info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Obama Administration Should Be Found Guilty of War Crimes in Yemen
59 views
Skip to first unread message
mg
Dec 29, 2017, 5:41:58 PM12/29/17
to
"The Obama Administration Should Be Found Guilty of War
Crimes in Yemen
HuffPost, Dan Kovalik, Updated Jan 05, 2017
Those of us who supported Barack Obama in 2008 in the hope
that he was a man of peace must face the painful reality —
we were dead wrong. Nowhere is our folly better illustrated
than in the ongoing human rights catastrophe now unfolding
in Yemen with critical U.S. assistance.
For months, those who bother to care about Yemen — one of
the poorest countries on earth — have been criticizing
President Obama for aiding and abetting the Saudi Coalition
assault on that country. As Foreign Policy reported back in
October, Obama was already being accused of committing War
Crimes through his logistical assistance to the brutal Saudi
air offensive against Yemen.
Yet, undeterred, Obama doubled down on his crimes in
November by approving the sale of $1.29 billion in smart
bombs to Saudi Arabia — a sale which, among other things, is
intended to replenish Saudi Arabia’s arsenal in attacking
Yemen.
Of course, as always, the U.S. mainstream media, which is in
the most sorry state I have ever witnessed it, has been
ready to lend a hand to Obama’s crimes by (1) barely
reporting on Yemen; and (2) reporting Yemen as a more or
less equal battle between Houthi rebels and the Saudi-led
coalition. To be clear, this is not a an equal fight, for it
is the Saudis who are inflicting the disproportionate share
of civilian casualties through a U.S.-backed air campaign
against a country with no air defenses.
Thus, as News Week recently reported:
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
told the U.N. Security Council . . . that a Saudi-led
coalition’s military campaign in Yemen appeared to be
responsible for a “disproportionate amount” of attacks on
civilian areas.
Speaking at the council’s first public meeting on Yemen
since the Saudi-led bombing campaign began nine months ago,
Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein said he had “observed with extreme
concern” heavy shelling from the ground and air in civilian
areas of Yemen including the destruction of hospitals and
schools.
The toll on Yemen’s civilian population from the U.S.-backed
conflict is great, with Human Rights Watch reporting back in
October:
The war, and particularly the numerous coalition
airstrikes, has taken a terrible toll on civilians. As of
late September, the U.N. had documented that the war had
killed 2,355 civilians and wounded 4,862, the majority in
coalition airstrikes. In the nearly two dozen strikes that
we have investigated on the ground, we collected the names
of more than 300 civilians who died, many of them children.
And the civilian deaths continue. In the last few weeks
local authorities and activists in Yemen have reported that
coalition aircraft bombed two wedding parties, killing
dozens of civilians. While a proper investigation is needed
to establish the facts, our research shows that many
coalition airstrikes that have killed civilians violated the
laws of war.
However, these numbers do not even begin to reflect the true
extent of the humanitarian crisis in Yemen where literally
millions of civilians are being brought to the brink of
starvation by the conflict. As an obscure piece out of
Australia entitled, “Yemen is the Crisis That the World
Forgot,” reports:
Yemen, which is just south of Saudi Arabia, is one of
the poorest countries in the Middle East. Even before the
current conflict, it depended on imports for 70 per cent of
its fuel, 80 per cent of its food and 100 per cent of its
medicine. With its ports and airports closed by a military
blockade, very little of anything is available to civilians
now. Before the war, more than 10 million Yemenis were going
hungry but now many are facing severe food shortages.
Those numbers should be shocking. But the sad reality is
they are easy to ignore in Australia and in other parts of
the Western world. Yemen has a population of 24 million,
roughly the same size as Australia.
Now consider the fact that in Yemen there are 21 million
people who are in need of humanitarian assistance.
Yes, the Obama Administration is knowingly aiding and
abetting the Saudis in murdering millions in Yemen. This is
a fact. And, it is a fact which is quite ironic given that
the current Obama-appointed U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. is
Samantha Power — an individual who came to prominence
through her Pulitzer-winning book which condemned the West’s
failure to respond to genocide throughout the world. In the
case of Yemen, however, the genocide is not happening due to
the mere omissions of the West, and in particular the U.S. —
rather, it is taking place with the active support of the
U.S., including Power’s own intervention at the U.N. which
prevented any independent investigation of the Saudi crimes
in Yemen.
In other words, the Obama team, including Samantha Power
herself, have become exactly what Power herself once
condemned — co-conspirators in genocide. Indeed, Power’s
treachery at the UN looks a lot like the maneuvers carried
out by the Clinton Administration in 1994 (maneuvers
condemned by Power in her book on genocide) which resulted
in UN troops being drawn down in Rwanda at the very time
they were needed to prevent genocide.
And again, the U.S. media bears great responsibility in all
of this as well, for it is not true that the world has
somehow “forgotten” about Yemen. Rather, the world has been
shielded from the realities in Yemen by a media which has
now become a mere mouthpiece for the U.S. State Department.
Tragically, it is the poorest of the poor in Yemen who are
paying the price for the immoral foreign policy of the White
House and its compliant press."
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-kovalik/obama-adminstration-guilt_b_8916380.html
Crimes in Yemen
HuffPost, Dan Kovalik, Updated Jan 05, 2017
Those of us who supported Barack Obama in 2008 in the hope
that he was a man of peace must face the painful reality —
we were dead wrong. Nowhere is our folly better illustrated
than in the ongoing human rights catastrophe now unfolding
in Yemen with critical U.S. assistance.
For months, those who bother to care about Yemen — one of
the poorest countries on earth — have been criticizing
President Obama for aiding and abetting the Saudi Coalition
assault on that country. As Foreign Policy reported back in
October, Obama was already being accused of committing War
Crimes through his logistical assistance to the brutal Saudi
air offensive against Yemen.
Yet, undeterred, Obama doubled down on his crimes in
November by approving the sale of $1.29 billion in smart
bombs to Saudi Arabia — a sale which, among other things, is
intended to replenish Saudi Arabia’s arsenal in attacking
Yemen.
Of course, as always, the U.S. mainstream media, which is in
the most sorry state I have ever witnessed it, has been
ready to lend a hand to Obama’s crimes by (1) barely
reporting on Yemen; and (2) reporting Yemen as a more or
less equal battle between Houthi rebels and the Saudi-led
coalition. To be clear, this is not a an equal fight, for it
is the Saudis who are inflicting the disproportionate share
of civilian casualties through a U.S.-backed air campaign
against a country with no air defenses.
Thus, as News Week recently reported:
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
told the U.N. Security Council . . . that a Saudi-led
coalition’s military campaign in Yemen appeared to be
responsible for a “disproportionate amount” of attacks on
civilian areas.
