jcd11235

Perhaps you should lay off the tequila, Vinny. Maybe you should also consider taking an intro to financial accounting before trying to analyze government spending. It will help you understand what all those big numbers mean. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Perhaps you missed the part in your own source about how the government was legally obligated to issue those IOU's. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

The fellow who stumbled upon North America while searching for India? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

It's statements like this that highlight the fact that the poster knows not what he speaks of. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I was unable to find the darkness related crimes. Would they be listed under "bogeyman in the closet" or "monster under the bed?" Seriously, you haven't given any reason to believe or evidence to suggest anyone was in any danger, regardless of whether you or the cops were in close proximity or not. What was the incident supposed to be a perfect example of? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Who's Hori? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

No, a lower P/E indicates a lower anticipation of earnings growth. But this metric should be used to compare equities in the same class. It is interesting to note a similar dividend rate between the two (xom- 2%, msft 1.7) Yes, a higher P/E might indicate higher anticipated growth. The stock is more valuable because people anticipate higher profits in the future. However, a lower P/E does represent higher profits per dollar invested in stock (at current price). Not everyone would consider Exxon' >17.6% higher dividend rate (using your numbers, I didn't verify their accuracy) compared to Microsoft to be "similar." Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Your chances probably would have been better if you would have handed him a fifty instead. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Ten minutes sounds like a reasonable response time for a non-emergency. Well. If you knew the hood it could have turned in to an emergency in a New York second. You gonna stand there w/ your cell ph. and call the cops and hope they get there before you're dead? Who was going to kill them? You said the power went out, not that there was a break in or drive-by. Are all of your neighbors afraid of the dark? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Ten minutes sounds like a reasonable response time for a non-emergency. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Actually, depositing money effectively removes money from the economy. If the reserve deposit is 10%, depositing x dollars results in the bank only being able to loan out .9 x dollars with the funds, effectively removing .1 x dollars from circulation, not adding .9 x dollars. The person who deposited their x dollars cannot use the funds while the bank is investing the .9 x dollars. It's an either or proposition, not both and. Increased savings without a corresponding increase in productivity is not good for the economy. It means people are spending less money. Spending money increases the GDP in an exponential manner. Increased savings (in a manner subject to federal reserve requirements) decreases GDP in an exponential manner. Edit to add: Upon rereading your post, M2 and M3 can be increased in the manner in which you described. I was thinking in terms of M1 when I wrote my post. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

True, Exxon has a lower P/E ratio than Microsoft. A low price per earnings ratio is more desirable than a high price per earnings ratio, all else equal. It means the shareholder sees greater earnings per dollar invested in stock. Profit margins are also highly misleading. They don't offer any information about the amount of time required between the capital investment for direct costs and the realization of profit of that investment. How long does it take Exxon to pump a barrel of crude, refine it, and sell it to the retailer? One week? Ten days? Two weeks? It doesn't take Exxon long to make that 8% profit. On a two week cycle with constant quantity demanded, 8% net profit margin yields over 200% net profit annually on the capital required to keep production going. Forgive me for not feeling sorry for Exxon because they only have an 8% profit margin. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Its a dodge due to your unwillingness to state what your opinion would be to rectify the overall situation. So, is everything that highlights your flawed logic a dodge? Let me guess; you're a cop. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Fortunately, CNN did some fact checking prior to agreeing to air the mockumentary. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

We're supposed to complain about visitors? Are the new owners aware of this policy? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

We should probably start making the t-shirts & other merchandising now. I survived the Rapture in 2000 2007 2009® Available in your choice of tie-dye or camouflage. Order now and receive a free gift, your choice of survival knife or one half pound of ganja. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

No one. If you want to smoke, smoke. It's your choice. We are all both limited and empowered by the choices we make. Personally, I've worked for employers who only hired tobacco users and employers who rarely (if ever) knowingly hired tobacco users. The former didn't want the hassle of a smoke free workplace. The latter found smoking unappealing, and even went so far as to offer some regular customers who smoked $1000 if they could quit smoking for six months. They are not controlling your choice to smoke. They don't even appear to be controlling their employees' choice to smoke or not. They are simply exercising their right to choose new hires who can statistically be expected to represent lower costs to taxpayers and other county employees. The way the article reads, you can even choose to give up smoking long enough to pass the employment screening, then choose to resume smoking, without penalty. The assertion that the new policy limits choice is absurd. It may create a new consequence of a choice, but the choice is still the individual's to make. Usually a result of lifestyle choices. It is not unheard of for employers to incorporate a physical examination as part of the screening process. New hire training represents a significant cost; some employers choose to be very selective about how that money is invested. Very doubtful. Appearance is also often a consideration in the hiring process, yet there are very few laws regarding personal appearance. Most are limited to requiring genitals, and, in some cases, female nipples to be covered. Nonsense. There's municipal governments, county governments, state/provincial governments, federal/national governments, even international governments. Why not? Did you forget prostate cancer? Some diseases affect one gender more often than the other. It's a fact of life. Typically, people are born into their gender. Women can't decide to be men in order to avoid breast cancer. Smokers can quit smoking in order to reduce their chances of getting smoking related illnesses. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

What did they do to tobacco? Too many resources to list individually Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Agreed. You must have missed the part where I wrote about using the unearned bonus money to cover additional casts due to unhealthy lifestyles and provide meaningful education/opportunities to adopt healthier lifestyles. One obvious offering would be tobacco cessation programs. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

No, you did not imply that IOU's were not debt. You claimed those the money obtained for those IOU's were used to fund on budget spending, which is simply not true for the years in question. Not if this thread is any indication of your level of understanding GAAP. Love your new straw man, Vinny. Of course the IOU's are going to come due. And sometime in 2017, there won't be enough cash coming into the system to allow reinvestment of all the trust fund earnings. That will cause problems for any President and Congress unable to balance the budget and retain enough revenue to pay down the debt as those investments mature and are redeemed for cash to be used to pay benefits. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

You might be right. I just pulled 5% out of the air for the sake of this discussion. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

As I said, the funds would optimally be used by the company to cover additional casts associated with smoking and other unhealthy lifestyles, as well as to fund meaningful education/opportunities to adopt healthier lifestyles. This proposal is freedom. Smokers could choose to take the job or not. They could choose to quit smoking or not. It sounds like, by freedom, you mean the ability to to have costs of their smoking subsidized. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Perhaps in your scenario, but not in the one I proposed. In the one I proposed, all new hires are hired at 95%, and all new hires are eligible receive healthy lifestyle bonuses if they qualify (i.e. meet healthy lifestyle requirements). Employees would be able to choose whether or not to seek those bonuses. It's positive incentive, not negative incentive. Of course, optimumly, the unearned bonus monies would be spent covering extra costs due to unhealthy lifestyles, and, hopefully, meaningful education/opportunities to adopt more healthy lifestyles. Nice misdirect about women and minorities. Women are born women, transsexuals notwithstanding, and minorities are typically born minorities. That's completely different from choosing to be a smoker, meat eater, etc. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Good, now you're making progress. Keep it up and you might understand basic accounting before long. The debt during 1999 and 2000 increased by less than the year end increases of funding in federal accounts. Short of faulty accounting (e.g. Enron), the only way for that to happen is for there to be more revenue than expenditures. In 1999 and 2000, this was true both on and off budget. Understand yet, or is the pace still too fast? Now Vinny, I'm not the one that has shown a clear lack of understanding of accounting. I've only made claims that can be substantiated by government sources. Yeah, well, keep dreaming, Vinny. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Nope. I'd probably like it better than Florida, though. Guess all you'd like. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!