Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
Fairweather

Libtards on Parade: Alcoholism, Corruption, Murder

Recommended Posts

 

When did this toxin dumping happen? .....

 

...... making pragmatic alliances with libertarians on issues like drug prohibition, gay marriage, agricultural subsidies, etc. It's certainly fascinating to see people who identify with the ideological yearnings of the Woodstock-era left waaaaaaaaaay more than I ever will leaping to the defense of the centralized administrative state (e.g The Man) so often, much less invoking Somalia every time someone tables the idea of eliminating Davis Bacon or opening up mail service to private competition.

 

Early 90's on the toxic dumping and illegal fishing by foreign vessels. So I guess it can't be said it was the cause of the collapse but really a symptom afterwards, and now a reason for the piracy.

 

http://www.projectcensored.org/3-toxic-waste-behind-somali-pirates/

 

I would have voted for Ron Paul because he was less of a tool than the other corporate puppets. Agree on drugs, corporate subsidies, the Fed, disagree on administrative regulation and privatization.

 

The reason for the banking collapse of 2008 was de-regulation. Imagine playing a game with no rules, or a highway with no laws. Take away the rules and regulations and you get chaos.

 

Some businesses are better off being public, usually the ones that are inherent monopolies. Like the power grid, water, phone and cable lines. Why is Comcast one of the most hated companies? They have a monopoly on hi speed internet, so they don't have to care and can charge whatever.

 

It costs 2 to 3 times as much to send a package via UPS or FedEx compared to the post office, because the post office is not for profit. The predatory capitalists just want the profitable part of the business, they will leave the rural delivery to USPS. They also pay their workers sh*t compared to the post office. A USPS job is a high living wage where you can almost afford to have a one wage earner household and a stay at home parent which means much better kids.

 

So here's the comparison. USPS, way lower rates, high pay to the 98%, nothing for the 1%. Private, higher rates, low pay to the 98%, obscene wealth for the mother fu*king scumbag sh*tstain on the face of humanity greed pigs.

 

The saga of the USPS is a long story. Established over many years it is now and I believe has always been self sustaining. When you deliver to all rural points it becomes an inherent monopoly because it would not be profitable to maintain more than one infrastructure that large.

 

So now the private companies want to come in and pillage only the profitable part built up by someone else. Recently the main way this has been done is through Republifu*k sh*theads in congress where they have enacted a law requiring the post office to fund employee retirement 80 years into the future. This is ludicrous and no company has ever had to do this before. It's just a way to try to drive them to bankruptcy so they can take over their business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I know. You've bothered to sing that performance art/BPD tune before. Top o the charts for the web's greatest hits. A bit baroque, but everybody needs a hobby.

 

Reckon some folks need to put things they can't grok or have pretty much zero data for into grokkable boxes. I don't, but whatev.

 

You put a similar lack of rigor and heaping helpings of assumption in your politard postings, so at least there's some consistency there.

 

What is plainly clear is that you've pulled your view of civil liberties advocacy from some turd blog menu of sound bytes rather than experience. Again, it's the web, where that shit flies for free.

 

 

 

NPD

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When did this toxin dumping happen? .....

 

...... making pragmatic alliances with libertarians on issues like drug prohibition, gay marriage, agricultural subsidies, etc. It's certainly fascinating to see people who identify with the ideological yearnings of the Woodstock-era left waaaaaaaaaay more than I ever will leaping to the defense of the centralized administrative state (e.g The Man) so often, much less invoking Somalia every time someone tables the idea of eliminating Davis Bacon or opening up mail service to private competition.

 

Early 90's on the toxic dumping and illegal fishing by foreign vessels. So I guess it can't be said it was the cause of the collapse but really a symptom afterwards, and now a reason for the piracy.

 

http://www.projectcensored.org/3-toxic-waste-behind-somali-pirates/

 

I would have voted for Ron Paul because he was less of a tool than the other corporate puppets. Agree on drugs, corporate subsidies, the Fed, disagree on administrative regulation and privatization.

 

The reason for the banking collapse of 2008 was de-regulation. Imagine playing a game with no rules, or a highway with no laws. Take away the rules and regulations and you get chaos.

 

Some businesses are better off being public, usually the ones that are inherent monopolies. Like the power grid, water, phone and cable lines. Why is Comcast one of the most hated companies? They have a monopoly on hi speed internet, so they don't have to care and can charge whatever.

 

It costs 2 to 3 times as much to send a package via UPS or FedEx compared to the post office, because the post office is not for profit. The predatory capitalists just want the profitable part of the business, they will leave the rural delivery to USPS. They also pay their workers sh*t compared to the post office. A USPS job is a high living wage where you can almost afford to have a one wage earner household and a stay at home parent which means much better kids.

