a very similar type of fallacious logic. He claimed that creating new money (the good old power to print money or create computer credits) to save AIG and similar businesses is *a form of tax that everyone pays.* Essentially more dollars equals less value per dollar; tempting, but not necessarily true. It is like saying if the government doubles the number of dollars in circulation overnight, then the price of *everything* will double. The reality is the increased number of dollars may cause some prices to fall, others to rise, and still others to remain flat.
This new money that was created (for AIG) may actually have prevented the dollar from collapsing. The system is a fiasco, but fortunately smoke and mirrors can work miracles allowing the cattle class to continue waving their flags and more importantly enjoying Big Macs and Taco Bells.
OTOH, new money can be fairly destructive depending on a person's needs and situation. For example, you own a nice home and just wish to take life easy and die in your home at a ripe old age. If new money is increasing the dollar value of your home, however, then you might not be able to really afford the taxes on the higher dollar value. Remember even though the funny money is just a computer credit or a new bill it DOES have the power to take real assets such as your home from you. Another example, again involving funny money and taxes. You own a real asset such as land that you've been holding for your retirement. Religiously paying property taxes and other fees for the property every year. Finally, you sell at a dollar "profit" and pay more taxes. If you look at the real purchasing power of those dollars, then your "profit" may actually be a loss depending on what goods or services you wished to purchase with your newly acquired dollars. Inflation 3%? Well, that is extrememly subjective because the government can see a car doubling in price as actually decreasing in price for inflation reporting purposes---the claim is that when the car doubles in price you have to consider all the valuable extras such as pollution control devices or plastic bumpers. Doesn't matter whether the consumer wanted these extras or not. Hell, on one new car that I attempted to purchase I told the dealer that I'd pay to have the extras removed. Other people may have loved the extras---point is the government made the choices for people and then decided how value laden those choices were. A Big Mac may have more value in govenment eyes with only 2 pickle slices rather than 3 pickle slices. Real consumers might prefer a greater or fewer number of pickle slices or may not give a damn one way or the other.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Printing money (mainly computer credits; printing is too costly) has workded very well for the U.S. and to allow a collapse when all that is necessary is a few computer book keeping entries doesn't seem sage. What people believe can be more important than the reality. For example, some people in my neighborhood believed they're wealthy because the price of their home went thru the roof. Well, it is the same house with more wear and tear and the taxes are much higher, but the important thing is people had a feeling of wealth. Sorta like the person with a diamond thinking it has great value---does it?
Bottom line bailouts of billionaires has benefits for all and clearly, imo, is more worthwhile than printing a million here and there to blow up this village or that village.
It seems so undemocratic not to have President Bush for another 4 years----I can feel in my bones he could be reelected in perpetuity. :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
I wouldn't have guessed that shadowcat had a sense of humor. The indignities (sp?) he is willing to endure to bring a little levity (sp?) to TUSCL.
Good job, shadowcat. However, I would note you failed to lure in Parodyman.
discussion comment
16 years ago
At the bookstore I was accused of price gouging on more than a few occasions. Those wannabe customers can be in your face spouting the law says this and the law says that. :) Now, I wasn't exactly Mr. Smiley at that time and probably even now I wouldn't have compassion for that mindset unless it was across the board in a form where all costs and salaries and wealth are regulated to just above poverty levels. Not a brilliant idea, but at least it is "fair." :)
Examples of my supposedly criminal price gouging? A book says 15 cents and perhaps I'm charging $2 or $3. Charging more than the cover is supposedly price gouging. No comprehension at all when I explain to them that the 15 cents was real money at the time and if it is adjusted for the printing presses than perhaps even $5 would be a bargain in real terms. When that book was selling for 15 cents the monthly rent for the bookstore might have been $20 compared to the current $400 at the time. Scratching the printed price off the covers of books with a list price of 95 cents. Heard hell about that time and again.
