U.S. Mortgage Backer May Need Bailout

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Oct 10, 2009 3:19 am

KC Scott wrote:You must be confused, Dio.
You assume yourself worthy to be read?

Not really. But it's amazing how many of you ankle-biters who 'never read my posts' follow me around with inane bullshit.

Then again, what do you expect from someone whose primary historical reference is youtube.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Sat Oct 10, 2009 3:31 am

You of course must know in the heirarchy of the board you are ranked below Jessfro and Paul and just above Irie, m2 and PiKKKle.

You have been banned for being banal -

Truly you own only a legacy of ignorance and mediocrity.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Oct 10, 2009 3:45 am

KC Scott wrote:You of course must know in the heirarchy of the board you are ranked below Jessfro and Paul and just above Irie, m2 and PiKKKle.

Surely you realize I don't give a flying fuck about your 'heirarchy'. Or hierarchy, for that matter.

KC Scott wrote:You have been banned for being banal -

Try for losing a bet. One I wouldn't have made if I gave a damn about being banned, of course.

KC Scott wrote:Truly you own only a legacy of ignorance and mediocrity.

Coming from a clueless twat like you, that's high praise.

Dr_Phibes · Post by **Dr_Phibes** » Sat Oct 10, 2009 4:03 am

88 wrote:
Why is it big business's fault that the government established a program to encourage big business to make loans to people that big business would not otherwise lend to?

Because government tried to inject some morality into the marketplace?
It's pointless, you can't do that - the old social democrat foible.

It's unfair to say government caused it, that's simplistic, like anything - it's a combination of events but certainly they exacerbated it.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Oct 10, 2009 10:44 pm

And don't imagine for a moment that Fannie and Freddie (and their Dem enablers) are done fucking things up...

Fannie's Next Big Adventure
Piling a guarantee on a guarantee on . . .

Step right up, taxpayer, because Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have a new deal for you. And don't worry—it will make housing more affordable and won't cost a dime. (Pardon us if you've heard this one before.)

Fan and Fred's latest excellent adventure is intended to help independent mortgage lenders that have been hard hit in the wake of the financial panic. These smaller players have seen their costs of capital rise and access to capital shrink. They never benefited like the big boys from bailout cash from Uncle Sam or the implicit backing of a too-big-to-fail guarantee. As a result, the three biggest U.S. mortgage lenders—Wells Fargo, Bank of America and J.P. Morgan Chase—now make more than half of all new home loans in the country.

Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve and now government-run Fannie and Freddie have been pushing mortgage rates down in a bid to buoy the housing market. These artificially low rates in turn have lowered the rate at which it's economical for a lender to borrow money to make home loans; this has also increased the squeeze on independent mortgage shops.

Thus the latest Fannie brainstorm: Launch a program to guarantee the short-term debt of these small mortgage lenders, provided they use the money to make mortgages approved by Fan and Fred. Keep in mind that Fan and Fred already guarantee the mortgages themselves. So this new program would pile another taxpayer liability on top of that one by guaranteeing the short-term debt of independent mortgage companies, too.

Now, some might say that in a world in which more than 90% of all mortgages are already taxpayer guaranteed, this is no big deal. If you insure the mortgage product, why not insure the lenders who created it too? Yet by that logic, the taxpayers might as well cut out the middle men and simply nationalize the entire mortgage industry. (On second thought, forget we mentioned that.)

Our point is that piling mortgage guarantee upon guarantee is going in precisely the wrong policy direction. If we are ever going to return to a private mortgage market, the feds need to begin to roll back their guarantees and market share. Yet the more guarantees that are made, the harder it will be to withdraw. This may be precisely what Fannie and Freddie and their Congressional patrons want, since these new guarantees will make it that much harder to reform them and reduce their sway in the housing market.

This also shows how one policy mistake typically begets another. Fannie and Freddie's guarantees and subsidies helped to create the housing disaster, which has led the Fed directly to purchase mortgage-backed securities and mess up the market for small mortgage lenders, which in turn is leading Fan and Fred to guarantee the debt of those small lenders. Market distortion is piled on market distortion until we have a mortgage industry that can't function without taxpayers being on the hook for every transaction.

The Chinese must look at all this and wonder why the crazy Americans think they can give anyone advice about how to run a market economy.

88 wrote:There are many who share the blame of this collapse. The government. The lenders. The borrowers. Even folks like me and IF, who have benefited from reduced interest rates and the ability to engage in business activities that, but for the easy capital climate, we would never have been able to afford.