Speaking at the council’s first public meeting on Yemen
since the Saudi-led bombing campaign began nine months ago,
Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein said he had “observed with extreme
concern” heavy shelling from the ground and air in civilian
areas of Yemen including the destruction of hospitals and
schools.
The toll on Yemen’s civilian population from the U.S.-backed
conflict is great, with Human Rights Watch reporting back in
October:
The war, and particularly the numerous coalition
airstrikes, has taken a terrible toll on civilians. As of
late September, the U.N. had documented that the war had
killed 2,355 civilians and wounded 4,862, the majority in
coalition airstrikes. In the nearly two dozen strikes that
we have investigated on the ground, we collected the names
of more than 300 civilians who died, many of them children.
And the civilian deaths continue. In the last few weeks
local authorities and activists in Yemen have reported that
coalition aircraft bombed two wedding parties, killing
dozens of civilians. While a proper investigation is needed
to establish the facts, our research shows that many
coalition airstrikes that have killed civilians violated the
laws of war.
However, these numbers do not even begin to reflect the true
extent of the humanitarian crisis in Yemen where literally
millions of civilians are being brought to the brink of
starvation by the conflict. As an obscure piece out of
Australia entitled, “Yemen is the Crisis That the World
Forgot,” reports:
Yemen, which is just south of Saudi Arabia, is one of
the poorest countries in the Middle East. Even before the
current conflict, it depended on imports for 70 per cent of
its fuel, 80 per cent of its food and 100 per cent of its
medicine. With its ports and airports closed by a military
blockade, very little of anything is available to civilians
now. Before the war, more than 10 million Yemenis were going
hungry but now many are facing severe food shortages.
Those numbers should be shocking. But the sad reality is
they are easy to ignore in Australia and in other parts of
the Western world. Yemen has a population of 24 million,
roughly the same size as Australia.
Now consider the fact that in Yemen there are 21 million
people who are in need of humanitarian assistance.
Yes, the Obama Administration is knowingly aiding and
abetting the Saudis in murdering millions in Yemen. This is
a fact. And, it is a fact which is quite ironic given that
the current Obama-appointed U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. is
Samantha Power — an individual who came to prominence
through her Pulitzer-winning book which condemned the West’s
failure to respond to genocide throughout the world. In the
case of Yemen, however, the genocide is not happening due to
the mere omissions of the West, and in particular the U.S. —
rather, it is taking place with the active support of the
U.S., including Power’s own intervention at the U.N. which
prevented any independent investigation of the Saudi crimes
in Yemen.
In other words, the Obama team, including Samantha Power
herself, have become exactly what Power herself once
condemned — co-conspirators in genocide. Indeed, Power’s
treachery at the UN looks a lot like the maneuvers carried
out by the Clinton Administration in 1994 (maneuvers
condemned by Power in her book on genocide) which resulted
in UN troops being drawn down in Rwanda at the very time
they were needed to prevent genocide.
And again, the U.S. media bears great responsibility in all
of this as well, for it is not true that the world has
somehow “forgotten” about Yemen. Rather, the world has been
shielded from the realities in Yemen by a media which has
now become a mere mouthpiece for the U.S. State Department.
Tragically, it is the poorest of the poor in Yemen who are
paying the price for the immoral foreign policy of the White
House and its compliant press."
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-kovalik/obama-adminstration-guilt_b_8916380.html
wolfbat359
Dec 29, 2017, 6:38:05 PM12/29/17
to
rumpelstiltskin
Dec 29, 2017, 7:15:39 PM12/29/17
to
billionaires there and in the USA, is the reason for
the current holocaust in Yemen. Not that Yemen is
any prize - they'd be slaughtering with the best of
them if they could do it themselves. Damned
religion.
Why are you blaming the Democrats so much
these days? The Republicans have been and
still are at least ten times worse.
me
Dec 29, 2017, 11:09:50 PM12/29/17
to
This sort of thing has been going on all over the ME. Israel is no exception. How much US military assistance has Israel received to fight wars? Why no demand for war crimes then?
El Castor
Dec 30, 2017, 4:48:43 AM12/30/17
to
>"The Obama Administration Should Be Found Guilty of War
>Crimes in Yemen
>
There is a war in the Middle East. Iran's long term goal is to seize
>Crimes in Yemen
>
control of the oil of the Arabian Peninsula, which would put roughly
52% of the world's oil reserves in Persian hands. Yemen is where that
war is currently being fought -- the Iranian supported Houthi
insurgency against the Saudi Arabian supported government of Yemen.
Saudi Arabia is a US ally. It would be a disaster for the Western
world if control of half the world's oil supply was to fall into the
hands of an Iranian theocracy. Iran must be stopped. Obama was correct
to support Saudi Arabia, and I am sure Trump will continue to do so.
rumpelstiltskin
Dec 30, 2017, 9:20:09 AM12/30/17
to
with that idea/excuse? Most of them, I would think.
mg
Dec 30, 2017, 12:40:24 PM12/30/17
to
On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 20:09:48 -0800 (PST), me
<werner...@gmail.com> wrote:
>This sort of thing has been going on all over the ME. Israel is no exception. How much US military assistance has Israel received to fight wars? Why no demand for war crimes then?
>
>
Palestinians submit Israel 'war crime' evidence to ICC
<werner...@gmail.com> wrote:
>This sort of thing has been going on all over the ME. Israel is no exception. How much US military assistance has Israel received to fight wars? Why no demand for war crimes then?
>
>
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/09/palestinians-submit-israel-war-crime-evidence-icc-170920115342560.html
Category: Israeli war crimes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Israeli_war_crimes
U.N. Report on Gaza Finds Evidence of War Crimes by Israel
and by Palestinian Militants
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-report.html
El Castor
Dec 31, 2017, 2:11:39 AM12/31/17
to
might sing a different tune. Yemen is just a pawn in a very long game.
"Exclusive: Iran Revolutionary Guards find new route to arm Yemen
rebels"
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-gulf-kuwait-iran-exclusive/exclusive-iran-revolutionary-guards-find-new-route-to-arm-yemen-rebels-idUSKBN1AH4I4
"Britain slams Iran for arming Houthi rebels in Yemen"
https://www.thenational.ae/world/europe/britain-slams-iran-for-arming-houthi-rebels-in-yemen-1.674520
rumpelstiltskin
Dec 31, 2017, 5:01:36 AM12/31/17
to
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 23:11:33 -0800, El Castor
Britain is allied with the USA of course, and after all
we've done to piss off Iran, conspicuously including
overthrowing the popular Mosaddegh in order to
install a dictator more compliant with the wishes and
pocketbooks of Western inddustrialists, the day when
we have to pay the piper may indeed be unpleasant.
"What goes around, comes around" as is said.
