Deep-fried beer invented in Texas Telegraph (hat tip reader Martin W)
Old star wallows in ‘steam bath‘ BBC (hat tip reader John M)
Man Lost $1.4 Million Corot Painting After Boozing, Suit Says Bloomberg (hat tip reader Buzz Potamkin). There is a second story on this matter up, but this version is remarkably unclear (it may be revised by the time readers access it).
Mervyn Kinkead crosses Irish Sea in a bath BBC (hat tip reader John M)
‘Charitable’ Behavior Found in Bacteria Science Daily (hat tip reader John M)
Latest Attempt To Create Federal Journalism Shield Law May Carve Wikileaks Out Of The Protections TechDirt
Will Russia’s Bloggers Survive Censorship Push? Der Spiegel (hat tip Richard Smith)
Child’s Ordeal Shows Risks of Psychosis Drugs for Young New York Times. Separate but related: I’ve noticed a subset of people under 40 who have thinking patterns that I don’t see in my age cohort or people older than me, of a difficulty discriminating between what is important and what isn’t, and a tendency to look almost obsessively for information on a topic with no particular strategy at hand (there is a certain stage in information gathering when milling about is inevitable; you don’t know what you don’t know, but once you have learned a bit, most people start targeting their queries. These people seem unable to get past the milling about stage). I’m not sure if this is the result of excessive multitasking or meds, but I’ve seen a fair bit of this starting maybe 3 years ago.
Poll Suggests Unpopular Individual Mandate Hurts Health Care Reform’s Popularity Firedoglake
German military report: Peak oil could lead to collapse of democracy Raw Story (hat tip reader John D)
Women Are Dying Out On Wall Street Clusterstock (hat tip reader John D) and the longer form version, Casualties of the Crisis: Stress, Sexism and Layoffs Thin the Ranks of Women on Wall Street Fins (hat tip reader
SEC Probes Canceled Trades Wall Street Journal
Economy Avoids Recession Relapse as Data Can’t Get Much Worse Bloomberg. Reader Michael D hones in on the truly remarkable lead sentence: “The U.S. economy is so bad that the chance of avoiding a double dip back into recession may actually be pretty good” as “Amazing double speak and balls!!”
Germans show signs of taking the risk-averse route of Japan Financial Times
Hedge Fund Manager’s Secret Insider Trading Code: “How’s The Weather In Healthcare?” Clusterstock (hat tip reader Francois T). Get this:
A former hedge fund manager basically just bragged that he traded on inside information and doesn’t mind paying the SEC a fraction of his profits on said (alleged) insider trade.
A Dream House After All Mark Thoma. A defense of homeownership. Frankly, I’ve owned and rented. The hassle re renting is the landlord can get flaky on you. But if you have a stable and decent landlord, then the optionality of renting works in your favor, and the ease of exit is a huge plus (and let us not forget there are also such things as flaky, even batshit crazy, co-op and condo associations, a plague of urban “homeowners”). And my rental in Sydney was fantastic.
Antidote du jour:
43 comments
Comments are closed.
The HFTs have nothing to worry about. Getting wacked by the SEC is like being slapped by a wet tissue.
I’ve noticed the same problem that you have, Yves, with younger people and a lack of what I would call common sense or discernment. They are unable to cut through the fog.
I doubt it has to do with medication, as many of those I’ve met have led idyllic lives as the top-of-their-class performer. Instead, I think that it has to do with the breakdown in what we used to call “education,” but now is more akin to “training,” and the pressure to perform from an early age.
Let me explain: these days, parents are concerned about building a child’s resume for college starting in preschool. Children are raised in a perfectionist atmosphere where mistakes are considered a disaster, and only one, straight path is considered acceptable. These poor kids are terrified of making a mistake: they are quite paralyzed with fear of making a wrong choice. They bog down in sorting processes because of a profound fear of going the wrong way, and no decision at all seems safer. Of course, that leads to failure every time – or the cosmos makes the decision for you.
But I increasingly see an unwillingness to make decisions, an inability to sort through options based on lack of practice making large and small decisions. They can’t weigh options because they just don’t have the practice. They were raised that way.
