Obama: The next Jimmy Carter

Happy Wenta said:

Julia:

Seriouswy. thwese repwublicans are just dewusional. bush gets us into the worst economic cwisis since the depwession, and it already obama's fault? will this cap on executive pay hurt the ny weal estate market? yes. i think obama has bigger things to worry about than the diwection of the new york weal estate market.

I didn't write this, but whoever this boss is he has it nailed down perfectly... read his entire message and the last 3 paragraphs will make total sense to you....and if you are a left leaning socialistic democrat this type of thinking just may get you to re-evaluate your sense of direction for this country. Don't remember where this came from, but "once everyone is in the wagon there will be no one left to pull it."

A letter from the Boss:

To All My Valued Employees,

There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your job. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn't pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job, however, is the changing political landscape in this country.

Let me tell you some little tidbits of fact which might help you decide what is in your best interests.

First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you have to understand that for every business owner there is a Back Story. This back story is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You've seen my big home at last year's Christmas party. I'm sure; all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life.

However, what you don 't see is the BACK STORY :

I started this company 28 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300 square foot studio apartment for 3 years. My entire studio apartment was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you.

My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn't have time to date. Often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business -- hard work, discipline, and sacrifice.

Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a modest $50K a year and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting the Nordstrom's for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the discount stores for clothing that didn't look like it was birthed in the 70's. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that eventually, some day, I too, would be able to afford the luxuries my friends supposedly had.

So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9 am, mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5 pm, I don't. There is no "off" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and have a weekend all to yourself. I do not have that freedom. I eat and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day this business is attached to my hip like a one- year-old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of that labor -- the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations... you never realize the Back Story and the sacrifices I've made.

Now, the economy is falling apart and I, the guy that made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail-out all the people who didn't. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for.

Yes, business ownership has is benefits but the price I've paid is steep and not without wounds. Unfortunately, the cost of running this business, and employing you, is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit. Let me tell you why:

I am being taxed to death and the government thinks I don't pay enough. I have state taxes. Federal taxes. Property taxes. Sales and Use taxes. Payroll taxes. Workers Compensation taxes. Unemployment taxes. Taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes and guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates and regulations and all the accounting that goes with it, now occupy most of my time. On Oct 15th, I wrote a check to the US Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my "stimulus" check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch.

The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country.

The fact is, if I deducted (read: stole) 50% of your paycheck you'd quit and wouldn't work here. And why should you? That's nuts. Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree which is why your job is in jeopardy.

Here is what many of you don't understand: To stimulate the economy, you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had government suddenly mandated that I didn't need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black-hole, I would have spent it hiring more employees and generating substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now.

When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don't defibrillate and shock his thumb thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or, do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the poor of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of "change" you can keep.

So where am I going with all this?

It's quite simple.

If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple. I fire you. I fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child's future. Frankly, it isn't my problem any more.

Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire. You see, I'm done. I'm done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it will be my citizenship.

So, if you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy. It will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steam-rolled the Constitution, and changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me sitting on a beach, retired with no employees to worry about.

Signed, THE BOSS

And your telling me Barney Frank is not the "Happy Renter"?

That letter is excellent. High taxes are destroying the business community in the U.S. We have one of the highest corporate rates in the nation, and it is becoming increasingly more difficult for people to start profitable businesses and take risks. Obama and his liberal congress will make this worse.

nyc10022, your points are all correct. There is this myth among liberals that the wealthy are cheating the system and avoiding taxes. There actually were a lot more loopholes and deductions back in the 1970's than now. This is why the top 1% pay 40% of all federal income tax even though the top marginal rate has fallen from 70%, before Reagan, to the current rate of 35%.

Liberals don't know economics. That much is clear.

> Liberals don't know economics. That much is clear.

What makes it worse is that the Democratic Party likes it that way....
just ask happyrenter.

Bush had an MBA.

MBAs know little to nothing about economics and finance.

I had a friend who was a first year grad student in finance at an ivy - one year out of college - and he was teaching finance to 2nd year advanced MBA students...

