On 6/14/18 10:47 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/14/2018 9:57 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/14/18 8:46 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:01:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:50:54 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 4:42 PM, Bill wrote:

And why are you opposed to social security funds in the stock
market?


My recollection is that the private wall street banksters were
lobbying
to "invest" those funds and earn their profit off it. Norges Bank
belongs to the people of Norway.

Norway invests all over the world in all sorts of things, Those
investments return real capital gains. The SS/MC funds are not really
invested in anything. There are just IOUs in the box and the
government spent the money on things that do not generate any income
for the government. They chalk up phony interest payments but some of
the money has to be borrowed from someone else when they actually have
to pay people the benefits they promise.


I suppose I should explain in pidgin English. I am not opposed to
investing. I oppose using the banksters in the USA to handle those
investments on behalf of our citizenry.

===

How do you propose making investments without using the financial
services industry?



Once again, the Norges Bank belongs to the people of Norway. Banksters
they may be but they are not Citibank or Wells Fargo types of banksters.


Both Citibank (division of Citigroup) and Wells Fargo are publicly
traded companies on the NYSE.

That means stock owners own them.




That's not the same as being owned by the citizens of the USA.

On 6/14/2018 9:54 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/14/18 8:43 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:03:35 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 11:03 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 19:18:24 -0400, Alex wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/13/18 8:24 AM, Tim wrote:

7:10 AMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I don't have a "brand new" Ducati.
.........


I know...


Mine has 4250 miles, several years old, hardly new. No dents or
scratches, though.

Let's see a picture of the motorcycle and odometer with a current
newspaper in the photo, too.Â* I'll give you a chance to win your
$100 back.

With Harry sitting on it.


Considering the sort of malooks who form the majority in this pigpen,
there is no way I am going to post photos of identifiable vehicles.

===

Right.

We wouldn't want any of your imaginary possessions to turn up under
someone elses ownership (like the red barn), or worse yet, from an
archived set of photos that someone else took (think Google images).

PS, you appear to be overworking the word "malook".Â* You must have a
thesaurus laying around someplace.Â* If not, there are several free
ones online:

https://www.google.com/search?ei=M2AiW53EJMGD5wLilLBI&q=free+thesaurus&oq =thesaurus


Let's try one just for the fun of it.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&filter=thesaurus&query=maloo k


This is odd.Â* The Oxford English dictionary has no exact matches.Â* Are
you sure that malook is even a word?




It's an Italian-American slang word, the "full" version of the word
"mook." It's in the urban dictionary, among other places.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mook

Mook is in the online Merriam-Webster.

It has several, similar meanings...the most common is "idiot."

Growing up when I did in New Haven, I had lots of friends of various
cultural backgrounds, including many Italians. In describing someone
like you, "malook" was a word that would have been used. Or "mook." It
had meanings back then beyond idiot...some of the WASPs were referred to
as mooks not necessarily because they were idiots but because they were
so "white bread." No decent "ethnics" back then ate Wonder Bread.




True. I've heard "malook" often in my married lifetime.
Often it was preceded by an adjective. :-)

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 07:59:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 10:37 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:29:04 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


Norway is smart about money and resources...from Wiki:

In March 2017, the Government Pension Fund controlled assets were valued
at approximately US$913 billion (equal to US$182,000 per capita), which
is about 178% of Norway's current GDP. It is the largest sovereign
wealth fund in the world. The fund controls about 1.3% of all listed
shares in Europe, and more than 1% of all the publicly traded shares in
the world. The Norwegian Central Bank operates investment offices in
London, New York, and Shanghai. Guidelines implemented in 2007 allow the
fund to invest up to 60% of the capital in shares (maximum of 40%
prior), while the rest may be placed in bonds and real-estate. As the
stock markets tumbled in September 2008, the fund was able to buy more
shares at low prices. In this way, the losses incurred by the market
turmoil was recuperated by November 2009.

Other nations with economies based on natural resources, such as Russia,
are trying to learn from Norway by establishing similar funds. The
investment choices of the Norwegian fund are directed by ethical
guidelines; for example, the fund is not allowed to invest in companies
that produce parts for nuclear weapons. Norway's highly transparent
investment scheme is lauded by the international community. The future
size of the fund is closely linked to the price of oil and to
developments in international financial markets.

