sherpa
-
Posts
3,587 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by sherpa
-
-
16 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:
OMG!That is horrible. I've broken three ribs total, and the pain, oh the pain... I cannot imagine what you must have gone through. Simply awful.
Actually, once you've broken three, the other 18 didn't matter.
I actually hear them crack.
I had a good support system, but I couldn't move laterally for about four weeks.
Note to the guys, and I apologize to anyone who has any medical background, though I am thankful that my wife was a Navy nurse and thought I was going to die.
If you subject your vascular system to extreme pressure, as in getting crushed, you will see results in weird areas, a few days later.
My ***** turned black after two days, and it lasted for about a week.
Too much information.....I know.....But just a heads up if you intend to over pressurize your vascular system.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:
Good grief! Did you lose a fight with a trash compactor?
No.
Short story, but I was doing maintenance on my tractor. Not a small tractor, the rear wheels are about chin level.
The valve that controls the hydrostatic transmission went into forward while I was underneath, pinning my shirt and me, and it ran over me.
This tractor weighs about 1000 pounds more than a car.
Still, after it ran over my chest, I got up, shut the tractor down, went in and sat on the couch.
My wife came in and noticed I wasn't quite right...Petechial and other hemorrhages all over my face from blood being forced out.
I told her what happened and she insisted we go to the hospital.
I insisted that I must shower and change.
When I looked at myself after the shower I realized things weren't quite right.
Anyway, 21 broken ribs, four that are repaired with titanium.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I have the University of Virginia hospital record for number of broken ribs that someone has survived.
I broke 21 of 24.
She can make it, but she is beyond any age where she should be serving.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Any others interested in astronomy?
Things will get even more interesting when the James Webb Space Telescope is launched, currently scheduled for March, 2021.
Parked at the Lagrange 2 point, a million miles from earth, it sill search the IR spectrum instead of the UV and optical spectrum which Hubble does.
-
1
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:
Think WMD in Iraq and 17 years of war that followed.
Think the 2008 crash and bailout of the big banks while homeowners took it on the chin.
The uniparty establishment is one big club, and we ain't in it.
There is no doubt in my mind that the existence of WMD in Iraq was a universal, honest opinion of the entire US intel community.
A view based on zero humint and defectors. A wrong opinion. A tragic opinion.
The efforts of the Fed in 2008 had to do with saving our entire capital structure, without favorites, and brilliantly executed.
It could have been way, way worse.
-
2 hours ago, KW95 said:
haha!
more like: Canadian living in Brazil who likes to pull your chains and get you guys going. It's so easy to do. Just post anything really and you guys bite like a tick!
I spent nine days a month there for about eight years.
Enjoyed it, but don't envy you a bit.
Todo bem?
-
14 hours ago, snafu said:
I never have to wait to vote. Same school gym since 1999.
I always give people working the voting booth my wife's name and ask if they want to see my photo I.D. just to make sweat appear on their brows.
I volunteered to do that thing for six years.
We had a few people like you.
Never understood what kind of a loser would think that was of any value, but we had names for them, and never "sweated" them.
-
None of these measures would stop a pilot who was a legitimate hire.
-
42 minutes ago, Dante said:
I have a nephew that is a anti-US nutty butty that has lived in Brazil but got hoofed out because he didn't follow proper immigration protocol. In other words, he didn't apply at all and just lived there for 3 or 4 years. He is preparing to go back. I wonder if he still wants to? Maybe Venezuela or Cuba might be a better option.
If he's sane, he will avoid Venezuela, or prepare to give up his life.
Brazil is the much better option, but if he doesn't care about immigration protocol, there may be no no place for him.
-
I think its funny when US or Canadians comment on countries and their govs and social systems that they know absolutely nothing about.
Brazil is not what people think, nor is any other country.
Corruption exists from the top levels of government to the school crossing guard, (which they don't have as I have been run over in Sao Paulo and can verify).
Changing people at the top won't change that. It is systemic.
Regional differences exist as well.
Rio is completely different than Sao Paulo or Recife, and we won't even consider the Amazon area.
What this is, in my humble view, is the final nail in the now continental repudiation of the Chavez Bolivarian Revolution coffin.
Way too much ground to travel though, as Argentina has demonstrated.
-
Make no mistake.
The provision that allows a guarantee of birth in the United States to citizenship in the United States is an industry across Central and some parts of South America.
Along with the other profit making aspects of the immigration "trade."
