the truth can be a harsh mistress!

[Avorysuds]

And as you can see, all the neocon/teabagger trolls are practically having a group orgasm over the following:

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader'

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader' - Telegraph

Yep, this guy pulled a fast one.....although he speaks to truths echoed by financial experts worldwide, he did misrepresent his credentials as to his station in life and actual expertise.....he's just a public speaker for hire. In short, he could have been a poster from this thread who got air time.

So yes, everyone except neocon/teabaggers who cover their ears at any criticism of reaganomics were fooled by this guy.

But here's the catch.....millionaires seem to get fat on the market during Depressions:

Jesse Livermore, Rockefeller, Wyckoff....a simple google search will point out that what this "hoaxer" was blustering about has more fact than fiction in it. Scary.


Well, that's that......and for the record, I started this thread as my last action before signing off for a day or two. I posted it, checked one other thread, and then left. Sorry if that upsets some unwritten law about immediate response to comments/challenges, but I can't devote all my time to this board as I (and I'm sure everyone else) has a life outside of this. Carry on, all.

So he is a liar... Quick, we should all believe what he says.

 

[California Girl]

And as you can see, all the neocon/teabagger trolls are practically having a group orgasm over the following:

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader'

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader' - Telegraph

Yep, this guy pulled a fast one.....although he speaks to truths echoed by financial experts worldwide, he did misrepresent his credentials as to his station in life and actual expertise.....he's just a public speaker for hire. In short, he could have been a poster from this thread who got air time.

So yes, everyone except neocon/teabaggers who cover their ears at any criticism of reaganomics were fooled by this guy.

But here's the catch.....millionaires seem to get fat on the market during Depressions:

Jesse Livermore, Rockefeller, Wyckoff....a simple google search will point out that what this "hoaxer" was blustering about has more fact than fiction in it. Scary.


Well, that's that......and for the record, I started this thread as my last action before signing off for a day or two. I posted it, checked one other thread, and then left. Sorry if that upsets some unwritten law about immediate response to comments/challenges, but I can't devote all my time to this board as I (and I'm sure everyone else) has a life outside of this. Carry on, all.

So he is a liar... Quick, we should all believe what he says.

That's about it. Does not speak well of TackyLiberals ability to check his sources. Defending some faux 'expert' is funny.

 

[Si modo]

And as you can see, all the neocon/teabagger trolls are practically having a group orgasm over the following:

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader'

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader' - Telegraph

Yep, this guy pulled a fast one.....although he speaks to truths echoed by financial experts worldwide, he did misrepresent his credentials as to his station in life and actual expertise.....he's just a public speaker for hire. In short, he could have been a poster from this thread who got air time.

So yes, everyone except neocon/teabaggers who cover their ears at any criticism of reaganomics were fooled by this guy.

But here's the catch.....millionaires seem to get fat on the market during Depressions:

Jesse Livermore, Rockefeller, Wyckoff....a simple google search will point out that what this "hoaxer" was blustering about has more fact than fiction in it. Scary.


Well, that's that......and for the record, I started this thread as my last action before signing off for a day or two. I posted it, checked one other thread, and then left. Sorry if that upsets some unwritten law about immediate response to comments/challenges, but I can't devote all my time to this board as I (and I'm sure everyone else) has a life outside of this. Carry on, all.

With respect to what I bolded above, intelligent persons have the ability to know how to make the best of a bad situation. Even if the communists got their way, there would be no fundamental change in that fact, just a shift in how it is done.

With respect to the rest and as I often state; when one has an argument which has a solid foundation in facts, there is no need to lie to get one's way. Once discredited, doubt is mandatory.

 

[editec]

According to him the "smart money" is out of equities and into US government bonds as a SAFE HAVEN.

Okay let's assume that is true.

Now how does an average citizen or even a modest affluent citizen protect his assets?

Keep it in the bank?

After all FDIC protects that moola, right?

So, if a T bill is a safe haven for a billionaire, how can FDIC protected savings also NOT BE equally protected?

I ask because even though I don't have much money to worry about I am responsible for corporate money and I would like to protect that.

Thoughts from those of you market mavens here who do not have a political axe to grind would be much appreciated.