By the way, it looks like that tiger is about to win a snowball fight the hard way, doesn’t it? He’s lovely.
The whole higher educational system is oriented toward the production of one kind of tunnel vision or another. Philosophy, law, economics, English, almost all of them favor students who are virtuosos at making ingenious arguments regardless of the real-world relevance of the arguments — what has been called “mad dog rationality”.
It is hardly surprising that milling about is on the rise. All the main institutions of democratic nations are on the verge of collapse. It seems that Plato had something to say about this.
A house is not an investment nor a college degree a career stepping stone.
Education should show one how to think, and should not be about increasing one’s lifetime earning.
On kids having “difficulty discriminating between what is important and what isn’t.”
I have nothing except my opinion to base this on, and not much direct contact with young people these days, but it seems to me that the world they are living in trains them to lack focus. Hundreds of TV channels with much of the content being purely voyeuristic, videos with short fast cuts, video games, Youtube, Google anything before you attempt to think about it, ubiquitous cell phones, texting, ipods. I think it is affecting my ability to focus. For young people flooded this way in their formative years, I find it no surprise that they might be a bit flighty and have some difficulty keeping a thought focused.
RE: “U.S. Avoids Recession as Data Can’t Get Much Worse”
This Bloomberg article wins the award for the most optomistic cheerleading comments compiled in one short article…also the most out of context quotes in one place.
Interesting that no opinions from businessmen on the Main St front lines were included in the article. No box occupants were quoted. No one on extended unemployment was consulted. No one working longer and harder for less money was asked. No one with a job offer in Alaska but unable to move because their home in NY cannot be sold even at a steep discount. No small businessmen that have been bankrupted by giganto-marts selling only items at manipulated price points.
What did the citizens expect Bernanke to say? ‘The economy is in the tank and getting worse’? Don’t hold your breath waiting for that one. How many examples of governments declaring ‘we are bankrupt and are handing over power to a constitutional assembly’ are there?
When almost all asset class prices are being controlled by the central bankers and gov fiscal policy why would economic indicators continue to matter?
Now comes an inkling that stats propping up MBS (actual real estate sales prices vs reported re sales prices) might be fudged as well. Would confirmation of this story surprise anyone?
“Are Existing Home Prices Overrepresented By Up To 40%?”
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/are-existing-home-prices-overrepresented-40
RE: Tiger photo… People that are owned by house cats will understand the look on the tiger’s face. Serious business.
Great photo Yves!
I agree that home ownership isn’t for everyone but neither is renting. The point is we should be able to choose and not be punished for it on either side. The goal of home ownership requires discipline, foresight, planning. The expectation that all should be able to get into a home is just as silly as all will make fortunes in the stock market.
There is a growing chorus out there that home ownership should not be among ordinary people’s expected goals in life, that it isn’t reasonable as an expectation. Is this becoming a meme as a misdirected backlash to the obscene sprawl and nodoc loans? I suppose that means that only the super special, intelligent and wealthy get that opportunity to chose then? Owning a home should be an obtainable goal for those who wish it to be. It doesn’t mean though that everyone can have the exact same lifestyle as a home owner with heavy emphasis on luxury, giant homes with the lifestyles to match.
Home ownership once upon a time was not only obtainable but didn’t require mortgaging ones entire future.Even people of very modest means could very easily do it on one income. Some thrifty people could buy a home outright and did.
Perhaps the expectation of living like rock stars in McMansions with every conceivable luxury is the problem. More modest housing that serves the purpose of shelter and a comfortable lifestyle wasn’t on the agenda for speculative builders or the FIRE sector.
Those who must work in large cities probably have difficulty with the point of view of those who choose home ownership with a more modest lifestyle and/or life in a rural area. It takes all kinds of people to make this world go ’round but we all have the exact same needs as humans. Shelter is one of those. How we shelter ourselves and our families is the issue. Home ownership is an opportunity if one chooses it as a lifestyle. That opportunity is what is at issue and if it is to be circumvented as yet another erosion of personal choices and freedoms in favor once again of those who twisted this economic lynch-pin into something ugly and predatory.
