In article ,
says...

Well, no. He pockets his $50 million and saunters off stage
left, whistling a happy tune. And his platinum parachute is
paid for by the employees & common stockholders. It's the
new corporate kleptocracy...

I love it.

We're not experiencing fascism, we're the subjects of a kleptocracy.

I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.

jps

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...


Meanwhile, Exxon wants the $5B settlement reduced for the Alaska spill.
Pigs.

Wouldn't you?

No.

I'm a citizen and, although justice in this land is by no means perfect,
a court case has been decided (using the best attorneys money can buy,
no doubt).

It's obscene to consider that a company at the peak of it's historical
earnings is trying to shirk it's civic responsibility. But that's a sign
of the times, eh? Foist civic responsibility back on the taxpayer, no
matter who's guilty of the injustice.

We foot the bill for cleanup in Alaska when their captain fell asleep.
We foot the bill when Walmart doesn't offer proper medical insurance
coverage for their employees.

This shifting of responsibility makes me sick. It's time for
accountability and for all to pay their fair share, including
politically influential corporations.

jps

My complaint about the Exxon bill, was Alaska got off with out also being
held liable. Fact is, they still got to distribute money each year to their
citizens. They had a tax on every barrel of oil pumped to buy spill
containment equipment. None was bought! They should have been made to
pony up the cost of any oil damage that would have been stopped from
containment.

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
. ..

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 12:03:17 -0800, jps wrote:

Exxon, Chevron and Halliburton are having historically profitable years.

Doe's this touch your brain at all?

i know my portfolio has done quite well in the oil sector.

You cannot deny them a profit, but it is obvious the oil company's are
fleecing us.




The previous quarter they had an ROI of 9.4%, Citigroup had a 24.7% ROI.
Sure the oil numbers are bigger, but the overall numbers are bigger also.
So do like Tom and I do, have some of your portfolio in oil. My Chevron is
down from it's highest point.

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
jps wrote in
:

In article ,
says...
" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in
:

You cannot deny them a profit, but it is obvious the oil company's
are fleecing us.

Knight-Ridder has a higher profit margin than Exxon-Mobil. Is "Big
Media" fleecing us too? And if so, where are your protestations
against them?

One is a voluntary purchase, the other is as close to mandatory and
one could come.

Capiche?

The guy you voted for in 2000 said that the internal combustion engine is
the greatest threat to mankind, and you're calling the purchase of its
lifeblood "mandatory"? Reverend Gore will be quite disappointed that you
haven't converted your home to solar and your car to ethanol or vegetable
oil. After all, the enviro-loonies ARE right, right? That alternative
energy sources are viable, practical and cost-efficient? Or is it all
just a load of socialist lies designed to buttress the politics of envy?

Your statement answers that last question definitively. Thank-you.

And I suppose we'd be better off if we hadn't invented the gas engine,
after all, the steam engine did just as well, right?

That being the case, we should put all our investment in finding more
expensive methods of sucking oil from the earth until we've run out of
ways to do it.

Then we can shift our attention to alternatives, right? Uhhhhh....

So, your extremist retort is, assuming that anyone not aligned with your
near-sighted program is a faggot treehugger, our answer must be to stop
using petroleum products tomorrow.... no, not soon enough... tonight!!!!
Yeah, right.

The world economy would fail if the US suddenly stopped using petroleum
based products, your (much smarter) nemesis Al Gore knows that.

The point you don't want to admit, the one that I'm trying to drive
home, is that we need to make a bigger commitment to finding
alternatives to fossil-based fuels or find and implement methods of
using it more efficiently. With the current administration in control,
that ain't gonna happen. They're so deeply in the pocket of big energy
and corporate influence peddlers that they'd have to successfully fake
their own deaths to break the stranglehold.

There's no magic bullet but incremental investments in research and
development of energy technology can certainly help stem the incredible
dependence we have on petroleum.

I expect you consider yourself a conservative. Why is it that you
people preach anything but conservatism and still assume it's
conservative thinking?

jps

We have a cure for the energy problem. NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS! But the
enviro's got the building of same, outlawed.