"In 1951, Mohammad Mosaddegh was appointed as the Prime Minister.
He became enormously popular in Iran after he nationalized Iran's
petroleum industry and oil reserves. He was deposed in the 1953
Iranian coup d'état, an Anglo-American covert operation that marked
the first time the United States had overthrown a foreign government
during the Cold War."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran
After that, are you surprised that Iran is pissed off at us?
we've done to piss off Iran, conspicuously including
overthrowing the popular Mosaddegh in order to
install a dictator more compliant with the wishes and
pocketbooks of Western inddustrialists, the day when
we have to pay the piper may indeed be unpleasant.
"What goes around, comes around" as is said.
"In 1951, Mohammad Mosaddegh was appointed as the Prime Minister.
He became enormously popular in Iran after he nationalized Iran's
petroleum industry and oil reserves. He was deposed in the 1953
Iranian coup d'état, an Anglo-American covert operation that marked
the first time the United States had overthrown a foreign government
during the Cold War."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran
After that, are you surprised that Iran is pissed off at us?
me
Dec 31, 2017, 9:51:23 AM12/31/17
to
You might be interested in this:
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-30/us-state-department-hints-iran-overthrow-are-we-witnessing-early-stages-regime
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-30/us-state-department-hints-iran-overthrow-are-we-witnessing-early-stages-regime
mg
Dec 31, 2017, 12:14:30 PM12/31/17
to
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 01:48:35 -0800, El Castor
<JustUsC...@Here.com> wrote:
<JustUsC...@Here.com> wrote:
been trying to control Middle Eastern oil since at least
WWI, and undoubtedly long before that. Western Corporations,
like everyone else, react to competition like Dracula reacts
to the crucifix and garlic. So, they do everything they can
to eliminate the competition and keep the price of oil as
high as possible. The simplest and most obvious method of
eliminating the competition is by destroying a country's
government and infrastructure, or colloquially speaking,
bombing them back to the stone age and creating instability
and civil wars and proxy wars, etc.
Therefore, whenever Big Oil and the government intervene in
the ME, nothing good happens for US citizens, or for
humanity, in general. First of all the price of oil will
probably go up. Second, Americans get stuck with a huge
military bill (about $4-6 trillion for Iraq and
Afghanistan), and third, a lot of Americans and innocent
people in oil-rich ME countries are killed and maimed. And
fourth all the killing and military interventions are
usually done in violation of international law.
Here's an interesting excerpt from an article on suppressing
oil production, incidentally:
"The oil majors had a better use for Iraq's oil than
drilling it - not drilling it. The oil bigs had bought
Iraq's concession to seal it up and keep it off the market.
To please his buyers' wishes, Mr. 5% spread out a big map of
the Middle East on the floor of a hotel room in Belgium and
drew a thick red line around the gulf oil fields, centered
on Iraq. All the oil company executives, gathered in the
hotel room, signed their name on the red line - vowing not
to drill, except as a group, within the red-lined zone. No
one, therefore, had an incentive to cheat and take red-lined
oil. All of Iraq's oil, sequestered by all, was locked in,
and all signers would enjoy a lift in worldwide prices.
Anglo-Persian Company, now British Petroleum (BP), would
pump almost all its oil, reasonably, from Persia (Iran).
Later, the Standard Oil combine, renamed the
Arabian-American Oil Company (Aramco), would limit almost
all its drilling to Saudi Arabia. Anglo-Persian (BP) had
begun pulling oil from Kirkuk, Iraq, in 1927 and, in
accordance with the Red-Line Agreement, shared its Kirkuk
and Basra fields with its IPC group - and drilled no more.
The following was written three decades ago:
Although its original concession of March 14, 1925,
cove- red all of Iraq, the Iraq Petroleum Co., under the
owner- ship of BP (23.75%), Shell (23.75%), CFP [of France]
(23.75%), Exxon (11.85%), Mobil (11.85%), and [Calouste]
Gulbenkian (5.0%), limited its production to fields
constituting only one-half of 1 percent of the country's
total area. During the Great Depression, the world was awash
with oil and greater output from Iraq would simply have
driven the price down to even lower levels.
Plus ça change...
When the British Foreign Office fretted that locking up
oil would stoke local nationalist anger, BP-IPC agreed
privately to pretend to drill lots of wells, but make them
absurdly shallow and place them where, wrote a company
manager, "there was no danger of striking oil." This
systematic suppression of Iraq's production, begun in 1927,
has never ceased. In the early 1960s, Iraq's frustration
with the British-led oil consortium's failure to pump pushed
the nation to cancel the BP-Shell-Exxon concession and seize
the oil fields. Britain was ready to strangle Baghdad, but a
cooler, wiser man in the White House, John F. Kennedy, told
the Brits to back off. President Kennedy refused to call
Iraq's seizure an "expropriation" akin to Castro's seizure
of U.S.-owned banana plantations. Kennedy's view was that
Anglo-American companies had it coming to them because they
had refused to honor their legal commitment to drill.
But the freedom Kennedy offered the Iraqis to drill
their own oil to the maximum was swiftly taken away from
them by their Arab brethren.
The OPEC cartel, controlled by Saudi Arabia, capped
Iraq's production at a sum equal to Iran's, though the
Iranian reserves are far smaller than Iraq's."
http://truth-out.org/archive/component/k2/item/63488:greg-palast--keeping-iraqs-oil-in-the-ground
mg
Dec 31, 2017, 1:43:02 PM12/31/17
to
On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 16:15:47 -0800, rumpelstiltskin<x...@y.com>
wrote:
I criticize whichever party I think has the greatest
probability of negatively impacting the quality of life and
standard of living of my children and grandchildren, and
friends and family, and the American public in general. Some
of the issues that I look at include Social Security,
Medicare, progressive taxation, military spending,
immigration, foreign trade, and personal safety.
I make that decision based not on the degree of opposition a
party has to programs such as Social Security and Medicare,
for example, but based on how I judge the possibility of
their eventual success in destroying, or damaging the
programs.
Hence, my opposition to the Democratic party. Although, I'm
sure that the Republicans would like to destroy Medicare and
Social Security, for example, my judgment is that the
Democrats are actually most likely to succeed.
wrote:
probability of negatively impacting the quality of life and
standard of living of my children and grandchildren, and
friends and family, and the American public in general. Some
of the issues that I look at include Social Security,
Medicare, progressive taxation, military spending,
immigration, foreign trade, and personal safety.
I make that decision based not on the degree of opposition a
party has to programs such as Social Security and Medicare,
for example, but based on how I judge the possibility of
their eventual success in destroying, or damaging the
programs.