I’m a fanatical renter, and I don’t think that homeowners calculate the amount of labor and grief that’s involved in ownership. Some people enjoy (for example) remodeling and lawn care, which I absolutely don’t, so they don’t count it as labor or time lost the way I do. But no one sane enjoys the nuisance kinds of work like pest control, plumbing repair, house painting, roofing, furnace troubleshooting, and other emergency response that landlords and owners have to do.
i enjoy the “nuisance” work. it keeps me sane :) I needed a house and especially a large garden to take care of. Very theraputic and breaks me away from my endless hours at work.
As for the obscessive info searching. With so much info available at the touch of your fingers..and so much BS out there from both sides of the fence (on debated issues) might be hard for them to make a decision.
Different but related, I have a horrible short term memory now from work, always being asked to shift gears completely from one task to another each “critical” and demanding intensive focus and break neck speed.
since russ hasnt shown up with a comment on the german military peak oil report ill provide some additional studies:
http://gregor.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Global-Crude-Oil-Supply-2002-2010-in-kbpd1.jpg
DOE Saying Possible Peak “Liquid Fuels” by 2011 –
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6337
http://www.eia.doe.gov/conference/2009/session3/Sweetnam.pdf
see page 8 for “unidenified” oil needed…
• The Oil Crunch: a Wake-up Call for the UK Economy
http://peakoiltaskforce.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/final-report-uk-itpoes_report_the-oil-crunch_feb20101.pdf
A report from the American Joint Forces Command published March 15 predicts that in 2015, the world capacity for petroleum prouction could be 10 million barrels per day less than the demand.
The Joint Operating Environment 2010 (United States Joint Forces Command)
http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/joe2010.pdf
Sustainable Energy Security: Strategic Risks and Opportunities for Business (insurer Lloyds of London with Chatham House, June),
http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/files/16720_0610_froggatt_lahn.pdf
I’m trying to post one right now that’s getting caught in the filter apparently. (It says “awaiting moderation.” WTF?)
It’s funny how many among the non-elites keep denying Peak Oil even as it’s clear that the elites have been preparing for it for awhile.
As Halliburton CEO in the 90s Cheney was already retooling that company to become a disaster capitalist predator of the Peak Oil savannah.
That “mission”, at least, was certainly “accomplished”.
“It’s funny how many among the non-elites keep denying Peak Oil even as it’s clear that the elites have been preparing for it for awhile.”
No practical, common sense person could be in denial that the resources of the earth are finite. Malthus pretty well confirmed this a very long time ago and the peak oilers, peak waterers, peak agriculture, ad infinum, have simply carried his message into the present.
IMO, the only people that could be in denial re peak oil are those in the faith based contingent, believing that there will be a divine intervention from on high that will save us from our curent habits of conspicuous consumerism.
I don’t believe that the majority of people deny that peak oil is in our future. I believe that the majority of people feel, and rightly so, that they did not create this problem and are not able, or willing, to fix it. Ford, Edison, Firestone, and friends, discussed the problems that they had created with their inventions…but even they did not have solutions to the problems that they had created.
Admission of the problem of peak oil does not come with a sure fire fix, iows. Paradoxes, where human nature is involved, are common.
Yes, and representatives of that faith-based contingent often manifest here, for example.
Well, I’ll try my earlier comment again (though I know Bates won’t like it if it posts this time):
Re insurance racket mandate (“protection” stick-up)
Why Democrats fought so hard to include this provision which could have been replaced by far less objectionable alternatives is beyond comprehension.
If by that he means he doesn’t understand the substantive reason why they wanted to do it, then it’s only “beyond comprehension” to anybody dense enough to still think the Democrats are less of an organized crime racket than the Republicans are. (That reason would be, they did it to help the insurance rackets further loot the people.)
If he means he doesn’t understand how they could have been politically incompetent enough to do this unilaterally and not either make the Republicans share responsibility or else drop it, I concur. The Dems are evil but also strategically and tactically often very incompetent.
Re Peak Oil and democracy:
There’s little to no chance oil will be apportioned in the future in any way other than the way it’s apportioned now, by ability to pay, with no rational distribution criteria whatsoever.
