All Posts (brobison)


(1) 2 3 4 ... 193 »


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
I think the author of the article raises some other very good points, particularly about the use of proper skepticism when reading someone else's opinions. What is missing from your post above is any actual facts. Your post is just a regurgitation of the author's conclusions without any critical thought of your own. You just accepted his facts, which have been shown to be bogus, and accepted his opinions, probably because you want them to be so.

Another interesting fact is that you are plagiarizing Bill O'Reilly in your post. WTF?

Posted on: 8/25 2:12 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Opium
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
That is what happens when the carnies roll into town with the fair. They bring some bad juice with them.

But definitely drugs should be legal because this shouldn't effect anyone else but the user, right?

Posted on: 8/25 8:34 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:
And the most important of those powers is national defense. But, you wouldn't know that by how they secure our borders.


But you would know how important it is by the amount that is spent on it. A full 21% of the total outlays of the government.

Posted on: 8/24 10:54 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:
Now, tell me MORE about the 1930's. UGH!!!


Oh yes the 30s. That was when we attempted to allow our labor markets to "clear". Yes, the 30's. The 30's which were the birthplace of Keynesian economics. That one?

Where we spent a decade of squalor and suffering because:

1. The Fed did not understand fully its role in supervision of the economy.
2. The hawkish portion of the Fed drove banks under.
3. The result of excesses of the previous decade and the irrational exuberance of the 20's.
4. The government didn't understand the role of stimulus in the economy.

Those 30's?

Posted on: 8/24 10:51 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: What's your take on the current state of the economy?
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

92WVUGrad wrote:
I don't understand why the market is in free-fall mode given the strength of the economy. We are told the economy is solid, we are creating jobs, the unemployment rate is very low and we are printing billions of dollars each month to prop up the already good economy. Also, every other country seems to be printing money and manipulating their currency to help their solid economies. I thought we were going to hit 20,000 this year.


The two main drivers of the fall of the stock market.

1. The realization that the strength of the economy will result in increases in interest rates. Increase in rates ALWAYS results in a decrease in stock price.

It works this way:

If you feel that a stock will result in constant free cash flows of $10 per year into the future as far as can be seen and the current rate is 5% then the value of this company is:

C/R = 10/.05 = $200

if the interest rate changes to 7% and all else stays the same:

C/R = 10 / .07 = $142.86

Simple math....simple investing....simple economics.

In our markets we predict future interest rates and those rates determine what investors are willing to pay. SO the analogy holds but the complexity increases...and there is noise in the "signal" for my electrical engineering friends.


2. The slowing of the Chinese economy results in reduced growth of listed companies ability to increase growth by tapping into the Chinese market. Add to that the recent weakening of the Yuan versus the dollar and you have a double dose of issues.

Posted on: 8/24 10:19 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
We have to understand better the pay scheme of the top executives so that a person can better understand the problem in question.

The leadership positions in company's are highly compensated so that it is an incentive for the people in the company to aspire to be at the top. It is a huge corporate carrot to get the best of everyone competing to be CEO. I have no problem with this. It is overall in the best interest of the corporation, in general. The problem is we need to stop believing that the CEO EARNS this money. He does not. He gets a high salary as a carrot to all others to strive for his position. In effect, he has won the lottery. So he "earns" this money just like a scratch off winner "earns" his or hers.

Not exactly the same but you can see the analogy. Now...looking at it that way takes on a new perspective.

As I said I have less of a problem with just highly compensating the CEO than I do with various performance bonus schemes because the bonus schemes are gamed at the actual detriment of the corporation.

I currently am a member of a bonus program. I have the same bonus triggers as the CEO has. I receive a bonus EVERY year. This should tell you something. I am not really able to influence the hitting of these triggers per se as they are corporate wide and I have a small input into meeting the numbers. One of my co-workers was worried about getting his bonus on his first year 2009. We had a pretty bad year from our perspective. I said "Don't you worry. The CEO is going to get his bonus. When he get's his we'll get ours."

We had HUGE layoffs, 15% of our employees. My co-worker was really worried now. "Don't you worry. The CEO will get his bonus. You may have seen your last evening at home with the family but the CEO is going to get his bonus."

At the end of the year I got one of the largest bonuses I ever got. Did I earn that bonus? Not really. The CEO got that bonus for me....how about my laid off co-workers....too bad for them.

Posted on: 8/24 8:49 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

92WVUGrad wrote:
Growth of government

The GDP also decreases as the growth of government increases. Funny how these stats don't go back to the 20's when government and taxes were cut in half resulting in the roaring 20s.