In 2000, the government sold one-third of the state-owned oil company
Statoil in an IPO. The next year, the main telecom supplier, Telenor,
was listed on Oslo Stock Exchange. The state also owns significant
shares of Norway's largest bank, DnB NOR and the airline SAS. Since
2000, economic growth has been rapid, pushing unemployment down to
levels not seen since the early 1980s (unemployment in 2007: 1.3%). The
international financial crisis has primarily affected the industrial
sector, but unemployment has remained low, and was at 3.3% (86,000
people) in August 2011.

Norway contains significant mineral resources, and in 2013, its mineral
production was valued at US$1.5 billion (Norwegian Geological Survey
data). The most valuable minerals are calcium carbonate (limestone),
building stone, nepheline syenite, olivine, iron, titanium, and nickel.

Norway is also the world's second-largest exporter of fish (in value,
after China). Hydroelectric plants generate roughly 98–99% of Norway's
electric power, more than any other country in the world.

Somehow, I think the Norwegians will figure out how to secure their future.

I am sure they will because they "privatized" their old age pension
fund and invested it in real things instead of just spending the money
and putting IOUs in the box. They are not dipping into the general
fund or borrowing money to pay their pensioners.
Their "future" is secure as long as we keep them safe and they should
doing that themselves, not sponging off of us.


And, once again, without our international commitments, there would be
more justification for shrinking our outrageous military budgets.

So why don't we? I would start with Europe.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:01:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:50:54 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 4:42 PM, Bill wrote:

And why are you opposed to social security funds in the stock market?


My recollection is that the private wall street banksters were lobbying
to "invest" those funds and earn their profit off it. Norges Bank
belongs to the people of Norway.

Norway invests all over the world in all sorts of things, Those
investments return real capital gains. The SS/MC funds are not really
invested in anything. There are just IOUs in the box and the
government spent the money on things that do not generate any income
for the government. They chalk up phony interest payments but some of
the money has to be borrowed from someone else when they actually have
to pay people the benefits they promise.


I suppose I should explain in pidgin English. I am not opposed to
investing. I oppose using the banksters in the USA to handle those
investments on behalf of our citizenry.

You didn't explain anything. Are you really saying you would rather
have politicians and bureaucrats handling your money than trained
money managers?

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:03:35 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 11:03 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 19:18:24 -0400, Alex wrote:

Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/13/18 8:24 AM, Tim wrote:

7:10 AMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I don't have a "brand new" Ducati.
.........


I know...


Mine has 4250 miles, several years old, hardly new. No dents or
scratches, though.

Let's see a picture of the motorcycle and odometer with a current
newspaper in the photo, too. I'll give you a chance to win your $100 back.

With Harry sitting on it.


Considering the sort of malooks who form the majority in this pigpen,
there is no way I am going to post photos of identifiable vehicles.

It must be horrible going through life being as scared of everything
as you seem to be.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 11:18:09 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:01:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:50:54 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 4:42 PM, Bill wrote:

And why are you opposed to social security funds in the stock market?


My recollection is that the private wall street banksters were lobbying
to "invest" those funds and earn their profit off it. Norges Bank
belongs to the people of Norway.

Norway invests all over the world in all sorts of things, Those
investments return real capital gains. The SS/MC funds are not really
invested in anything. There are just IOUs in the box and the
government spent the money on things that do not generate any income
for the government. They chalk up phony interest payments but some of
the money has to be borrowed from someone else when they actually have
to pay people the benefits they promise.


I suppose I should explain in pidgin English. I am not opposed to
investing. I oppose using the banksters in the USA to handle those
investments on behalf of our citizenry.

You didn't explain anything. Are you really saying you would rather
have politicians and bureaucrats handling your money than trained
money managers?

Well sure, as long as they're *Democrat* politicians and bureaucrats.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 10:48:17 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/14/18 10:47 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/14/2018 9:57 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/14/18 8:46 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:01:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:50:54 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 4:42 PM, Bill wrote:

And why are you opposed to social security funds in the stock
market?


