djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 31, 2016 13:28:41 GMT -5
... ... is there something about my posts that compels you to make the kind of replies you do? ... Advice for Virgil Showlion i don't understand the graphic, bills. what are you trying to say?
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,527
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 31, 2016 14:12:46 GMT -5
AMAZING!
For thefirst time in eons (ever?) the pro-choice and anti-abortion backers found something they could agree upon.
ALL slammed Trump. And according to later news reports Trump did, somewhat, back down. IMHO, the way Trump handled is speaks volumes about what words end up coming out of his mouth.
Although he was not only pro-abortion, he was pro partial birth abortion, which almost NO pro-choice people are, just a few years ago, it's obvious that he decided his most likely voters were going to be anti-abortion, so suddenly he was, too.
But he knows so little about the issue, when asked a question about what should happen to women who had an abortion (should abortion be made illegal federally) and he throws out the words that he thinks his target audience will want to hear - punish the dirty hos!! (Ok that isn't LITERALLY what he said).
Then, caught once again with his foot in his mouth, but this time taking fire from pretty much every person, both pro and con the subject, he attempts, as usual, to backtrack and pretend we heard him wrong, or understood him wrong, or whatever.
Clearly a person who only says what he thinks his target voters want to hear, and when he makes a mistake, doesn't defend his position but back tracks and revamps it. I know he says he isn't a politician, but this is what every crappy politician of either party has always done. Sounds like a politician to me.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 31, 2016 16:49:01 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,208
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 31, 2016 18:06:36 GMT -5
i don't understand the graphic, bills. what are you trying to say?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 31, 2016 19:26:24 GMT -5
DJ: Let's all have a few beers, make love to our wives, and when we come back, if you still want to discuss methodologies for testing the assumption that angry newspaper op eds have a positive impact on Mr. Trump's popularity, strike your head violently with a blunt object until you no longer have the urge. If it helps: I concede that I have no way of proving the hypothesis. It's derived from a corpus of sporadic observations I've made during the past nine months, plus my own gut feel about how right-leaning (i.e. pro-Trump or potentially pro-Trump) Americans will perceive the editorial. I can think of no reasonable methodology for testing it.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 31, 2016 20:59:43 GMT -5
My argument for tax cuts is not a fiscal one anyway. I could care less if government takes in less money. So, what? Spend less. That's what the rest of us have to do when taxes go up. My argument for tax cuts is that it's MY MONEY. I earned it. I DESERVE TO KEEP IT.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 31, 2016 21:02:30 GMT -5
Trump imploded in Wisconsin, didn't he? We'll see what the actual results are, but that looks like something on the order of a 30 point swing in the polls. And that poll (University of Wisconsin at Madison - UWM - Law School) was taken BEFORE Trump suggested locking women up for having abortions, and Lewindowski being quasi semi-sorta arrested. It's been a rough two weeks for the Donald.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 31, 2016 21:19:05 GMT -5
My argument for tax cuts is not a fiscal one anyway. I could care less if government takes in less money. So, what? Spend less. That's what the rest of us have to do when taxes go up. My argument for tax cuts is that it's MY MONEY. I earned it. I DESERVE TO KEEP IT. Considering the US is six months away from implementing bank "bail-ins" similar to those in Europe and Canada, whereby your bank can confiscate your deposited savings in exchange for worthless bank stock in the event of insolvency, you're not keeping your money whether the government gets it or not. And if you think you're going to take it out in big bills and hide it in a safe somewhere, they've got a solution for that too. Only criminals hold large-denomination bills. Time to get rid of cash entirely. Welcome to the new American century.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 31, 2016 21:24:14 GMT -5
DJ: Let's all have a few beers, make love to our wives, and when we come back, if you still want to discuss methodologies for testing the assumption that angry newspaper op eds have a positive impact on Mr. Trump's popularity, strike your head violently with a blunt object until you no longer have the urge. If it helps: I concede that I have no way of proving the hypothesis. It's derived from a corpus of sporadic observations I've made during the past nine months, plus my own gut feel about how right-leaning (i.e. pro-Trump or potentially pro-Trump) Americans will perceive the editorial. I can think of no reasonable methodology for testing it. that is a much more helpful response. thanks. for the record, i knew the methodology was flawed, but in the social sciences, we rarely get a perfect test for anything we think.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 31, 2016 21:26:58 GMT -5
My argument for tax cuts is not a fiscal one anyway. I could care less if government takes in less money. So, what? Spend less. That's what the rest of us have to do when taxes go up. My argument for tax cuts is that it's MY MONEY. I earned it. I DESERVE TO KEEP IT. i would rather that you just stick to this argument and stop feeding us all of the supply side bullshit.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 31, 2016 21:27:36 GMT -5
i don't understand the graphic, bills. what are you trying to say? still doesn't make sense. can you please explain it?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 31, 2016 21:33:15 GMT -5
