Ignoramus14749 wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Wes wrote:
Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

I do not know about soon, but I feel good about owning stocks for the
long term, based on current prices.


As long as they are doing fine by the time I'm ready to retire, I'm willing to hang on,
invest, and wait. I'm still betting on America.

Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

Gunner Asch wrote:

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


I one nagging worry is what will happen as the boomers continue to sell off stocks to fund
their retiremnent. We still have a lot of boomers reaching retirement age.

Wes

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 14:27:59 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:15:43 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?

Something tells me that you're the last person who needs to worry
about things like that...

Wayne

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 16:53:52 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:15:43 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


Gunner, this is typical bull**** that screws up so many investors.

No one knows what the market will do tomorrow.

This is not really as big of a problem as some think.

In the longer run, all investor returns are from earnings and
dividends, so if I buy that at a reasonable price, I will be
rewarded. Much indigestion will occur along the way.

If you "buy based on price", to some outside observer it may look like
brilliant market timing, but in reality it is a simple process
intellectually.

I have never believed in any theory that would propose to "buy at any
price" or to "never buy regardless of price".

i

I strongly suggest you read the following..as a start to your education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Crash_of_1929



“Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his
or her adult life pass by before getting back to even. ”
—Richard M. Salsman


Follow it up with this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act


Get back to me when you finish...and we can discuss your call of
"bull****"

Ok?

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 18:10:28 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


I one nagging worry is what will happen as the boomers continue to sell off stocks to fund
their retiremnent. We still have a lot of boomers reaching retirement age.

Wes

Indeed.




"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 16:53:52 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:15:43 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


Gunner, this is typical bull**** that screws up so many investors.

No one knows what the market will do tomorrow.

This is not really as big of a problem as some think.

In the longer run, all investor returns are from earnings and
dividends, so if I buy that at a reasonable price, I will be
rewarded. Much indigestion will occur along the way.

If you "buy based on price", to some outside observer it may look like
brilliant market timing, but in reality it is a simple process
intellectually.

I have never believed in any theory that would propose to "buy at any
price" or to "never buy regardless of price".

i

I strongly suggest you read the following..as a start to your education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Crash_of_1929



?Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his
or her adult life pass by before getting back to even. ?
?Richard M. Salsman


Follow it up with this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act


Get back to me when you finish...and we can discuss your call of
"bull****"

Ok?

Gunner, with all due respect etc, try to actually read what I
write. OK? I never was the one to pay too much for stocks, which is
what I clearly stated.

i



"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 21:44:15 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 16:53:52 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:15:43 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


Gunner, this is typical bull**** that screws up so many investors.

No one knows what the market will do tomorrow.

This is not really as big of a problem as some think.

In the longer run, all investor returns are from earnings and
dividends, so if I buy that at a reasonable price, I will be
rewarded. Much indigestion will occur along the way.

If you "buy based on price", to some outside observer it may look like
brilliant market timing, but in reality it is a simple process
intellectually.

I have never believed in any theory that would propose to "buy at any
price" or to "never buy regardless of price".

i

I strongly suggest you read the following..as a start to your education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Crash_of_1929



?Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his
or her adult life pass by before getting back to even. ?
?Richard M. Salsman


Follow it up with this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act


Get back to me when you finish...and we can discuss your call of
"bull****"

Ok?

Gunner, with all due respect etc, try to actually read what I
write. OK? I never was the one to pay too much for stocks, which is
what I clearly stated.

i

So did you read them, or not?

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 21:44:15 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 16:53:52 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:15:43 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


Gunner, this is typical bull**** that screws up so many investors.

No one knows what the market will do tomorrow.

This is not really as big of a problem as some think.

In the longer run, all investor returns are from earnings and
dividends, so if I buy that at a reasonable price, I will be
rewarded. Much indigestion will occur along the way.

If you "buy based on price", to some outside observer it may look like
brilliant market timing, but in reality it is a simple process
intellectually.

I have never believed in any theory that would propose to "buy at any
price" or to "never buy regardless of price".

i

I strongly suggest you read the following..as a start to your education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Crash_of_1929



?Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his
or her adult life pass by before getting back to even. ?
?Richard M. Salsman


Follow it up with this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act


Get back to me when you finish...and we can discuss your call of
"bull****"

Ok?

Gunner, with all due respect etc, try to actually read what I
write. OK? I never was the one to pay too much for stocks, which is
what I clearly stated.

i

So did you read them, or not?


Yes, I did, a while ago.

i

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:38:46 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 21:44:15 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 16:53:52 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:15:43 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


Gunner, this is typical bull**** that screws up so many investors.

No one knows what the market will do tomorrow.

This is not really as big of a problem as some think.

In the longer run, all investor returns are from earnings and
dividends, so if I buy that at a reasonable price, I will be
rewarded. Much indigestion will occur along the way.