I agree. But the fact is that the primary instruments of this shitstorm are the ones currently blaming A) George Bush B)"Greedy" capitalists and C) anyone but themselves.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:33 am

88 wrote:If a robber gives some of his loot to someone he deems to be needy, it does not justify his theft or make it moral.

Why do you hate Israel?

Never again, you racist hate-monger. You're worse than Hitler.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:39 am

Martyred wrote:
88 wrote:If a robber gives some of his loot to someone he deems to be needy, it does not justify his theft or make it moral.
Why do you hate Israel?

Never again, you racist hate-monger. You're worse than Hitler.

Hitting the booze already?

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:48 am

Ziodog, you are the most pathetic of the urine drinking life raft survivors of the so-called "rightwing" assholes that are still floating around like stunned steers in a Chicago beef lot (not to mix metaphors

) ...I mean...are you actually defending Phil Gramm's evangelical dismantling of the Glass- Steagall act? You're supporting that? Let's be clear.....Why?

And M-tyrd...what the fuck are you? You're not funny, informed, and certainly not in any way connected with any real issue. Do you actually live in some Canadian postage stamp and just jack-off all day? You seem like it. Let us know when you actually see how many fingers you're sucking on at once.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:21 pm

LTS TRN 2 wrote:...are you actually defending Phil Gramm's evangelical dismantling of the Glass- Steagall act?

No, Bill Clinton (the guy who signed it) is...

"I don't see that signing that bill had anything to do with the current crisis. Indeed, one of the things that has helped stabilize the current situation as much as it has is the purchase of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America, which was much smoother than it would have been if I hadn't signed that bill.... On the Glass-Steagall thing, like I said, if you could demonstrate to me that it was a mistake, I'd be glad to look at the evidence."

Also, your obession with Gramm aside, it passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57.

What I AM saying is that the truly damaging part of the bill (the one the Dems insisted on) was the expansion of the CRA. That was what gave scumbag community activists the leverage to coerce banks into making bad loans.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:52 pm

The slimeball actions and evasions of Bubba aside, as well as the shameless acquiescence of the bought and paid for congress, do you support the dismantling of this crucial legislation? Why?

As for the bad loans, guess what? The banks knew full well most would default--and they welcomed this because they ended up having their BEST YEAR ever. You seem to be blithely unaware--or actually supporting!--the rapacious and utterly horrific transfer of wealth to a tiny percentage of corporate/banking interests that has attended this economic clusterfuck. You seem to be a complete traitor, in other words, to the basic principles and values of American democracy. The fact that you're a cheap racist is irrelevant because the vast majority of victims in this gigantic swindle are working class white folks who have worked hard all their lives. How do you look in the mirror?

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:30 pm

What's the "tin foil hat" business supposed to mean? Are you drunk? Look, all of the swindling and shameless greed went down in the previous eight years (and yes, in Bubba's fetid administration as well), but your idiotic assertion that Barry and his handlers pulled this off is really beneath comment. Of course we're all shocked at the degree to which he appears completely beholden to the banking interests (with Geitner providing Wall St. a hot line to the white house) but no, of course we don't tip our hats to grotesquely immoral thieves. Do you? First of all, it's not a smooth scheme at all because the whole world knows they're crooks. They've destroyed any faith in bankers, Wall St., insurance companies--in short, these rapacious bandits have screwed it up for all actual smooth operating crooks. I mean, really, if Madoff succeeded so long because the SEC was basically compliant, and if the whole congress is bought and paid for to allow the looting of America's entire middle class, well what's to admire?

Now, why does this suggest a "tin foil hat" again? You suggest this without anything to back it up. As usual.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:32 pm

88 wrote:
LTS TRN 2 wrote:The slimeball actions and evasions of Bubba aside, as well as the shameless acquiescence of the bought and paid for congress, do you support the dismantling of this crucial legislation? Why?