The church sells books 10 for a dollar, which was true. I asked then why don't you shop at the church? Repeated answer: The church doesn't have any good books. This tired nonsense got so repetitive that not only did I stop donating books to the church, but I started ripping those books that I put in the trash in half--another supposed or real crime. A couple of garbage divers even had the nerve to complain that I was ripping the books in my garbage in half. I explained the situation and they had the perfect solution almost. Their solution was that I just cut my prices to 10 cents a book. I told 'em that was brilliant, if they could just bet my landlord to slash his monthly rent to $20---maybe pass a law? You know like progressive areas such as New York City. :) Another advantage of ripping books in half is that the garbage divers stopped diving and making a mess.
I don't know if it was because it is required reading by the public schools, but I saw this thin small paperback with a printed price of $9 at the neighbor's house. Damn, made me feel dirt poor and screaming for price controls. :)
I wish the nitwits would reintroduce price controls back onto gas. I miss those gas lines. Imagine if it was against the law to charge more than a buck a gallon. :) High energy prices solved! And, 50 cents for lap dances. I have NO doubt there would be dancers willing to sell for 50 cents a dance. Might be fat---hey, some customers love blubber. Might be old---some customers love old. Might be ugly----some customers dig personality. :)
Voting, imo, seems like an unconscionable waste of energy. Don't vote and save our *limited* resources. :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
"It cost a significant amount to keep and maintain it, and that goes right to the bottom line."
In some businesses it costs even more NOT to keep and maintain it; and it is bird-brained to cut it under the mantra of cutting costs.
More than a few bright eyes thought it was so smart to understock until they start losing business to competitors assuming the government will allow competitors that is. According to The Wall Street Journal retailers in the UK must be the brightest minds in the world because the shelves are kept scarcely stocked by management design. Just think of all the money they're saving! Whoop dee doo. They probably never thought about the sales they're losing and NOT just when customers come and don't buy cause it ain't in stock---but, customers deciding to visit less frequently because it just isn't worth the gamble of making a special trip if the product isn't in stock.
Stripclubs are especially poorly managed in this regard. A dancer has the brilliant idea to leave early or not to show on slow days may not stop to figure a potential regular long term customer may be lost. Dancers who could have been regulars just didn't make the cut because other dancers were more reliable. And, it is sort of funny in that the unreliable dancer wants regular customers and just doesn't see how a lack of routine kills that opportunity. There are a few dancer that I'd make a special trip to see, but I don't because they aren't reliable. Then I hear complaints that I'm not coming in. Gee, keep the product on the shelf and it makes all the difference. As far as cost cutting, maybe yes and maybe no. It too often isn't given critical thought.
discussion comment
16 years ago
It seems somewhat amusing to be complaining about the price of gas where the majority of customers have NO problem putting out $10 or $20 for a 3 minute dance not to mention all the other costs.
With the government bailout of AIG it seems that with any luck more socialism is on the way. :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
"Some of these men with good women at home, or who pass on other good women in their lives."
Your point seemed limpid.
"sexually neglect because they aren't turned on by them."
Again a limpid point. So, I meet quality women who are fun to be with and who have high character . . . and this somehow replaces a young hottie?! PLEASE!!!
It just seems like you're coming from the twilight zone. How am I supposed to be attracted to a women who is old? Or, who is fat? It would be better if I was attracted to older women, but it is a real chore to get even a little warmed up. Meanwhile hot young stripper slut has me roaring hot without much effort if any. I like young and hot. Morals and intelligence and a lot of other traits just don't compare to young and hot; that is what I need.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Yes. I could see the dancers at Coco's and at Angels I could see the dumpster (perpetual renovations). The pace of technology is incredible.
discussion comment
16 years ago
"no need to try and educated those that do not care to educate themselves."