If you "buy based on price", to some outside observer it may look like
brilliant market timing, but in reality it is a simple process
intellectually.

I have never believed in any theory that would propose to "buy at any
price" or to "never buy regardless of price".

i

I strongly suggest you read the following..as a start to your education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Crash_of_1929



?Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his
or her adult life pass by before getting back to even. ?
?Richard M. Salsman


Follow it up with this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act


Get back to me when you finish...and we can discuss your call of
"bull****"

Ok?

Gunner, with all due respect etc, try to actually read what I
write. OK? I never was the one to pay too much for stocks, which is
what I clearly stated.

i

So did you read them, or not?


Yes, I did, a while ago.

i

Slow learner eh?

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:38:46 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 21:44:15 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 16:53:52 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:15:43 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


Gunner, this is typical bull**** that screws up so many investors.

No one knows what the market will do tomorrow.

This is not really as big of a problem as some think.

In the longer run, all investor returns are from earnings and
dividends, so if I buy that at a reasonable price, I will be
rewarded. Much indigestion will occur along the way.

If you "buy based on price", to some outside observer it may look like
brilliant market timing, but in reality it is a simple process
intellectually.

I have never believed in any theory that would propose to "buy at any
price" or to "never buy regardless of price".

i

I strongly suggest you read the following..as a start to your education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Crash_of_1929



?Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his
or her adult life pass by before getting back to even. ?
?Richard M. Salsman


Follow it up with this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act


Get back to me when you finish...and we can discuss your call of
"bull****"

Ok?

Gunner, with all due respect etc, try to actually read what I
write. OK? I never was the one to pay too much for stocks, which is
what I clearly stated.

i

So did you read them, or not?


Yes, I did, a while ago.

i

Slow learner eh?


Gunner, since 2003, I have outperformed the market by 6.5 percent
annually. That means that I am not that slow learner. I was also 90%
in the market in March 2009.

i

On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 23:41:51 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:38:46 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 21:44:15 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 16:53:52 -0500, Ignoramus14749
wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:15:43 -0400, Wes
wrote:

Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?


Gunner, this is typical bull**** that screws up so many investors.

No one knows what the market will do tomorrow.

This is not really as big of a problem as some think.

In the longer run, all investor returns are from earnings and
dividends, so if I buy that at a reasonable price, I will be
rewarded. Much indigestion will occur along the way.

If you "buy based on price", to some outside observer it may look like
brilliant market timing, but in reality it is a simple process
intellectually.

I have never believed in any theory that would propose to "buy at any
price" or to "never buy regardless of price".

i

I strongly suggest you read the following..as a start to your education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Crash_of_1929



?Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his
or her adult life pass by before getting back to even. ?
?Richard M. Salsman


Follow it up with this one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act


Get back to me when you finish...and we can discuss your call of
"bull****"

Ok?

Gunner, with all due respect etc, try to actually read what I
write. OK? I never was the one to pay too much for stocks, which is
what I clearly stated.

i

So did you read them, or not?


Yes, I did, a while ago.

i

Slow learner eh?


Gunner, since 2003, I have outperformed the market by 6.5 percent
annually. That means that I am not that slow learner. I was also 90%
in the market in March 2009.

i

So far so good. I rather suspect that your skill in the market (kudos
btw) wont be helping you very much in the next few years.

I really hope Im wrong. I truely do.

I also really hope Im wrong about the Great Cull too.

But...I dont think Im wrong about either of them.

Shrug

Good luck!!

We are all going to need it.


Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On 8/6/2010 6:00 PM, Liberal Leroy wrote:


"Hawke" wrote in message
...
On 8/5/2010 8:30 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 17:11:40 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Aug 5, 7:06 pm, "John R. Carroll"

SS isn't a savings plan for anyone.
It's a compact between the employed and the retired.
The employed pay and the retired get that money.
SS can end just as soon as you convince those that are retired to
forfeit
their payments even though they paid throughout their entire
working lives
to support their elders.

Piece of cake really.
All it takes is enough votes.......





You can already do all of that through tax free plans outside of SS.
SS was never intended to provide a complete retirement income for
anyone.
It still isn't, although that is sometimes the case.
Two things are accomplished, at least, through the SS program.
First, it acts as a direct and powerful stimulus to the economy.
Second, it keeps geriatrics from panhandling but only up to a point.

--
John R. Carroll

Social Security is sort of a savings plan, but certainly not an
investment plan. Sort of a savings plan as long as it is not
changed. In that you do not get to spend all you earn, but have to
give the government some with the understanding that you will get some
of it back. Could be that you don't, but most likely you will.

But I disagree that Social Security is a direct and powerful stimulus
to the ecomony. It is a pay as you go plan. For every dollar paid
out which stimulates the economy, a dollar is taken away from a wage
earner. So there is no net effect.