As for the bad loans, guess what? The banks knew full well most would default--and they welcomed this because they ended up having their BEST YEAR ever. You seem to be blithely unaware--or actually supporting!--the rapacious and utterly horrific transfer of wealth to a tiny percentage of corporate/banking interests that has attended this economic clusterfuck. You seem to be a complete traitor, in other words, to the basic principles and values of American democracy. The fact that you're a cheap racist is irrelevant because the vast majority of victims in this gigantic swindle are working class white folks who have worked hard all their lives. How do you look in the mirror?
[adjusting tin foil hat]If what you say is true[/adjusting tin foil hat], you have to give props to those who managed to pull off this scam. See, they suckered the First Black President to sign legislation, that they got 90 senators to approve, that would eliminate certain regulations that permitted them to engage in all kinds of risky stuff ostensibly to help the downtrodden obtain property that, without the help of Big Brother, they could never hope to obtain. Once they got this giant scam rolling, they were able to siphon money out of the economy at an enormous clip, sufficient to effectuate a "transfer of wealth to a tiny percentage of corporate/banking interests" heretofore unseen. And they did that all to the expense of the working class white folks. As horrible as that proposition is, you have to tip your cap to them and say "Nice one." [adjusting tin foil hat]Or am I missing something?[/adjusting tin foil hat]

The Jews are quite crafty.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:45 pm

Diogenes wrote: The Jews are quite crafty.

How else do you think they trick Nicky Felchco into sucking their cock?
Crafty indeed.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:09 am

Ziodog, if those Jews whose theories and actions have lead directly to the present economic catastrophe are so clever, how come their scheme has proven utterly disastrous? Think about it. From the brilliance] of theorists like Friedman and Greenspan, to the serious smarts of Jack Abranhoff, to the sheer intelligence of Richard Fuld, so complete has been their disgrace that if anything we should feel sorry for the great majority of honest and intelligent Jews who are now cast in their wide shadow of stupidity, incompetence and greed. And there's also the previously unthinkable degrees of humiliation and shame--and that's Bernie's biggest legacy--so that if anything this rolling shit storm of international calamity has so undermined any of the traditional stereotypes about Jews and their financial acumen that your type of stereotype is now automatically the heaviest sarcasm! Think about that. :wink:

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:11 am

88 wrote:Don't you think its time you at least acknowledge that you're in a game with a pro that is making you his man-bitch?

Maybe he secretly wants to be his man-bitch.

Nicky Felchco = "power bottom"

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:17 am

88 wrote:
LTS TRN 2 wrote:What's the "tin foil hat" business supposed to mean? Are you drunk? Look, all of the swindling and shameless greed went down in the previous eight years (and yes, in Bubba's fetid administration as well), but your idiotic assertion that Barry and his handlers pulled this off is really beneath comment. Of course we're all shocked at the degree to which he appears completely beholden to the banking interests (with Geitner providing Wall St. a hot line to the white house) but no, of course we don't tip our hats to grotesquely immoral thieves. Do you? First of all, it's not a smooth scheme at all because the whole world knows they're crooks. They've destroyed any faith in bankers, Wall St., insurance companies--in short, these rapacious bandits have screwed it up for all actual smooth operating crooks. I mean, really, if Madoff succeeded so long because the SEC was basically compliant, and if the whole congress is bought and paid for to allow the looting of America's entire middle class, well what's to admire?

Now, why does this suggest a "tin foil hat" again? You suggest this without anything to back it up. As usual.
When a warrior goes into battle and loses, he gains respect for his adversary. That's all I'm talking 'bout. You go to battle with "corporatism", "capitalism", "W-ism", "Zio-nazi-neo-conism" and the like and they always get over on you. Don't you think its time you at least acknowledge that you're in a game with a pro that is making you his man-bitch? If this was a boxing match, they would have long thrown in a towel from your corner. Instead, you just get plunger-raped over and over and over and over, then make a few posters and lead a march that that no one watches or cares about and declare victory, while the MAN takes more of your money and power. Hell, you managed to elect Mr. Obama, and somehow the MAN got to him too. Seriously. When are you going to give your adversary due props? That's all I'm sayin.

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

Problem with that, 88, is that it comes down to shit stained morons like Curtis LeMay and Henry Kissinger. These sort of respective lunatics have always plagued mankind. Praising them could never be the honorable respect paid to a worthy adversary, but rather is like tipping your hat to cancer. In other words it's not a recent or distinctive situation, but a general condition. And I'm certainly not bound in my aversion to it by nationalism or ethnicity, etc.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:54 am

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Ziodog, if those Jews whose theories and actions have lead directly to the present economic catastrophe are so clever, how come their scheme has proven utterly disastrous?

You forgot Saul Alinsky.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:12 am

88 wrote:C'mon, Nick. Either your adversaries are playing the world like Joshua Bell plays a Stradivarius, or they are just wicked lucky. If it is the former, then you must pay respect to their ability to get over notwithstanding your vigilance. If it is the latter, then that is one incredible lucky streak. When do you get to celebrate a victory? Even a small one.

