JayB

Looks like I'd better stock up on the polycarbonate bottles before the hysteria makes its way south of the border.

Amanuensis?

One insoluble mystery is what prompted the adoption of the new nom de spray.

Appending a suffix to "Hayek" and using it as an adjective in one of your posts = blown cover.

Yeah - looks like Bachelor is a tough nut to crack for discounts. Heard rumblings about discount tickets available at Costco and Gi Joes last year, but not coming up with much this year. $66 bones per day for Bachelor beats paying about the same for man-made groomers on the East Coast, but is still kind of painful.

If they wanted to really go green and reduce the "capita" portion of the resource consumption equations, collectivizing agriculture is clearly the way to go. It has no equal in that regard. Just ask the Ukrainians, Chinese, and North Koreans. KK Found! He's talking out of Jay_B's ass! Clearly. I'm looking forward to the seeing all of the data that support a contrary conclusion.

If they wanted to really go green and reduce the "capita" portion of the resource consumption equations, collectivizing agriculture is clearly the way to go. It has no equal in that regard. Just ask the Ukrainians, Chinese, and North Koreans.

Please explain how multiple progeny benefit the environment. Average age of resident in Colorado City, AZ = 14 I eagerly await your snide, dismissive, non sequitar reply. Seems like you'd have to evaluate that in terms of something like: Total Consumption = Resource Use Per Person * Number of Persons. The polygamists doubtless do well on the resource use per-person front, but probably not so well on the number of persons front. For those who are truly sincere in their convictions and their desire to save the earth from the impending climate catastrophe, the implications are clear: they can maximize their impact on both fronts by killing themselves before they have a chance to reproduce.

I'm astonished that you haven't seized upon the opportunity to pontificate on behalf of a set of C.A.F.E. standards that would limit the scope of the damage that these selfish life choices inflict on the planet. Couples Average Fidelity Expectations? Counseling Against Familial Egress? Individuals have shown that they have little or no capacity to govern their relationships in a manner that minimizes CO2 emissions, ergo the case is clear that the said behaviors need to be subject to the appropriate international regulatory framework.

Climate heroes for sure, but bush-leaguers compared to the folks living in Colorado City, AZ and Bountiful, BC.

I'm eagerly awaiting the prospect of activists festooning couples emerging from divorce court proceedings with "I'm Changing the Climate!!!" stickers on account of the excess C02 emissions that their selfish lifestyle choices are leading to, and the effects that the said choices will have on every other living occupant of the planet. "Environmentalists who are thinking of getting a divorce may want to reconsider, a new study at Michigan State University finds. Households in which a divorce occurs have a greater negative impact on the environment in terms of efficient use of resources than the households of married couples, according to research that will be published this week by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The reason is simple — it's all about efficiency, says Jianguo Liu, lead author of the study who has the Rachel Carson chair in ecological sustainability at the university's department of fisheries and wildlife. "In the divorced households, the number of people is smaller than in married households," Liu told ABCNEWS.com. "The resource efficiency used per person is much lower than in married households." Link

Will be staying near Bachelor for the holidays, and was wondering if there were any local outfits that sold tickets for less than you'll pay at the base, etc. Many thanks,

Hahahaha.

Lest anyone think I exaggerate... "Well, that's a completely different discussion, and not the one that's been going on here. No, Blake's attitude is to hold his gear choices out as the 'right' ones, and denigrate anyone who chooses otherwise, rather than just say, 'look, this has been my experience'. FF went right along with this arrogance by making fun of those customers for choosing competing products that they simply don't offer, as if that choices were somehow 'illegitimate' or 'for fashion only' (as if that's a problem). I argued that the ultra light sweaters are a viable, logical, and versatile choice for backcountry users such as myself as well as urban users. My viewpoint is that, if you want to run a successful business, listen, don't preach to your customers. Eric8 chimes in with nothing but some fuckhead spray. And somehow I'm the tool?"

Not to mention the fact that FEATHERED FUCKING FRIENDS DOESN'T MAKE A SVELTE-YET-STYLISH DOWN SWEATER THAT'S EQUALLY AT HOME ON DOWNTOWN SIDEWALKS OR HIGH IN THE MOUNTAINS!!!! THE ARROGANCE!!! THE AUDACITY TO PRESUME THAT *THEY* KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT DOWN CLOTHING AFTER A SCANT ~30 YEARS IN THE BUSINESS!! I WAS A CHIEF TECHNICAL OFFICER - WHY WON'T THEY LIIIIIIIISTEN!!!! IF ONLY THEY WOULD LIIIIIISTEN TO *ME*? WHY HAVEN'T THEY DISPATCHED AN INTERN TO MY PHINNEY RIDGE HQ, LIKE YESTERDAY, WITH A SKETCHPAD, CAMCORDER, AND AN OFFER FOR AN EQUITY STAKE IN EXCHANGE FOR MY COUNSEL!!!!!! HEAR THAT BLAKE? CHIEF TECHNICAL OFFICER!!! AND WHERE IN THE *FUCK* IS THAT GORDITA'S BURRITO!!!

lbxBFb3A5ak

Exhibit A: "Florida's Pension Fund Holds Same `Suspect' Debt as Frozen Pool By David Evans Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Florida's pension fund owns more than $1 billion of the same downgraded and defaulted debt that sparked a run on a state investment pool for local governments and forced officials to freeze withdrawals. The State Board of Administration, manager of $37 billion in short-term assets, including the pool, also oversees the $138 billion Florida Retirement System. The board purchased $3.3 billion of debt whose top ratings were reduced following the collapse of the subprime mortgage market, according to documents obtained by Bloomberg News through an open records request. Like the hundreds of school districts and towns unable to access $14 billion frozen in the Local Government Investment Pool, Florida's 1.1 million current and retired state workers rely on the board's management to boost returns on the funds that pay their pensions. That has left them vulnerable to the same potential for losses. A state-created home insurer and the treasury are also at risk. ``These were highly inappropriate investments for taxpayers' money,'' said Joseph Mason, a finance professor at Drexel University in Philadelphia. ``This is the tip of the iceberg for pension funds. We know the paper is sitting there. There are substantial subprime-related losses that haven't shown up yet.'" http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aEWz6lIRbqE4&refer=home

Good background info: http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9033348

If misery loves company, the folks in Norway will be feeling better shortly.

"Food not Orthodoxy" would probably be a serviceable distillation of the sentiments that prevailed in the Ukraine during the 1930s, under the Great Leap Forward, in present-day North Korea, etc.

One of the grander ironies of cultural relativism is that it was never embraced by the populations that it was intended to benefit.

Must have heard the NPR story about the grow-ops in the Puget Sound financed with no-doc loans. Match made in heaven.

That select group in this case is likely to be the occupants and/or owners of dwellings financed with ponzi-credit. Stupid you for locking in at ~4% fixed. If only you had taken out a neg-am, I/O, payment-option ARM with a teaser rate you could have potentially scored a much better rate, underwritten by the German pension fund, CALPERS, or some other bag-holder.

Maybe they can find someone willing to rent it for ~12K/mo until they find a full-price buyer....

People will still buy homes if the loans aren't subsidized and the gains aren't tax free. They'd just have to content themselves with smaller homes secured by smaller loans. The federal subsidy for home ownership can't be defended as either an economic or social policy.