A lot of lefties on this site like or want to try a 90% tax rate. Well, as Harry Reid said, this is a voluntary tax system. I would like to know the number of the lefties on this site that paid extra on their income taxes to equal the 90% rate. If you really like it, why don't you pay 90%? I would certainly hope you would voluntarily pay 90% of your 2015 taxes. Your federal rate, being 25%, 30, 35, 40 or whatever is the minimum you have to give. You lefties can give more. Like Warren Buffet saying he pays too little in taxes but you don't see him volunteering to pay extra. If you don't pay 90% this year and have never volunteered to pay the 90%, STFU!!!!


There is quite a lot of stupid in this comment. It will be tough to know where to start.

It appears from your graph that government spending as a percentage of GDP runs about 20%. This is consistent through the time period in your chart. So we see in this chart that we have the greatest growth period in our country's history along with our worst in 2007-2014. At the same time to peg a spending per GDP measure is a little bit of a falsehood because spending spurs FUTURE growth normally..I am not real happy with the Obama administration's spending but then again it has been a number of years since we spent to grow our future economy. We have had the MBA business outlook for sometime. This isn't conducive to future growth.

Your 90% argument is absolutely the dumbest thing I have ever heard in my life. No one is saying that a wealthy person is supposed to pay 90% of what he makes. How about this. How about we tax @ 90% of everything over $50 million a year? Now, do you think a guy making a $100 million a year can live on $55 million a year? Think he will have a problem with that? Don't like that how about 90% of everything over $75 million a year? Is the extra funds generated investing in things to make our country grow better than an asshole using it to purchase his 15th yacht?

I make $100,000 per year. This is in the top 20% of earners. If I got taxed at 90% for my salary I would only make $10,000 per year. Not enough to make a house payment or put food on the table. Is it sinking in how stupid your statement is yet?

I have NEVER complained about paying my taxes. The tax code as it stands right now is skewed to help the wealthy. The average working person DOES pay a higher percentage in payroll tax than the top 1% depending on what the top 1% invest in. So does that mean we can increase the wealthy's contribution to the SS?

NO ONE....is going to pay MORE taxes than they are required. To state that you can't have input on the tax code unless you pay 90% may be the dumbest statement ever!!! Warren Buffet would most likely be paying A LOT more in taxes if his proposals were implemented. Is that not ENOUGH?! He advocates HIM paying more in taxes not SOMEONE ELSE!!!

I greatly respect Warren Buffet because he is one of the last investors of his time. He is a builder. He takes downtrodden organizations out of favor and invests in them.

Contrast with the Jackass people who don't want to pay more who rip companies apart and ship jobs overseas all in the name of getting themselves a bigger bonus and then begrudging paying taxes. These guys rig the game so that they make their millions and amazingly, some of them actual criminals keep getting hired time after time. How do you explain that? Do you think the OWNERS of the company want that? As an OWNER, I will tell you they do not.

You don't want to get me started on what is wrong with American public corporation governance. It is better than it used to be but it is a rigged game for sure.

Posted on: 8/24 8:37 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Can you believe that Hillary and Bill have been stupid enough to think ...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

delispam wrote:
Quote:

sg44gold wrote:


Ha! Ha! Ha!

Protecting Top Secret and Highly Classified information is assinine.

Yea, right.

Stick your head back in the sand and vote for Bernie Sanders. And YOU will get the government you DESERVE.




Tell me how any of that information effected your life in the slightest? The only piece of information you actually care about is the political party of who held it.

Regarding elections and politics in general:

Let me know when the majority of your generation is comfortably retired. Then I might believe most ya'll have insight about finances and fixing the economy.


I am going to side with SG44Gold here. I know....I know.

I think it is somewhat questionable the impetus for investigating this...however...Here is a problem. It is valid to ask the question whether top secret information was stored on her server.

By her own admittance, she stated that she didn't secure delete emails from her system because "I don't understand that process in the least". Essentially if not verbatim her words in an interview not mine. If she REALLY does not understand the process behind wiping clean a hard drive (I don't believe this in the least however) then there is NO WAY she should have those on her server.

It is not true that a person would have gotten those secrets off of a secure file server at the state department. This is where people who are not computer/encryption literate fail to see a distinction. Hacking the SS numbers and personnel data of employees of the government is a world away from learning state secrets. It is. State secrets are encrypted and safe commensurate with the damage they could do.

For those who have worked with security clearances in the government how easy is it to walk out of your office with something classified? I venture to say pretty difficult and if it were found that you did you would be fired and face criminal prosecution. Clinton is no better than this.

Colin Powell also had a personal email account and a review of data on it should be reviewed. I don't care at what level you reside in the government you ought not be allowed to be careless with our country's secrets.

Do I care about Benghazi? Nope. But I do care that people are taking the proper precautions with our data....and it appears from the singing and dancing she is doing that she lacked the basic competency to understand what was needed to be done and as such probably shouldn't have had a private server. In this day and age I have no idea why you would ever need to have a private server.....EVER HEARD OF VPN?! Christ Almighty!!!!!