MBA classes are filled with folks who need remedial math - I kid you not, Harvard and Wharton have bootcamps - so expecting an understanding of finance and economics is a mistake. MBAs are more about marketing, organizational theory, and corporate strategy than they are understanding deficits and tax rates...

from Harvard!

that was supposed to immediately follow aboutready's post

Wow, over a 100 posts of partisan shill. When will you all realize that Republicans & Democrats are exactly the same? Politicians pull on the emotional strings of people that don't know any better (this thread is a great example) to cloud the fact that neither party is competent, responsible, or capable. It is entertaining to try and blame Clinton for X and praise Reagan for Y but the reality is that the majority of what goes on while they are in office is circumstance, happenstance, and luck. What a bunch of Hippocrates, you are all caught up in the same partisan baloney that continues to drive this country further and further into mediocrity.

The irony about Obama is not that he has had a rough couple weeks; it is that people think he is actually different. The reality for all the obnoxious liberals currently gloating at the second coming of Christ is that Obama is no different than any other politician. He was just the best at playing the game this time around. Sorry to burst the orgasmic liberal bubble but the only reason you’re happy is because he is the candidate that currently stands for your particular basket of meaningless drivel. I don’t understand how you can’t see it. It is the biggest political blind spot / snow job ever accomplished.

> Wow, over a 100 posts of partisan shill. When will you all realize that Republicans & Democrats are
> exactly the same?

I never said otherwise.... I just like going after self-righteous folks from either side.

Both parties should be destroyed... Jefferson said political parties were the worst thing about democracy.

> the reality is that the majority of what goes on while they are in office is circumstance,
> happenstance, and luck

Agreed... although I still do think the Reagan years represented a shift in the way we as Americans look at the world... and its still with us. Not saying its awesome, or bad, its just still here...

> What a bunch of Hippocrates, you are all caught up in the same partisan baloney that continues to
> drive this country further and further into mediocrity.

We're doctors now?

;-)

But, seriously, check yourself... I agree its all baloney. Shoot both sides...

> Wow, over a 100 posts of partisan shill.

It is funny that the guy with the craziest claims outed himself as a Democratic operative!

Economists know little about economics and finance. Republicans no little about economics and finance. Democrats know little about ecoomics and finance. You act as though it's a science. It's not, and if it were most of the titans of business and industry would be failing right now, as well as the vast majority of financial pundits.

And then there's Greenspan. You see, he had a wee problem with his model. He presumed that long-term self-preservation would overcome the desire for short-term gain. Well, think again, if we animals are left to our own unfettered devices, we don't do very well except for the individual, which, as we now see, does not spread wealth to all. Oopsie, sorry I destroyed the world economic order as it was known. Can we supply-siders have just one more shot at it? No f'ng way.

Remind me never to invest any money in happyrenter's hedgefund. I would like my money manager to actually understand how business works.

lol

> You act as though it's a science.

Its a social science.

> It's not, and if it were most of the titans of business and industry would be failing right now, as
> well as the vast majority of financial pundits.

I assume you mean would NOT be failing.

And, few of these titans were trained in economics.. we'd be better off if they were.

Your points are akin to saying because some terrorists took some materials and blew up a bomb that destroyed the world, science is at fault.

Hey, idiots are idiots...

And, guess what, the economists absolutely predicted this. Roubini anyone?
Shiller anyone?

Problem is, the idiots didn't listen.

"Well, think again, if we animals are left to our own unfettered devices, we don't do very well except for the individual, which, as we now see, does not spread wealth to all."

This is asinine liberal spooge. Do you actually believe it is the responsibility of the person that works his ass off to pay for the guy who doesn't want to work? I will NEVER understand the wealth spreading argument. I can't tell you how many people I have offered to help find a job during this recent downturn that have responded "we'll I'm not ready to back to work just yet, I can still collect for a couple more months". Wealth spreading. What a fucking joke.

You know how you spread wealth... JOB CREATION.

But don't tell that to the socialist whinies....

The wealth spreading argument isn't mine, it's the supply siders. Those well-known liberals.

"You know how you spread wealth... JOB CREATION."

Exactly, if people actually want to work. Why work when the goverment keeps writing me checks?

"The irony about Obama is not that he has had a rough couple weeks; it is that people think he is actually different."

ding ding ding!

NYCfund had me until he started trash talking the mother on welfare with four children..Just as the letter writer has a back story how he got rich, struggles, the mother of four on welfare has a back story why she ended up on welfare.

