Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

mugtang

We’re in a full blown trade war

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Akkula said:

Japan's problem is they hate immigrants and sex so they are spending all that stimulus on Depends for old people. 

This has to be the first time you said something funny and somewhat true!   Grats!  hA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

I’ll give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who graduated from an Ivy League school

I used to be impressed but so many I have met are so unimpressive.  I now look at them with suspicion they are some kind of socially stunted retard with a high IQ and no common sense.  I am sure the high functioning Ivy league guys aren't what I run into in rural nevada though.  HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HAA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

This has to be the first time you said something funny and somewhat true!   Grats!  hA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

I have spent a little time in Japan , specifically Okinawa. That Island I think has the most people over 100 years old than anywhere ekse in the world. It’s the low fat, high protein diet, made up mostly of fish and vegetables. I love the people there. It was an amazing place to visit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

You know that president Trump has his masters degree from the Wharton school of business at the University of Pensylvania. They are one of the most prestigious business schools in the world. They don’t just hand out degrees to anyone who is willing to pay tuition. Calling president Trump uneducated, makes you look like a an uneducated fool.  

Correction. He has his Undergraduate Business Degree from Wharton. Which is not as impressive but saying he has a business degree from Wharton makes people assume its an MBA but he doesn't have one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, tspoke said:

Correction. He has his Undergraduate Business Degree from Wharton. Which is not as impressive but saying he has a business degree from Wharton makes people assume its an MBA but he doesn't have one.

I stand corrected. I assumed it was an MBA 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

I’ll give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who graduated from an Ivy League school

Unless it's in the humanities?

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

You know that president Trump has his masters degree from the Wharton school of business at the University of Pensylvania. They are one of the most prestigious business schools in the world. They don’t just hand out degrees to anyone who is willing to pay tuition. Calling president Trump uneducated, makes you look like a an uneducated fool.  

Let me guess. You don't believe in "fake news" and therefore get all of yours from Sean Hannity and Fox and Friends?

President George W. Simpleton graduated from Yale. What do Simpleton and Trump have in common besides having been elected (I use the term loosely) president? Being from rich families with pull to get them in and through prestigious universities.

See this: https://www.salon.com/2011/05/03/donald_trump_wharton/ And this: http://www.businessinsider.com/legacy-kids-have-an-admissions-advantage-2013-6

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

I used to be impressed but so many I have met are so unimpressive.  I now look at them with suspicion they are some kind of socially stunted retard with a high IQ and no common sense.  I am sure the high functioning Ivy league guys aren't what I run into in rural nevada though.  HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HAA!

I'm not sure I would go that far but that's probably because I haven't had business with very many Ivy League grads. However, I think there might be a similar public mis-perception as there is with attorneys. I've associated with dozens who graduated from UCLA and USC law schools, both of which are ranked in the top 20 in the country in most polls, and have wondered whether some of them didn't hire a surrogate to take the California bar exam for them. Honestly, the marginal competence of about 1/3 of them is shocking. We're talking Trumpian competence here.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Let me guess. You don't believe in "fake news" and therefore get all of yours from Sean Hannity and Fox and Friends?

President George W. Simpleton graduated from Yale. What do Simpleton and Trump have in common besides having been elected (I use the term loosely) president? Being from rich families with pull to get them in and through prestigious universities.

See this: https://www.salon.com/2011/05/03/donald_trump_wharton/ And this: http://www.businessinsider.com/legacy-kids-have-an-admissions-advantage-2013-6

I never watch Hannitty or Fox and Friends. I don't watch cable news period. I get the large majority of my news from the Wall Street Journal. It is one of the last remaining sources of professional unbiased journalism left, unlike the two sources you have linked above. 

It is no secret that kids from wealthy families get accepted into the most prestigious universities, more so than poor minorities, I have never argued otherwise. 

Are you saying that Yale and Penn participate in academic dishonesty by letting the kids of wealthy parents graduate without earning it? That is a big claim to make. Do you have evidence to back that claim up, or are you just pulling this out of  your ass as I suspect you are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

I never watch Hannitty or Fox and Friends. I don't watch cable news period. I get the large majority of my news from the Wall Street Journal. It is one of the last remaining sources of professional unbiased journalism left, unlike the two sources you have linked above. 