Dan

Google "Ponzi Scheme"


Gunner



Gummer; an American who will desperately need to be on social security
just to survive. But will most likely speak out against it.

Hawke

Feel free to send him your share!


About the only thing that I would ever send Gummer's way is a left hook.


Hawke

On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 13:36:34 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:


So if you guys see a young man in a wheel chair, or with artificial
limbs...ask if he is a vet and if he says yes...thank him for his
service to his country.

How about old men in wheel chairs or with prostheses? What about vets
that were lucky enough to survive their tours with less obvious
permanent physical damage? For example, every vet I've met of my age
has some degree of hearing impairment. I have state-of-the-art
digital aids but I still can barely hear my 5-year-old granddaughter's
tiny voice speaking at her mummy's motormouth rate in a Brit accent
that makes her sound like a miniature Amanda Holden. The gentle,
spontaneous, perceptive and unabashed honesty of an intelligent and
confident 5-year-old child is to be treasured. They arrived
yesterday, Nana Mary is thrilled as you might imagine. Mar walked a
mile and a half today and she is lookin' good. Very good! Meds and
procedures are important but ya can't beat the therapeutic value of a
visit by daughter from overseas, favored SIL and treasured grandchild.

Bella noted at the airport that Nana Mary is quite beautiful, poppa
Don has funny-looking ears (she spotted my aids) and Uncle Daive
(sic) has a big tummy.

On Aug 8, 1:28*am, Hawke wrote:





And a ponzi scheme is neither. *Save that it stimulates the movement
of money from one group to another. * *And devil take the last group
of "investors".

tschus
pyotr

Well, as usual you don't know what the **** you are talking about. A
Ponzi scheme is a class of fraud, which means it's a crime, a felony to
be precise. It's a crime where someone receives money from a client and
is contractually bound to invest it for the benefit of that client. The
criminal then takes this money and appropriates it for himself. He is
able to keep the enterprise going by adding new clients and getting new
money which he uses to pay the older clients, which allows him to keep
the fraud going. That is nothing like what social security is.

Social security is a plan to take in funds from tax revenues and use
those funds for the benefit of older citizens. It does this generation
after generation. Everyone knows what is going on, it's entirely legal,
and it's intended to benefit the majority of Americans. So you see it's
nothing like the fraud committed by a criminal in a Ponzi scheme. But
being such a dope I doubt you will be able to comprehend the difference
between the two even when it's explained to you on a sixth grade level.

Hawke

Social Security started with many workers contributing and only a few
getting benefits. So it ran a surplus, which Congress spent. As time
went on more people started getting benefits. So Social Security was
expanded to include more people paying in. An example of this is that
all the people in the armed services were added in about 1958. People
working for state and local governments were also added.

See the similarity to a Ponzi scheme? Social Security is legal, but
still close to a Ponzi scheme. It was sold to the American people as
something which would benefit them. But the similarity to a Ponzi
scheme continues. Now Social Security is getting to the point where
the money coming in is not enough to pay the benefits. So this is
similar to what happens in a Ponzi scheme. The early investors get
the benefits and the last people in get less than they put in. This
is made even worse because people are living longer.

So I have to tell you that it is very unlikely that you will receive
as many dollars in benefits as you will have contributed. Social
Security benefits are calculated using a scale where the all earnings
are not equal. See below

A three-tiered benefit formula determines a monthly benefit based on
your AIME. It is designed to replace a higher percentage of earnings
for people at lower levels. At higher levels of earnings the formula
provides higher benefits, but the percentage of the benefit relative
to AIME declines.

The earnings levels where percentages change are called bend points
because a graph of the benefits would have a bend in the line at those
points.

The formula provides 90% of AIME up to the first bend point, 32% from
there up to the second bend point, and 15% above the second bend
point. Bend points are adjusted each year for inflation. For workers
retiring in 2005, the bend points are $627 and $3,779. Note that these
are applied to your monthly earnings, so they correspond to annual
income 12 times that amount ($7,524 for the first bend point and
$45,348 for the second bend point)

So if you only earn $7500 a year, you are likely to get more benefits
than you paid in. But if you earn over $45,000 a year it is unlikely
that you will collect as much as you pay in.

Dan

On Aug 7, 6:10*pm, Wes wrote:
Gunner Asch wrote:
Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon. *

Wes

The problem is...which direction will they be going...up.....or down?

I one nagging worry is what will happen as the boomers continue to sell off stocks to fund
their retiremnent. *We still have a lot of boomers reaching retirement age.

Wes

I doubt if the retirement of the boomers will greatly affect the price
of stocks. The stock prices are mostly dependent on what the
companies are earning. Price to earnings ratio.