Trump imploded in Wisconsin, didn't he? We'll see what the actual results are, but that looks like something on the order of a 30 point swing in the polls. And that poll (University of Wisconsin at Madison - UWM - Law School) was taken BEFORE Trump suggested locking women up for having abortions, and Lewindowski being quasi semi-sorta arrested. It's been a rough two weeks for the Donald. it is a very slow meltdown, but it has been going on a long time. here are the primaries he has underperformed on since Super Tuesday: Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Puerto Rico, DC, Guam, Missouri, Ohio, and Utah. Here is where he OVERPERFORMED: Maine, Hawaii, Idaho, Mississippi, Virgin Islands, Illinois, North Carolina the rest he performed according to expectations and requirements. if it looks about 50/50, IT IS. and that means he is only hitting target about half the time. which is not good. he is slowly slipping on target, and making it very likely this will go to convention. i still put the odds at 60%, however, given his nice showing last Saturday.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 31, 2016 21:34:19 GMT -5
My argument for tax cuts is not a fiscal one anyway. I could care less if government takes in less money. So, what? Spend less. That's what the rest of us have to do when taxes go up. My argument for tax cuts is that it's MY MONEY. I earned it. I DESERVE TO KEEP IT. Considering the US is six months away from implementing bank "bail-ins" similar to those in Europe and Canada, whereby your bank can confiscate your deposited savings in exchange for worthless bank stock in the event of insolvency, you're not keeping your money whether the government gets it or not. And if you think you're going to take it out in big bills and hide it in a safe somewhere, they've got a solution for that too. Only criminals hold large-denomination bills. Time to get rid of cash entirely. Welcome to the new American century. i predict that your prediction, like all of your other dire predictions, will not come to pass.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,208
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 31, 2016 22:03:44 GMT -5
i don't understand the graphic, bills. what are you trying to say? still doesn't make sense. can you please explain it? So here is what I referenced: ... is there something about my posts that compels you to make the kind of replies you do? ... This statement seems to be opening a door for feedback. My post advises Virgil Showlion that what appears to be an opening isn't.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 31, 2016 22:21:00 GMT -5
i don't understand the graphic, bills. what are you trying to say? still doesn't make sense. can you please explain it? So here is what I referenced: ... is there something about my posts that compels you to make the kind of replies you do? ... This statement seems to be opening a door for feedback. My post advises Virgil Showlion that what appears to be an opening isn't. it is not an opening, it is a suggestion. i am suggesting that we should be more civil, and less snarky, and that i am making the effort FIRST. i am going to do the same with you, and pretend that little exchange never happened.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,208
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 31, 2016 22:48:36 GMT -5
it is not an opening, it is a suggestion. i am suggesting that we should be more civil, and less snarky, and that i am making the effort FIRST. i am going to do the same with you, and pretend that little exchange never happened. Exactly. Thus the appropriateness of the posting of Virgil Showlion
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 31, 2016 23:05:20 GMT -5
it is not an opening, it is a suggestion. i am suggesting that we should be more civil, and less snarky, and that i am making the effort FIRST. i am going to do the same with you, and pretend that little exchange never happened. Exactly. Thus the appropriateness of the posting of Virgil Showlion this is the best circular argument i have seen in a while.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,208
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 31, 2016 23:08:30 GMT -5
this is the best circular argument i have seen in a while. Thank you
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 1, 2016 0:10:47 GMT -5
Considering the US is six months away from implementing bank "bail-ins" similar to those in Europe and Canada, whereby your bank can confiscate your deposited savings in exchange for worthless bank stock in the event of insolvency, you're not keeping your money whether the government gets it or not. And if you think you're going to take it out in big bills and hide it in a safe somewhere, they've got a solution for that too. Only criminals hold large-denomination bills. Time to get rid of cash entirely. Welcome to the new American century. i predict that your prediction, like all of your other dire predictions, will not come to pass. I predict that your prediction of my prediction will prove untrue. Furthermore, I predict that you will predict that my prediction of your prediction of my prediction will fail to materialize.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 1, 2016 9:16:32 GMT -5
So, my take on that is, USA!, USA!, USA!
Give it a few years and they'll come after the rest of you.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 1, 2016 10:15:58 GMT -5
i predict that your prediction, like all of your other dire predictions, will not come to pass. I predict that your prediction of my prediction will prove untrue. Furthermore, I predict that you will predict that my prediction of your prediction of my prediction will fail to materialize. i qualified my statement. i said your DIRE predictions. your mundane predictions are way more accurate than your dire ones. i have yet to see ANY of your dire predictions come true, in the 5 years i have posted on this board.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 1, 2016 10:16:36 GMT -5
So, my take on that is, USA!, USA!, USA!