Carter is anti-semitic.
He supports terrorism against Jews.
He has never encouraged the Arab people to live up to their responsibility for their own people, after they expelled minority Jews from Arab lands only to have Israel.
And, whether you like Reagan or not, he asked a simple question that can be looked at in retrospect today and confirmed - 1977 vs 1980 - were people better off after 4 years of Carter?

Big difference!
The new guy has much bigger nuts, bigger than peanuts.
We are going down the drain. The smooth silky sounds of Obamaramma are infinatly more relaxing than that slack jawed southern drawl.
Hey Jimmy! me and the Mrs. are heading for the crapper, think you could buid us a house?
Maybe then I could break my Streeteasy addiction

"School Loan Deduction - PHASED OUT for rich folks
IRA deduction - PHASED OUT for rich folks "

Sadly, these are phased out long before being "rich" or even "affluent". I seem to remember a few other deductions that we missed some ridiculously low cutoff. No free $1200 last year either.

Fuck Obama. I don't think I've ever seen a more incompetent first 100 days - and it's only been 16 days! Liberals always seem to enjoy levying taxes, they should try paying them once in a while too (how many have stepped down now?).

wow, this is just about the most deranged, insane, last gasp of the right wing conversation i have ever read. you should probably move this over to the john birch society message boards. here's the link:

http://www.jbs.org/

i won't even respond to all the stupidity and vitriolic nonsense, but three gems from nyc10022 jump out.

1. he posts this long thing about the self-made ceo as some sort of example of the evils of progressive taxation write before informing us about his trust fund (which probably explains why he spends all day long posting right wing talking points. he doesn't need to work).

2. he says the dnc is a mess. hmmm. the job of the dnc is to elect democrats. seems like we are doing a pretty good job.

3. he thinks that graduating from yale with an undergraduate degree in economics makes him an expert in something. last time i checked economics was the major for people too dumb or uninteresting to make it in serious academic discipline. given your trust fund situation and lack of a career i'll assume you were a legacy at yale. i'll put my summa cum laude harvard degree in philosophy and math and my masters degree in philosophy up against your trust funded four years 'studying' economics at yale any day.

enjoy the right wing mongering.

> i won't even respond to all the stupidity and vitriolic nonsense

Yes, I get it... we proved you INSANELY wrong, with completely bogus claims, so you are completely ignoring that and resorting to... what else... PERSONAL INSULTS!

Last resort of the ignorant... scream nonsense!

Wow, if this is the democratic party, I say its gone in 15 years...

> informing us about his trust fund
You moron, I STARTED the trust. I went to college on financial aid.

> he says the dnc is a mess. hmmm. the job of the dnc is to elect democrats. seems like we are doing a
> pretty good job.

NY mag did an entire article on how Obama bypassed the DNC with his own organization... and the DNC has completely lost its base of power.

> he says the dnc is a mess. hmmm. the job of the dnc is to elect democrats. seems like we are doing a
> pretty good job.

Yes, unlike, uh, philosphy!

WOW, REALLY, THE DNC OPERATIVE HAS NOTHING BUT INSULTS! MAN, THE PARTY IS DEAD!

Wow, this guy just does not get it.

He doesn't understand taxation or fiscal policy AT ALL, yet he's in the democratic machine.

WE ARE SCREWED!

"Wa, wa, wa... I don't understand anything about finance or taxation or policy, so I'll just yell insults!!!!"

Can't say I'm surprised coming from a democratic party operative....

seriously, not one lick of actually backing up his claims...

I guess he knows he doesn't know anything.

We have a PROGRESSIVE tax policy, and putzes like him running around claiming otherwise are why politics are such a cesspool.

nyc10022,

the fact that i don't CAPITALIZE MY POSTS and COME ON EVERY FIVE MINUTES TO REFUTE YOUR NONSENSE seems to prove to you that i know nothing about finance of tax policy. lucky for me your opinion isn't dispositive and hasn't prevented me from rising to the top of my profession at the tender age of 27. sorry that i assumed you had the trust fund rather than that you created it. i didn't realize you were old.

it is odd to see you ranting and fuming and piling on the insults while complaining IN CAPITAL LETTERS that i insulted you. it is pretty amazing that the example you use for a poor family is one that subsists on $6,000 a year. the idea that an entire family in the united states of america subsisting on $6,000 per year should pay any taxes at all is just absurd. the poor folks i was referring to were the working poor living above the poverty line, not the desperately poor who don't have enough money for food let alone for rent.