Of course, contrary to the drivel cited in that piece, that state of affairs already has nothing whatsoever to do with “free markets” or “democracy”, but rather with their subversion.
In a real free market oil, a finite natural resource, would never have been privatized, nor would its price be left to “the market”. It might sound paradoxical, but in a real free market things which cannot be rationally and equitably distributed by the market wouldn’t be left to it, where they inevitably become market failures and corrupt the entire market.
And in a real democracy such a critical strategic resource would have remained owned and closely overseen by the public.
So the article contains totalitarian code. When they say “Peak Oil may lead to anti-free market, anti-democratic rationing”, it’s really a signal that “we the elite had better step up our ongoing anti-free market, anti-democratic rationing by wealth and power, since oil supply is soon going to be constrained.”
Re Wikileaks:
Here’s another example of a stark defining line, which separates true citizen advocates and activists from elitist hacks.
Even among the “true progressives” who have rejected Obama, there’s been a lot of visceral hostility toward Assange and Wikileaks. Even they blanch at the proposition that the elites and their system have no right to ANY secrets; that ALL elite secrets are the property of the people and must be dragged into the sunshine, however much these criminals resist the shining of light onto their crimes.
So here we see how liberals, even the best of them, are indelibly elitist. After all, what’s the difference between a socialist or anarchist and even the best liberal? The former wants true democracy and worker control of the means of production; the liberal still wants elite control, elite monopoly of the produce, and then some trickling down.
The only difference between the Obama hack and the “true progressive” is that the latter may be sincere about wanting trickle-down to work. But he still has his “Obama Line” which he won’t cross. At that line he flips and sides with the elites. The elite monopoly of secrets is clearly part of that line for many of them, and the way Wikileaks challenges it goes over that line.
Attempter, I for one do not think bates is a bad actor, maybe one that has lived their life to the ground *lied* before them and not a free-rider, this is a distinction with a difference.
One cannot hope to change what has transpired by vilifying everyone..eh.
Skippy…I for one have much to answer for…but, wish for better out comes for all. Mea culpa…ignorance is not an excuse although I strive to learn and if such enlightenment ever is achieved for all…I would have to retreat to a isolated spot…for I am so infected as too be a vector for reintroduction of which you lament.
PS. may I have the opportunity to fish and some times put one on my plate, if I give back to its origins, for what I’ve taken.
That was just a throwaway reference to his odd criticism from the other day
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/09/links-9110.html#comment-158160
since I repeated the sin in this comment.
That comment wasn’t originally a reply to anyone but a stand-alone which kept inexplicably getting caught in the moderation filter. I wish I knew why.
So I tried to repost it as a reply and chucked in those added prefatory sentences. But it still got flagged and didn’t appear till today, while the original never did.
I guess I shouldn’t make a fuss, but I really do care about that Wikileaks point.
Not everyone of Christian Faith should be lumped together in the same camp. Most Christians believe there is a great tribulation coming. Not all believe that they or anyone else will escape this coming tribulation via the much espoused pre-tribulation rapture. In fact some of us believe the idea of a pre-trib rapture to be one of the biggest lies to be thrust upon what has become an extremely Nationalistic Christian nation dangerously susceptible to a fascism being promoted by a corporate/money-party owned/controlled media. As a result of my beliefs I am trying to obtain property owned outright to grow food, raise animals, save seeds etc. However my entire family is and will continue to be passport ready, including all the babies, for such a time that we feel the need to leave the United States of America. Not sure where we would be going. I figure we will know at the appointed time where that “safer place” will be.
Re insurance racket mandate (“protection” stick-up)
Why Democrats fought so hard to include this provision which could have been replaced by far less objectionable alternatives is beyond comprehension.
If by that he means he doesn’t understand the substantive reason why they wanted to do it, then it’s only “beyond comprehension” to anybody stupid enough to still think the Democrats are less of an organized crime racket than the Republicans are. (That reason would be, they did it to help the insurance rackets further loot the people.)
If he means he doesn’t understand how they could have been politically stupid enough to do this unilaterally and not either make the Republicans share responsibility or else drop it, I concur. The Dems are evil but also strategically and tactically often very stupid.