"trainfan1" wrote in message
...
Wayne.B wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:34:02 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:


My truck has over 100k and the town car is approaching 100k - that
little escort i bought to keep the gas milage down is over 100k - 115k
in fact.

100k is nothing nowadays.


That's true if you buy the right vehicle.

Absolutely!

My youngest son is now
driving the Camry that I bought new in 1992. It is at almost 200K
miles and still going strong in NYC traffic and roads.

Rust will consume that car before wear & tear.

My wife's
Honda Accord is over 100K miles and still runs like new.

It'd better. It's not even broken in yet.


On the other hand our 1991 Dodge Caravan had trim falling off of it by
50,000 miles, 3 transmissions, all new brakes and a radiator by
70,000. It was getting too unreliable to keep, and it will be a long
time before we buy another Chrysler product. I'd rather spend my
money on boats. (on topic)



My neighbors Honda minivan is maybe 3 years old, not that many miles, and is
on it's 3rd tranny. Maybe it is a Chrysler product in disguise.

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:
Fred Dehl wrote:


Illiterate asshole,

Read the post again. Do you know what the **** a "profit margin" is?
God you're the stupidest sack of **** in the world.



Uh, Fred, you're not in your kitchen here. Try to control your foul
mouth.

Thanks.

I doubt his mommy would let him talk that way at home.....
at least not without a cake of soap to clean up afterwards.

I guess it is OK when jps writes it?

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

Well, no. He pockets his $50 million and saunters off stage
left, whistling a happy tune. And his platinum parachute is
paid for by the employees & common stockholders. It's the
new corporate kleptocracy...

I love it.

We're not experiencing fascism, we're the subjects of a kleptocracy.

I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.

jps


You know what? None of this matters. For every proven crook running a
company, I'll find you an honest, hard working example. It all depends on
one's personnel perspective of the world and business. If you tend to be of
the cynical bent, you are going to find conspiracy and deceit behind every
door. If you're a glass half full type your going to gravitate towards the
belief that the system can work, despite Herculean problems.
I've always been more of the latter. Obviously others here are not. Makes
the world go 'round. In my life there have been more people telling me I
couldn't do something than those who encouraged me to try. I rarely
listened to the first group.

RCE

In article . net,
says...

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:
Fred Dehl wrote:


Illiterate asshole,

Read the post again. Do you know what the **** a "profit margin" is?
God you're the stupidest sack of **** in the world.



Uh, Fred, you're not in your kitchen here. Try to control your foul
mouth.

Thanks.

I doubt his mommy would let him talk that way at home.....
at least not without a cake of soap to clean up afterwards.

I guess it is OK when jps writes it?

Don't try to paint me with a brush that doesn't apply (today).

I may break down and call people assholes and cocksuckers some other day
but I've chosen to hold my tongue in these proceedings in hopes of
making more important points.

I hope you appreciate my attempt at civility.

jps

jps wrote:

You really really miss the old days of political
mud-throwing in this NG, don't you?

Old days? It was just yesterday for me. AFAIC the group has been
dumbed down, a perfect reflection of our society.

I'm guessing the savings rate on brain cells and good ideas is, like
savings, at a historical low.

jps,
I am curious, what is wrong with keeping this group a place to discuss
boats and exchange friendly banter among boaters?

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:27:34 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:14:20 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

But I can assure you that in their latest
entries to the market, the American auto maufacturer's quality and
engineering is on par with the best of them again.

Let's talk again after 100,000 miles.

I'll be out of it before 40,000 miles. ;-)

see - thats what i don't understand. you dont gain anything by
leasing a vehicle for a stated length of time.



I gain a new car every 3-3 1/2 years. If I bought the car, but financed
it,
I'd barely be even in 3 years. If I paid cash, and traded it, I'd lose
$25k
in depreciation in that time period.


we ordinarily keep our cars for at least 100k if not more than that -
i think the grand marquis my wife had before the town car had 140k on
it when we traded it in.

You're smarter than me. But I've got a soft spot for new cars. Your
way is
of course the smartest way to own a car.

Not necessarily......if you drive exactly the miles that the lease alllows
you every year, it is better to lease, at the end of the lease, if market
value is higher than the buy option, you simply buy it and sell it, if it is
lower, you let the auto company take the loss.