Hence, my opposition to the Democratic party. Although, I'm
sure that the Republicans would like to destroy Medicare and
Social Security, for example, my judgment is that the
Democrats are actually most likely to succeed.
rumpelstiltskin
Dec 31, 2017, 2:49:11 PM12/31/17
to
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 11:43:00 -0700, mg <no...@none.nl> wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 16:15:47 -0800, rumpelstiltskin<x...@y.com>
<snip>
>On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 16:15:47 -0800, rumpelstiltskin<x...@y.com>
>> Why are you blaming the Democrats so much
>>these days? The Republicans have been and
>>still are at least ten times worse.
>>
>>
>I criticize whichever party I think has the greatest
>probability of negatively impacting the quality of life and
>standard of living of my children and grandchildren, and
>friends and family, and the American public in general. Some
>of the issues that I look at include Social Security,
>Medicare, progressive taxation, military spending,
>immigration, foreign trade, and personal safety.
>
>I make that decision based not on the degree of opposition a
>party has to programs such as Social Security and Medicare,
>for example, but based on how I judge the possibility of
>their eventual success in destroying, or damaging the
>programs.
>
>Hence, my opposition to the Democratic party. Although, I'm
>sure that the Republicans would like to destroy Medicare and
>Social Security, for example, my judgment is that the
>Democrats are actually most likely to succeed.
impact social security and medicare as soon as
2018. They have to pay for those tax cuts for the
wealthy somehow: either that or skyrocket the
national debt some more.
El Castor
Dec 31, 2017, 3:00:15 PM12/31/17
to
Persian Gulf, and eventually the Arabian Peninsula and it's oil.
Should it succeed, it would become one of the most powerful nations on
the planet. Yemen is just a small step in the process. We don't need
to invade Iran, bomb Iran, or do anything military to Iran, but we do
have a clear national interest in resisting Iranian efforts to become
nuclear, gain control of the Gulf itself, or establish a foothold on
the Arabian Peninsula. So we are allied with Saudi Arabia. If you
disagree, that's your privilege, but I believe you are wrong.
mg
Jan 1, 2018, 8:25:17 AM1/1/18
to
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 11:49:10 -0800, rumpelstiltskin<x...@y.com>
wrote:
That's very true and we will have to wait to see what the
future brings with regard to the Republicans and issues like
Medicare, Social Security, Immigration, and Foreign Trade,
etc. However, in the case of Medicare and Social Security,
Obama has already either cut those programs, or proposed
cuts to those programs and, in addition, the Democrats have
already passed NAFTA, and proposed Obamatrade and is totally
in favor of mass immigration to the point that they seem to
be saying that white people are inferior to people of color.
wrote:
future brings with regard to the Republicans and issues like
Medicare, Social Security, Immigration, and Foreign Trade,
etc. However, in the case of Medicare and Social Security,
Obama has already either cut those programs, or proposed
cuts to those programs and, in addition, the Democrats have
already passed NAFTA, and proposed Obamatrade and is totally
in favor of mass immigration to the point that they seem to
be saying that white people are inferior to people of color.
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 1, 2018, 9:39:15 AM1/1/18
to
My Medicare payments always went directly to
Kaiser, and they still do. I also don't remember any
Social Security cuts.
NAFTA is a different matter. It does IMO severely
negatively impact the welfare of working people in
the USA, but I personally haven't been a working
person since 1999.
Mass immigration isn't for me a white versus
"coloured" issue. It's an issue of national stability,
since many illegal immigrants will be headed
straight for crime and/or welfare. People in those
categories will be most likely to move in because
they have nothing to lose by leaving their countries
of origin.
As to Foreign Trade, IMO that helps the rich who
make a profit off it, but it's a two-edged sword for
working people because although it allows them to
buy some stuff cheaper, it also cuts down on the
need for their paid labour, which means more
unemployment, depressed wages, and less power
for the people.
islander
Jan 1, 2018, 5:08:54 PM1/1/18
to
it, corporations will have free reign to deal with China without any
controls on what they do. At least the TPP gave us an alliance of 12
nations to counter Chinese and corporate domination of trade in the
Pacific region. Without it, the corporations can make any deal that
they want. Frankly, I don't trust them.
mg
Jan 1, 2018, 6:31:34 PM1/1/18
to
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 12:00:09 -0800, El Castor
I don't think that there are very many people in the U.S.,
or in the world, who would approve of what the U.S. has done
in the Middle East and Africa since 9/11. Or, at least I
hope there aren't very many people who approve.
Which military actions/interventions do you approve of? Do
you approve of what we have been doing in Yemen?
or in the world, who would approve of what the U.S. has done
in the Middle East and Africa since 9/11. Or, at least I
hope there aren't very many people who approve.
Which military actions/interventions do you approve of? Do
you approve of what we have been doing in Yemen?
bill bowden
Jan 3, 2018, 11:15:27 AM1/3/18
to
Rumple wrote:
>>
The Trump administration may well negatively
impact social security and medicare as soon as
2018. They have to pay for those tax cuts for the
wealthy somehow: either that or skyrocket the
national debt some more.
>>
'Basic program to figure income from SS.
cls
principle = 0
salary = 20000
interest =.06
fica = 0.18
for year = 1 to 35
principal = principle + (principal*interest)
principle = principal + (salary * fica)
next year
print "principal = "; principal
print "income ="; principal * interest
end
islander
Jan 3, 2018, 11:59:15 AM1/3/18
to
investments need to become more conservative. You no longer have the
ability or the time to recover if the market takes a dive. In addition,
your costs increase as you age. You have the VA to protect you from
medical expenses, but Medicare still leaves you vulnerable to additional
costs. Our supplemental insurance gets more expensive every year. You
also will find yourself unable to do things that were easy when you were
younger and you will need to pay to have them done for you. Some things
you will find you cannot do without.
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 3, 2018, 12:01:44 PM1/3/18
to
won't crash, since my two major "checking" ("savings", really)
accounts are only paying about 1.2%, not counting my local
bank convenience checking account which pays no interest
at all. I still have half my money in the stock market, which
is doing a lot better, but that could crash any day.
Everything financial is based on hot air and expectations
that are possibly unsupportable in the long term. As Adam
Smith wrote, "all money is a matter of belief". 1929 is one
conspicuous year in which that belief collapsed.
I just read a scary article (which I can't find again now)
that included the amount of student debt in modern times,
and the fact(?) that more people 18-34 now are still living
with their parents than ever before in modern times. I
don't know how much of it to believe, since I'm just a
dumb Joe, but it definitely does make me uneasy. I'm not
shelling out $19 for the book though, both because it will
probably be too boring for me to read and because I'm
distrustful of people making extravagant claims while
keeping most of their supposed "info" under their hat
until you buy their book.