> the fact that i don't CAPITALIZE MY POSTS and COME ON EVERY FIVE MINUTES TO REFUTE YOUR NONSENSE

Yes, the fact that you completely ignored all the data and points made does! The fact that you responded with NOTHING but INSULTS does!

Nice job, at least you are admitting you don't know diddly!

> hasn't prevented me from rising to the top of my profession at the tender age of 27

Yes, you are the top money-loser in town. Well done!

> the poor folks i was referring to were the working poor living above the poverty line, not the
> desperately poor who don't have enough money for food let alone for rent.

Yes, and you were WRONG ABOUT THEM, TOO!!!

You were wrong, plain wrong... sorry.

Everything you said was just... uh, WRONG.

(and, yes, now TWO posts and counting with nothing but insults from you... not a lick of support for your claims. I guess you've given up on being right, now you're just trying to bang your fist on the table and yell loud enough that noone notices you don't know anything)

wait, i'm the top money-loser in town? huh? have you somehow accessed my returns? you are really unhinged. reminds me of the time you stated that you thought you could move the real estate market by posting negative comments on real estate blogs.

dude, i don't even know what claim you are talking about any more. the claim that US taxes are less progressive now than at any point in the last fifty years? the claim that the rich pay lower total effective taxes than the upper middle class? at least MAKE it CLEAR WHICH point you want ME to BACK UP before RantINg in HalF capitALIZEd sentENCEs.

> dude, i don't even know what claim you are talking about any more

Yes, I understand that you have reading comprehension problems.

"all studies of overall taxation show that the middle and upper middle class bear the largest burden, and the rich and poor pay around the same. them's the facts."

Sorry, but you are an idiot...

AnD YOu cAN CapitaliZE All yOU WanT, but you are..

still wrong.

sorry.

"all studies of overall taxation show that the middle and upper middle class bear the largest burden, and the rich and poor pay around the same. them's the facts."

"i know what the effective tax rates are for the upper middle class, and i know that the burden they shoulder is greater than that of the rich."

"the rich pay the biggest share of taxes primarily because they earn the most income. if you look at percentages, the middle and upper middle classes tend to pay a higher overall tax rate than the rich. that's what regressive taxation means. it doesn't mean that someone who earns 80k per year pays more than someone who earns 500k in dollar terms. it means the person earning 80k pays a higher percentage."

still wrong...

happyrenter, this is nyc's game. He'll never back down, will throw in some insults, and will continue posting, even after you've stopped in order to mock you. He's not a dumb guy, but this is why some are annoyed with him. It was actually worse when he posted as EddieWilson. Let's move on and let this thread go on its merry way.

bjw, don't be a hypocrite...

Not to mention... this guy started the insults... I gave links and data points, and he came back with personal insults and nothing else. The post is right up there, clear as day.

If you are going to be a hall monitor, know what you are talking about....

Or, more to the point, stop making your agenda so clear when you take sides...

free speech for all!!

nyc10022, what's my agenda exactly? I haven't taken sides in this, mostly because I've never registered with any party, so this partisan stuff isn't my bag. What I do know is that happyrenter, though a relative newcomer, has always been civil and backed his points with "actual data." What did you post here, one link? And you berate him over that?

> has always been civil and backed his points with "actual data."

Not here... check the thread again.

> nyc10022, what's my agenda exactly?

You're very quick to Hall Monitor bears, and MUCH slower to do it with bulls. Then it carries over into other discussions, like this one (or like the techguy stuff).

Its is CLEARLY happyrenter's mistake here, and guess where you jumped in again. You did the same with techguy, a guy CLEARLY in error.

Your bias has always been pretty clear.

> And you berate him over that?

No, i berated him over going after me personally when his data was shown to be made up.

Then again, he does pretty much give the worst commercial for Harvard of all time:

"i'll put my summa cum laude harvard degree in philosophy and math and my masters degree in philosophy up against your trust funded four years 'studying' economics at yale any day."