 

[Mad Scientist]

So what he said isn't true? Goldman Sachs doesn't rule the world? International Bankers don't rule the world and the countries of the politicians they've bought off?

Again I ask; "So what he said isn't true?"

Me saying "Obama is controlled by banks and large corporations" is nullified by the fact that I don't have a Political Science or Economic Degree?

 

[asterism]

According to him the "smart money" is out of equities and into US government bonds as a SAFE HAVEN.

Okay let's assume that is true.

Now how does an average citizen or even a modest affluent citizen protect his assets?

Keep it in the bank?

After all FDIC protects that moola, right?

So, if a T bill is a safe haven for a billionaire, how can FDIC protected savings also NOT BE equally protected?

I ask because even though I don't have much money to worry about I am responsible for corporate money and I would like to protect that.

Thoughts from those of you market mavens here who do not have a political axe to grind would be much appreciated.

The FDIC limits the amount that can be protected. Right now it's $250,000 per entity.

 

[California Girl]

So what he said isn't true? Goldman Sachs doesn't rule the world? International Bankers don't rule the world and the countries of the politicians they've bought off?

Again I ask; "So what he said isn't true?"

Me saying "Obama is controlled by banks and large corporations" is nullified by the fact that I don't have a Political Science or Economic Degree?

His opinion is as valid as yours, assuming you have neither. What intelligent people would not do, is credit that opinion with any significant weight. Unless, apparently, you are TackyLiberal who seems to think that, because it came from someone interviewed on the BBC, that makes it important.

See how that works? If your gonna hold someone up as an 'expert', it kind of helps if they actually are an expert... It gives their opinion some backbone.

Not exactly rocket science.

 

[taichiliberal]

And as you can see, all the neocon/teabagger trolls are practically having a group orgasm over the following:

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader'

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader' - Telegraph

Yep, this guy pulled a fast one.....although he speaks to truths echoed by financial experts worldwide, he did misrepresent his credentials as to his station in life and actual expertise.....he's just a public speaker for hire. In short, he could have been a poster from this thread who got air time.

So yes, everyone except neocon/teabaggers who cover their ears at any criticism of reaganomics were fooled by this guy.

But here's the catch.....millionaires seem to get fat on the market during Depressions:

Jesse Livermore, Rockefeller, Wyckoff....a simple google search will point out that what this "hoaxer" was blustering about has more fact than fiction in it. Scary.


Well, that's that......and for the record, I started this thread as my last action before signing off for a day or two. I posted it, checked one other thread, and then left. Sorry if that upsets some unwritten law about immediate response to comments/challenges, but I can't devote all my time to this board as I (and I'm sure everyone else) has a life outside of this. Carry on, all.

So he is a liar... Quick, we should all believe what he says.

No genius, he lied about his credentials...his opinion was all his own, and as I pointed out, his opinion is based strongly in fact. How he got passed the BBC is their problem.....remember, his "opinion" was given credence because he faked his background...without the fake background, he's just another guy on the street with an opinion. I just pointed out that his opinion is based in facts sans the exaggerations.

 

[taichiliberal]

And as you can see, all the neocon/teabagger trolls are practically having a group orgasm over the following:

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader'

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader' - Telegraph

Yep, this guy pulled a fast one.....although he speaks to truths echoed by financial experts worldwide, he did misrepresent his credentials as to his station in life and actual expertise.....he's just a public speaker for hire. In short, he could have been a poster from this thread who got air time.

So yes, everyone except neocon/teabaggers who cover their ears at any criticism of reaganomics were fooled by this guy.

But here's the catch.....millionaires seem to get fat on the market during Depressions:

Jesse Livermore, Rockefeller, Wyckoff....a simple google search will point out that what this "hoaxer" was blustering about has more fact than fiction in it. Scary.


Well, that's that......and for the record, I started this thread as my last action before signing off for a day or two. I posted it, checked one other thread, and then left. Sorry if that upsets some unwritten law about immediate response to comments/challenges, but I can't devote all my time to this board as I (and I'm sure everyone else) has a life outside of this. Carry on, all.

So he is a liar... Quick, we should all believe what he says.

That's about it. Does not speak well of TackyLiberals ability to check his sources. Defending some faux 'expert' is funny.