What do you mean my adversaries? Do you have some allegiance to Wall St. kleptocrats? Or are you such a fan of military industrialists that you don't recognize their threat to everyone? Are you of such an adolescent mentality that you just march along until your IRA account gets evaporated, or your company dissolved by way of the machinations of some faceless off-shore corporate entity? Look, son, the battles of those who would be free against those who would enslave have been around forever. We've won a lot of battles but the powers of those Bohemian Grove sorts have adapted and continued as well. At present they are basically maxed out and for all practical purposes are desperately hoarding all they can in a frenzy of unabashed looting--not really so different from the Iraqis fleeing Kuwait loaded up like the Beverly Hillbillies. Hopefully they will get the same treatment.

Choose your sides. Don't pretend they're not your adversary too.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:18 am

Diogenes wrote:
LTS TRN 2 wrote:Ziodog, if those Jews whose theories and actions have lead directly to the present economic catastrophe are so clever, how come their scheme has proven utterly disastrous?
You forgot Saul Alinsky.

Wrong, Ziodog...BAD DOGGIE!

I clearly distinguished between the "crafty" Jews to which you referred, and the honest and intelligent Jews whom I fear will be smeared by the actions of the thieving vampires on Wall St. as well as the PNAC crowd, etc. Saul Alinsky was just one man--but he was all the way on my side, not yours!

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:34 am

LTS TRN 2 wrote:
Diogenes wrote:
LTS TRN 2 wrote:Ziodog, if those Jews whose theories and actions have lead directly to the present economic catastrophe are so clever, how come their scheme has proven utterly disastrous?
You forgot Saul Alinsky.
Saul Alinsky was just one man--but he was all the way on my side, not yours!

I know. And Obama's. And ACORN's.That's why the economy is is such a shambles.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 3:42 am

88, you sound a lot like a bunkered Libertarian Survivalist. Such selfishness is a small boat indeed. And, if you really believe the kleptocratic Wall St. types--Jewish or not--and the seething PNAC types are not your adversary, your self-employment is probably a tiny coal mine. I'm not surprised you've got firearms, etc., though these are worthless in the real fight. Wakey wake!

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 3:53 am

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Such selfishness is a small boat indeed!

One of the favorite accusations (along with greed and class traitor) of redistributionist leftists since Marx on.

88 must be doing something right...

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:23 am

Well, 88, that's certainly the "strict constructionalist" credo/manifesto...but...you're very short on specifics, 'cept for demanding access to guns. I've said nothing about the government's role, but let me be clear: the role of government is to serve the people. And first and foremost that means protecting the people--against rapacious corporate interests, for starters. Do you have a problem with Eisenhower's brave warning against the "military industrial complex"? Your rote assertion that government should "get the hell out of the way" of..corporate looters?...is hollow. Are you suggesting it should stop protecting us--loosen regulations? Which ones?

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Tue Oct 13, 2009 1:16 pm

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Well, 88, that's certainly the "strict constructionalist" credo/manifesto...but...you're very short on specifics, 'cept for demanding access to guns. I've said nothing about the government's role, but let me be clear: the role of government is to serve the people. And first and foremost that means protecting the people--against rapacious corporate interests, for starters.

If by "strict constructionist" you mean Constitutionalist, then yes. As far as the role of the government being to protect the people from evil businessmen-wrong. The Constitution ad particularly the Bill of Rights was created to protect the people from the government. Giving said government unlimited power in order to 'protect us' is the exact opposite of what the founders intended. Even if there were some kind of sinister conspiratorial cabal trying to fleece the public, they would be less of a threat than even well meaning utopians and bureaucrats. 'Corporate interests' just want your money. Leftists want power over your lives. And they are what the founders were trying to protect us from.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 4:39 am

A corporation is only dangerous and unethical when it achieves a trans-national bearing protected by full rights of a person. Frankly, it's abominable how the corporate structures have completely transcended the basic practical function that you describe--and become amoral, neo-colonialist entities which hold entire nations in strangleholds of economic subjugation. If you think Coca Cola is somehow a healthy entity (besides the obvious toxicity of the product itself) you are misguided--and your simplistic theory utterly misleading. As for the military industrial complex, are you kidding? Have you done any research on just how vast and costly this monstrosity has become? Of course the world--and especially the U.S.--would be tremendously served by a quantum reduction in our military character. After all, it's proven disastrous since Ike warned us about it. Or what...can you name a single war we've won? And for all the grotesque American military invasions of smaller neighboring countries--on direct behalf of these trans-national (non tax-paying) corporations, what has that brought the world? Greater profits for a tiny percentage? It's a total disgrace which has run its course. There's never been a reasonable defense for the rapacious exploitation of nations by corporations, and it's absolutely time to change. It's not only in our interest, it's necessary for our survival. Or do you think this can't get a lot worse?