Only thing going for Harvard here is that 70% of the class gets honors (its about a third of that at Yale). So summa at Harvard is as easy as just cum at Yale...

"You're very quick to Hall Monitor bears, and MUCH slower to do it with bulls."

You call it "hall monitoring," when you do the same exact thing. Or to paraphrase you - it's always the people calling others hall monitors who are doing it themselves! But seriously, you just lump people into this "bull" or "bear" camp, which is something I don't subscribe to. I'll just call out posts that are cogent but overly reactionary or biased, though I will largely ignore completely ridiculous ones (like some of what steveF posts, for example). There was more of this from what you call the "bulls" in 07 and part of 08, and it's switched since then. So clearly, there's more junk coming from that "side" now.

"Its is CLEARLY happyrenter's mistake here, and guess where you jumped in again. You did the same with techguy, a guy CLEARLY in error."

I "jumped" in literally 4 posts after you "jumped" in. And you are clearly biased about others' "mistakes" when you're the one on the other end of the argument.

According to the New York Times:

"Last year, 46.4 percent of all seniors graduated from Yale with general honors - 11 percent graduated summa cum laude, 11.5 percent magna."

And at Harvard:
"summa and magna together can go to no more than 20 percent," and "Summa cum laude degrees have been capped at 5 percent of the graduating class since 1997."

so let's see how your math stacks up. 5% of Harvard's graduates receive summa. 45% of Yale graduates get cum. so even if we assume that yale and harvard students are equal (obviously untrue) that would mean it is 9x easier to get a cum and yale than a summa at harvard. so guess again. but you'll never admit to being wrong, so i won't hold my breath for it.

let me correct my data. yale has followed harvard's lead and now also caps summa at 5%. i can admit when i am wrong.

25% of yale's graduating class receives cum or above, so it is only 5x harder to earn summa at harvard than cum at yale (that is, it would be 5x harder if yale and harvard had the same caliber of student).

You have bad data... ONCE AGAIN.

Yale summa is top 5%, Magna is next 10%, summa is next 15%... 30% in total....

Harvard has 70% with honors...

"summa and magna together can go to no more than 20 percent"
still more than Yale, and almost as much as ALL honors at Yale....

> would mean it is 9x easier to get a cum and yale than a summa at harvard.
Wow, for a math major, your math sucks.... nice job!

Hey, thats 3 posts and counting... STILL avoiding the actual point.
Nice job!

Sorry, my math was incorrect... FIVE posts of avoiding the question on the mistake you made and sticking only to insults!

Great job!

> You call it "hall monitoring," when you do the same exact thing.

Think what you want, bjw, but I do NOT do the exact same thing as you...

"I'll just call out posts that are cogent but overly reactionary or biased, though I will largely ignore completely ridiculous ones (like some of what steveF posts, for example). There was more of this from what you call the "bulls" in 07 and part of 08, and it's switched since then. So clearly, there's more junk coming from that "side" now"

Only when you - as you admitted - "ignore" all the junk from the other "side", like SteveF.

Thats slant.

Call it whatever you want, but you have no problem letting nonsense from folks like Steve get past, but are the board hall monitor from anyone with negative news...

it wasn't just your math that was incorrect--the entire basis for your point was totally and completely invalid. 30% cum at yale, 5% summa at harvard. although i know you did not graduate summa from harvard in math i assume you are capable of seeing that those percentages are not equal.

"25% of yale's graduating class receives cum or above, so it is only 5x harder to earn summa at harvard than cum at yale (that is, it would be 5x harder if yale and harvard had the same caliber of student)."

I can't believe you are still arguing the joke point. I was sticking up for your school! Because you're making it sound like a horrible education.

Seriously, use data and logic, or quiet down. You're making Harvard sound a worse place by the minute!

"25% of yale's graduating class receives cum or above, so it is only 5x harder to earn summa at harvard than cum at yale (that is, it would be 5x harder if yale and harvard had the same caliber of student)."

Actually, "math" major, your math is bad here. Your 5x smaller therefore 5x "harder" is absolutely horrible. You are assuming an even distribution here of GPAs. And a fixed scale of "hard".

Wow, for a math major.... your math sucks. Just out of school in a dying industry.