This graph, or one very like it, was included in the
article:
https://tinyurl.com/y96fro8e
The article at the URL below is not what I was
reading, but it makes some of the same points:
https://dollarcollapse.com/debt/is-this-the-debt-jubilee/
I must admit that I didn't do anything more than
quickly and inadequately scan the article at the
above URL.
islander
Jan 3, 2018, 1:47:22 PM1/3/18
to
to journals. Guess my Stanford connection has timed out. And there is
presently a glut of people who are attempting to publish. At least the
kindle releases are pretty affordable.
As to student debt, that is really getting out of hand. At least under
the government programs there is a limit on payback amounts based on the
student's income and there are some provisions to excuse the debt in
exchange for community service. The big problem is private debt.
Parents are getting desperate to send their kids to college and are a
target of lending institutions. Unfortunately, under the Bankruptcy Act
of 2005, student debt is one of those debts that cannot be renegotiated.
Kids are stuck with it. Thank you Republicans!
Now the Republicans have even eliminated the tax deduction for student
loans. Grumble!
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 3, 2018, 1:52:09 PM1/3/18
to
education would be seen as such a boon to society
that the people, as represented by the government,
would want to make it free so as to facilitate
people's ability to advance themselves and advance
society. Unfortunately, at least in the USA, things
seem now to be trending very much in the opposite
direction.
El Castor
Jan 3, 2018, 3:24:00 PM1/3/18
to
9/11, punishing Afghanistan for harboring al Qaeda was appropriate --
invading Afghanistan for the purpose of regime change was a big
mistake. Iraq invasion, huge mistake that played right into Iran's
hands. An Iranian agent may have had a hand in persuading us to do it.
We did what Iran wanted, but by itself could not -- ousted a Sunni
regime that had ruled Iraq for centuries, and installed a Shiite
regime. Syria, big mistake. Libya, big mistake. Supporting the Muslim
Brotherhood in it's efforts to take over Egypt, big mistake. Resisting
Iranian efforts to dominate the waters of the Persian Gulf was an
important success. Failing to support Saudi Arabia and the government
of Yemen in defeating the Iranian supported and supplied Houthi
rebellion in Yemen would be a big mistake, but we got that one right.
Just proves the old adage that a stopped clock is right twice a day.
From 3 weeks ago ...
"Somewhere in the mountains of northern Yemen, the missile lifted off
in a dense cloud of fire and smoke and began its arc over Saudi
Arabia. After roaring north for some 600 miles, the Iranian-made
Qiam-1 reached its target, the international airport just outside of
Riyadh. The Saudis claim they blew the missile out of the sky with a
U.S.-supplied Patriot interceptor, but experts now say the incoming
missile exploded upon impact, narrowly missing the domestic airport
terminal. This November 4 attack, Middle East intelligence sources
tell Newsweek on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive security
matters, was one of 87 such long-range missile strikes Yemen’s
Iran-backed Houthi rebels have launched against the Saudis in their
nearly three-year war. The strikes—some 50 of which the Saudis have
tried to keep secret—not only threaten to derail Riyadh’s ambitious
plan to transform its oil-based economy into one more attractive to
foreign investors; they’re also the latest sign that Iran and its
proxies are thumping the kingdom in their fierce battle for dominance
in the Middle East."
http://www.newsweek.com/iran-saudi-arabia-yemen-houthis-trump-israel-bombing-riyadh-missiles-742886
bill bowden
Jan 3, 2018, 6:43:29 PM1/3/18
to
Islander wrote:
>>
The problem with these kind of projections is that as you age, your
investments need to become more conservative. You no longer have the
ability or the time to recover if the market takes a dive. In addition,
your costs increase as you age. You have the VA to protect you from
medical expenses, but Medicare still leaves you vulnerable to additional
costs. Our supplemental insurance gets more expensive every year. You
also will find yourself unable to do things that were easy when you were
younger and you will need to pay to have them done for you. Some things
you will find you cannot do without.
>>
so my SS benefits would be $105 greater. My veteran friend now has a studio
apartment with a room-mate for about $200 a month so he has about $200 a week
to spend. And he gets to park in all the handicapped spaces. But you are right about trying to survive in a bear market. I've been through 4 of them. The first was 1974 when the Nasdaq crashed 50% and it took 8 years to recover. The next was 1987 when the market crashed 20% in one day which was not a big deal and the
market recovered in 6 months or so. The third was 1999 when the dot-com bubble
burst and it took 7 years to recover. And the fourth was 2008 when the market
dropped 50% and took another 5 years to recover. But I was lucky on that one
and hedged my position so I only lost 7% and made that up in the next 6 months.
Now, I'm about 50% stocks and 50% bonds. I like junk bonds paying 5% and they only crash about half the general market. My one share of AMZN is up 20% in 5 months. Every little $200 helps. As for getting old, I need a female room-mate to take care of me and I can take care of her. But I'm lazy and the only girl I know is only 20 years old. But she sure is pretty.
islander
Jan 3, 2018, 7:27:25 PM1/3/18
to
Can't have the masses educated. They might vote them out of office.
El Castor
Jan 4, 2018, 3:13:54 AM1/4/18
to
equities. The IRAs have gone into robo accounts. I would hate to keel
over with alzheimers or a stroke and neglect to take an RMD -- the
penalty for that is horrendous. The stock market should be looked at
as a place to get rich slowly. Sure we could all be billionaires if we
bought this and sold that. An old friend who was at one time very well
off treated the market like Las Vegas. Today he is in his seventies
and flat broke.
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 4, 2018, 3:23:28 AM1/4/18
to
me
Jan 4, 2018, 10:08:02 AM1/4/18
to
You conveniently ignore Democrat shit holes where education is a particularly awful.
http://www.endit.info/Education.shtml
https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/blog/top-100-worst-schools
http://www.endit.info/Education.shtml
https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/blog/top-100-worst-schools
mg
Jan 4, 2018, 11:07:03 AM1/4/18
to
Robert Reich says that the TPP only benefits the 1% and the
TPP isn't really a trade agreement.
http://billmoyers.com/2015/02/21/trade-deals-boost-top-1-bust-rest/
"Robert Reich: The Trans Pacific Partnership is a corporate
hijacking. The former secretary of labor sounds the alarm
bell about the Obama administration's newest investment
treaty"
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/05/robert_reich_the_trans_pacific_partnership_is_trickle_down_economics_by_another_name_partner/
Paul Krugman says the TPP is not a trade agreement.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/this-is-not-a-trade-agreement/?_r=0
The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) says that
the TPP would result in a gain of just .15 percent in U.S.