At the very least it legitimately calls into question her ability to be President in my opinion. More so than any issue with Benghazi.

Posted on: 8/21 1:29 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Georgia Southern
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
WOW! I read this thread and I now am pretty sure that Don Nehlen makes up the majority of this website's posters. No one and I mean NO ONE could talk up a mediocre MAC team as good as he could. Come on Don! You only need half a dozen user names on here.

I think the days of we as fans being concerned about the likes of Georgia Southern are over. If not you have no chance whatsoever of making a bowl. There will be less angst over playing Oklahoma. When we roll into Oklahoma it will be primarily how we are going to repeat the Fiesta Bowl...yadda....yadda.

Not to say that GS is a horrible team but come on guys. If we want to be "Big Time" we can't play up GS. This is a "Take Care of Business" game.

The big question is: Will we be able to take care of business with our vanilla offense and defense? If not, that can be a problem.

Navy beat them 52-19 last year.

Posted on: 8/21 9:15 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: WVU Football Thread for Things That Don't Need Their Own Thread
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

Sane wrote:
Lots of pretty walkways. Zero available parking.


I am surprised by two things...I think the renderer has things a little out of kilter.

First off, there are WAY too few Morgantown police officers with parking ticket books and the fans milling about with seemingly no place to go appear mockingly coherent and too physically astute to be attending a WVU football game.

Posted on: 8/20 2:52 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
When did rich people become such a sacred cow?


Yes. I really don't get it. I keep hearing the fiscal "conservatives" talk about how important it is to "balance" the budget. Then, when we declare war on Iraq and in Afghanistan we decide we would rather balloon the debt than increase taxes on the wealthy to pay for it.

As you know....I am not one of those that believes that the debt matters one iota. I just find it hypocritical that those that DO are so quick to abandon their ideals so that a guy making 1000-fold what they are making can keep his "lottery" money. I don't get it.

While I don't care about the debt, I do believe that we should give the balancing of the budget the old college try and definitely deficits matter. I believe that most of the inflation in the 2000s were attributable to this deficit spending. At the same time, the Fed, I am sure has at least some target as to the appropriate deficit the budget should be running to properly account for growth.

Posted on: 8/20 2:35 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

sg44gold wrote:
Quote:

brobison wrote:
Quote:

sg44gold wrote:
Nice to see we have Socialists on the Couch.

Do you understand what a top progressive tax rate of 90% does to an economy???

Wow. What has gone wrong with our education system?


Well...the last time we had it we became the greatest country on earth. Between 1945-1964 we had a top marginal tax rate of 90%. After 1964 the top was 70%

Open in new window

What do we see when it comes to GDP growth? I see a downward trend commensurate with the decrease in tax rates.

I think we should try it. I am not saying it will work but I hardly believe that it will ruin our economy. If you 90% the top 0.5% it would greatly help the funding of our budget and you fiscal conservatives would love that wouldn't you?


Stop it with this absolute hroseshit nonsense.

We were powerful because we were a capitalist free-market nation on the rise.

A-hole politicians were using the tax system to grab money.

Your point, if that is what you call it, is complete horseshit!


So you think that this funding that built the interstate highway and funded the development of the LASER and the space program is horseshit? OK. Well you have the right to your opinion. It is wrong but you have every right to it.

Posted on: 8/20 1:57 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
http://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/1268603053

Is this a Bernie Sanders web site?!

It doesn't really look like I match with much of anyone. Well, I kind of figured that.

Posted on: 8/20 12:56 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

delispam wrote:
Bernie Sanders.

People (not just me) are responding to what he has to say and showing up in large numbers to see what he's about. He's been flying under the cable news radar but yet he's been filling arenas larger than the one that held the Republican debate circus a couple weeks ago.

There is some speculation that he doesn't get the coverage the others do because he hasn't bought a ton of ad space/time and doesn't intend to at any time. That is bad for business as far as the media conglomerates (and their parent companies) are concerned.

He been winning in polls not sponsored by large corporate media. If you think the money in politics has gotten out of hand you should at least hear what he has to say even if you don't agree with %100 of it.

Any other Sanders supporters sitting on the couch?


Me. I took a test to determine which candidate's views were most like mine and it was clearly Bernie Sanders. Not really a Hillary fan. I don't see much from the Republicans. I hope he continues to gain momentum because he is speaking to the important issues.


Was this an on-line test? If so, can you post a link? I would like to take that test.

Posted on: 8/20 11:18 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

sg44gold wrote:
Nice to see we have Socialists on the Couch.

Do you understand what a top progressive tax rate of 90% does to an economy???

Wow. What has gone wrong with our education system?


Well...the last time we had it we became the greatest country on earth. Between 1945-1964 we had a top marginal tax rate of 90%. After 1964 the top was 70%

Open in new window

What do we see when it comes to GDP growth? I see a downward trend commensurate with the decrease in tax rates.