Education is a funny business. I still remember how computers were supposed to be job killers or higher taxes egual more revenue for the government or recycling is good for the environment or more prisons mean less crime or etc. IOWs, I wouldn't be all too sure about "educated" position. I remember this wise old man who knew corporations don't pay taxes, but people do-----his erroneous thinking was that corporations would merely pass on higher costs to consumers. In a free market, his thinking would be on fairly solid ground---the U.S. ain't a free market so taxing certain corporations like Microsoft or Disney thru the nose might be very wise policy.
discussion comment
16 years ago
What a lachrymose set of posts. DickJohnson was right. I've known some good women that had everything but super hots. Who do I want to sleep with the sweet older woman who is licensed physician who is crazy about me or a dollar crazed sexy slut? I mean that is just such a tough choice.
I know the dollar crazed sexy slut! :) The older women? She could be nice to shoot the breeze with----someone to treat like a buddy. What is ridiculous is that the older women has reminded me a few times that I'm older than her . . . as if I could forget. Bring on the young hoes- times a wasting
discussion comment
16 years ago
"If you propose an alternative fuel that is inefficient for powering machinery but is relatively efficient for powering humans (e.g., corn or other food), I'm sure we'll all reject your idea as we should."
You give people way too much credit. Don't you know corn is a wonderful fuel for powering vehicles? :)
All those brainiacs in government must have thought so . . .
discussion comment
16 years ago
"1 dictionary results for: price gouging
WordNet - Cite This Source - Share This price gouging
noun
pricing above the market price when no alternative retailer is available"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=price+gouging&r=66
I have a strong feeling, for what little that's worth, that the above definition is wrong. Price gouging is whatever political authority says it is.
discussion comment
16 years ago
"Technically, there is no such thing as 'price gouging' in a free market."
True, but the U.S. doesn't have a free market.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Maybe your standards are too high? For whatever it's worth I usually expect less from the typical hot white dancer than from the typical hot black dancer. The easy white dancers usually seem easy to identify and normally aren't blazing hot, but then there are exceptions. Also, the whites typically expect more $$$.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Women can get wet from horseback riding, but that doesn't mean the horse arouses them. Rape victims get wet, but..."
In both cases they're aroused (aroused meaning "to stir to action or strong response; excite")---doesn't mean they're enjoying it, but their aroused. Sorta like some fat slob sucking on my dick while she has me pinned. My dick ain't getting up due to the "friction." (If simple friction was the deal, then walking would have my dick up.) And, if I could get the fat slob off of me----then bingo she is gone and away from my dick at warp speed. Similarly, a man could be raped by a man or a woman after getting hard-----doesn't mean he is happy about the man or woman raping him.
I can suck on a woman's titties and if they get hard----yes, she is aroused. Doesn't mean she is enjoying my titty sucking, but it is her arousal that gets me. I don't need the stripper to enjoy it----but the arousal in the form of hardened titties and racing heart are a supreme turn on.
Let's go back to our female rape victim. She is gushing wet, titties super hard, heart going a million miles a minute, and she is moaning from all the stimulation----yep, yes, affirmative she is aroused; this doesn't mean she is happy about being raped.
discussion comment
15 years ago
BTW, for those nitwits who believe that women never enjoy forcible rape----grow up already! :) I'd assume that vast majority don't, but the act of rape doesn't preclude the victim from enjoying the act. Forget about the vile government's one size fits all mentality and feminist propaganda.
Also, the nitwits who believe a woman can't enjoy forcible rape may lead the victim to feeling guilty or dirty or whoreish because the victim did enjoy the sexual stimulation. So there is nothing wrong with explaining to the victim that it is ok, if there were good feelings even though you didn't want to be raped---the victims can and do respond differently to the act. The one size fits all mentality needs to taken out with the trash.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Perky.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"'I mean they don't grade fathers but if your daughter is a stripper you f*&$#@ up' - Chris Rock"
Not the type thinking I'd succumb to.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
motorheadFat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
I like it the few times it has been available. The dancers were very appreciative. Of course, some women are much more attractive than others when pregnant.