 

So here's the comparison. USPS, way lower rates, high pay to the 98%, nothing for the 1%. Private, higher rates, low pay to the 98%, obscene wealth for the mother fu*king scumbag sh*tstain on the face of humanity greed pigs.

 

The saga of the USPS is a long story. Established over many years it is now and I believe has always been self sustaining. When you deliver to all rural points it becomes an inherent monopoly because it would not be profitable to maintain more than one infrastructure that large.

 

So now the private companies want to come in and pillage only the profitable part built up by someone else. Recently the main way this has been done is through Republifu*k sh*theads in congress where they have enacted a law requiring the post office to fund employee retirement 80 years into the future. This is ludicrous and no company has ever had to do this before. It's just a way to try to drive them to bankruptcy so they can take over their business.

 

 

Well - looks like we agree on most of the stuff in the top paragraph. I don't entirely disagree with you when it comes to regulation. The part that I disagree with isn't because I think regulation is inherently bad, it's because regulation is a tough thing to get right, and the more complex the underlying process that you are trying to regulate is, the more likely you are to encounter unintended consequences.

 

It's easy to lose sight of this these days, but most regulations in most commercial fields emerged via an evolutionary process involving lots of trial and error rather than being summoned from the ether by an omnipotent bureaucrat/dictator/legislature/etc issuing a top-down diktat. Most of the regulations that emerge from this sort process are field tested at a small scale and only spread and persist if they worked. The "regulations" that NW tribes (once) used to regulate how much of the salmon they harvested every year are an example of this kind of "emergent" regulation.

 

Back when banking was an entirely private enterprise, and when the bank officers stood to have their banks go bust and lose everything they owned if they made bad loans, the regulations that governed banking were the product of a similar process. It's been a long time since "free" banking existed - mostly because kings didn't like having to ask banks to borrow money for wars, castles, etc- but if you look around you can see examples where banks were primarily governed by rules that evolved over centuries were more robust than those that were subject to top-down regulations created by "intelligent design."

 

There are lots of examples of top-down regulations in banking that were well intentioned but made the system more fragile. The ban on "branch banking" was a great way to protect local banks from competition, but made it impossible for them to diversify their loan base enough to ride out local crop failures, etc. Government deposit insurance is a good way to prevent small-scale bank runs and nominally protect the little guy, but it increases systemic risk in the banking system and virtually all of the insurance benefit goes to the people with the most money. Mandating that bank reserves be AAA sounds good in practice, but it creates a "monoculture" of bank reserves, creates an incentive to stuff crappy debt into "AAA" packaging, and reduces the banks' incentive to evaluate the quality of the securities that they use for reserves, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.....blah.

 

Then there's also regulatory capture, incentives to use the political process to secure special exemptions from the rules that are applied to competitors that foster corruption, whether the regulations create incentives that will overpower the rules,etc, etc, etc, etc. All of which is an overly long way of saying that regulations aren't inherently good or bad, and I don't think that's a very useful framework to use when evaluating a policies, political agendas, etc.

 

In the case of the GFC - there's lots of blame to go around, but I don't think you can tell the whole story without looking into the role that the Fed's rate cuts had on boosting home prices, the regs that created more demand for AAA securities that actually existed, pension funds desperate for yield, the various "top-down" regulations that undermined loan quality....all the way down to the aggregate effect that the ethics/decisions that millions of individual Americans made that resulted in them taking on more debt and financial risk than they could afford.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In the case of the GFC - there's lots of blame to go around, but I don't think you can tell the whole story without looking into the role that the Fed's rate cuts had on boosting home prices, the regs that created more demand for AAA securities that actually existed, pension funds desperate for yield, the various "top-down" regulations that undermined loan quality....all the way down to the aggregate effect that the ethics/decisions that millions of individual Americans made that resulted in them taking on more debt and financial risk than they could afford.

 

I think 2008 was just an intentional scam from the top down.

 

They intentionally gave out loans to unqualified people with ARM's. They knew these loans would go bad when rates went up. They bundled these bad loans and fraudulently graded them AAA. Somewhere in the process they multiplied things with derivatives. Then they sold the bad bundles to unwitting investors, at the same time betting against them, betting that they would go bad. Then they raised rates and watched their plan go through. Then when all the sh*t hit the fan they had the unmitigated gall to ask for a taxfunded "bailout" for the banks they were involved with that had taken a hit.