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:01 am

LTS TRN 2 wrote:A corporation is only dangerous and unethical when it achieves a trans-national bearing protected by full rights of a person

We have anti-trust laws and regulatory commissions as infinitum controlling what "dangerous and unethical" deeds evil capitalists can do. How about government? it "is only dangerous and unethical" when given unlimited power with no oversight in order to harass "dangerous and unethical" capitalists.

LTS TRN 2 wrote: As for the military industrial complex, are you kidding? Have you done any research on just how vast and costly this monstrosity has become? Of course the world--and especially the U.S.--would be tremendously served by a quantum reduction in our military character. After all, it's proven disastrous since Ike warned us about it. Or what...can you name a single war we've won?

Remember the Cold one? How many wars have enlightened folk like Neville Chamberlain won?

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:36 pm

'Scuse me, are you guys camping in Glenn Beck's colon? Do you actually believe a word of Rusp Limpdick's demented blather? Seriously, your robotic and completely tired sound bite defenses of the trans national corporations are a joke. You are obviously in a some armored state of denial as to the actual practices of these entities, as well as their effects upon this and other countries. Coca Cola of course is a classic case of a dreadfully unhealthy product being aggressively foisted upon the world's nations--with disastrous results. Are you really familiar with this (toxic) monstrosity?

"in the United States, people consume more soft drinks than any other liquid- including ordinary tap water. If we take full advantage of our opportunities someday, not too many years into our second century, we will see the same wave catching on in market after market, until, eventually, the number one beverage on earth will not be tea or coffee or wine or beer, It will be our soft drinks."
R.Giozueta, ex CEO of Coca Cola.

Coca Cola GmbH (Germany) collaborated with the Nazis. The company advertised in Nazi papers financially assisting the regime. They opened up bottling plants in Sudetenland shortly after the Nazis had invaded. They exhibited at Nazi trade fairs. And in 1941 when Coca Cola GmbH could no longer get the syrup to make Coke from America they created a new drink out of the ingredients they had available to them. That drink created for the Nazi soft drink market was Fanta.

The excellent Book by Mark Pendergrast "For God Country and Coca Cola" describes the CEO of Coke GmbH standing under Coca Cola banners and swastikas at a Coke rally before leading the audience in the Seig Heils for Hitler. Pendergrast also points to the near certainty that Coke used forced labour in the bottling plants, considering that 1/5 of the workforce was forced labour by 1945 it is perhaps not surprising.

Today the mighty Coca Cola empire is rapidly becoming a pariah company. It dominates the world of sporting sponsorship, while selling a drink that is basically sugared water and is linked with childhood obesity. In Kerala, Southern India, thousands have suffered from lack of water. The company, they claim, has used their groundwater and over exploited it. So while some villagers had to walk 7kms for fresh water Coke was merrily trucking out bottles in front of them.

In Colombia the Coca Cola bottlers are accused of hiring or conspiring with paramilitaries to kill, torture, kidnap and disappear trade unionists working for the company. Eight trade unionists have been killed so far. A few weeks ago close family members of a prominent trade unionist working for Coke were attacked by paramilitaries. Gabriel and Fanny Remolina were shot dead; their son Robinson died the next day. There are 2 surviving children.

"A billion minutes ago Christianity appeared. A billion seconds ago the Beatles changed music forever. A billion Coca Colas ago was yesterday morning."
R. Goizueta ex CEO of Coca Cola.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:28 pm

88 wrote:Does Coca-Cola train guns on its customers and order them to drink sugar water? Or, does the consuming public worldwide find sugar water so refreshing that it is willing to shell out hard earned coin to get it? Are you advocating that government put a "Acceptable Products Czar" in place to dictate what products can be sold and what cannot?