My recollection is that the private wall street banksters were
lobbying
to "invest" those funds and earn their profit off it. Norges Bank
belongs to the people of Norway.

Norway invests all over the world in all sorts of things, Those
investments return real capital gains. The SS/MC funds are not really
invested in anything. There are just IOUs in the box and the
government spent the money on things that do not generate any income
for the government. They chalk up phony interest payments but some of
the money has to be borrowed from someone else when they actually have
to pay people the benefits they promise.


I suppose I should explain in pidgin English. I am not opposed to
investing. I oppose using the banksters in the USA to handle those
investments on behalf of our citizenry.

===

How do you propose making investments without using the financial
services industry?



Once again, the Norges Bank belongs to the people of Norway. Banksters
they may be but they are not Citibank or Wells Fargo types of banksters.


Both Citibank (division of Citigroup) and Wells Fargo are publicly
traded companies on the NYSE.

That means stock owners own them.




That's not the same as being owned by the citizens of the USA.

On the other hand SSA is owned by the tax payers and it's only asset
is an IOU from a government that had to borrow over $50 billion every
month last year just to pay it's bills. The business world would
consider that being bankrupt and their stock would drop to zero.

On 6/14/2018 10:48 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/14/18 10:47 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/14/2018 9:57 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/14/18 8:46 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:01:49 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:50:54 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 4:42 PM, Bill wrote:

And why are you opposed to social security funds in the stock
market?


My recollection is that the private wall street banksters were
lobbying
to "invest" those funds and earn their profit off it. Norges Bank
belongs to the people of Norway.

Norway invests all over the world in all sorts of things, Those
investments return real capital gains. The SS/MC funds are not really
invested in anything. There are just IOUs in the box and the
government spent the money on things that do not generate any income
for the government. They chalk up phony interest payments but some of
the money has to be borrowed from someone else when they actually
have
to pay people the benefits they promise.


I suppose I should explain in pidgin English. I am not opposed to
investing. I oppose using the banksters in the USA to handle those
investments on behalf of our citizenry.

===

How do you propose making investments without using the financial
services industry?



Once again, the Norges Bank belongs to the people of Norway.
Banksters they may be but they are not Citibank or Wells Fargo types
of banksters.


Both Citibank (division of Citigroup) and Wells Fargo are publicly
traded companies on the NYSE.

That means stock owners own them.




That's not the same as being owned by the citizens of the USA.


You think citizens of the USA don't own any Citigroup or Wells Fargo stock?

On Thursday, 14 June 2018 12:13:42 UTC-3, wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 07:59:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 10:37 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:29:04 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


Norway is smart about money and resources...from Wiki:

In March 2017, the Government Pension Fund controlled assets were valued
at approximately US$913 billion (equal to US$182,000 per capita), which
is about 178% of Norway's current GDP. It is the largest sovereign
wealth fund in the world. The fund controls about 1.3% of all listed
shares in Europe, and more than 1% of all the publicly traded shares in
the world. The Norwegian Central Bank operates investment offices in
London, New York, and Shanghai. Guidelines implemented in 2007 allow the
fund to invest up to 60% of the capital in shares (maximum of 40%
prior), while the rest may be placed in bonds and real-estate. As the
stock markets tumbled in September 2008, the fund was able to buy more
shares at low prices. In this way, the losses incurred by the market
turmoil was recuperated by November 2009.

Other nations with economies based on natural resources, such as Russia,
are trying to learn from Norway by establishing similar funds. The
investment choices of the Norwegian fund are directed by ethical
guidelines; for example, the fund is not allowed to invest in companies
that produce parts for nuclear weapons. Norway's highly transparent
investment scheme is lauded by the international community. The future
size of the fund is closely linked to the price of oil and to
developments in international financial markets.

In 2000, the government sold one-third of the state-owned oil company
Statoil in an IPO. The next year, the main telecom supplier, Telenor,
was listed on Oslo Stock Exchange. The state also owns significant
shares of Norway's largest bank, DnB NOR and the airline SAS. Since
2000, economic growth has been rapid, pushing unemployment down to
levels not seen since the early 1980s (unemployment in 2007: 1.3%). The
international financial crisis has primarily affected the industrial
sector, but unemployment has remained low, and was at 3.3% (86,000
people) in August 2011.

