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

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

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

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

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

"Tamaroak" wrote in message
. ..
More people are living in cardboard boxes in this country
than
ever
and
these fat cats are making more and paying less taxes than
ever.
And
we
are
STILL cutting taxes while the deficit skyrockets. How can
these
people
call themselves conservative?

The deficit fell from '04 to '05...and its expected to
continue
to
fall
through at least '09.

In the past 30 years we've gone from:

Biggest importer of raw materials and exporter of finished
goods

to

Biggest exporter of raw materials and largest importer of
finished
goods.

China and Japan own a large percentage of our currency,
corporations
are
allowed to operate offshore to avoid taxation and more of our
currency
is flooding into the mid-east than ever before.

I just had a meeting with some very nice folks from the
mid-east
who
don't mind us being in Iraq at all. Their friends are making
money
hand
over fist supplying goods and services to our troops.

Not only are we sending them tankerloads of oil money, we're
paying
them
seven different ways for supplying our country with goods and
services.

Something wrong with this picture? Why are we so damned
near-sighted???

The biggest danger to our country is allowing jobs to escape to
countries
that are not our allies. China is our biggest threat...and
corporations
have bought into the Chinese government horse and pony show that
paints
such
a rosy scenario over there. It's a facade...and China's recent
restrictions
placed on Google are a perfect example of how screwed up things
are
over
there right now.

For the first time in the last half decade, I decided to buy an
American
car
again. I would hope you and every other American would consider
doing
the
same. For a very long time, American car manufacturers had
their
problems,
and you were right to stay away. 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.

Awhile back you stated that if a car manufacturer made an
all-wheel-drive
sport sedan that is comparable to what you were driving at the
time
(an
Audi
Quattro?), you'd buy it. So now I'm going to hold you to your
word:
go
drive the Cadillac STS AWD or the Chrysler 300M AWD and buy
whichever
you
like better. Either should fit your needs nicely. I went from
an
Infiniti
G35 to a Cadillac STS and have been very happy with the choice.

Are you claiming to be a good American or a good investor?

I don't think the above suggestion would satisfy both criteria.


I leased the car. 39 months, $422/mo (includes tax), $1850 out of
pocket.

The Chrysler is ugly.

$18,308 to have the privilege of driving a Cadillac for 39 months.
I'd
rather make payments on a boat or summer cabin and have the 2nd home
write off.

Name me a single car with an MSRP over $40k that you could drive for
less
than $18,500 over 39 months. Don't forget to include tax!

That's dependent on leasing. Most people don't lease.

Driving a vehicle over $40k for 39 months isn't a function of the value
of the car, it's a function of how many they've sold and how aggressive
the financing rates they're willing to offer to get you in the car.

The real value in a car is after you've paid it off and drive it
another
50,000 miles. That's when the cost/mile goes down. Your cost/mile has
to be astronomical.

How long do *you* keep a car?

It depends. My A6 is on a lease and I'll probably purchase it this
September. Our '95 Cherokee was paid for 6 years ago and has 75,000 on
it. I also have a '68 Chev c-20. I tend to keep 'em longer.


And, in order to purchase that car post-lease, you'd be buying a car
that's worth 2/3 of the residual. Cadillac will have to write off the
loss when it's incurred.

Correct. But GMAC takes the hit. And I go buy another car.

I'm astounded that you don't recognize the folly in your statement.
You're all for it given that the big, stupid company will, in the end,
take it in the shorts.

To some extent I agree with you. When auto manufacturers lease cars at
ridiculously inflated residuals, they don't make as much money over the long
run as if they'd sold it, or leased it at a true market residual value. But
in a highly competitive market, sometimes half a loaf is better than no
loaf.

They make their profit up front on the sale of the vehicle. They depreciate
the vehicle over the life of the lease, and take the tax writeoff at the
end.

They aren't really "buying" the vehicle at the residual value. That's a
number that matters more to the consumer.



Regardless, they accomplished their goal:
They got a young professional to buy a GM car again (after owning 2 Toyotas
and an Infiniti), and changed his mind about American cars for the better.

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:09:41 -0500, DSK wrote:

I own several oil company stocks, and the
neither dividends nor price appreciation has not followed
reported profits... yet...

Then you haven't owned them long enough. Oil will be king until
alternative energy sources are developed, and that won't happen until
gasoline hits 5 to 10 dollars a gallon. On second thought, that might
happen sooner than we think.

My guess is that WW III will be all about oil and that history will
not be kind to the US energy policies of the last 30 years.

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

Let's talk again after 100,000 miles.

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

Fair enough but have you ever calculated your cost per mile?

Let me help, using your numbers:

"I leased the car. 39 months, $422/mo (includes tax), $1850 out of
pocket."

That comes to $18,308, divided by 40,000 miles = 45.8 cents/mile
before insurance, fuel and maintenance.

If you purchased a Lexus for about $45,000 and drove it 100,000 miles
you'd get about the same numbers but the Lexus would still be worth
somewhere between $5 and $10K, possibly more.

The advantage of leasing is getting a new car every 3 or 4 years with
minimal transaction costs, but it is still cheaper to purchase and
hold if you buy quality.

Using my numbers, the second 100,000 miles is almost free!