GDP while increasing our massive trade deficit.
https://nfu.org/2016/05/19/usitc-report-predicts-increase-in-trade-deficit-modest-gains-overall-from-tpp/4902/
Elizabeth Warren says that the TPP could undermine Wall
Street Reform.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/18/elizabeth-warren-trade-deal_n_6350312.html
The World Health Organization says that TPP could limit
cheap medicines.
http://www.voanews.com/a/who-tpp-could-limit-cheaper-medicines/3055137.html
Progressives and the AFL-CIO and public health advocates and
environmentalist don't like the TPP deal.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/01/12/progressive-flank-refuses-accept-obamas-relentless-pitch-tpp
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/01/12/progressive-flank-refuses-accept-obamas-relentless-pitch-tpp
Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says the TPP is the
"worst trade deal ever".
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/joseph-stiglitz-tpp-1.3515452
ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE
"No, the TPP Won't Be Good for the Middle Class"
http://www.epi.org/blog/no-the-tpp-wont-be-good-for-the-middle-class/
BERNIE SANDERS
"The TPP Must Be Defeated"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-bernie-sanders/the-tpp-must-be-defeated_b_7352166.html
ELIZABETH WARREN
"Elizabeth Warren Slams President Obama On Trade, Says Deals
Similar To TPP Haven't Lived Up To Promises On Labor
Standards"
http://www.ibtimes.com/elizabeth-warren-slams-president-obama-trade-says-deals-similar-tpp-havent-lived-1927147
THE LABOR UNIONS
"Why labor unions oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership"
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/labor-unions-oppose-trans-pacific-partnership/
THE PROGRESSIVE
"The Trans Pacific Partnership: A Fast Track to Lost Jobs
and Lower Wages"
http://www.progressive.org/news/2015/04/188098/trans-pacific-partnership-fast-track-lost-jobs-and-lower-wages
------------------------------------
The Republicans are crazy and the
Democrats have been bought off.
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 4, 2018, 11:46:59 AM1/4/18
to
On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:08:53 -0800, islander <no...@priracy.com> wrote:
<snip>
>I am beginning to think that killing the TPP was a bad idea. Without
>it, corporations will have free reign to deal with China without any
>controls on what they do. At least the TPP gave us an alliance of 12
>nations to counter Chinese and corporate domination of trade in the
>Pacific region. Without it, the corporations can make any deal that
>they want. Frankly, I don't trust them.
for American workers and at the same time allow importation
of goods made elsewhere by cheap labour and sold here for
much less. That will make the rich richer, true, but the USA
already does far too much to make the rich richer.
Importation without tariffs is just another feather in their cap.
bill bowden
Jan 4, 2018, 12:33:23 PM1/4/18
to
Rumple wrote:
>>
Everything financial is based on hot air and expectations
that are possibly unsupportable in the long term. As Adam
Smith wrote, "all money is a matter of belief". 1929 is one
conspicuous year in which that belief collapsed.
>>
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 4, 2018, 1:03:18 PM1/4/18
to
Mostly though I've made quite a bit of money
off the market. I'm not at all anxious to get
into it again, though half my money is still
in "safe" market investments, insofar as
anything in the stock market can really be
called "safe". Maybe even money isn't
safe. I hear the Romanians have
discovered the body of Atilla and are trying
to clone him. If they succeed, we may all
be toast, no matter how much money we
have right now! Imagine Atilla with nukes:
he wouldn't hesitate to use 'em!
islander
Jan 4, 2018, 1:12:18 PM1/4/18
to
leveling the playing field except that I would totally disallow import
of *any* product that was not manufactured under the same regulatory,
human rights, and worker compensation conditions required of domestic
companies. Where we differ is that I am not about to allow companies to
simply pay a tariff in order to excuse them from the laws under which
domestic companies are required to comply.
Admittedly, the TPP does not go as far as I would have liked, but it is
a step in the right direction to prevent corporations from escaping our
laws in what is a race to the bottom.
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 4, 2018, 2:13:58 PM1/4/18
to
On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 10:12:15 -0800, islander <no...@priracy.com> wrote:
>On 1/4/2018 8:47 AM, rumpelstiltskin wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:08:53 -0800, islander <no...@priracy.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>>> I am beginning to think that killing the TPP was a bad idea. Without
>>> it, corporations will have free reign to deal with China without any
>>> controls on what they do. At least the TPP gave us an alliance of 12
>>> nations to counter Chinese and corporate domination of trade in the
>>> Pacific region. Without it, the corporations can make any deal that
>>> they want. Frankly, I don't trust them.
>>
>>
>> Tariffs. You can't both maintain a high standard of living
>> for American workers and at the same time allow importation
>> of goods made elsewhere by cheap labour and sold here for
>> much less. That will make the rich richer, true, but the USA
>> already does far too much to make the rich richer.
>> Importation without tariffs is just another feather in their cap.
>>
>
>My position is not a lot different from yours within the goal of
>leveling the playing field except that I would totally disallow import
>of *any* product that was not manufactured under the same regulatory,
>human rights, and worker compensation conditions required of domestic
>companies. Where we differ is that I am not about to allow companies to
>simply pay a tariff in order to excuse them from the laws under which
>domestic companies are required to comply.
If you don't make them pay a tariff but do allow imports, then
>On 1/4/2018 8:47 AM, rumpelstiltskin wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:08:53 -0800, islander <no...@priracy.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>>> I am beginning to think that killing the TPP was a bad idea. Without
>>> it, corporations will have free reign to deal with China without any
>>> controls on what they do. At least the TPP gave us an alliance of 12
>>> nations to counter Chinese and corporate domination of trade in the
>>> Pacific region. Without it, the corporations can make any deal that
>>> they want. Frankly, I don't trust them.
>>
>>
>> Tariffs. You can't both maintain a high standard of living
>> for American workers and at the same time allow importation
>> of goods made elsewhere by cheap labour and sold here for
>> much less. That will make the rich richer, true, but the USA
>> already does far too much to make the rich richer.
>> Importation without tariffs is just another feather in their cap.
>>
>
>My position is not a lot different from yours within the goal of
>leveling the playing field except that I would totally disallow import
>of *any* product that was not manufactured under the same regulatory,
>human rights, and worker compensation conditions required of domestic
>companies. Where we differ is that I am not about to allow companies to
>simply pay a tariff in order to excuse them from the laws under which
>domestic companies are required to comply.
there's no restraint on them importing stuff and selling it for a
profit while bypassing American standard-of-living pay rates.
Inspecting other countries' standards is a bureaucratic
nightmare and one that's certain not to work because it's so
easy to finagle. Tariffs bypass all such difficulties, and bring
in money to the government too, so that we won't have to tax
people who don't have their own estates with garages in
order to fill the public coffers. Around here, the amount of
money collected for the exorbitant tickets for parking one's
car in an unfortunate place on street-cleaning-days is actually
counted as part of the city budget. The city used to hedge
about that, but apparently they've decided they can get away
with calling it what it is now, so they don't even bother
trying to cover it up anymore.