We need to view it for what it is, which is a profit seeking industry, designed to make money off the heartstrings of American benevolence.
I saw it for years, and it has to be stopped.
-
2
-
-
Finally, a way to dispose of the missing 9-11 passengers.
Or maybe just a simple pitot static problem that very poorly trained pilots on a very poor airline could not handle.
But for conspiracy folks.....Both.
By the way, I'm no DR, but I do have some contacts.
Here's a maintenance write-up in that aircraft's logbook the day prior.
" Indicated airspeed and altimeter disagree after takeoff and elevator feel differential pressure light illuminated."
The airline claims it was fixed.
I'm guessing they were wrong.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, /dev/null said:
Muslim woman Democrat, that's like hitting a triple
If she were a Lesbian Muslim woman Democrat, that's like hitting a home run.
Or in some parts of the Islamic world.....dead.
-
6 minutes ago, peace out said:
I am not arguing Trump is responsible or culpable for the crime, however those targets were specifically chosen because of Trump's rhetoric - no matter who sent the packages.
You have no idea why they were targeted.
Just stop......Until somebody with no other objective other than fact finding figures this out.
-
The size of the balance sheet has a good deal to do with the ability of the Fed to deal with the next downturn.
Of course there is no magic number, unlike an individuals credit limit, but eventually the size gets to the point where it can't be reasonably financed by any rational estimate of GDP, so it eventually causes currency problems.
See Venezuela.
Deficits don't cause inflation, nor, in and of themself, stimulate economic activity.
Deficits are simply spending more than one takes in.
Supply and demand imbalance causes inflation or deflation, and clearly, gov demand is part of the calculus, but a part of it.
The Fed is doing what it needs to do to fulfill its dual mandate of price stability and full employment.
It is responding by incrementally raising its two rates.
It is clearly not responsible for fiscal policy, which is an entirely different issue.
-
40 minutes ago, TPS said:
Expanding the deficit when we are near full employment adds fuel to the economy at the wrong time. As I said, if bigger deficits lead to overheating for an extended period, then the Fed will be forced to act more forcefully. 2018Q2 is currently the only quarter under Trump >4%, which IS a result of the tax cuts and spending increases. I expect Q3--which comes out next week, to be close to 4% as well. The underlying problem will be the wage pressures that come with a hot economy at < 4% unemployment.
Why does the Fed need to reduce its balance sheet? Certainly it affected markets as it accumulated assets, but by what economic rationale is it necessary to reduce it?
In fact, its BS will automatically decline as the assets are paid down (its MBS holdings, for example) and/or mature. The size of its BS doesn't mean a hill of beans to the real economy...
We disagree on the impact from S-H in 1930. Economies were already declining rapidly, and would continue regardless of S-H.
The Fed's balance sheet has grown form 869b in 2007 to over 2 trillion.
If you question the need to reduce that, there is not much I can say.
It's kind of like asking if it is OK to increase your mortgage from 500k to 2.5 billion.
Works as long as it works, but it gives the Fed little room to handle the next downturn, unless adding multiple zeros to debt doesn't matter-and it does, to those who must pay it.
Expanding the deficit, in and of itself, does nothing, unless it results in:
a. decreasing the value of the dollar, or.
b. spiking interest rates.
Of course there is the moral obligation of strapping the number to our progeny, but that is beyond the scope.
Neither of those has happened. Interest rates are rising at a very moderate level at the gov and corporate level, and are evidence of a very healthy debt market.
that can change.
If your "if" suggestions are considered, you have a point.
As of now, we are not in your "if" scenarios.
-
17 hours ago, TPS said:
The reasoning is very straightforward, tax cuts (and spending increases) have widened the deficit, juicing the economy when it is near full employment. If they lead to overheating for an extended period, the Fed will raise rates faster and higher than expected.
I fully understand what tax cuts do.
What the Fed does is based on a number of things, the deficit not even close to being one of the criteria.
We are at a very healthy 3-4% GDP growth. 2 in some quarters, close to 4 in others.
Nobody in their right mind would state that is "overheating."
What the Fed needs to do is lower its balance sheet, a balance sheet expanded exponentially under QE forever.
The good news is that their recent moves have been in the right direction, and a start to getting us back to normal metrics.
We are not in an inflationary period. Tariffs are a damper, and the Fed is doing what it should do.
16 hours ago, DC Tom said:Are we back to "deficits matter?"
Deficits matter when the bond market determines they matter.