Really, quit while you are only pretty far behind.

from the harvard site:

"Generally speaking, a student who has received a departmental recommendation of highest honors, and whose GPA for all courses counted towards the AB degree is 3.33 (14 in the old scale) or above, has a good chance of being awarded Summa Cum Laude."

3.33???

That's hard?

LOL i used the 'easier' language because it was the language you used. wow you are stupid:

'so summa at Harvard is as easy as just cum at Yale...'

nice selective quotation. that quote comes from the website of the linguistics department. my guess is that there are well under ten linguistics concentrators in any given year and i can guarantee you that they only recommend one person for summa in each graduating class. the point is that the best linguistics student each year gets summa if the department recommends him or her, assuming that person has grades above a certain level. to put that on here as if it is a general policy for all harvard departments is ridiculous. my year out of 200 economics concentrators i believe four received summa (a friend from oxford was one of them). and none of them had a 3.3.

> LOL i used the 'easier' language because it was the language you used. wow you are stupid:
> 'so summa at Harvard is as easy as just cum at Yale...'

Wow, your math is horrific... You REALLY need to learn about statistical distribution.

You didn't even understand the point I was making.

And that is now SEVEN posts from you without addressing the mistake you made. All you can do is try insults. It was YOU who tried to play the degree card.

Man, you are a joke. You don't understand economics or finance. You don't understand tax policy, yet you brag about it. You joined an industry in a bubble that has since been decimated, and you brag about that too.

Stop digging yourself deeper, really...

> LOL i used the 'easier' language because it was the language you used. wow you are stupid:
> 'so summa at Harvard is as easy as just cum at Yale...'

Wow, your math is horrific... You REALLY need to learn about statistical distribution.

You didn't even understand the point I was making.

And that is now SEVEN posts from you without addressing the mistake you made. All you can do is try insults. It was YOU who tried to play the degree card.

Man, you are a joke. You don't understand economics or finance. You don't understand tax policy, yet you brag about it. You joined an industry in a bubble that has since been decimated, and you brag about that too.

Stop digging yourself deeper, really...

> LOL i used the 'easier' language because it was the language you used. wow you are stupid:
> 'so summa at Harvard is as easy as just cum at Yale...'

Wow, your math is horrific... You REALLY need to learn about statistical distribution.
You didn't even understand the point I was making.

And that is now SEVEN posts from you without addressing the mistake you made. All you can do is try insults. It was YOU who tried to play the degree card.

Man, you are a joke. You don't understand economics or finance, yet you try and claim others don't. You don't understand tax policy, yet you brag about it. You joined an industry in a bubble that has since been decimated, and you brag about that too.

> wow you are stupid:

Man, anyone can just look above at the thread and see what you wrote. You should be the last person on this board calling someone else stupid.

We've all read your posts!

Stop digging yourself deeper, really...

> LOL i used the 'easier' language because it was the language you used. wow you are stupid:
> 'so summa at Harvard is as easy as just cum at Yale...'

Wow, your math is horrific... You REALLY need to learn about statistical distribution.
You didn't even understand the point I was making.

And that is now SEVEN posts from you without addressing the mistake you made. All you can do is try insults. It was YOU who tried to play the degree card.

Man, you are a joke. You don't understand economics or finance, yet you try and claim others don't. You don't understand tax policy, yet you brag about it. You joined an industry in a bubble that has since been decimated, and you brag about that too.

> wow you are stupid:

Man, anyone can just look above at the thread and see what you wrote. You should be the last person on this board calling someone else stupid.

We've all read your posts!

Stop digging yourself deeper, really...

anyway, enough. you sucked me into your game and i fell for it. the thread is yours, enjoy.

anyway, enough. you sucked me into your game and i fell for it. the thread is yours, enjoy.

Thank you!

From now on, please leave the posting to folks who actually know something about the topic!

Yes, my "game" of showing actual data and being correct, as opposed to your "serious non-game" of personal insults because you don't have a clue!

Keep on truckin'!

"Only when you - as you admitted - "ignore" all the junk from the other "side", like SteveF.

Thats slant.

Call it whatever you want, but you have no problem letting nonsense from folks like Steve get past, but are the board hall monitor from anyone with negative news..."