Norway contains significant mineral resources, and in 2013, its mineral
production was valued at US$1.5 billion (Norwegian Geological Survey
data). The most valuable minerals are calcium carbonate (limestone),
building stone, nepheline syenite, olivine, iron, titanium, and nickel.

Norway is also the world's second-largest exporter of fish (in value,
after China). Hydroelectric plants generate roughly 98–99% of Norway's
electric power, more than any other country in the world.

Somehow, I think the Norwegians will figure out how to secure their future.

I am sure they will because they "privatized" their old age pension
fund and invested it in real things instead of just spending the money
and putting IOUs in the box. They are not dipping into the general
fund or borrowing money to pay their pensioners.
Their "future" is secure as long as we keep them safe and they should
doing that themselves, not sponging off of us.


And, once again, without our international commitments, there would be
more justification for shrinking our outrageous military budgets.

So why don't we? I would start with Europe.

A lot of your military costs are by your own doing...that is sticking your beak into any and every trouble spot. Viet Nam was a good example. You like to project your power whether it's requested or not.

On 6/14/2018 12:11 PM, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 June 2018 12:13:42 UTC-3, wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 07:59:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 6/13/18 10:37 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:29:04 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:


Norway is smart about money and resources...from Wiki:

In March 2017, the Government Pension Fund controlled assets were valued
at approximately US$913 billion (equal to US$182,000 per capita), which
is about 178% of Norway's current GDP. It is the largest sovereign
wealth fund in the world. The fund controls about 1.3% of all listed
shares in Europe, and more than 1% of all the publicly traded shares in
the world. The Norwegian Central Bank operates investment offices in
London, New York, and Shanghai. Guidelines implemented in 2007 allow the
fund to invest up to 60% of the capital in shares (maximum of 40%
prior), while the rest may be placed in bonds and real-estate. As the
stock markets tumbled in September 2008, the fund was able to buy more
shares at low prices. In this way, the losses incurred by the market
turmoil was recuperated by November 2009.

Other nations with economies based on natural resources, such as Russia,
are trying to learn from Norway by establishing similar funds. The
investment choices of the Norwegian fund are directed by ethical
guidelines; for example, the fund is not allowed to invest in companies
that produce parts for nuclear weapons. Norway's highly transparent
investment scheme is lauded by the international community. The future
size of the fund is closely linked to the price of oil and to
developments in international financial markets.

In 2000, the government sold one-third of the state-owned oil company
Statoil in an IPO. The next year, the main telecom supplier, Telenor,
was listed on Oslo Stock Exchange. The state also owns significant
shares of Norway's largest bank, DnB NOR and the airline SAS. Since
2000, economic growth has been rapid, pushing unemployment down to
levels not seen since the early 1980s (unemployment in 2007: 1.3%). The
international financial crisis has primarily affected the industrial
sector, but unemployment has remained low, and was at 3.3% (86,000
people) in August 2011.

Norway contains significant mineral resources, and in 2013, its mineral
production was valued at US$1.5 billion (Norwegian Geological Survey
data). The most valuable minerals are calcium carbonate (limestone),
building stone, nepheline syenite, olivine, iron, titanium, and nickel.

Norway is also the world's second-largest exporter of fish (in value,
after China). Hydroelectric plants generate roughly 98–99% of Norway's
electric power, more than any other country in the world.

Somehow, I think the Norwegians will figure out how to secure their future.

I am sure they will because they "privatized" their old age pension
fund and invested it in real things instead of just spending the money
and putting IOUs in the box. They are not dipping into the general
fund or borrowing money to pay their pensioners.
Their "future" is secure as long as we keep them safe and they should
doing that themselves, not sponging off of us.


And, once again, without our international commitments, there would be
more justification for shrinking our outrageous military budgets.

So why don't we? I would start with Europe.

A lot of your military costs are by your own doing...that is sticking your beak into any and every trouble spot. Viet Nam was a good example. You like to project your power whether it's requested or not.



It would be interesting for historians to speculate on what the
planet would be like today if the USA (and Canada) had completely
followed a "we'll mind are own business" policy since the end of WWII.