Re Peak Oil and democracy:
There’s little to no chance oil will be apportioned in the future in any way other than the way it’s apportioned now, by ability to pay, with no rational distribution criteria whatsoever.
Of course, contrary to the drivel cited in that piece, that state of affairs already has nothing whatsoever to do with “free markets” or “democracy”, but rather with their subversion.
In a real free market oil, a finite natural resource, would never have been privatized, nor would its price be left to “the market”. It might sound paradoxical, but in a real free market things which cannot be rationally and equitably distributed by the market wouldn’t be left to it, where they inevitably become market failures and corrupt the entire market.
And in a real democracy such a critical strategic resource would have remained owned and closely overseen by the public.
So the article contains totalitarian code. When they say “Peak Oil may lead to anti-free market, anti-democratic rationing”, it’s really a signal that “we the elite had better step up our ongoing anti-free market, anti-democratic rationing by wealth and power, since oil supply is soon going to be constrained.” .
Re Wikileaks:
Here’s another example of a stark defining line, which separates true citizen advocates and activists from elitist hacks.
Even among the “true progressives” who have rejected Obama, there’s been a lot of visceral hostility toward Assange and Wikileaks. Even they blanch at the proposition that the elites and their system have no right to ANY secrets; that ALL elite secrets are the property of the people and must be dragged into the sunshine, however much these criminals resist the shining of light onto their crimes.
So here we see how liberals, even the best of them, are indelibly elitist. After all, what’s the difference between a socialist or anarchist and even the best liberal? The former wants true democracy and worker control of the means of production; the liberal still wants elite control, elite monopoly of the produce, and then some trickling down.
The only difference between the Obama hack and the “true progressive” is that the latter may be sincere about wanting trickle-down to work. But he still has his “Obama Line” which he won’t cross. At that line he flips and sides with the elites. The elite monopoly of secrets is clearly part of that line for many of them, and the way Wikileaks challenges it goes over that line.
re: Child’s Ordeal Shows Risks of Psychosis Drugs for Young
Yves, when you were young, it was *expensive* to float propaganda. Now, any pint-sized company, organization, or basement crank can put out a respectable media campaign for pennies.
I think the “milling about” you mention is actually an effort to distill useful information from FUD. If you pick any given topic with even a small measure of political or economic stake, you will find reams (hah, anachronism, that.) of data that contest the point. Everything from climate to food quality to law to behavioral studies.
“True” is no longer what is listed in the Britannica, now it’s mob rule.
Was there more about this behavior in that article? All I saw was some sad kids who are medicated (unnatural) in an attempt to make them go quietly along with urban (unnatural) indoor (unnatural) living in estranged nuclear families (unnatural).
Why shouldn’t they be weird?
My whole life is weird. By rights, I should be living in a hut, with a stick, eating herbs and the occasional dead herbivore, breeding shortly after adolescence, and dying shortly after my teeth wear out.
If you hurry, you can join yours truly to become the second member of ‘Stone Age Living Is Good’ (SALIG) society.
Re: SALIG philosophy
When Gen. Curtiss LeMay suggested bombing people back to the stone age, was he trying to do them a favor?
I favor the voluntary approach.
Re insurance racket mandate (“protection” stick-up)
Why Democrats fought so hard to include this provision which could have been replaced by far less objectionable alternatives is beyond comprehension.
If by that he means he doesn’t understand the substantive reason why they wanted to do it, then it’s only “beyond comprehension” to anybody dense enough to still think the Democrats are less of an organized crime racket than the Republicans are. (That reason would be, they did it to help the insurance rackets further loot the people.)
If he means he doesn’t understand how they could have been politically incompetent enough to do this unilaterally and not either make the Republicans share responsibility or else drop it, I concur. The Dems are evil but also strategically and tactically often very incompetent.
Re Peak Oil and democracy:
There’s little to no chance oil will be apportioned in the future in any way other than the way it’s apportioned now, by ability to pay, with no rational distribution criteria whatsoever.
Of course, contrary to the drivel cited in that piece, that state of affairs already has nothing whatsoever to do with “free markets” or “democracy”, but rather with their subversion.
