ShcShc11

Do you want a serious breakdown and/or Discussion of the German economy? I know all about its economy from 1919-1945. Thanks, but Economists gravitate to picking flyshit out of pepper, and confuse that tendency with analysis. I have seen examples of what you think you know. My point was not that we are NEAR Post-Great Way Germay, it is that we are in Much Worse Shape. Regardless of the fact that the U.S. prints (or at least generates electronically) the "foreign reserve," everything we have is BORROWED to begin with. The Fed is neither Federal nor a Reserve. The basis for issuance of currency is the 'loan' from the Fed by the 'Mandrake Mechanism,' whereby money is created out of thin air. Not only do we not have X weeks foreign reserve currency, our Treasury has nothing but 40 years of IOUs - for which WE owe, NOT owed to us. The bottom line is that, whenever the note comes due that we can't quite pay, our entire economic system will consist of a big sucking sound. BSBD, Winsor Look at the 10 years U.S bonds. The investors are willing to PAY THE U.S to let them borrow their money. And frankly, you don't know what you know because you don't know the data. You don't understand them nor do you even remotely make an effort to understand them. I don't think you understand that WE are the foreign reserve currency. What you described is an economy pegged on gold standard. A country's economy is not your personal credit card -at all-. It doesn't remotely function the same way but people keep on confusing them. The background information behind the deficits itself are far more important. By your standard, a 250 pounds bodybuilder/weightlifter is considered unhealthy and unfit based on his numerical weight. Cheers! Shc

Do you want a serious breakdown and/or Discussion of the German economy? I know all about its economy from 1919-1945. You are completely deluded by saying that U.S is anywhere NEAR Post-Great War Germany. France invaded and occupied the economic area of Germany, forcing Germany to pay for its own coal. Coal was Germany's prevalent source of export. And guess what? In 1923, they actually had to IMPORTERS and buy exclusively their own coal from the French. We have NOTHING like that. We don't owe FORCED REPARATIONS to anyone (no, don't even think China is a form of reparations). Germans had to pay until at least the 1980s and even through the 1990s (or that was the plan). Germany had, in 1934, ONLY ONE WEEK WORTH OF FOREIGN RESERVE CURRENCY . One week. The poorest countries in this world today has to have AT LEAST 8 months of foreign reserve. North Korea is the exception with approx 2 months worth of foreign reserve. And the U.S? They ARE the foreign reserve. So really, people have to stop deluding themselves about some impending U.S economic catastrophe. As Ronald Reagan once said: "We forget that we only just begun". Cheers! Shc

FOUR MORE YEARS

http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/PDF/CHART_00037___Rig_Sizing_Chart.pdf Thinking about purchasing a Vector too... Is "Full Fitting" (e.g: putting a 170 in a V348) a bitch to pack? Cheers! Shc

...then we forget the cost Public and Private for cleaning up pollution.

As shown in my other topics, previous GOPs including Reagan were more Government expansionary than Obama. I know I know. Your reaction will be: "That can't be true!". But the numbers are there. Cheers!

It wasn't enough. ...it was BY FAR not enough. Trying to plug a 3 trillion $ GDP gap with a 400B$ stimulus (remember most of it was inefficient tax cuts and "Federal to State Transfers") is INSUFFICIENT. We were too scared by the boogeyman called "debt cliff" (and we still are even if investors are willing to give money for U.S to borrow FOR FREE). But that doesn't mean we didn't do better than Europe and/or other financial institution-related recessions/depression. Cheers! Shc

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/10/28/exp-farees-take.cnn Short video, but summarizes well. Whoever presides next will essentially reap the awards of a better conditioned-economy. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/10/26/exp-ken-rogoff-on-correcting-romney.cnn a 1 min video from Harvard University's Kenneth Rogoff. Cheers! Shc

Only a Leftist would think that the Huffington Post is not bias. I know FoxNews is heavily bias to the Right, just as the Huffington Post is heavily bias to the Left. Indoctrination is a powerful thing. I love the way you write your posts. You accuse me of using the huff when its actually Bloomberg magazine (a right-wing leaning magazine) that wrote that lol. If you want to know about indoctrination, then read "Propganda" by Jacques Ellul. Very interesting book. Anybody who remotely touches any form of news are essentially indoctrinated. Read it. Read my posts then you can comment. You run your mouth about indoctrination then purposefully distort information Read on Greg Mankiw. Romney's economic advisor. My comments on the economy is shared by him and anyone essentially serious about economics share this view aswell. This as a zero-bound recession. Cheers!

Fox news Pot meet Kettle. You want to criticize FoxNews for their bias news coverage ... fine they are definitely bias ... but ... you think the Huffington Post is any different with their Leftist slant. What a fucking joke. Tell me which life size poster do you have in your room. The one of Dalton McGuilty or have you jumped on the Justin Trudeau is my hero bandwagon? LOLL. 1) The newscover is bloomberg (center with perhaps right-wing slant), not huffingtonpost. and seriously, foxnews is at the bottom... far worse than huff. 2) Look at my other posts on economics- always varied and from non-partisan sources. p-s: spoke to a few Liberals like Marc Garneau; they/he doesn't have that much belief on JT. Conservatives could probably stay in power until 2020 unless if the NDP radically shifts to the center-right. The Libs seem to be slowly but surely starving cash too. Cheers! Shc

Fox news

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/842700/original.jpg ...and Number of questions asked about Global Warming in the past three debates: 0. Cheers! Shc

Oh my GOD!!!!!

And he should revise the notion of "economic waste". Just because a $ not spent on NASA does not mean a $ was saved. Trying to save that $ could actually mean more $ wasted elsewhere. e.g: A passionate scientist wanting to go to University might be denied due to lack of demand on this department. Instead he goes to law school to become a lawyer. This would be considered to be a larger waste of taxpayer's money. Cheers! Shc

How in the hell did you get that anyone is criticizing your fuhrer? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Republicans criticizes Obama for over-hyping the storm; shows a lack of judgment and leadership

Just curious which websites you guys are using for the electoral outlook? Cheers! Shc

LOL

brrrrr. I don't know how you guys do it. 5k jumps at winter time?? brrrr

I recommend: http://www.amazon.com/Propaganda-Formation-Attitudes-Jacques-Ellul/dp/0394718747/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1351275934&sr=1-3&keywords=Propaganda Great book, should have a read. I couldn't care less about Romney and women saga. But I do find it funny that you accuse me of sipping the media coolaid" yet your criticism of Biden ("Biden is an order of fries short of a happy meal") comes from the same media. Cheers!

Binders full of women

If it was before Avatar, then it is a fad. But it can't be anymore. Too much money has been spent on 3D to let it fail. All TV manufacturers are betting on 3D to the extent where their TV division would bleed red if they closed it down. Samsung especially is incredibly bullish on 3D tv to the extent where they are using Galaxy's profit to fund 3D R&D. Cinema owners put too much investments in 3D to the extent where they would pressure studios to make 3D. 2007 had 15% of the 3D we have today (thank you Avatar again). ...hell the Chinese Gov is betting on 3D. So no. too much money has been invested to make it just a fad.

There is no Tar in the Oil Sands. Will you Fabian Socialists back east ever get this through your skulls. Fabian Socialists LOL

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/climate-of-doubt/ watching it.

There is a difference between producing X amount of oil and producing X amount of easy oil. Much of today's oil gains come from far more difficult and costly areas such as Alberta's tar sands. These are energy intensive as well. Its no different than Farber producing artificial oil from coal for Germany in the 1940s, but cost x8 more than oil exports. Cheers! Shc