I don't totally disagree with you. Buying and holding a quality car is the
cheapest way to go. Usually.

But like I said, the primary advantage is that leasing allows me to get into
a new car every 3 to 3 1/2 years.

And one thing you're forgetting about is the cost to drive that Lexus for
the 50,000 miles *after* the warranty has expired.

Even if nothing breaks, you'll have tires, brake pads, rotors, spark plugs,
etc. to replace...where I'll simply turn the car in before it's time to
spend money on all of those again.

Then, if you have a major mechanical issue arise at 80,000, what does that
Lexus cost you over the 100,000 mile lifetime?

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:09:41 -0500, DSK wrote:

I own several oil company stocks, and the
neither dividends nor price appreciation has not followed
reported profits... yet...

Then you haven't owned them long enough. Oil will be king until
alternative energy sources are developed, and that won't happen until
gasoline hits 5 to 10 dollars a gallon. On second thought, that might
happen sooner than we think.

My guess is that WW III will be all about oil and that history will
not be kind to the US energy policies of the last 30 years.


Heck, WWII was about oil. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor as a result of the
oil embargo we imposed upon them.

As opposed to spending 100s of millions of dollars shouting
lies & slander over & over until it is commonly accepted as
"truth?"


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
you mean like the daily kos and wonkette?

or mother peace?


Let's see, which side spent the most, last campaign season?
How much $$ is tossed into these sources you name?

Frankly, the Democrats did not field even ONE 'Swift Boat
Veterans' type ad campaign, the Rove/Bush faction did how
many? You should be proud, not ashamed. After all, it worked.


I'd agree with term limits, but not with slander &
name-calling. Why can't you offer something positive,
especially since that's your main criticism of "the other side?"

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
i can do that until im blue in the face and it wont change anything at
all.


Try it, then. Don't give up before you start.


slander and name calling are part of the process

Wrong. Slander and name-calling is a popular tactic for
those who have little else to offer. It has been used to
sway the gullible and the petty mean-spirited since
Hammurabi... or even earlier.

DSK

I own several oil company stocks, and the
neither dividends nor price appreciation has not followed
reported profits... yet...

"Wayne.B" wrote
Then you haven't owned them long enough.

heh heh since 1978. If that's not long enough, what is?

What I meant by my comment above is that *current* price
trends are not reflecting profits (or at least not in
proportion), and the profits are not being passed on.

... Oil will be king until
alternative energy sources are developed, and that won't happen until
gasoline hits 5 to 10 dollars a gallon. On second thought, that might
happen sooner than we think.


Well, depends on what you mean by 'developed.' There are all
kinds of alternative energy technologies out there. Problem:
they all cost more & deliver less HP-per-gallon than petroleum.

And in some places, gasoline already costs $9/gal.


My guess is that WW III will be all about oil and that history will
not be kind to the US energy policies of the last 30 years.



Agreed. Totally.


NOYB wrote:
Heck, WWII was about oil. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor as a result of the
oil embargo we imposed upon them.


Largely, yes.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
As opposed to spending 100s of millions of dollars shouting lies &
slander over & over until it is commonly accepted as "truth?"


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
you mean like the daily kos and wonkette?

or mother peace?


Let's see, which side spent the most, last campaign season? How much $$ is
tossed into these sources you name?

Frankly, the Democrats did not field even ONE 'Swift Boat Veterans' type
ad campaign,

Moveon.org

"DSK" wrote in message
...
I own several oil company stocks, and the
neither dividends nor price appreciation has not followed
reported profits... yet...

"Wayne.B" wrote
Then you haven't owned them long enough.

heh heh since 1978. If that's not long enough, what is?

What I meant by my comment above is that *current* price trends are not
reflecting profits (or at least not in proportion), and the profits are
not being passed on.

... Oil will be king until
alternative energy sources are developed, and that won't happen until
gasoline hits 5 to 10 dollars a gallon. On second thought, that might
happen sooner than we think.


Well, depends on what you mean by 'developed.' There are all kinds of
alternative energy technologies out there. Problem: they all cost more &
deliver less HP-per-gallon than petroleum.

And in some places, gasoline already costs $9/gal.


My guess is that WW III will be all about oil and that history will
not be kind to the US energy policies of the last 30 years.



Agreed. Totally.

Which is why we need at least get the ball rolling on tapping our own oil
resources in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. We don't have to start pumping
the stuff yet. Just get it ready for when the big one breaks out.

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

"DSK" wrote in message
...
As opposed to spending 100s of millions of dollars shouting lies &
slander over & over until it is commonly accepted as "truth?"


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
you mean like the daily kos and wonkette?

or mother peace?


Let's see, which side spent the most, last campaign season? How much $$
is tossed into these sources you name?

Frankly, the Democrats did not field even ONE 'Swift Boat Veterans' type
ad campaign,

Moveon.org


CBS

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 06:55:51 -0500, thunder
wrote:


If I'd lost my retirement and was forced to eat cat food
during my Golden Years because of some fat cat's greed, I'd be thinking
he'd better be spending heavily on security.


wha? you mean you'd take the - law - into your own hands?

tsk.... :)

actually, i agree with you. and i know how and have the - stuff- - to
do it from long range - really long range. :)

Maybe you should put on a workshop for others lacking your talents.