On 10/16/2018 at 7:28 AM, TPS said:Almost all business taxes are passed along as a "cost" and therefore influence the price of goods. You are conflating a demand-side collapse with tariffs. The US economy was already collapsing when S-H was passed in summer of 1930.
I never said a thing about "taxes."
What I said was that tariffs are economic wet blankets.
They are not inflationary.
Of course specific industries experience price increases, but in aggregate, they are stifling.
Watch the Democrat strategy unfold this autumn. Quite likely they will pull the deflationary strings of farmers and anyone else who has experienced decreased prices from trade policy.
The point is that that the tariff policy mentioned was extremely important in what developed in 1930.
-
3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
They make goods cost more. That's inflationary.
Goodness.
Tell me how Smoot-Hawley caused inflation.
If you aren't familiar with that tariff, I suggest you look at the 1930 time frame, and the economic decade that followed.
You really get this, don't you?
-
4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
How are tariffs "Anti-Inflationary"?? Do you know what you are talking about? If people have to pay for the more expensive goods, or higher taxed goods--tariffed goods--then that is inflationary. Higher steel and aluminum prices make cars cost more, for example.
You are clearly ill-informed.
Tariffs diminish trade activity.
Diminished trade activity is counter inflationary, and in and of itself, would lead to reduced demand for capital, and thus lower interest rates.
You are over the cliff.
-
And by the way, it is curious why the accusation of the Trump trade policies, which are whined about repeatedly here as being anti growth, anti economic activity and therefore anti inflationary, are not mentioned in the same discussion.
Perhaps its a bit disingenuous to complain about minor, healthy, justified stimulus without mentioning minor, unhealthy, justified anti stimulus.
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
Why do those two completely brainwashed idiots feel the need to whine?
Are you completely incapable of considering that your views are foolish?
A very minor and justified tax adjustment is a very minor stimulus.
It was something that the Fed would never consider as a stand alone policy to increase the rates they control, which are minor by the way.
You are apparently unaware of what they use and how they use that criteria to execute their mandate.
All that aside, a more healthy, growing economy, which is generating wage growth above inflation, a point I made earlier and which you have, seemingly, disregarded, is good for everybody.
Your point is akin to stating that a reduction in body temperature and flu symptoms for one suffering from that is a bad thing, 'cause it increases the likelihood they might get out of bed and get into an accident.
Here's a clue. A slow growing economy with a healthy demand for capital is a good thing.
Economic activity has far more impact on fed tax revenue than minor, justified, adjustments to taxes.
It also makes for a happier populace, at least the sane ones.
-
4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
You must agree that the tax cuts put pressure on the fed to raise rates. They are charging Peter (Middle class borrowers) to pay Paul (The Donor class that got tax cuts).
I love how you say the Fed must raise rates to have them ready for next downturn, which I agree with, but what about the Federal budget? Where will they cut taxes come from if deficits go from bad to way worse with an economic slump?
And I never said rates shouldn't go up, just pointing out how they could have risen slower without giving the rich their tax cuts that have ballooned the deficit, AND made the debt more expensive with higher rates!
I don't agree at all that tax cuts put pressure on the Fed.
That isn't one of the things they look at to execute their mandate, which is clear.
Frankly, I am at a loss to understand your claim that rates could have risen slower, or that tax cuts caused the acceleration.
The Fed has been extremely slow to raise rates, and the tax cut wasn't near the stimulus that QE to infinity presented to a rate hawk.
I think your reasoning is corrupted by your politics.
In fact, I'm certain of it.
-
1
-
-
Tax cuts didn't "juice the economy."
Of course they were a positive, but economic activity was increasing with or without that issue.
Tibs, you are one of those guys that I'm not going to do homework for, but the true indicator is wage growth, and wage growth is quite positive.
Getting interest rates to a normal level vs economic activity is not only desirable, but after having been at negative rates vis a vis inflation, necessary to allow the Fed to use its most normal weapon to minimize the effects of the next downturn.
Simply stated, it is quite desirable to have the ten year at 4% or slightly higher, for a number of reasons, none of which are political, which is the stick in your eye you can't seem to remove.
-
6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
Oh? Would a smart person just hold and buy more? That's what I do, I'm a pretty sharp fellow
You'd be "sharper" if you wrote calls against them during periods of market over valuation.
Chances are, you can cover at a much lower price, and hold them all the while.
But you knew that.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Has Fallen
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
By the way, related.
If anyone wants to talk about medical insurance away from work provided or Obamacare, I'd be glad to relate my experience with MediShare.