Paris climate agreement: Wall Street & FTSE stocks hit RECORD high after Trump drops deal

[bripat9643]

hedge fund mgrs were buying blocks of enviro stocks and SHORTING them.

What's your point?

that you are an idiot and your dumbass question proves it.

How does it do that?

BTW, you don't "buy a stock and then short it." When you short a stock you borrow it. If the price goes down then you can return it at a lower price, thereby making a profit.

You're calling me a dumbass and you don't know the simplest things about the stock market.

Short sellers can buy the borrowed shares and return them to the broker any time before they’re due. Returning the shares shields the short seller from any further price increases or decreases the stock may experience. Brokers borrow the shares for short sale transactions from custody banks and fund management companies that lend them as a revenue stream. Institutions that lend shares for short selling include JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Merrill Lynch Wealth Management.

How does that salvage the previous idiocy you posted? You said "buy a stock and then short it." It's right there on the board.

 

[bripat9643]

View attachment 130608
Source: "60 Years Of Energy Incentives," Management Information Services for the Nuclear Energy Institute

Propaganda.

 

[RightyTighty]

Americans love their corn. And hey, just look at that, you found (yet another) industry that the Federal government subsidies. Good for you.

Yes, I found another example of corrupt collusion between politicians and industry fat cats. That's what you're promoting, dumbshit.

Ah, no. And since your "We never paid up for that" argument is dead as a door nail you might want to move along onto another debate topic (that you will also lose),.

Meaning I nailed your ass to the wall, and now you want to take your ball and go home.

Dude, get a reality. It's US history. You aren't going to win by denying it.

I'm not denying it. You are. Government subsidies to industry are just one endless litany of corruption and fraud.

I'm not interested in your dogma. You don't want us spending dollars on the future (even though we are still spending much more on the past). Got it.

 

[bripat9643]

Yup..



The president faced a backlash after confirming that he would reverse his Barack Obama's decision to join the pact to cut emissions.

But stock markets appeared to brush off the news.

The S&P yesterday hit a fresh record highs, while the Dow Jones surged by 0.65 per cent.

Today Britain's FTSE 100 followed the lead to reach to new top levels of 7,598.

US stock markets were helped by a fresh round of positive economic data, with the latest jobs numbers coming in far higher than expected.

So you think a temporary positive economic surge is worth the potential inevitable end of the planet?
You would.
In that that vein....
Trump is suspending production of penicillin to help bring back Bubonic Plague. Gravediggers CEO applauds jobs move.

There is no "potential end of the planet," and a bunch of globalist politicians aren't going to save it even if it was going to end.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, I found another example of corrupt collusion between politicians and industry fat cats. That's what you're promoting, dumbshit.

Ah, no. And since your "We never paid up for that" argument is dead as a door nail you might want to move along onto another debate topic (that you will also lose),.

Meaning I nailed your ass to the wall, and now you want to take your ball and go home.

Dude, get a reality. It's US history. You aren't going to win by denying it.

I'm not denying it. You are. Government subsidies to industry are just one endless litany of corruption and fraud.

I'm not interested in your dogma. You don't want us spending dollars on the future (even though we are still spending much more on the past). Got it.

It's not dogma. It's historical fact.

I don't want to give money to politicians so they can reward their friends. If a technology is economically viable, it doesn't need subsidies.

 

[Reasonable]

I don't think he has the intellectual bandwidth to comprehend the significance of world treaties in general. If the Bill of Rights was approved under Obama, he'd be working to get rid of them. He's really just that inept.

.

Indeed...and vindictive.

 

[RightyTighty]

Yup..



The president faced a backlash after confirming that he would reverse his Barack Obama's decision to join the pact to cut emissions.

But stock markets appeared to brush off the news.

The S&P yesterday hit a fresh record highs, while the Dow Jones surged by 0.65 per cent.

Today Britain's FTSE 100 followed the lead to reach to new top levels of 7,598.

US stock markets were helped by a fresh round of positive economic data, with the latest jobs numbers coming in far higher than expected.

So you think a temporary positive economic surge is worth the potential inevitable end of the planet?
You would.
In that that vein....
Trump is suspending production of penicillin to help bring back Bubonic Plague. Gravediggers CEO applauds jobs move.

There is no "potential end of the planet," and a bunch of globalist politicians aren't going to save it even if it was going to end.

Oh, it's going to end. The sun is - non-renewable.

 

[Reasonable]

Yup..



The president faced a backlash after confirming that he would reverse his Barack Obama's decision to join the pact to cut emissions.

But stock markets appeared to brush off the news.

The S&P yesterday hit a fresh record highs, while the Dow Jones surged by 0.65 per cent.