Dan

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
So far so good. I rather suspect that your skill in the market (kudos
btw) wont be helping you very much in the next few years.

I really hope Im wrong. I truely do.

I also really hope Im wrong about the Great Cull too.

But...I dont think Im wrong about either of them.

Shrug

Good luck!!

We are all going to need it.

I aM sure tHAT you are wrong and that great cull will not occur.

You will not really benefit from great cull, with your health
problems that need a complicated medical response.

i

On 2010-08-07, Wes wrote:
Ignoramus14749 wrote:

On 2010-08-07, Wes wrote:
Ignoramus14749 wrote:

I feel a bit better. The last 10 years sure have been rocky.

This because stocks were very expensive 10 years ago. Now the prices
are much more reasonable, and so are the prospects of future returns.

Hopefully most of those 500 stocks in the index are about to take off soon.

I do not know about soon, but I feel good about owning stocks for the
long term, based on current prices.


As long as they are doing fine by the time I'm ready to retire, I'm willing to hang on,
invest, and wait. I'm still betting on America.

Same here.

i

On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 08:44:34 -0500, Ignoramus2412
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
So far so good. I rather suspect that your skill in the market (kudos
btw) wont be helping you very much in the next few years.

I really hope Im wrong. I truely do.

I also really hope Im wrong about the Great Cull too.

But...I dont think Im wrong about either of them.

Shrug

Good luck!!

We are all going to need it.

I aM sure tHAT you are wrong and that great cull will not occur.

Lets hope not, Comrade.


You will not really benefit from great cull, with your health
problems that need a complicated medical response.

i

Which problems are those?

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 08:44:34 -0500, Ignoramus2412
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
So far so good. I rather suspect that your skill in the market (kudos
btw) wont be helping you very much in the next few years.

I really hope Im wrong. I truely do.

I also really hope Im wrong about the Great Cull too.

But...I dont think Im wrong about either of them.

Shrug

Good luck!!

We are all going to need it.

I aM sure tHAT you are wrong and that great cull will not occur.

Lets hope not, Comrade.


You will not really benefit from great cull, with your health
problems that need a complicated medical response.

i

Which problems are those?

Heart, etc

On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:32:11 -0500, Ignoramus2412
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 08:44:34 -0500, Ignoramus2412
wrote:

On 2010-08-08, Gunner Asch wrote:
So far so good. I rather suspect that your skill in the market (kudos
btw) wont be helping you very much in the next few years.

I really hope Im wrong. I truely do.

I also really hope Im wrong about the Great Cull too.

But...I dont think Im wrong about either of them.

Shrug

Good luck!!

We are all going to need it.

I aM sure tHAT you are wrong and that great cull will not occur.

Lets hope not, Comrade.


You will not really benefit from great cull, with your health
problems that need a complicated medical response.

i

Which problems are those?

Heart, etc

Heart etc?

They fixed my heart. What is the etc that you are mentioning?

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Sat, 7 Aug 2010 18:57:31 +0000 (UTC), Przemek Klosowski
wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 15:26:12 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:

What Iggy is proposing is basically the position of most people
throughout history, throughout western societies.

Even the most confiscatory taxation is far more liberal than the solution
adopted by the Catholic Church: the celibate. It is not a religious
mandate: it came about to prevent the priests from accumulating and
passing wealth, instead concentrating it in the Church, which then spent
it on Good Works. Come to think about it, that would probably be labeled
as communism by the Tea Partiers.

"Good Works" are great, a societal boon. Crap like the $25 million
spent on a Mormon temple in Sandy Eggo or the $100M CatHolic church in
HelL.A. is not.

Outlaw organized religion.

Gunner Asch on Sat, 07 Aug 2010 12:51:22 -0700
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Sat, 7 Aug 2010 18:57:31 +0000 (UTC), Przemek Klosowski
wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 15:26:12 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:

What Iggy is proposing is basically the position of most people
throughout history, throughout western societies.

Even the most confiscatory taxation is far more liberal than the solution
adopted by the Catholic Church: the celibate. It is not a religious
mandate: it came about to prevent the priests from accumulating and
passing wealth, instead concentrating it in the Church, which then spent
it on Good Works. Come to think about it, that would probably be labeled
as communism by the Tea Partiers.

At various period of history..the Catholic church was far different than
it is today. At various periods..there were many many married priests,
many who were involved in life long "arraingements" with 1 or more women
(including nuns) and many many "millionare" priests (generally Bishops
and higher) who controlled large amounts of money as their own.

And then there were periods where the Church dug in its heels, did
internal housekeeping and corrected these issues.

And then the clean house devolved back into married priests and so
forth.

Its been rather cyclic if one studies history over the past 2000 yrs.

And that is the Roman Church. The Orthodox haven't seen any need
to be constantly changing things.


tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!