In a real free market oil, a finite natural resource, would never have been privatized, nor would its price be left to “the market”. It might sound paradoxical, but in a real free market things which cannot be rationally and equitably distributed by the market wouldn’t be left to it, where they inevitably become market failures and corrupt the entire market.
And in a real democracy such a critical strategic resource would have remained owned and closely overseen by the public.
So the article contains totalitarian code. When they say “Peak Oil may lead to anti-free market, anti-democratic rationing”, it’s really a signal that “we the elite had better step up our ongoing anti-free market, anti-democratic rationing by wealth and power, since oil supply is soon going to be constrained.”
Re Wikileaks:
Here’s another example of a stark defining line, which separates true citizen advocates and activists from elitist hacks.
Even among the “true progressives” who have rejected Obama, there’s been a lot of visceral hostility toward Assange and Wikileaks. Even they blanch at the proposition that the elites and their system have no right to ANY secrets; that ALL elite secrets are the property of the people and must be dragged into the sunshine, however much these criminals resist the shining of light onto their crimes.
So here we see how liberals, even the best of them, are indelibly elitist. After all, what’s the difference between a socialist or anarchist and even the best liberal? The former wants true democracy and worker control of the means of production; the liberal still wants elite control, elite monopoly of the produce, and then some trickling down.
The only difference between the Obama hack and the “true progressive” is that the latter may be sincere about wanting trickle-down to work. But he still has his “Obama Line” which he won’t cross. At that line he flips and sides with the elites. The elite monopoly of secrets is clearly part of that line for many of them, and the way Wikileaks challenges it goes over that line.
Peak oil must be the reason why the DOD, being the largest consumer in the world, rather ‘prefers’ staying close to its suppliers; Irak, 12% of world’s oil reserves
Also owned and rented. Buying a house is a combination of long-term savings/investment and housing. But it requires a longer-term commitment, good timing, and good job prospects. If you can buy low and stay in one place without worrying about losing your job, buying is a good deal. Otherwise you’re much better off renting.
The problem is that people have been buying high-priced assets since about 1998. They’ve been doing it with too much leverage since 2000 or so. After about 2003, they were buying into a bubble using leverage, a particularly bad idea with any asset.
My tween kids think it’s boring as hell when I talk to them about economics and finance, but I figure there isn’t going to be a better time to stick buy low/sell high into their brains. They aren’t going to learn that in school.
Re Peak Oil and democracy:
There’s little to no chance oil will be apportioned in the future in any way other than the way it’s apportioned now, by ability to pay, with no rational distribution criteria whatsoever.
Of course, contrary to the drivel cited in that piece, that state of affairs already has nothing whatsoever to do with “free markets” or “democracy”, but rather with their subversion.
In a real free market oil, a finite natural resource, would never have been privatized, nor would its price be left to “the market”. It might sound paradoxical, but in a real free market things which cannot be rationally and equitably distributed by the market wouldn’t be left to it, where they inevitably become market failures and corrupt the entire market.
And in a real democracy such a critical strategic resource would have remained owned and closely overseen by the public.
So the article contains totalitarian code. When they say “Peak Oil may lead to anti-free market, anti-democratic rationing”, it’s really a signal that “we the elite had better step up our ongoing anti-free market, anti-democratic rationing by wealth and power, since oil supply is soon going to be constrained.”
Re Wikileaks:
Here’s another example of a stark defining line, which separates true citizen advocates and activists from elitist hacks.
Even among the “true progressives” who have rejected Obama, there’s been a lot of visceral hostility toward Assange and Wikileaks. Even they blanch at the proposition that the elites and their system have no right to ANY secrets; that ALL elite secrets are the property of the people and must be dragged into the sunshine, however much these criminals resist the shining of light onto their crimes.
So here we see how liberals, even the best of them, are indelibly elitist. After all, what’s the difference between a socialist or anarchist and even the best liberal? The former wants true democracy and worker control of the means of production; the liberal still wants elite control, elite monopoly of the produce, and then some trickling down.