 

The bailout bill failed the first time it went through congress. Partly due to the fact the American public contacted their representatives in record numbers. It actually broke the record for citizen contact with representatives. 95% of them asking congress not to bailout the banks. The bankers came back threatening the reps with martial law if they didn't give them the bill and the bunch of pu**ies caved.

 

All this was allowed by de-regulation. Instead of breaking laws they just got rid of them. But even that was not enough and they did break laws and commit crimes. While the Raygoon admin convicted about 1000 bankers in the S&L scandal of the '80s the Obama "justice" department has convicted zero bankers in this scandal. Although recently they have levied some fines, which are of course pennies on the dollar, a mere fee for criminal activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original thread.

 

Love it when Repulicun*s claim they are not the party of racists. (that's perfect the asterisk representing the "T" looks like an apostrophe)

 

The current scandal in Oklahoma (capital of white cracker racists) involves the University of Oklahoma Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity in which they were caught on video performing an anti black chant repeatedly using the N word.

 

Well the fraternity house mother, 78-year-old Beauton Glibow, was interviewed by CBS and said "I heard the words. Unbelievable. This is not... this is not SAE,"

 

[video:youtube]

 

Well a new video has just been released where the white haired house mom is happily singing a song in which she says the N word six times in a row.

 

Republicun racist singing an "N" word song.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh my, I had no idea we came so close to martial law in 2008! :crosseye::lmao:

 

Didn't say we did, just that it was threatened.

 

[video:youtube]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In the case of the GFC - there's lots of blame to go around, but I don't think you can tell the whole story without looking into the role that the Fed's rate cuts had on boosting home prices, the regs that created more demand for AAA securities that actually existed, pension funds desperate for yield, the various "top-down" regulations that undermined loan quality....all the way down to the aggregate effect that the ethics/decisions that millions of individual Americans made that resulted in them taking on more debt and financial risk than they could afford.

 

I think 2008 was just an intentional scam from the top down.

 

They intentionally gave out loans to unqualified people with ARM's. They knew these loans would go bad when rates went up. They bundled these bad loans and fraudulently graded them AAA. Somewhere in the process they multiplied things with derivatives. Then they sold the bad bundles to unwitting investors, at the same time betting against them, betting that they would go bad. Then they raised rates and watched their plan go through. Then when all the sh*t hit the fan they had the unmitigated gall to ask for a taxfunded "bailout" for the banks they were involved with that had taken a hit.

 

The bailout bill failed the first time it went through congress. Partly due to the fact the American public contacted their representatives in record numbers. It actually broke the record for citizen contact with representatives. 95% of them asking congress not to bailout the banks. The bankers came back threatening the reps with martial law if they didn't give them the bill and the bunch of pu**ies caved.

 

All this was allowed by de-regulation. Instead of breaking laws they just got rid of them. But even that was not enough and they did break laws and commit crimes. While the Raygoon admin convicted about 1000 bankers in the S&L scandal of the '80s the Obama "justice" department has convicted zero bankers in this scandal. Although recently they have levied some fines, which are of course pennies on the dollar, a mere fee for criminal activity.

 

-I suppose that's one way to look at it, but your post bring the phrase "never assume a conspiracy when simple incompetence will do." That - and "Devil Take the Hindmost..."is always the rule when it comes to debt-fueled speculative mania. Read up on the tears and recriminations that followed after the South Sea and Mississippi bubbles if you get the chance.

 

-It seems like you've got enough interest in the topic to devour all of the book length tomes on the topic. I'm not sure they'd change your mind, but you'd probably find them interesting all the same. Ditto for "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" or any other book on the history of speculative manias.

 

-Some - I'd say most - of the guys who made a killing on the bust had more luck than smarts on their side. "The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent" is normally the rule of the day when it comes to taking short positions. Lots of people with lots of money looked at the fundamentals in the US RE market, shorted the bejesus out of banks, mortgage originators, etc - and got eaten alive then the speculative mania kept the party going and the price of the stocks they'd shorted kept going up. The lunacy going on in the Canadian property market as had people have been shorting Canadian banks for years with zero payoff. I'm sure that there will be a handful of people that look like geniuses when that cycle corrects, too - and no one will think about all of the people who made bets against that market with no payoff, either.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Can bankers declare martial law? Over what - their lobbies? Who enforces - the Brinks truck guys?

 

2) Are all republicans racist? Similarly, are all blacks (you fill in the blank)?

 

3) Is the Sigma Alpha Epsilon frat republican only? It seems as though their history of alcohol related deaths and sexual assault might be at least as important as their little ditty.

 

4) What would have happened to our economy without the bailout? Every analysis I've read indicates the bailout was, in fact, a rousing success.

