root's Comments

The Economic Impact of the G20 Ending Oil Subsidies

Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:19:40 -0400

I can see what your saying but just to note i was not saying we should eliminate our military but we can like you say, decrease our spending by 25% and healthcare wouldn't be an issue. Moreover, we'd still have the largest military. A lot of people fail to realize the proportions the gov't spends on things.

On Sep 17 07:47 PM Troy Jensen wrote:

> Just gotta comment here - those wasteful billions ensure global stability.
> Our very presence in the Middle East ensures the lights stay on so
> you can tap that comment on your laptop or fully-charged PDA. Israel
> remains an important piece in maintaining that stability. And assuredly,
> there is nothing random about the countries on the receiving end
> of US military action. Morally, it may be wrong, unjustified, corrupt...take
> your pick, if you like. But maintaining objectivity is critical.
> There is an absolute, critical reason for that projection-of-power
> in the Middle East, and to simply eliminate the United States military
> would be catastrophic for not just the US, but for the world.

>
> Not taking a stance on the morality of it - them's just the facts,
> and they are absolute. I'm an Objectivist when studying any marketplace
> - I leave politics for arguments with my rather strongly opinionated
> grandmother. ;)
>
> Decrease our military budget by 25% or more, and we won't have to
> worry about any sort of health care debate, to be sure. There would
> be no money for the debate, and far more urgent matters for our leaders
> to then have to attend to. I wish there was a counter-force to help
> maintain order, and we could place those freed budgetary funds into
> whatever would be more beneficial...but we can't.
>
> I do, however, applaud your strong moral stand. It shows conviction
> of the heart and mind, no matter which side of the fence anyone stands
> on. I just think when evaluating an article about G20 oil subsidies
> and their corresponding effect on the economy, politics goes out
> the window - if we are trying to objectively analyze, not further
> any one agenda.
>
> Cheers to all!

The Economic Impact of the G20 Ending Oil Subsidies

Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:51:27 -0400

Mind you i mean wastefully spend our money in a corrupt healthcare systems as opposed to wastefully spending it into our corrupt military industrial complex and Israel and all that garbage :D

On Sep 17 02:49 PM root wrote:

> In all honesty if you were in their shoes you would live in a cardboard
> box and burn wood for heat and drive a steam powered car??
>
> No matter what side of the fence your on in politics. The facts
> remain that they are influenced by some sort of big business. Whether
> its alternative energy, health care, energy or the military industrial
> complex. Deal with it or rally for an overall change in our govt.
>
>
> Besides I am not really taking a stance on health care but I find
> it funny when so many people are against using our money for something
> that benefits us. But are all for spending hundreds of billions
> yearly on building up our military so we can bomb random middle eastern
> countries like Iraq. Or poor billions into Israel

The Economic Impact of the G20 Ending Oil Subsidies

Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:49:54 -0400

In all honesty if you were in their shoes you would live in a cardboard box and burn wood for heat and drive a steam powered car??

No matter what side of the fence your on in politics. The facts remain that they are influenced by some sort of big business. Whether its alternative energy, health care, energy or the military industrial complex. Deal with it or rally for an overall change in our govt.

Besides I am not really taking a stance on health care but I find it funny when so many people are against using our money for something that benefits us. But are all for spending hundreds of billions yearly on building up our military so we can bomb random middle eastern countries like Iraq. Or poor billions into Israel

On Sep 17 12:24 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:

> Right on, Stephen! This admin is clearly in the tank with the anti-oil
> syndicate, as witnessed by the push for "cap & trade" and the
> biggest farce ever pushed on mankind: "global warming"! Obama and
> Gore both have big stakes in the "carbon exchange" and stand to make
> mega-bucks by pushing their vested interest in such...while living
> in complete hypocrisy with large homes that burn several times the
> energy of the average American home!! I'll start listening to these
> fraudulent goons when their personal actions measure up to their
> rhetoric and when the obvious vested interests are not what is pushing
> their agendas!

Newton's Third Law: DJIA Poised for Epic Rise?

Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:39:27 -0400

Newton's Third Law of motion is actually:

Whenever a first body exerts a force F on a second body, the second body exerts a force −F on the first body. F and −F are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction

The Bulls and the Bears are essentialyl the manifestations of Newton's Third Law in the market. Since the opposite force -F is felt only while the implied force F is well forcing the object.

If you want to talk physics you should be looking at Hooke's Law of Elasticity. Which describes the behaviour of the extension of a spring from equilibrium and the restoring force which tends to offshoot hte equilibrium position into another direction. This would indeed indicate we may ride up for a while after last weeks bounce but the restoring force is going to just drag it back down again until equilibrium is achieved.

Of course springs are much too simplistic anyway to realistically relate to the market but its a better rough representation or application the Newton's Third Law.

BofA Makes SEC Charges on False Statements Go Away in a Hurry

Mon, 03 Aug 2009 15:02:02 -0400

Although this may be viewed as a stupid comment. The robot picuture is probably the funniest yet most realistic view of market reaction I have scene yet.

Cheers.

Jon Stewart Takes on Goldman Sachs [Video]

Tue, 21 Jul 2009 09:58:27 -0400

Cheers Uncommon. I am glad there is someone else in the world with a pragmattic mind to see the truth.

In the end the left service one set of companies the right another set of companies and they rally the heards of sheeple on rhetoric nonsense. Anything you can take sides on like abortion, gay rights or what the new name for french fries should be.

On Jul 17 06:13 PM Uncommon_Cents wrote:

> Don't get brainwashed into the left/right, liberal/conservative stuff.
> They are all the same; thieves.
>
> And, Stewart merely says what everyone is thinking.
>
> On Jul 17 03:38 PM ScroogeMcduck wrote:

Why the Dow Is Headed to 6000

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:44:54 -0400

Has anybody noticed the head and shoulders pattern emerging in the chart of the dow?

Will Rising Oil Prices Prevent a Recovery?

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:55:50 -0400

Thats probably the most unintelligent thing I have ever read. Sure I agree with you about the weaking dollar and speculation but bring some base to your arguement. Instead of ignorant rhetoric.

On Jun 10 09:36 AM doubleguns wrote:

> No you are not NED, you are cetin!!!
>
> I think the rise in oil is simply a reflection of the weakening dollar
> with speculation added in.
>
> We need to drill, drill, drill and create some jobs here in our new
> socialist Amerika.
>
> A jobless recovery will simply fall right into the socialists plans
> to continue to socialize Amerika even more.
>
> Things are not looking good.
>
> On Jun 10 09:16 AM dreen wrote:

Bailout, Schmailout

Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:03:57 -0400

Very interesting and unique take on the matter.

Starbucks on Sale (Part I)

Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:21:01 -0400

They would attract a lot more customers if they made their wifi free like Panera Bread.