The only difference between the Obama hack and the “true progressive” is that the latter may be sincere about wanting trickle-down to work. But he still has his “Obama Line” which he won’t cross. At that line he flips and sides with the elites. The elite monopoly of secrets is clearly part of that line for many of them, and the way Wikileaks challenges it goes over that line.
Sorry to hear about the thinning ranks of anatomically correct female workers on Wall Street.
Let’s not forget though the real goal – to bring to Wall Street, as an institution, more female energy (rather than female bodies), to make the system more feminine.
What exactly is “female energy”, and how does it differ from male energy. Also, in what way is a feminine scam different from a male scam?
Good question.
We are talking about the yin energy of the yin and yen school of thought. The standard idea is that the yin energy represents negative, submissive, feminine, introvert, passive and withdrawn energy.
“negative, submissive, feminine, introvert, passive and withdrawn”
Guess you haven’t met my wife or daughter.
I guess you’re lucky in that they are both anatomically female and have that yin energy in them.
But the simple fact is that anyone can have yin engery. It’s their yin side.
Is “yin and yen” a Japanese thing where females control the money?
(I think in the West, it is usually referred to as Yin and Yang.)
Sorry, typo. I meant yin and yan, or ying and yang.
That heavey white powder on the face might mean that this is a Kabuki Tiger.
If that finding is correct, we Homo Not-So-Sapiens NOt-So-Sapiens are actually lower than bacteria.
Re: renting vs. owning:
I’d think privacy is a driving for a lot of people pursuing ownership vs. continuing to rent, especially for a lot of people who were themselves raised in single-family homes and associate that lifestyle with “normal” family life.
Regarding flaky landlords: before we landed in our current situation my husband and I looked at a number of owner-occupied duplexes and it was clear to me that for most of those situations we wouldn’t be considered because we had children. Our current landlord doesn’t live in the building so the kids were a non-issue for him, but we’ve had complaints about them over the years from the steady stream of new neighbors in the other unit.
Immigration status seems to be an issue for other landlords in our neighborhood. For instance, the woman who owns the building next door appears to have two different leases she uses, one for native-born citizens and the other for immigrants. The latter stipulates that renters are not allowed to have overnight guests (even relatives), they are not allowed to have parties that last after 10 p.m., etc. While I’m aware there’s probably a huge amount of discrimination in lending for immigrants, I don’t know anyone whose mortgage makes those kinds of stipulations concerning personal life.
Ownership is ephemeral.
Try not paying taxes or maybe your mortgage on the property you ‘own’. Neglect your HOA fees, hell even violate their rules ignoring the fines and see who really ‘owns’ your property, if only in the background.
Ownership is always transitory. Everyone dies and you won’t take it with you. More pointedly Napoleon is not remembered for his chateaus or Shakespeare for his townhouses on the Thames. At best any long term ownership is communal, the individual granted terms to claim temporary possession of some asset by the current larger society under which they, the owners, live.
In the end accumulation of property is its own moral/spiritual weight, causing you to sink to the bottom. If you feel greater possession of a house by holding contractual rights for its use and therefore increased responsibility to maintain or upgrade it, fine, you are doing service to your community and avoid some of the obloquy above.
As to landlords, most I’ve come across are more than reasonable, their main goal to have and keep responsible tenants. That they may not allow you to express your individual taste on your domicile, yes that is a problem, but you have to understand that commercial property, which sees common acceptance of leasing agreements, allows broad leeway to individual discretions. You rent a shell, upon which you can inflict, within reason, whatever travesty you want on better tastes of society.
What I was going to say (and have said (mostly) on this site before). Well done. I liked Yves’ analysis up above as well. The answer to which is better: it depends.
Stone Age Living socitety huh, can I come along PrimeBeef? we’ll sit and recap what we’ve been talking about while the world crashes and burns.
Hey Nelcisco. Good to see you.
We need a strong cave. That’s what we need.
Cautionary tale about exit strategies from 1930s Japan
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/686b6978-b6ad-11df-b3dd-00144feabdc0.html
(spied this item on the net just now)
Joe Ortiz Exposes !
Joe Ortiz exposes some dishonest rapture gimmicks in his Apr. 10, 2010 “End Times Passover.”
Go there and read “Pretrib Rapture Secrecy”!