 

5) Jay, you got time for another 10 second psychoanalysis session? Cuz real ones are so damned expensive. I dreamed of whales last night. Would that represent my enormous cock or my enormous intellect? Please advise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree, the N word is a bit overworked ;)

 

Just one round of trying for formulate public policy and you quickly realize that

 

a) Consensus is nearly impossible

b) Language is an imperfect tool

c) You're gonna screw up somewhere with regards to unintended consequences

d) the historical knowledge base from which to draw conclusions is far from perfect

e) the monitoring and correction systems for any public policy, if they exist at all, are far from perfect

f) Humans are, for the most part, emotional - not logical, creatures.

 

Perfectly natural - literally. Organisms evolve by way of mistakes. All complex things do, it seems.

 

It's a good thing we have 50 public policy petri dishes going all at once.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a good time, I listen to TVW on occasion. I caught this gem during a hearing on some proposed drone regulation:

 

ACLU lobbyist: "Today's drones can now collect all kinds of non-visual information. For example, some can detect scents better than a dog"

 

WA State Representative: "So, wait, are we talking about a proposal to put dogs on drones?"

 

He was actually being serious.

 

This is how public policy is created.

 

It ain't pretty, but it can be pretty funny.

 

That same lobbyist recounts another legislator threatening to castrate him during a morning hearing. Later that day, the same legislator invited the lobbyist to go for an afternoon motorcycle ride.

 

The lobbyist's comment after telling the story "It's all in good fun"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) Can bankers declare martial law? Over what - their lobbies? Who enforces - the Brinks truck guys?

 

2) Are all republicans racist? Similarly, are all blacks (you fill in the blank)?

 

3) Is the Sigma Alpha Epsilon frat republican only? It seems as though their history of alcohol related deaths and sexual assault might be at least as important as their little ditty.

 

4) What would have happened to our economy without the bailout? Every analysis I've read indicates the bailout was, in fact, a rousing success.

 

5) Jay, you got time for another 10 second psychoanalysis session? Cuz real ones are so damned expensive. I dreamed of whales last night. Would that represent my enormous cock or my enormous intellect? Please advise.

 

1) no one ever said the bankers would declare it, they just said "there would be" in other words it would be the result.

 

2) the majority of them on the first part

 

3) given how red Oklahoma is probably most of them, probably the token dem is the one that released the vid.

 

4) Crock of sh*t. $700 billion straight from the taxpayers, straight to the 1 percent, just another transfer of wealth. Economic disparity is higher than it's ever been in the history of man. Stop buying what the Orwell TV feeds you, it's just not true.

 

5) Dreams are just the representation of what happened that day that is then filed away in your sub-conscious. That's why you so rarely remember them because it then becomes a loop or multiple representation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For a good time, I listen to TVW on occasion. I caught this gem during a hearing on some proposed drone regulation:

 

ACLU lobbyist: "Today's drones can now collect all kinds of non-visual information. For example, some can detect scents better than a dog"

 

WA State Representative: "So, wait, are we talking about a proposal to put dogs on drones?"

 

He was actually being serious.

 

This is how public policy is created.

 

It ain't pretty, but it can be pretty funny.

 

That same lobbyist recounts another legislator threatening to castrate him during a morning hearing. Later that day, the same legislator invited the lobbyist to go for an afternoon motorcycle ride.

 

The lobbyist's comment after telling the story "It's all in good fun"

 

 

Camera drones are way cool when used for recreational purposes. There's a lot of cool footage of mountains already. Imagine being able to fly up and down Liberty Crack or NE Butt of Slesse. Sadly it is going to be restricted. Last time I was at Smith there was a "No Drones" sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In the case of the GFC - there's lots of blame to go around, but I don't think you can tell the whole story without looking into the role that the Fed's rate cuts had on boosting home prices, the regs that created more demand for AAA securities that actually existed, pension funds desperate for yield, the various "top-down" regulations that undermined loan quality....all the way down to the aggregate effect that the ethics/decisions that millions of individual Americans made that resulted in them taking on more debt and financial risk than they could afford.

 

I think 2008 was just an intentional scam from the top down.

 

They intentionally gave out loans to unqualified people with ARM's. They knew these loans would go bad when rates went up. They bundled these bad loans and fraudulently graded them AAA. Somewhere in the process they multiplied things with derivatives. Then they sold the bad bundles to unwitting investors, at the same time betting against them, betting that they would go bad. Then they raised rates and watched their plan go through. Then when all the sh*t hit the fan they had the unmitigated gall to ask for a taxfunded "bailout" for the banks they were involved with that had taken a hit.

