On 24/04/2011 7:15 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 08:19:24 -0600,
wrote:

On 23/04/2011 5:42 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 16:53:45 -0600,
wrote:


So why would you control private business? So it can be as efficient at
disposing of money as Government Motors?

let's see...in the last 3 years, efficient private business cost the
US TEN TRILLION in national wealth.

so much for THAT little piece of right wing bull****

Market was overdosed on DEBT bubble, and it burst. Market just reacted.

yep.the right wing deregulated the financial markets and ran the debt
market up to stratospheric levels

more reason we need to regulate wall street


But I will thank our liberal leftie money for nothing debtors...it
presented a once in a lifetime buying opportunity. But then, that is
the difference between the seasoned investor and a knee jerk.

gee. what did the liberal left do?

you keep bleating this. but never get into specifics.

is that because you're a racist who hates obama or because you're too
stupid to know it was CONSERVATIVES who engineered the destruction of
the US?



The fact that so many were blinded by liberalism debt greed, well, isn't
a righties fault. Just envy on the left as many sold at the bottom when
they should have been buying....but then again they had too much DEBT.

more cliches

any specifics?

no. i thought not. you ahve glen beck and rush and all the right wing
blather


Bobby, have you gone through all 99 weeks of your unemployment yet?

Maybe on to welfare?



--
I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with
fleabagger debt.

On 24/04/2011 8:10 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:15:46 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 08:19:24 -0600,
wrote:



The fact that so many were blinded by liberalism debt greed, well, isn't
a righties fault. Just envy on the left as many sold at the bottom when
they should have been buying....but then again they had too much DEBT.

more cliches

any specifics?

no. i thought not. you ahve glen beck and rush and all the right wing
blather


Bobby, have you gone through all 99 weeks of your unemployment yet?


perhaps

but fortunately for you and your family

welfare goes on for a bit longer than that

Welfare should be eliminated. If a person is truly disabled, there is
disability. But welfare is an excuse to pay people to lay on their
backs and have babies they cannot otherwise afford.

If society needs such a function, perhaps government should take them in
like sheep, breed a better quality and manage their lives.
--
I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with
fleabagger debt.

On 24/04/2011 9:19 AM, Harryk wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:

While big money buys elections, last I checked it didn't buy your vote.
Money buys advertising, they pick the Rep and Dem ponies, but you often
can vote for a third option. But you don't.


A third option? Most of the "third option" candidates who run in this
country are as bat**** crazy as you are.

So did you run?

--
I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with
fleabagger debt.

Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/04/2011 9:19 AM, Harryk wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:

While big money buys elections, last I checked it didn't buy your vote.
Money buys advertising, they pick the Rep and Dem ponies, but you often
can vote for a third option. But you don't.


A third option? Most of the "third option" candidates who run in this
country are as bat**** crazy as you are.

So did you run?


I almost ran for public office once, when I lived in Michigan many years
ago and was very active in the state Democratic party.

On 24/04/2011 12:19 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 08:25:11 -0600,
wrote:

On 23/04/2011 5:40 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 12:54:24 -0600,
wrote:

Or if you don't want to go international and are risk adverse, just buy
an oilfield or gold and wait.

So why invest in a hyper-inflationary anti-business USA again?

HAHAHAHA anti business US...

the US is a plutocracy where the SCOTUS just legalized corporate
purchase of elections

and he says wer're anti business!

Government is for banking. Most people have their mortgages with Fannie
or Freddie...now also add GMAC...and they are all bankrupt.

While big money buys elections, last I checked it didn't buy your vote.
Money buys advertising, they pick the Rep and Dem ponies, but you
often can vote for a third option. But you don't.

which does nothing to address your bizarre statement that the US is
'anti business'

and who do you vote for when the big money has idiots like you
convinced that big money is big money because god wants it that way?

How so? Byzantine paperwork and rules, need a law degree to even
contemplate opening a business without being sued, fined, harassed...
Then get a union up your arse like a stuck pig. Big hikes in utilities,
taxes and more taxes.

I always vote one way and one way only. Who is going to cost me less.
Not many good choices, but it is how I vote.

Hey, USA has lost its edge.

--
I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with
fleabagger debt.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 22:51:09 -0700, sent the
following message
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:39:21 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:


On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 22:12:38 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:05:44 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 20:39:41 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 18:25:30 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 12:41:35 -0400, Gene
wrote:

Holding a big inventory of oil in your tank farm is not
without risk
and it takes massive investments in time and money to build
the
infrastructure. Not surprisingly, the people who make those
investments expect to earn a profit once in a while.

"A profit once in a while.....?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/business/01oil.html

http://www.grist.org/article/2010-04...panies-continu
e-to-see-big-profits-pollution-while-am
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/29/news...xxon/index.htm

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...009/performers
/companies/profits/

The oil companies and speculators are almost single-handedly
preventing an economic recovery.... and they are being paid
handsomely
to do so..... and you are DEFENDING that?

Incredible.....

It's a very cyclical business and no one feels sorry for Exxon
when
they have stagnant growth, or even worse, when they fail to
discover
enough new oil to replace what they sold. Unfortunately that
is what
is happening. It is probably reasonable to assume that as
their
exploration and acquisition costs go up, and as their reserves
go
down, they will want a higher price for the product.

In the interest of full disclosure, I own stock in both Exxon
and
Chevron-Texaco. Their annual reports make interesting
reading and
the future for energy prices is not good.