You mention Coca-Cola GmbH. That is/was a German corporation. And I suspect that in Germany during the 1930's and 1940's, it would be very good for business to be in the good graces of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (aka Nazi's). It might just help you sell some soft drinks. Coke makes the world sing in perfect harmony, dog.

What do you want companies that sell soft drinks to do differently?

You obviously didn't read the info. Coca Cola owned Fanta and worked with the Nazis hand in glove--as did many other major American corporations. But that's only a side issue. Since then they've assumed the typical corporate posture of using the military to further its aims--you know, like having Central and South American governments overthrown in order to control the sugar, etc., of those nations. And yes, labor leaders in these nations were murdered when they attempted to organize for decent wages in Coca Colas' plants. Right now Coca Cola is fucking up this country and others by pushing ahead full steam on the disastrous Planet Corn policy. Your take is simplistic and childish, frankly, relying on tired tropes about "free enterprise" and "getting government off our backs." It's pathetic that someone who prides himself on demanding "freedom" will shamelessly suck up to utterly dreadful entities such as Coke--as well as the militarists. You're fucked!

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:35 pm

I'm sorry, Nicky. When I told you to take your meds, I was not referring to the crack pipe.

Get help.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:02 pm

BTW,this site is great...

http://www.killercoke.org/

I'm down with your boycott, Nicky.

But then, I'm a Pepsi drinker.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:48 pm

GOOD DOOGIE! Ziodog, that's a damn good site--and you know it. And for a treat I'll give you a very helpful piece of advice: don't ever drink soft drinks again. Your body will appreciate it--and maybe your head will improve as well!

88, is your perspective really so tiny as to simply say--"no one's forcing me to drink Coke"--and thus not have any concern for the actions and effects of an entity like Coca Cola? Are you really that selfish and small? Because while I'm obviously not forced to drink it either, I still see perfectly well the extremely damaging effects of many huge corporations in their blind thrust for profit--and in Coca Cola in particular we see a perfect shit storm of negative factors that have earned it a special place. From its disgusting product which is extremely unhealthy, to its business practices which have been both amoral and exploitative, to its leading role in the current Corn policy which is disastrous on even more unfolding levels, Coca Cola just might be the worst. But it's hardly the only one. And you are apparently so ignorant of these connections that you don't seem to see these huge problems as connected to you. Well, wake the fuck up.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:07 am

88 wrote: Someone ought to do a study on the investment/return scenario going on there. Why is it that the city of East Cleveland spends $13,294 per pupil but graduates 58% percent of its students (which kicks ass on Cleveland, proper's 48%). The average per pupil spending in Ohio is $8,750.

Because they keep electing Democrats?

Just guessing.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:00 pm

Okay, 88, but just as you claim to have a narrow self-interest, in fact the calamity of Coca Cola has easily found you hiding...look, the students at, say, Shaw High School in East Cleveland drink how much soft drinks per semester? And how much obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure and general "feeling like shit" is present in this student body? Sure, if they all stopped drinking the toxic swill they would no doubt improve significantly in all areas of their lives. Of course it's certainly not the only problem, but it's a very good start.

Thus, you claim to be angry about black kids who don't perform well in school, but you attempt to ignore one of the principal causes. And that's called faking it.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 8:08 pm

The problem with your idiotic notion of testing the obvious is that we can't find a school that's not saturated in soft drinks and junk food. Everyone's fat and wheezing, short of attention span and feeling anxious, etc. It's across the board. And why? Because Coca Cola has succeeded in installing itself inside schools by way of lucrative contracts--cash strapped schools allow several soda machines in the school, etc. And their aggressive pursuit of underwriting major sporting events has produced similar disastrous results. Look at the next ten fatsos you see...and ask your self honestly if these folks wouldn't e better off without soft drinks and junk food. Okay. Now consider how the tremendous amount of unhealthy people are in fact impacting your state's economy. It's all connected, and it's costing you plenty!

You're an idiot, 88, and a disgrace to bunkered Libertarian Survivalists everywhere. And the worst part is that you somehow feel an allegiance to these rapacious corporations--as though they're your friend! :doh:

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 8:38 pm

LTS TRN 2 wrote:The problem with your idiotic notion of testing the obvious is that we can't find a school that's not saturated in soft drinks and junk food. Everyone's fat and wheezing, short of attention span and feeling anxious, etc. It's across the board. And why? Because Coca Cola has succeeded in installing itself inside schools by way of lucrative contracts--cash strapped schools allow several soda machines in the school, etc. And their aggressive pursuit of underwriting major sporting events has produced similar disastrous results. Look at the next ten fatsos you see...and ask your self honestly if these folks wouldn't e better off without soft drinks and junk food. Okay. Now consider how the tremendous amount of unhealthy people are in fact impacting your state's economy. It's all connected, and it's costing you plenty!