You don't get it - I was saying your arguments are mostly cogent. steveF's are mostly junk. If you ignore the junk, it tends to go away. The other stuff is actually worth discussing. And I certainly don't post against all "negative news" (and it isn't exactly negative for buyers when prices come down, now is it?); just the kind that gets spun out of proportion. The moment anyone posts something offering at all optimistic, you jump on it. Look in the mirror, nyc.

> The moment anyone posts something offering at all optimistic, you jump on it.

Causation or correlation...
I jump on it, because its 99.9% of the time misused data...

> You don't get it - I was saying your arguments are mostly cogent. steveF's are mostly junk

No, I get it... just saying you should spend more time on the junk then. And, it hasn't gone away, SteveF has been doing it for quite some time.

> and it isn't exactly negative for buyers when prices come down, now is it?);

but it is for sellers...

In terms of a market, negative news means down...

This is why I try to stay away from politics on these boards (alas, not always successfully).

z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z

Happy Wenta Buys a Horse

by Admiral

Happy Renter sees an add in the paper for a horse for sale pretty cheap. He goes to the address to take a look at the horse. A man comes out and sees Happy Renter and asks if there is something he can do for him. Happy Renter says, "I would like to theee the horth you haf for thale". The man takes him to the stable and Happy Renter sees the horse and says to the man," I would like to look in the horth's earzth". So the man picks up little Happy Renter so he can look at the horses ears. He puts Happy Renter down and pretty soon Happy Renter says, " I would like to look in the horth's mout". So, again the man picks up Happy Renter so he can look in the horses mouth. He sets Happy Renter back down, and soon the midget says, " I would like to theee the horth twat". By now the man has lost all patience with Happy Renter. He picks him up, lifts the horses tail, and starts shoving him in and out of the horses behind. Feeling better now, he sets Happy Renter back down and starts to walk away, when the midget says," tat's pretty neat, but I wanted to theee the horth twat awound the twack"!

hehe admrial, pretty good joke. that would have to be some horse--i'm 6'3 190--but a good joke nonetheless.

Thank you. Sorry for picking on you but when i mentioned Barney Fwank, some circuit in my bwain got crossed and started associating his manner of speaking with you.

p.s. I'm also happily renting for the past year; best move i ever made. I'll buy my old place back for $400,000 less.

hey, i'm perfectly happy to associated with barney frank. he's widely considered one of a handful of the smartest, toughest, most effective politicians in the country. yes, he talks funny. big deal.

picking on me? dude, i'm a mid-20s former college athlete with a very full dance card and a very successful business. i've been coming onto this site for the past couple months because i am looking for a 3 bedroom in the village. i can handle a joke as long as it's funny.

HR: I have a masters degree in philosophy too (non-ivy, of course). I bet that makes you cringe ;)

Who wudda thunk we had somethin' in commom.

you think i expect that all people with masters degrees in philosophy see the world the way i do?

LOL. I was just teasing you. I actually just finished reading this thread. It's taken me 3 days.

what was your area? i focused mostly on philosophy of mind although these days i mostly read political and moral philosophy. i was going to write by dissertation on the significance of bertrand russel's critique of bishop berkley until my life went in a different direction.

Ethics...my heart is with the Classics. Mind was always fun. Looks like you got much farther than I did. Would have loved to do a PhD but wasn't in the cards for this lifetime :(

nah. i read a lot and i have a photographic memory but i wasn't a particularly deep thinker. hence i wound up on wall street instead of writing philosophy or math papers.

i agree with you about the classics, by the way. there is just nothing like studying plato and aristotle for the first time.

"hey, i'm perfectly happy to associated with barney frank. he's widely considered one of a handful of the smartest, toughest, most effective politicians in the country."

LOL. He was an apologist for Fannie/Freddie for years. He's not one of the "smartest, most effective politicians" in his own home.

"picking on me? dude, i'm a mid-20s former college athlete with a very full dance card and a very successful business."

Defensive much... Dude? And since when does making it to your mid-20's count as an accomplishment? Keep up the good work. In 5 years, you have a shot at being 30...

"i wasn't a particularly deep thinker. hence i wound up on wall street"

How's the middle office these days? Still running down trade tix for the brokers?

