bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 21:50:01 -0400,
wrote:


bpuharic wrote:

On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 11:43:47 -0400, wrote:


STOLE THE FREAKIN' ECONOMY!



and people were not paying attention to where the money was coming
from. There was plenty of greed to go around. What about those yuppies
house flippers who were borrowing 99% of the home price, hoping they
would never have to make a payment or the ones with the 125% home
equity loans?
There were some people who knew this was going to crash. The smart
builders were scaling back in 2006.


well golly. if people were so smart why are we in the condition we're
in?


Define "wall street" in your own words...

ever hear of morgan stanley?


Sure, but they aren't "Wall Street".

On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 23:31:40 -0400, Larry
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 21:50:01 -0400,
wrote:


bpuharic wrote:

On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 11:43:47 -0400, wrote:


STOLE THE FREAKIN' ECONOMY!



and people were not paying attention to where the money was coming
from. There was plenty of greed to go around. What about those yuppies
house flippers who were borrowing 99% of the home price, hoping they
would never have to make a payment or the ones with the 125% home
equity loans?
There were some people who knew this was going to crash. The smart
builders were scaling back in 2006.


well golly. if people were so smart why are we in the condition we're
in?


Define "wall street" in your own words...

ever hear of morgan stanley?


Sure, but they aren't "Wall Street".

why? did he work in botswana?

bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 23:31:40 -0400,
wrote:


bpuharic wrote:

On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 21:50:01 -0400,
wrote:



bpuharic wrote:


On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 11:43:47 -0400, wrote:


STOLE THE FREAKIN' ECONOMY!




and people were not paying attention to where the money was coming
from. There was plenty of greed to go around. What about those yuppies
house flippers who were borrowing 99% of the home price, hoping they
would never have to make a payment or the ones with the 125% home
equity loans?
There were some people who knew this was going to crash. The smart
builders were scaling back in 2006.



well golly. if people were so smart why are we in the condition we're
in?



Define "wall street" in your own words...


ever hear of morgan stanley?



Sure, but they aren't "Wall Street".

why? did he work in botswana?

HE? Do you think there is/was a guy named Morgan Stanley that is
relevant to your tirade?

On 8/29/10 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 05:39:41 -0400, wrote:

ever hear of morgan stanley?


Sure, but they aren't "Wall Street".

why? did he work in botswana?

He?
Do you think there is or was a guy named Morgan Stanley?


Wall Street financial houses...more crooked than your neighborhood
bookie, and they do a lot more damage, too. My two major issues with
Obama...ramping up in Afghanistan...and bailing out the bankers. We
should have left the "bankers" twist in the wind, and then prosecuted them.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 12:19:38 -0400, Secular Humanist
wrote:

On 8/29/10 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 05:39:41 -0400, wrote:

ever hear of morgan stanley?


Sure, but they aren't "Wall Street".

why? did he work in botswana?

He?
Do you think there is or was a guy named Morgan Stanley?


Wall Street financial houses...more crooked than your neighborhood
bookie, and they do a lot more damage, too. My two major issues with
Obama...ramping up in Afghanistan...and bailing out the bankers. We
should have left the "bankers" twist in the wind, and then prosecuted
them.


Not a big argument about that here (either one).
Afghanistan is a pure loser but you can play the Wall Street game if
you understand how trading works.
The fat cats won't let us drive the bus or even ride inside but we can
hitch a ride if you know how.

There's no agreement whatever that Afg. is a pure loser. I'd prefer to wait
for a professional assessment.

On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 12:16:19 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 05:39:41 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

ever hear of morgan stanley?


Sure, but they aren't "Wall Street".

why? did he work in botswana?

He?
Do you think there is or was a guy named Morgan Stanley?

do you think no one works for morgan stanley?

bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 12:16:19 -0400, wrote:


On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 05:39:41 -0400, wrote:


ever hear of morgan stanley?



Sure, but they aren't "Wall Street".

why? did he work in botswana?

He?
Do you think there is or was a guy named Morgan Stanley?

do you think no one works for morgan stanley?


Nice deflection but unrelated to your claim.

On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:24:19 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 13:22:55 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 12:16:19 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 05:39:41 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

ever hear of morgan stanley?


Sure, but they aren't "Wall Street".

why? did he work in botswana?

He?
Do you think there is or was a guy named Morgan Stanley?

do you think no one works for morgan stanley?

I am just not sure why you singled out one brokerage house, then made
it sound like one guy.

you mean other than he made a BILLION dollars during the economic
collapse?

BTW if we didn't have Wall Street, there wouldn't really be any such
thing as retirement for anyone

HAHAHAHAHAHA who the HELL do you think can afford to retire other
than the rich???

THAT"S THE WHOLE POINT!! they took the money of the middle class and
now we CANT retire!!

On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:05:45 -0400, wrote:

You keep bitching about how your 401k is losing money. If you had
simply bought IBM stock you would be getting 2-3% return from
dividends alone.

Now who would have thought that a big manufacturing company in the US
could possibly have been successful over so many years. Maybe
because of good management, good products, good people, good service
and no unions (that I know of) ?

Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:05:45 -0400, wrote:

You keep bitching about how your 401k is losing money. If you had
simply bought IBM stock you would be getting 2-3% return from
dividends alone.

Now who would have thought that a big manufacturing company in the US
could possibly have been successful over so many years. Maybe
because of good management, good products, good people, good service
and no unions (that I know of) ?


I thought IBM was an Indian company now.
Heard that's where their largest workforce is.
http://localtechwire.com/business/lo...gpost/8155238/
This is old 2006 info
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...ees/index.html
But it's probably wrong. The IBM number looks global.
You could have as well mentioned Ford, Boeing, GE, UPS, GM, etc.
They all provide more jobs for Americans.
Wouldn't fit in with the union-bashing though.
Can't remember the last time I bought an IBM product made in the U.S.
Maybe the original IBM pc had parts made in the U.S.
Bought a couple "IBM" hard drives made in some Singapore sweatshop about
8 years ago. They both failed pretty quick. Junk.
Not having a union over there didn't help a bit.
Probably the design engineers in the U.S. screwed the pooch.
That might be why they're moving so much to India.
There's one thing easier than bashing unions though.
Picking stocks after their performance is known, and fancying yourself a
genius.

Jim - Tripe isn't only found in sausage.