You're an idiot, 88, and a disgrace to bunkered Libertarian Survivalists everywhere. And the worst part is that you somehow feel an allegiance to these rapacious corporations--as though they're your friend! :doh:

Please, Dude. Take somebody's meds.

And see your doctor.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:29 pm

It's not my opinion that soft drinks are unhealthy, it's common knowledge. Or what? And despite my personal feeling that the execs of Coca Cola should be publicly hanged, I actually support their right to exist. But, like tobacco and other completely unhealthy products, they should be forced to reveal just what ingredients are in their swill--and provide real warnings, etc. As you may know Coca Cola has used its very deep pockets to stonewall any disclosure of ingredients, etc. They've fought it tooth and nail. Now as to my basic point, you certainly can't deny that their product in fact is directly connected to the astronomical level of obesity and diabetes, etc. And too that this effect has a direct impact on your state's economy. You've got no argument--and indeed you don't even try. All you've got is some rote and lame lip service to "free enterprise." Seriously, bouncing you around like a ball gets pretty boring. Too bad you're so fucking dumb. :wink:

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:09 am

88 wrote: If I hit myself on the head with a hammer, does that make Sears an evil corporation?

7000 lawyers just hit the phone lines.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:32 pm

Do you actually live in such a simplistic and childish head space? It's like FOX News or some some such idiocy. Look, 88, follow your logic. If the tobacco industry had its way, it too would have refrained from any disclosure of the health risks of its products. Just like the soft drink industry. Okay? Are you following this? And..the fact that the tobacco industry was forced to provide such warnings and information (as limited as they could possibly make this), a tremendous amount of people stopped smoking. Similarly, the issue of second hand smoke became law, with widespread results. Get it? Now if this same mandate of the government serving the people by protecting them from unhealthy products was applied to soft drinks, a similar reduction in such consumption would follow. Of course idiots can still smoke--many do. And millions of morons would still drink Coca Cola and similar toxic junk food. But it's the government role of seeking to protect the people that's in question (not the toxic properties of Coca Cola), and the clear positive results that regularly occur when the corporate lobbying does not interfere.

Now look at an even more obvious example. Corporations always want environmental impact limitations avoided--because they feel it impacts their profits to their shareholders. And guess who pays for these corporations using their deep pockets to thwart environmental regulations?

This is the result of coal sludge being unregulated in Tennessee. Critics say the EPA failed to create national standards for waste storage due to opposition from utility companies and the coal industry. With responsibility handed off to state agencies, standards vary widely, resulting in the phenomenon of “importing pollution” from a highly regulated state to one with lower standards.

You see, corporations are inherently opposed to any regulation which might impeded their profits. Your simplistic rote sound bites aside, you've got no argument.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:39 pm

I think somebody needs to ban the free coffee I've been swilling at various workplaces over the past 25 years or so.

I'm sure I'd loose a pound or two.

Please, uncle barry, stop the mean caffeine pushers before my heart blows up.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:28 pm

I guess being a bunkered paranoid Libertarian Survivalist really does have an effect on one's brain. I mean, you're obviously demented. Your idiotic claim of the government making more money on tobacco--or oil!--than the respective corporations is simply dribbling drivel. And of course you can't back up a word of it.

Smoking is in fact way down--though creeping up. And more importantly, we the people are now protected against second hand smoke in restaurants, theaters, airplanes, ballparks, stores and countless other venues where the tobacco companies would love to have their products freely used--just like it had been for centuries before any sort of responsible government behavior became established. As for the oil companies, the tax is all at the pump--from the consumers--not the oil companies themselves. These entities have used all of their lobbying muscle to lessen corporate taxes. Corporate tax is now at an all-time low. Starting with the senile Reagan and continuing right up to the present, the philosophical base of the GOP (and paranoid bunkered Libertarians, etc) has been to allow unfettered profiteering to the corporations.

And this means gutting or staving off meaningful environmental protections, first and foremost. We notice you have no argument at all concerning the horrific coal sludge flood in Tennessee--as well as thousands of other similar toxic waste issues by corporations whose only concern is profit. Seriously, when do you begin to start connecting clear facts?