I'm sorry, i'm SUCH a prick...anything to amuse myself!

admiral,
if you are going to insult me at least get your facts in order. middle office? please. but i do love that barney frank--brilliant man.

at least i don't need to bother insulting you back--you take care of it yourself.

I'm sure Barney loves you back, in his own special way.

Sorry about the middle-office joke, you do strike me more as a back-office monkey. Enjoy that $20K bonus this year, BOM?

you know what my bonus was last year admiral? $0. and this coming year? $0. and my salary? $0. a $20k bonus sounds great compared to that!

"you know what my bonus was last year admiral? $0. and this coming year? $0. and my salary? $0."

You're still over-paid.

now that's the truth!

"i'm 6'3 190"

dude, lift a weight will ya?

"but i do love that barney frank--brilliant man."

OMG

Oh, I get it! They pay back office monkeys in BANANAS, now!

yep i am way overpaid in bananas. they are rotting and stinking up my apartment. ten million friggin bananas lying all over the place. it's gross.

There's always money in the banana stand!

uwsmom - just as long as you don't burn it down! (Nice reference.)

> i'm a mid-20s former college athlete

Wait, you pull out the degree card and you got in to college as an ATHLETE?

Wow, way to forget to mention you made it over the significantly lower bar. Now all of your mistakes make sense.... as I said, the Harvard student body (at least the meritocracy portion) would have done much better in any political discussion...

"LOL. He was an apologist for Fannie/Freddie for years. He's not one of the "smartest, most effective politicians" in his own home."

ROTFL...

nyc10022,

i guess you didn't go to harvard. there are over 40 varsity sports--more than any other school in the country. most varsity athletes were not athletic recruits. i was not an athletic recruit. things must be done differently at yale.

all you republicans who want to blame the entire economic situation on fanny, freddie, and barney frank are entitled to your opinions. but year after year frank is ranked by national journal one of the five smartest members of congress. i've met him several times and he's completely brilliant. you may not agree with him and that's fine, but there's no question that he's exceptionally talented.

"i guess you didn't go to harvard. there are over 40 varsity sports--more than any other school in the country. most varsity athletes were not athletic recruits. i was not an athletic recruit. things must be done differently at yale."

suuuuure... all on your own merits.... suuure. Not like there's an academic index or anything.

You keep telling yourself you're smart..

The rest of us will just read your posts!

> all you republicans

Moron, who said I'm a republican.....?

> i've met him several times and he's completely brilliant

Yes, and no opinion about a politician is more qualified than that of the guy who has zero understanding of politics.

> but there's no question that he's exceptionally talented.

There are TONS of question there. He's ON RECORD being 100% wrong on Fannie/Freddie...

Nice job!

dude, you graduated without honors in economics from a second rate school in new haven. i'm not the one who has to tell himself that he's smart.

barney frank is brilliant. ask anyone who has worked with him.

as for fan/fred, i disagree that he was 100% wrong. but that aside, the man has been in congress for more than thirty years. i'm sure he's been wrong about a lot. who hasn't? doesn't change the fact that he's a brilliant and highly successful political figure.

Right, got it... resorting to personal attacks when you're proven dumb again... I got it. Trying to pull me into your game of anonymous web site bragging? Yes, we get it, you were proven wrong and now you're trying to boast. Old news... and you're still too slow...

> dude, you graduated without honors in economics from a second rate school in new haven. i'm not the
> one who has to tell himself that he's smart.

1) who said I didn't graduate with honors, genuis!

2) Harvard was EASIER TO GET IN THAN YALE when you applied. Check the stats, genius.... Yale had a lower acceptance rate and a higher percentage of folks with better class ranks a few years back (which I think Harvard retook recently) For all your claim about student body, you're WRONG THERE, TOO!

So, lash out all you want... we've read your posts... we know you don't know anything!

> barney frank is brilliant. ask anyone who has worked with him.

Yes, he's brilliant. I swear. Just ask the other morons he hired!

"year after year fwank is ranked by national journal one of the five smartest members of congress."

LOL. Year after year, communism is ranked "#1 system for ensuring prosperity and human rights" by The Nation.

"i've met him several times and he's completely brilliant."

"Hey barn, pass the soap, eh?"

lol

not the next Bill Clinton