Give it a few years and they'll come after the rest of you. no. they won't.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 1, 2016 10:17:46 GMT -5
Give it a few years and they'll come after the rest of you. no. they won't. Yes. They will.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 1, 2016 10:21:19 GMT -5
let me see if i understand this right: you think that the guvmint is coming after my savings? how soon, pray, do you think this is going to happen? you tell me why you think it will happen, and then i will tell you why i think it won't. let's have an adult debate about this.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 1, 2016 10:31:49 GMT -5
let me see if i understand this right: you think that the guvmint is coming after my savings? how soon, pray, do you think this is going to happen? you tell me why you think it will happen, and then i will tell you why i think it won't. let's have an adult debate about this. It's not the government coming after your savings. It's the government authorizing your bank to come after your savings (in exchange for worthless equity) in the event of insolvency. Why do I think it will happen? Several reasons. It's already the law of the land in several European countries. It's soon to be the law of the land in Canada, thanks owed to the Liberal government under PM Trudeau. And despite the assurances of US policymakers that US banks are too well-capitalized to fail (and moreover, that US banking regulations would never screw Mom & Pop Mainstreet out of their hard-earned cash), US banks most assuredly aren't too well-capitalized to fail, and US banking regulations can, have, and will continue to screw Mom & Pop Mainstreet out of their hard-earned cash when it's either Main Street or Wall Street. Furthermore, as demin's article points out, you're already well on your way there. Incrementalism. It works wonders in disarming the masses.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 1, 2016 10:33:40 GMT -5
let me see if i understand this right: you think that the guvmint is coming after my savings? how soon, pray, do you think this is going to happen? you tell me why you think it will happen, and then i will tell you why i think it won't. let's have an adult debate about this. It's not the government coming after your savings. It's the government authorizing your bank to come after your savings (in exchange for worthless equity) in the event of insolvency. Why do I think it will happen? Several reasons. It's already the law of the land in several European countries. It's soon to be the law of the land in Canada, thanks owed to the Liberal government under PM Trudeau. And despite the assurances of US policymakers that US banks are too well-capitalized to fail (and moreover, that US banking regulations would never screw Mom & Pop Mainstreet out of their hard-earned cash), US banks most assuredly aren't too well-capitalized to fail, and US banking regulations can, have, and will continue to screw Mom & Pop Mainstreet out of their hard-earned cash when it's either Main Street or Wall Street. Furthermore, as demin's article points out, you're already well on your way there. Incrementalism. It works wonders in disarming the masses. same difference. so, WHEN do you think this will happen? edit: never mind- i see it- six months. so, by September 30th, 2016, the banks will confiscate our savings. got it. here is why i think this WON'T happen: WHY WOULD THEY? even if what you say is true about banks running out of funds (it isn't), the banks can get as much money they want to loan at 0% interest. why would they put their CUSTOMERS accounts (with all of the attendant legal and business issues) at risk under those circumstances?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 1, 2016 10:47:50 GMT -5
It's not the government coming after your savings. It's the government authorizing your bank to come after your savings (in exchange for worthless equity) in the event of insolvency. Why do I think it will happen? Several reasons. It's already the law of the land in several European countries. It's soon to be the law of the land in Canada, thanks owed to the Liberal government under PM Trudeau. And despite the assurances of US policymakers that US banks are too well-capitalized to fail (and moreover, that US banking regulations would never screw Mom & Pop Mainstreet out of their hard-earned cash), US banks most assuredly aren't too well-capitalized to fail, and US banking regulations can, have, and will continue to screw Mom & Pop Mainstreet out of their hard-earned cash when it's either Main Street or Wall Street. Furthermore, as demin's article points out, you're already well on your way there. Incrementalism. It works wonders in disarming the masses. same difference. so, WHEN do you think this will happen? I don't know. My guess would be "incrementally, over the next six years", but it could conceivably happen as early as the end of next year. It depends on how long they manage to kick the can down the road. They might also take a less direct approach. Or they might stick with the public bail-out route since Congress was so accommodating the first time. There are many different approaches to accomplishing the same thing. Hence the only thing I'll commit to on this timeframe is "there will be something equivalent to depositor and/or taxpayer bail-ins implemented" when they can't kick the can any further.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 1, 2016 10:50:08 GMT -5
same difference. so, WHEN do you think this will happen? I don't know. My guess would be "incrementally, over the next six years", but it could conceivably happen as early as the end of next year. It depends on how long they manage to kick the can down the road. They might also take a less direct approach. Or they might stick with the public bail-out route since Congress was so accommodating the first time. There are many different approaches to accomplishing the same thing. Hence the only thing I'll commit to on this timeframe is "there will be something equivalent to depositor and/or taxpayer bail-ins implemented" when they can't kick the can any further. you said 6 months in 2640. let's stick with that.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 1, 2016 10:52:48 GMT -5
I don't know. My guess would be "incrementally, over the next six years", but it could conceivably happen as early as the end of next year. It depends on how long they manage to kick the can down the road. They might also take a less direct approach. Or they might stick with the public bail-out route since Congress was so accommodating the first time. There are many different approaches to accomplishing the same thing. Hence the only thing I'll commit to on this timeframe is "there will be something equivalent to depositor and/or taxpayer bail-ins implemented" when they can't kick the can any further. you said 6 months in 2640. let's stick with that. Referring to the bondholder bail-ins, which are already on the books for the middle of this year. So unless something changes... I win.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 1, 2016 10:56:47 GMT -5
you said 6 months in 2640. let's stick with that. Referring to the bondholder bail-ins, which are already on the books for the middle of this year. So unless something changes... I win. pretty dumb move, considering the US Savings Rate. you can't win pre-emptively, Virgil. let's see if this is something that is actually DONE, and doesn't result in immediate overturning (if not before it is ever done). lots of things like this are tried. very few of them succeed, in the US.
|
|