Somehow, you are missing the reality that when Exxon loses
money, the
stockholders are ****ed..... when Exxon continues to make
record
profits in an otherwise miserable economy, they are sticking it
to all
of the users of gasoline.... one way or the other, the entire
American population.... and to the entire American economy....

Let's not forget that they are entitled to make a profit no
matter how
miserable the economy might be. Their costs are going up, way
up.
Our cost will go up also. The dollar continues to depreciate.
That's a result of our fiscal policies and upside down balance of
payments. A strong dollar would result in cheaper oil, and that
is
what we've been used to in the past.

Corporations are not, like any individual, entitled to commit
treason
with impunity.... no matter how important profit is, to some self
centered investors...

Strong words Gene. I always believed you were more thoughtful
than
that (unless you are being spoofed of course, in which case I
apologize).

Someone has to explore for this oil, pump it, refine it and
deliver it
to us. There has to be a profit in that to provide the incentive
to
find and pump more of it, just like any other business or any other
product.

What about the farmers? They also supply an essential product
wouldn't you agree? Right now they are reaping sky high profits on
corn because our government thought it was a good idea to burn
ethanol
as fuel. Should we accuse the farmers of treason for making
increased profits on an essential product?


Yes, someone has to do it, and making a profit is important.
However,
making a profit should not be and cannot be allowed to destroy the
environment and kill people. Every business I know of has to abide
by
regulations that go beyond the day-to-day operation of the corp.
There
is nothing wrong with regulating an industry that can do the kind of
environmental damage we've witnessed.


What about farmers? The large agri-business' don't need subsidies,
just like big oil doesn't need them. That should end.

We cant herlp you. Talk to your crongress critters.

On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 09:07:32 -0400, Harryk
sent the following message
BAR wrote:
In ,
says...
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 11:40:23 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 08:36:48 -0400, Gene
wrote:

uh no. it's speculators. they caused a similar run up under
the white
guy who preceded the guy you hate because he's black
Damn speculators.

Why aren't more people doing it? Let's go halves on a tanker
load and
resell it on EBAY. Anybody else want in on the deal? We're
going to
need a dock, tank farm, distribution network, trucks,
pipelines and a
whole sh*t load of permits. With some help from Wall Street
we can
probably get 90 day financing.
Sorry, you are too late..... the guys that already had all of
that are
reaping all the profits...... re-read that thing about
frugality....
proactiveness is number one.....
Holding a big inventory of oil in your tank farm is not without
risk
and it takes massive investments in time and money to build the
infrastructure. Not surprisingly, the people who make those
investments expect to earn a profit once in a while.
"A profit once in a while.....?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/business/01oil.html

8% Profit for 2010.
6.2% Profile for 2009.

Doesn't seem out of line to me.




Please...if you believe those are "real" numbers, perhaps you'd
like to
buy shares in a bridge in Brooklyn.

How many are you trying to dump?

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

Canuck57 wrote:
On 24/04/2011 9:19 AM, Harryk wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:

While big money buys elections, last I checked it didn't buy your vote.
Money buys advertising, they pick the Rep and Dem ponies, but you often
can vote for a third option. But you don't.


A third option? Most of the "third option" candidates who run in this
country are as bat**** crazy as you are.

So did you run?


I almost ran for public office once, when I lived in Michigan many years
ago and was very active in the state Democratic party.

Yeah, sure, we believe you Harry. Everyone here believes everything you
say. Rounded the horn, fireboat welcome, Yale degree, yep.

On 24/04/2011 12:27 PM, wf3h wrote:

Nothing wrong with profits, after all you don't go to work for nothing
do you? So why should my capital go to work unless I make a profit?

profits are not bad. what we have in the US is profits for the few and
risk for the many

Only because a few are investing in USA. You dont invest in USA, you
just whine. You want the wealth of an investor, but yet will not invest.

I call them needy greedy slug fleabaggers. To envious and lazy to work
for it, and don't even invest in there own country.

Hey, you don't invest in yourself, you don't invest in your country, you
just whine a lot -- well no wonder your are a loser.

the right wing enables this by continuing to assert that the rich are
rich because, in the US, you're rich because you 'work hard' or you're
'smarter' or some other such bull****

the OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE shows this is WRONG. but the right continues to
believe this MYTH


No doubt, the Queen of Mean, Leona Helmsley was one mean bitch. But
will say his she left $4 billion into a charity trust.

and what was her use of money after she was dead? fine. let's get more
dead rich people. sounds like a great idea

More good than you will ever do.

Yep, it was a democrat supporter that coined "We don't pay taxes. Only
the little people pay taxes.". Look it up, she loved Jimmy Carter,
democrat. Go figure.

So if you think Leona is GOP, please cite as I say BS to to. She was a
democrat.


which has ZIP to do with the fact the GOP has deregulated wall street
to the point that bankrupting the US is legal

and the right wing supports this.

You skirted the point. You shot your mouth off mindlessly.
--
I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with
fleabagger debt.

On 25/04/2011 6:47 AM, BAR wrote:

No doubt, the Queen of Mean, Leona Helmsley was one mean bitch. But
will say his she left $4 billion into a charity trust.

and what was her use of money after she was dead? fine. let's get more
dead rich people. sounds like a great idea

It was here money and she should be able to dispose of it any way she
wants.

What do you plan to do with your left over "fortune", give it all to the
government? I sure hope so, they need it more than your children.

Pretty obvious wf3h is skint, does not think of his wife, family nor
others. Be lucky if he has enough to cover his funeral costs.

--
I can assure you that the road to prosperity is not paved with
fleabagger debt.