Actually, it was up to the BBC to check the sources. Since this guy was giving an "opinion", he was only given credence because of his faked background. Otherwise, he's just another regular guy with an opinion. All I did was point out that his opinion is based strongly in historical fact...which in no way defends his fraud.

CaliforniaGirl ONLY knew this guy was a fraud from reading OTHERS research....NOT by her own efforts...so it's rather funny that she should try and laud a successful "hoax" on a person as a their personal failure to "check their sources" when Cali-Girl didn't do anything of the sort.

I wonder what Cali-Girl and AvorySuds were doing when Miller was gaming the NY Times, or the Shrub & company were lying their asses off and others were DOCUMENTING their lies? See folks, unlike the neocon/teabagger stooges here, I can admit error or when I've been had.

 

[taichiliberal]

And as you can see, all the neocon/teabagger trolls are practically having a group orgasm over the following:

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader'

BBC financial expert Alessio Rastani: 'I'm an attention seeker not a trader' - Telegraph

Yep, this guy pulled a fast one.....although he speaks to truths echoed by financial experts worldwide, he did misrepresent his credentials as to his station in life and actual expertise.....he's just a public speaker for hire. In short, he could have been a poster from this thread who got air time.

So yes, everyone except neocon/teabaggers who cover their ears at any criticism of reaganomics were fooled by this guy.

But here's the catch.....millionaires seem to get fat on the market during Depressions:

Jesse Livermore, Rockefeller, Wyckoff....a simple google search will point out that what this "hoaxer" was blustering about has more fact than fiction in it. Scary.


Well, that's that......and for the record, I started this thread as my last action before signing off for a day or two. I posted it, checked one other thread, and then left. Sorry if that upsets some unwritten law about immediate response to comments/challenges, but I can't devote all my time to this board as I (and I'm sure everyone else) has a life outside of this. Carry on, all.

With respect to what I bolded above, intelligent persons have the ability to know how to make the best of a bad situation. Even if the communists got their way, there would be no fundamental change in that fact, just a shift in how it is done.

You're either missing the point or are being purposely obtuse. Many "intelligent" persons were NOT born into money, have the connections or had the capital necessary to game the system on Wall St. during the Depression. Bottom line: it wasn't about keeping jobs in America and building a middle class for these jokers, it was merely about staying rich and getting richer...and if that meant screwing the majority of Americans, so be it. THAT is the mentality of the folks that the neocon/teabagger GOP is so ardently defending now. Since YOU are not part of that tax bracket, your defense of these people's actions is at best confusing.

With respect to the rest and as I often state; when one has an argument which has a solid foundation in facts, there is no need to lie to get one's way. Once discredited, doubt is mandatory.

Really? Because to date the entire 8 years of the Shrub's foreign, military and economic policy players have been discredited....yet there are a plethora of people who are die hard defenders of them to date. Like I said, the guy was a fraud.....he got his 15 minutes based on that fraud...but eerily his opinion hit's on solid, historical FACT. Deal with it.

 

[taichiliberal]

So what he said isn't true? Goldman Sachs doesn't rule the world? International Bankers don't rule the world and the countries of the politicians they've bought off?

Again I ask; "So what he said isn't true?"

Me saying "Obama is controlled by banks and large corporations" is nullified by the fact that I don't have a Political Science or Economic Degree?

His opinion is as valid as yours, assuming you have neither. What intelligent people would not do, is credit that opinion with any significant weight. Unless, apparently, you are TackyLiberal who seems to think that, because it came from someone interviewed on the BBC, that makes it important.

See how that works? If your gonna hold someone up as an 'expert', it kind of helps if they actually are an expert... It gives their opinion some backbone.

Not exactly rocket science.

Once again for the mentally short changed: the guy faked credentials to give an opinion as an "expert"...and although he's NOT an "expert" his opinion does hit a lot of historical FACTS that cannot be denied....well, not by rational folk anyway. No one is defending his fraud.

Neocon/teabaggers who thrive on willful ignorance and headlines from the WND and FOX just don't think beyond the immediate.....but they sure as hell will STILL defend the factually disproven lies by 8 years of the Shrub. Go figure.

 

[uscitizen]

Ahh Herman Cains future treasury secretary.

 

[froggy57]

Good one.

 

[taichiliberal]

Ahh Herman Cains future treasury secretary.