 

The bailout bill failed the first time it went through congress. Partly due to the fact the American public contacted their representatives in record numbers. It actually broke the record for citizen contact with representatives. 95% of them asking congress not to bailout the banks. The bankers came back threatening the reps with martial law if they didn't give them the bill and the bunch of pu**ies caved.

 

All this was allowed by de-regulation. Instead of breaking laws they just got rid of them. But even that was not enough and they did break laws and commit crimes. While the Raygoon admin convicted about 1000 bankers in the S&L scandal of the '80s the Obama "justice" department has convicted zero bankers in this scandal. Although recently they have levied some fines, which are of course pennies on the dollar, a mere fee for criminal activity.

 

-I suppose that's one way to look at it, but your post bring the phrase "never assume a conspiracy when simple incompetence will do." That - and "Devil Take the Hindmost..."is always the rule when it comes to debt-fueled speculative mania. Read up on the tears and recriminations that followed after the South Sea and Mississippi bubbles if you get the chance.

 

-It seems like you've got enough interest in the topic to devour all of the book length tomes on the topic. I'm not sure they'd change your mind, but you'd probably find them interesting all the same. Ditto for "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" or any other book on the history of speculative manias.

 

-Some - I'd say most - of the guys who made a killing on the bust had more luck than smarts on their side. "The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent" is normally the rule of the day when it comes to taking short positions. Lots of people with lots of money looked at the fundamentals in the US RE market, shorted the bejesus out of banks, mortgage originators, etc - and got eaten alive then the speculative mania kept the party going and the price of the stocks they'd shorted kept going up. The lunacy going on in the Canadian property market as had people have been shorting Canadian banks for years with zero payoff. I'm sure that there will be a handful of people that look like geniuses when that cycle corrects, too - and no one will think about all of the people who made bets against that market with no payoff, either.

 

It was intentional fraud from front to back. The FBI warned about it as early as 2004.

 

The 2008 scandal is about 70 to 100 times worse than the '80s one and the regulators have been reduced to 1/5 the previous number. And the Obama admin has done far less about it than Reagan did in the 80's.

 

William Black puts it best, a regulator from the S&L scandal.

 

[video:youtube]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the drone regulation i refer to applies to WA state and local government drones only, not hobby or commercial ones. it requires a warrant for the collection of private information by state operated drones - primarily law enforcement.

Edited by pat gallagher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Diagnosed with narcissistic whale cock disorder (NWCD), yet still pressing on with relentless advocacy for peace, justice, and the American way. Bravo, I say there young man, bravo! (And you have our most sincere condolences too, of course.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"5) Jay, you got time for another 10 second psychoanalysis session?"

 

Well - since we'll never meet in person if I play my cards right, I'll never be able to resolve the performance-art vs personality disorder paradox.

 

I hope that it's all just an act or an example of a particularly extreme gap between an online persona and the real life person (such was the case with our beloved Crazy Polish Bob).

 

And, hey - there are parts of the performance that I always find amusing. For instance whenever a random topic somehow gets tethered to civil rights advocacy, literally apropos of absolutely nothing - I either think of the Monty Python skit where the answer to every question is "Pork," or this scene in the Big Lebowski.

 

Walter Sobchak:

Those rich fucks! This whole fucking thing... I did not watch my buddies die face down in the muck so that this fucking strumpet...

 

The Dude:

I don't see any connection to Vietnam, Walter.

 

Walter Sobchak:

Well, there isn't a literal connection, Dude.

 

The Dude:

Walter, face it, there isn't any connection."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps it's 'neither', Jay, but such a notion might lie a wee bit beyond your shoe box.

 

It's funny that the people who spend the most neural firings trying to figure out ole Tvashie - you and FW mainly, are also the ones who play online psychiatrist - ever a buffoon's game. Why, all that attention is enough to make a poor pilgrim feel kinda narcissistic.

 

Rest assured, the focus isn't reciprocated.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"

 

And, hey - there are parts of the performance that I always find amusing. For instance whenever a random topic somehow gets tethered to civil rights advocacy, literally apropos of absolutely nothing - I either think of the Monty Python skit where the answer to every question is "Pork,"

 

While I don't get here often there are still a few gems put out now and then. And, as the resident ego goes - what the board lacks in suspense he certainly doubles down with consistency. Who knows what fuels this run-away insecurity train.

 

I did notice, however, that it is a quarter to midnight on the countdown to 20k posts. Not long now!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hint: You have to care about someone to care what they think of ye. Disagreement is particularly hard on people who don't quite get this basic principle of hairless monkey nature.

 

Essentially, this is like getting yelled at by three lunatics on a street corner.

 

Here, have a dollar.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×