It is no secret that kids from wealthy families get accepted into the most prestigious universities, more so than poor minorities, I have never argued otherwise. 

Are you saying that Yale and Penn participate in academic dishonesty by letting the kids of wealthy parents graduate without earning it? That is a big claim to make. Do you have evidence to back that claim up, or are you just pulling this out of  your ass as I suspect you are. 

No they've earned it. They've definitely earned it. When you are an alum of an Ivy League school, right about when you are of child rearing age, they start hitting you up for fund raising with the only slightly coded message that if you give generously you will earn those kids entry into the university. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

I'm not sure I would go that far but that's probably because I haven't had business with very many Ivy League grads. However, I think there might be a similar public mis-perception as there is with attorneys. I've associated with dozens who graduated from UCLA and USC law schools, both of which are ranked in the top 20 in the country in most polls, and have wondered whether some of them didn't hire a surrogate to take the California bar exam for them. Honestly, the marginal competence of about 1/3 of them is shocking. We're talking Trumpian competence here.

I've been around a lot of Ivy League grads, and those places pump out plenty of dolts. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bornontheblue said:

I never watch Hannitty or Fox and Friends. I don't watch cable news period. I get the large majority of my news from the Wall Street Journal. It is one of the last remaining sources of professional unbiased journalism left, unlike the two sources you have linked above. 

It is no secret that kids from wealthy families get accepted into the most prestigious universities, more so than poor minorities, I have never argued otherwise. 

Are you saying that Yale and Penn participate in academic dishonesty by letting the kids of wealthy parents graduate without earning it? That is a big claim to make. Do you have evidence to back that claim up, or are you just pulling this out of  your ass as I suspect you are. 

1.The Wall Street Journal is a quality publication but don't fool yourself. It is also considerably right wing politically and definitely pro-business and as such, isn't entirely objective about Republican presidents.

2. On your final point, I'll clarify by relating a story about UCLA law school. Before becoming self employed, I worked for an agency of the state of California which would bring in summer interns from various law schools to assist in doing legal research on issues before us. One such intern had completed two years and had her final year to go. She did a considerable amount of work for me and I liked her very much. At the end of the summer I took her to lunch as thanks for having been an enthusiastic intern (contrary to a few we had from UCLA) and it was clear she wanted to have a heart to heart talk. Among the questions was whether I thought she could be a quality lawyer and I asked why she had doubts. She said she had barely gotten in to UCLA and had been on probation all of her first two years. I was very surprised to hear that because she seemed plenty bright but she was very concerned that she wouldn't be able to pass the bar. Toward the end of the conversation she acknowledged that but for being being female and a member of a racial minority she wouldn't have gotten to where she then was. She did graduate and did pass the bar and has had a reasonably good legal career. However, my point is just like public universities have often given special preference for such minorities, I think Ivy League schools have given similarly special preference for legacies. Can I prove that? Yeah, right. Just like that young woman would never publicly repeat what she told me in confidence, the Dubyas and Trumps of the world would never admit it if they got special preferences. Heck, in Trump's case, we know for a virtual fact that he's LIED about what kind of student he was at the Wharton School.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, renoskier said:

Including these two?

Image result for hillary clinton

Sure, 

They are both very intelligent people

Aside form his poor personal decisions , Bill Clinton did a pretty good job while in office after a shaky start. 

The economy was doing very well, we actually had budget surpluses, he lowered taxes. He actually worked with the opposing party and signed several pieces of very good bipartisan legislation while he was in office. He was the last Democrat president we had that could connect with people in the industrial heartland, or the Midwest and Southern states. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

I've been around a lot of Ivy League grads, and those places pump out plenty of dolts. 

I've worked with only three Harvard Law grads. Two are outstanding lawyers while the third stopped practicing law to go into politics two decades ago. The first two are atypical attorneys in being salt of the earth guys while the third is a total prick. How he's managed to get elected and appointed to so many positions is beyond me. That JD from Harvard must really impress some folks.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

1.The Wall Street Journal is a quality publication but don't fool yourself. It is also considerably right wing politically and definitely pro-business and as such, isn't entirely objective about Republican presidents.