Today Britain's FTSE 100 followed the lead to reach to new top levels of 7,598.

US stock markets were helped by a fresh round of positive economic data, with the latest jobs numbers coming in far higher than expected.

So you think a temporary positive economic surge is worth the potential inevitable end of the planet?
You would.
In that that vein....
Trump is suspending production of penicillin to help bring back Bubonic Plague. Gravediggers CEO applauds jobs move.

There is no "potential end of the planet," and a bunch of globalist politicians aren't going to save it even if it was going to end.

Science illiterate.

 

[bripat9643]

Yup..



The president faced a backlash after confirming that he would reverse his Barack Obama's decision to join the pact to cut emissions.

But stock markets appeared to brush off the news.

The S&P yesterday hit a fresh record highs, while the Dow Jones surged by 0.65 per cent.

Today Britain's FTSE 100 followed the lead to reach to new top levels of 7,598.

US stock markets were helped by a fresh round of positive economic data, with the latest jobs numbers coming in far higher than expected.

So you think a temporary positive economic surge is worth the potential inevitable end of the planet?
You would.
In that that vein....
Trump is suspending production of penicillin to help bring back Bubonic Plague. Gravediggers CEO applauds jobs move.

There is no "potential end of the planet," and a bunch of globalist politicians aren't going to save it even if it was going to end.

Science illiterate.

You're a science dumbass.

 

[RightyTighty]

Ah, no. And since your "We never paid up for that" argument is dead as a door nail you might want to move along onto another debate topic (that you will also lose),.

Meaning I nailed your ass to the wall, and now you want to take your ball and go home.

Dude, get a reality. It's US history. You aren't going to win by denying it.

I'm not denying it. You are. Government subsidies to industry are just one endless litany of corruption and fraud.

I'm not interested in your dogma. You don't want us spending dollars on the future (even though we are still spending much more on the past). Got it.

It's not dogma. It's historical fact.

I don't want to give money to politicians so they can reward their friends. If a technology is economically viable, it doesn't need subsidies.

In your world we would still be dreaming that one day man would walk on the moon. (or your phone could tell you where on earth you are).

Do you know why the Federal government spends so much on designing and building new weapons systems? Because anyone else who tried would fail. You don't need a stealth bomber to fly Grandma home for Christmas.

 

[RightyTighty]

Yup..



The president faced a backlash after confirming that he would reverse his Barack Obama's decision to join the pact to cut emissions.

But stock markets appeared to brush off the news.

The S&P yesterday hit a fresh record highs, while the Dow Jones surged by 0.65 per cent.

Today Britain's FTSE 100 followed the lead to reach to new top levels of 7,598.

US stock markets were helped by a fresh round of positive economic data, with the latest jobs numbers coming in far higher than expected.

So you think a temporary positive economic surge is worth the potential inevitable end of the planet?
You would.
In that that vein....
Trump is suspending production of penicillin to help bring back Bubonic Plague. Gravediggers CEO applauds jobs move.

There is no "potential end of the planet," and a bunch of globalist politicians aren't going to save it even if it was going to end.

Science illiterate.

Beyond illiterate. Intentional ignorance. That's hard work.

 

[bripat9643]

Meaning I nailed your ass to the wall, and now you want to take your ball and go home.

Dude, get a reality. It's US history. You aren't going to win by denying it.

I'm not denying it. You are. Government subsidies to industry are just one endless litany of corruption and fraud.

I'm not interested in your dogma. You don't want us spending dollars on the future (even though we are still spending much more on the past). Got it.

It's not dogma. It's historical fact.

I don't want to give money to politicians so they can reward their friends. If a technology is economically viable, it doesn't need subsidies.

In your world we would still be dreaming that one day man would walk on the moon. (or your phone could tell you where on earth you are).

Do you know the Federal government spends so much on designing and building new weapons systems? Because anyone else who tried would fail. You don't need a stealth bomber to fly Grandma home for Christmas.

The fact that I reject your hysterical predictions of doom doesn't make me a Luddite. Traditionally, the luddites were the ones predicting doom. You have demonstrated in this very thread that you don't know the facts about energy subsidies, so why should anyone accept you as some kind of scientific expert on global warming?

 

[james bond]

I hope this wasn't posted already. Paris Climate Accord is genocide against all plant life. Vegetarians and vegans should be marching in Gay Paree right now!

"The primary goal of the Paris Climate Accord — the reduction of atmospheric carbon dioxide — is nothing less than genocide against all plant life across our planet."