I got a $73 ticket a couple of weeks ago because my
facocta receiver was acting up, and I hadn't reset my
bedroom clock correctly after pulling out all the plugs to
jimmy the receiver. It's 10:54 now and I have to move my
car by noon or I'll get another ticket, which I hate like
poison especially since my doctor and dentist don't have to
worry about such things because they're rich enough to
have their own garages. Such problems are only for f.ing
peasants, which of course is why the city is so gleeful
about creating them.
I talked about cloning Attila the Hun elsewhere today, but
right now I'll talk about resurrecting M. Guillotine to take
care of the modern "aristocracy" problem. We may know
where his body is buried though his head may not be with
it, since he eventually ended up getting guillotined himself.
bill bowden
Jan 5, 2018, 1:52:56 PM1/5/18
to
Rumple wrote:
>>
I'm not at all anxious to get
into it again, though half my money is still
in "safe" market investments, insofar as
anything in the stock market can really be
called "safe". Maybe even money isn't
safe.
>>
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 5, 2018, 3:07:03 PM1/5/18
to
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 10:52:53 -0800 (PST), bill bowden
<billbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Rumple wrote:
>
>>>
>I'm not at all anxious to get
>into it again, though half my money is still
>in "safe" market investments, insofar as
>anything in the stock market can really be
>called "safe". Maybe even money isn't
*>safe.
<billbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Rumple wrote:
>
>>>
>I'm not at all anxious to get
>into it again, though half my money is still
>in "safe" market investments, insofar as
>anything in the stock market can really be
>called "safe". Maybe even money isn't
>>>
>
>Did you hear about the woman who had 40K buried in her back yard and her house and all the money burned to the ground during the recent fire? And I keep hearing about the bitcoin scams getting worse every day. Stay away from bitcoins. As for the market, I don't have any choice. I can't live on SS without moving to the desert. But I know a guy who lives in the desert and travels to the city every Sunday, He lives in 2 shipping containers with solar panels and a well. He doesn't pay any rent and bought the land and containers for less than 10K. The city keeps pinning notes on his door about this and that violation but he justs throws them in the trash.
No, I hadn't heard about the money buried in the back yard getting
>
>Did you hear about the woman who had 40K buried in her back yard and her house and all the money burned to the ground during the recent fire? And I keep hearing about the bitcoin scams getting worse every day. Stay away from bitcoins. As for the market, I don't have any choice. I can't live on SS without moving to the desert. But I know a guy who lives in the desert and travels to the city every Sunday, He lives in 2 shipping containers with solar panels and a well. He doesn't pay any rent and bought the land and containers for less than 10K. The city keeps pinning notes on his door about this and that violation but he justs throws them in the trash.
burnt. Sounds very plausible though. Around here there was a guy
who found to stashes of 19th century gold coins buried on his land.
It may have been a bank robber who was killed, or a Silas Marner
who died before digging up the gold. The government was holding
it to make sure it wasn't the proceeds of robbery, but that was quite
a while ago so the guy who found it probably has the gold back by
now.
You don't need to warn me to stay away from bitcoin. It scares
the bejasus out of me. As I've said though, if I could only get next
week's newspaper delivered to me every day, I'd have invested in
bitcoin like a madman, then cashed it all in the day that my
next-week's newspaper told me that bitcoin had popped like a soap
bubble overnight.
Luckily I have a pension as well as SS, and I have cheap rent due
to living in the same flat for 40 years under rent control, so I have
plenty of money in the bank and in the market. I don't spend even
half what I have coming in, since I have SS and a pension. I just
keep getting richer, at a speedy rate though not as speedily as Bill
Gates keeps getting richer. People, including my son and my
sister, often ask why I don't spend more on myself, but why should
I? I'm not into luxury at all but I am into fiscal security and that
money sure is buying me fiscal security. As to "vacations", come
on! -- I live in San Francisco so I'm on vacation all the time!
islander
Jan 5, 2018, 3:36:33 PM1/5/18
to
think, to use our market while we can to demonstrate our values to the
rest of the world rather than engage in retaliatory practices in the
race to the bottom.
>
> I got a $73 ticket a couple of weeks ago because my
> facocta receiver was acting up, and I hadn't reset my
> bedroom clock correctly after pulling out all the plugs to
> jimmy the receiver. It's 10:54 now and I have to move my
> car by noon or I'll get another ticket, which I hate like
> poison especially since my doctor and dentist don't have to
> worry about such things because they're rich enough to
> have their own garages. Such problems are only for f.ing
> peasants, which of course is why the city is so gleeful
> about creating them.
If I lived in a city, I would seriously consider giving up a personal
> I got a $73 ticket a couple of weeks ago because my
> facocta receiver was acting up, and I hadn't reset my
> bedroom clock correctly after pulling out all the plugs to
> jimmy the receiver. It's 10:54 now and I have to move my
> car by noon or I'll get another ticket, which I hate like
> poison especially since my doctor and dentist don't have to
> worry about such things because they're rich enough to
> have their own garages. Such problems are only for f.ing
> peasants, which of course is why the city is so gleeful
> about creating them.
car, especially if there is good public transportation. But, we have
discussed this before.
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 5, 2018, 9:20:01 PM1/5/18
to
always will. As to "demonstrating our values to the world",
I personally will echo what Rocky said to Bullwinkle:
"That trick never works!"
Our values are not, IMO, all that great anyway - the
values we actually practice as a nation, I mean - not the
values we pretend to ourselves that we hold as a nation.
>>
>> I got a $73 ticket a couple of weeks ago because my
>> facocta receiver was acting up, and I hadn't reset my
>> bedroom clock correctly after pulling out all the plugs to
>> jimmy the receiver. It's 10:54 now and I have to move my
>> car by noon or I'll get another ticket, which I hate like
>> poison especially since my doctor and dentist don't have to
>> worry about such things because they're rich enough to
>> have their own garages. Such problems are only for f.ing
>> peasants, which of course is why the city is so gleeful
>> about creating them.
>
>If I lived in a city, I would seriously consider giving up a personal
>car, especially if there is good public transportation. But, we have
>discussed this before.
shop at Costco and Foodsco, and the value I get from
doing that takes compensates for the expense of the car,
IMO. There are also long trips, though my car is so
decrepit now that may no longer be advisable. My
landlady lost my rent check this month, since it arrived
so early (I make it out at the same time I make out my
credit card checks, mid month), so I drove to her place
to give her a replacement. That would have been a
major hassle without a car. My annual state fee is
only about $180 I think, and my insurance only costs
me about $240. I got the car free since it was my
mom's car before she died in 2002.
islander
Jan 6, 2018, 11:48:22 AM1/6/18
to
talking about different things. I am specifically referring to our
values as implemented in laws and regulations that protect the
environment, our health and assure that worker's rights are not
violated. These are fundamental values that the Republicans keep trying
to eliminate, but which Democrats hold dear and fight for. I would
agree that the current administration is not a friend to these values,
but hope that that is a temporary setback.
been complaining about. Your choice, of course.