2. On your final point, I'll clarify by relating a story about UCLA law school. Before becoming self employed, I worked for an agency of the state of California which would bring in summer interns from various law schools to assist in doing legal research on issues before us. One such intern had completed two years and had her final year to go. She did a considerable amount of work for me and I liked her very much. At the end of the summer I took her to lunch as thanks for having been an enthusiastic intern (contrary to a few we had from UCLA) and it was clear she wanted to have a heart to heart talk. Among the questions was whether I thought she could be a quality lawyer and I asked why she had doubts. She said she had barely gotten in to UCLA and had been on probation all of her first two years. I was very surprised to hear that because she seemed plenty bright but she was very concerned that she wouldn't be able to pass the bar. Toward the end of the conversation she acknowledged that but for being being female and a member of a racial minority she wouldn't have gotten to where she then was. She did graduate and did pass the bar and has had a reasonably good legal career. However, my point is just like public universities have often given special preference for such minorities, I think Ivy League schools have given similarly special preference for legacies. Can I prove that? Yeah, right. Just like that young woman would never publicly repeat what she told me in confidence, the Dubyas and Trumps of the world would never admit it if they got special preferences. Heck, in Trump's case, we know for a virtual fact that he's LIED about what kind of student he was at the Wharton School.

1. The WSJ editorial section has slight political biases , but is still a very professional publication that reports the news in a fair manner.  The only place I see where they take a political stance, or a pro business stance is on the editorial page which I usually skip. I read the WSJ most mornings and they have articles on things other than business all the time. 

2. Anecdotal examples are far from conclusive evidence that colleges look the other way as the kids of rich donors skate through college without doing the work.  I will assume the schools are academically honest until actual evidence leads me to conclude otherwise. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

Sure, 

They are both very intelligent people

Aside form his poor personal decisions , Bill Clinton did a pretty good job while in office after a shaky start. 

The economy was doing very well, we actually had budget surpluses, he lowered taxes. He actually worked with the opposing party and signed several pieces of very good bipartisan legislation while he was in office. He was the last Democrat president we had that could connect with people in the industrial heartland, or the Midwest and Southern states. 

 

Bill Clinton oozes charisma and is from the south. That helped him connect with the industrial heartland. His wife is the opposite in the charisma department which is why she lost. 

There are only two things I can't stand in this world: people who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, bornontheblue said:

1. The WSJ editorial section has slight political biases , but is still a very professional publication that reports the news in a fair manner.  The only place I see where they take a political stance, or a pro business stance is on the editorial page which I usually skip. I read the WSJ most mornings and they have articles on things other than business all the time. 

2. Anecdotal examples are far from conclusive evidence that colleges look the other way as the kids of rich donors skate through college without doing the work.  I will assume the schools are academically honest until actual evidence leads me to conclude otherwise. 

I haven't asserted any "conclusive evidence." As to Trump, stories which included questions addressed to some of his classmates generally indicate he was perceived as having been aloof but nice enough and a decent student and I don't doubt he did the two years of coursework needed to earn his bachelor's degree from the Wharton business school. However, contrary to his boasting about having been one of the best students in the graduating class, the "evidence" such as it is shows that to be inaccurate: 

http://www.thedp.com/article/2017/02/trump-academics-at-wharton

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

Several problems of which that and no immigration at all combine to have a very few supporting very many.

They continue to do the same thing over and over which is to try to spend their way out of recession which always has the same outcome.  A very short term limited gain followed by long term pain as the spending is always accompanied by borrowing so a year down the road you are worse off than you were at the bottom of the original recession.

Our 2009 recession is a grand canyon style example of the same problem.  Taking on over 4 trillion in debt didn't do much for the economy, although you could argue it softened the landing.  Yet no one can argue that our country is not long term worse off because of that spending.

I think at some point, we have to take our medicine for our poor financial choices.  Companies will have to fail, there will have to be adjustments to spending, it will be hard on some people.

Image result for jim mcmahon with lavell edwardsImage result for byu logoImage result for byu boise state end zone hail maryc07489bb8bb7f5bad3672877f8b04f34.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...