I think we should try it. I am not saying it will work but I hardly believe that it will ruin our economy. If you 90% the top 0.5% it would greatly help the funding of our budget and you fiscal conservatives would love that wouldn't you?

Posted on: 8/20 11:13 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Preseason depth chart
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

cgmounty1 wrote:
didn't he beat Clemson in a bowl game? Not his players, I get that, but he still did it. I think some people just can't wait for the next peice of drama to fall. But I guess it makes for entertainment.


Hey!

Stop letting the facts get in the way of a guy on here making a point. He was on a roll!

Posted on: 8/19 4:59 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Preseason depth chart
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

TheMac wrote:
Quote:

brobison wrote:
Quote:
Holgs is 18-20 in last three years w/ zero bowl wins, and now he's working for a guy that didn't hire him, and who also is coming from a school where football success is an absolute necessity.


RR was 20-17 after three seasons with no bowl wins....

Maybe Texas, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will leave the Big 12 and they will be replaced by Cincinnati, UConn and South Florida so that we can have an exact duplication of our comparison.



Yes he was, he was also employed by the guy who hired him.


Pretty sure RR didn't have a $4.6 million buyout so it is pretty expensive for that guy to get rid of Dana and to get HIS guy.

Posted on: 8/19 4:51 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Preseason depth chart
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:
Holgs is 18-20 in last three years w/ zero bowl wins, and now he's working for a guy that didn't hire him, and who also is coming from a school where football success is an absolute necessity.


RR was 20-17 after three seasons with no bowl wins....

Maybe Texas, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will leave the Big 12 and they will be replaced by Cincinnati, UConn and South Florida so that we can have an exact duplication of our comparison.


Posted on: 8/19 1:45 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Preseason depth chart
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

Sane wrote:
Quote:

WVUswim wrote:
This is a dumb question, but what is the differance between red shirt senior and regular senior?



A redshirt senior is a senior who has used up his redshirt year, so this is his last year in the program.

A regular senior didn't redshirt, so he could actually redshirt this year and come back next fall, assuming he won't have played more than 4 years in a 5-year period.


Done unless he gets a medical red shirt for another year or graduates and goes to a different school or if....

Posted on: 8/19 12:35 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Little League Softball World Series Scandal
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 11:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 3869
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:
Quote:

brobison wrote:
A simpler way to go is to simply make it a single or double elimination tournament. Then it is TRULY NEVER in your best interest to lose.

See what happens when Little League tries to get cute? It used to be elimination tournaments when I was young.

This is one thing that the world cup and FIFA,FIBA,Olympics gave us that is just stupid. In AAU they do this pool play crap so that they can guarantee teams a certain number of games. The guarantee tournaments beat out the elimination tournaments because the money goes to them. Who wants to pay $1000 to go have your kahunas kicked in and on your way home after one game?

As such....suck it baby!


If by FIFA you are referring to the World Cup finals, I don't think the comparison is fair. You won't see a team in the World Cup throw a game for a number of reasons. First, the players are getting exposure to professional clubs all over the world, and want to do well individually because it could result in a huge salary upgrade for many of them. Second, the last games in group play are played simultaneously, so none of the teams know the result needed to go through automatically. Even if they get updates on the other game, they don't know the result and don't know what they need to go through. Every World Cup there are two teams who are tied in the last game of the round robin and who would likely both go through if the results stood, yet one of them scores because they aren't certain. When Landon Donovan scored the goal against Algeria in extra time in 2010, the US went from third place in the group to first place in the group "if the results stood," which they did In other words, both teams in the other game, which was being played at the same time, were likely to go through until he scored, which eliminated one of them. It actually adds a lot of excitement for the fans because things keep changing for all four teams in the group with every goal scored.


Really? Or is it just because the situation hasn't arisen? I do agree that playing the last games at the same time HELP, they can't really contain the situation completely.

I think we can ALL agree that the situation that happens here is a rare event. An EXTREMELY rare event...but do you seriously believe that a World Cup player THROWING a game where the end result is a better chance of winning an actual World Cup is bad?!!! WTF?! I guarantee you that IF I owned a team and I thought I could win a championship I would hire those players that made that possible. I absolutely would hire a player smart enough to throw a game to win a championship.

In fact I would lose every game if it gave me a better chance in the end. As a Pirate fan, I am already advocating a strategy of possibly throwing games in September....if possible to give as rested a team as I can to get to the World Series. This type of stuff happens all of the time in professional sports.

As for teams doing it, Cameroon threw every (?) game in the last World Cup so I guess there were no professionals on that team. So the fact that players wouldn't do it is a little hollow.

Posted on: 8/18 2:24 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 



 Top
(1) 2 3 4 ... 193 »




Login
Username:

Password:

remember me





Copyright © 2004-2011 wemustignitethiscouch.com All Rights Reserved