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 6, 2018, 1:50:38 PM1/6/18
to
On Sat, 6 Jan 2018 08:48:17 -0800, islander <no...@priracy.com> wrote:
>On 1/5/2018 6:20 PM, rumpelstiltskin wrote:
<snip>
>On 1/5/2018 6:20 PM, rumpelstiltskin wrote:
>There are values and then there are values. I think that we may be
>talking about different things. I am specifically referring to our
>values as implemented in laws and regulations that protect the
>environment, our health and assure that worker's rights are not
>violated. These are fundamental values that the Republicans keep trying
>to eliminate, but which Democrats hold dear and fight for. I would
>agree that the current administration is not a friend to these values,
>but hope that that is a temporary setback.
has real "values", after Cuba and Vietnam and El Salvador
and Iraq etcetera etcetera, but some of the people in it
do care more about the environment, for example, than
just stealing as much as they can and making sure that
when they do it, it's legal. When push comes to shove,
though, those people are not the ones who control most
everything, and the reason for that is tied to the natural
order of the universe.
<snip>
>> It would make shopping a nightmare though. I like to
>> shop at Costco and Foodsco, and the value I get from
>> doing that takes compensates for the expense of the car,
>> IMO. There are also long trips, though my car is so
>> decrepit now that may no longer be advisable. My
>> landlady lost my rent check this month, since it arrived
>> so early (I make it out at the same time I make out my
>> credit card checks, mid month), so I drove to her place
>> to give her a replacement. That would have been a
>> major hassle without a car. My annual state fee is
>> only about $180 I think, and my insurance only costs
>> me about $240. I got the car free since it was my
>> mom's car before she died in 2002.
>>
>Personally, I would not want to put up with the hassle that you have
>been complaining about. Your choice, of course.
*not* owning one would be more of a hassle. I wouldn't
want to shop for groceries and then arrange to have them
delivered somehow, and I wouldn't like to have to figure
out how to get anywhere before I started getting there.
I'm so hassle-phobic that I just sent $400 to the gas and
electric company, just so I won't have to write and mail
them checks for the next few months. My convenience
checking account pays no interest anyway, so I'm not
losing any money by doing that.
El Castor
Jan 7, 2018, 2:21:50 AM1/7/18
to
the spell wears off. (-8
bill bowden
Jan 8, 2018, 6:17:27 PM1/8/18
to
Rumple wrote:
>>
Luckily I have a pension as well as SS, and I have cheap rent due
to living in the same flat for 40 years under rent control, so I have
plenty of money in the bank and in the market. I don't spend even
half what I have coming in, since I have SS and a pension. I just
keep getting richer, at a speedy rate though not as speedily as Bill
Gates keeps getting richer.
>>
As to Bill Gates, he doesn't care about getting richer, all he does nowadays is look around for someone to give money to. It must be a nice job trying to figure out who to give money to. I bet he gets a ton of email asking for money. But around here the bitch who owns the place wants every extra nickle she can get. She makes about 1 million after expenses and tax and wants more. Her husband used to own the place and personally counted all the quarters in the washing machines. His property was worth 10 million and he wanted to count quarters in the washing machines. There is no end to greed. But he died 20 years ago so his wife gets all the money now and wants more. She can't live on a million dollars a year and wants more. I don't think I would like to sleep with her.
rumpelstiltskin
Jan 8, 2018, 7:01:44 PM1/8/18
to
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 15:17:25 -0800 (PST), bill bowden
<billbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Rumple wrote:
>
>>>
>Luckily I have a pension as well as SS, and I have cheap rent due
>to living in the same flat for 40 years under rent control, so I have
>plenty of money in the bank and in the market. I don't spend even
>half what I have coming in, since I have SS and a pension. I just
>keep getting richer, at a speedy rate though not as speedily as Bill
>Gates keeps getting richer.
>>>
>
>It sounds to me you can afford to take some risk on investments.
Maybe I can afford to, but I don't want to. Investing is like
<billbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Rumple wrote:
>
>>>
>Luckily I have a pension as well as SS, and I have cheap rent due
>to living in the same flat for 40 years under rent control, so I have
>plenty of money in the bank and in the market. I don't spend even
>half what I have coming in, since I have SS and a pension. I just
>keep getting richer, at a speedy rate though not as speedily as Bill
>Gates keeps getting richer.
>>>
>
>It sounds to me you can afford to take some risk on investments.
working - it's work. I've never enjoyed work, except for my
very first job when I was a teenager. Not because of the
work, which was dreary, but because I was a teenager
hanging out with other teenagers.
>Sort of like going to Las Vegas and playing craps. I'd do it if I had the money. Last time I went to Vegas I was playing Black Jack and was delt 2 10s or facecards, I forget. Anyway it was 20 and I split it and got 2 more 10s or facecards. So, I had two hands of 20 each and figured I couldn't lose. The dealer had 16 showing and hit himself with a 5 for 21 and I lost both hands. Not sure if it was a setup or not. Some of these dealers are pretty experienced and know how to do magic tricks with cards. But nowadays if I had any spare money I would play the stock market. Much better returns than Vegas. I don't know why anybody goes to Vegas when they could get much better odds playing the market and stay home. My dad liked Vegas and always played craps. When I was 18 I lived in a 2 bedroom apartment with a room-mate and we had a tap beer bar and held gambling nights every friday and Saturday night. I think it was craps and
>black-Jack but not sure. It paid a good part of the rent. We couldn't buy beer since we were under 21, but the delivery boy from the liquor store was only 16 and we gave him a $2 tip for delivering a 7.5 gallon keg of beer for the bar.
>
>As to Bill Gates, he doesn't care about getting richer, all he does nowadays is look around for someone to give money to. It must be a nice job trying to figure out who to give money to.
I should write a book "The pleasures of indolence",
except that I'm too indolent to write it.
> I bet he gets a ton of email asking for money. But around here the bitch who owns the place wants every extra nickle she can get. She makes about 1 million after expenses and tax and wants more. Her husband used to own the place and personally counted all the quarters in the washing machines. His property was worth 10 million and he wanted to count quarters in the washing machines. There is no end to greed. But he died 20 years ago so his wife gets all the money now and wants more. She can't live on a million dollars a year and wants more. I don't think I would like to sleep with her.
mo' money, MO' MONEY!"
0 new messages