The Paris Climate Accord is GENOCIDE against plants, forests and all life on our planet

 

[RightyTighty]

Dude, get a reality. It's US history. You aren't going to win by denying it.

I'm not denying it. You are. Government subsidies to industry are just one endless litany of corruption and fraud.

I'm not interested in your dogma. You don't want us spending dollars on the future (even though we are still spending much more on the past). Got it.

It's not dogma. It's historical fact.

I don't want to give money to politicians so they can reward their friends. If a technology is economically viable, it doesn't need subsidies.

In your world we would still be dreaming that one day man would walk on the moon. (or your phone could tell you where on earth you are).

Do you know the Federal government spends so much on designing and building new weapons systems? Because anyone else who tried would fail. You don't need a stealth bomber to fly Grandma home for Christmas.

The fact that I reject your hysterical predictions of doom doesn't make me a Luddite. Traditionally, the luddites were the ones predicting doom. You have demonstrated in this very thread that you don't know the facts about energy subsidies, so why should anyone accept you as some kind of scientific expert on global warming?

I don't know the "facts"? I posted the links to the history of US Energy Subsidies - exactly what you said (doesn't exist) and then you said, they exist but are bad. Now, if we can get you to they exist (and can be good or bad) life as we know it can go on (until the sun dies and takes the earth with it).

 

[jknowgood]

Paris climate agreement: Wall Street & FTSE stocks hit RECORD high after Trump drops deal

Isn't that great?

Now you can sit back and clip coupons and make lots of money...

While your grandkids are suffocating on the slice-able Brown Air that you (and those who think like you) forced upon those most unfortunate innocents...

Win-Win, eh?

---------------------------------------------

The New Republican Party...

Transforming America from Bedford Falls into Pottersville, one defenseless, choking child at a time...

----------------------------------------------

Jesus-H-Tap-Dancing-Christ-on-a-Crutch... you TrumpBot Dikkwads have got to start pulling your heads out of your arses and come up for air... soon...

Before it's too late for The Republic...

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not denying it. You are. Government subsidies to industry are just one endless litany of corruption and fraud.

I'm not interested in your dogma. You don't want us spending dollars on the future (even though we are still spending much more on the past). Got it.

It's not dogma. It's historical fact.

I don't want to give money to politicians so they can reward their friends. If a technology is economically viable, it doesn't need subsidies.

In your world we would still be dreaming that one day man would walk on the moon. (or your phone could tell you where on earth you are).

Do you know the Federal government spends so much on designing and building new weapons systems? Because anyone else who tried would fail. You don't need a stealth bomber to fly Grandma home for Christmas.

The fact that I reject your hysterical predictions of doom doesn't make me a Luddite. Traditionally, the luddites were the ones predicting doom. You have demonstrated in this very thread that you don't know the facts about energy subsidies, so why should anyone accept you as some kind of scientific expert on global warming?

I don't know the "facts". I posted the links to the history of US Energy Subsidies - exactly what you said (doesn't exist) and then you said, they exist but are bad. Now, if we can get you to they exist (and can be good or bad) life as we know it can go on (until the sun dies and takes the earth with it).

Yes, you posted links to your propaganda, and all they proved is that energy subsidies are a corrupt boondoggle. They didn't support your point. The fact that you didn't know that only shows what a complete dumbass you are. The oil industry didn't start getting subsidies until 50 years after it became a large flourishing industry. It didn't get them prior to that.

In short, the facts prove you wrong, but you're too much of a dumbass to know it.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Here's a good one for the big dumbo, Bripat.

Long History Of U.S. Energy Subsidies | December 19, 2011 Issue - Vol. 89 Issue 51 | Chemical & Engineering News

This one is easier to read - the children here will like it better.

There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies

I've already dealt with your horse manure, shit for brains.

And, the real truth gets posted but - Bripat runs away from it. As expected.

Take me on little injun.

I will make you cry again..

Why do you run from me?

.

 

[RightyTighty]

I'm not interested in your dogma. You don't want us spending dollars on the future (even though we are still spending much more on the past). Got it.

It's not dogma. It's historical fact.

I don't want to give money to politicians so they can reward their friends. If a technology is economically viable, it doesn't need subsidies.

In your world we would still be dreaming that one day man would walk on the moon. (or your phone could tell you where on earth you are).

Do you know the Federal government spends so much on designing and building new weapons systems? Because anyone else who tried would fail. You don't need a stealth bomber to fly Grandma home for Christmas.

The fact that I reject your hysterical predictions of doom doesn't make me a Luddite. Traditionally, the luddites were the ones predicting doom. You have demonstrated in this very thread that you don't know the facts about energy subsidies, so why should anyone accept you as some kind of scientific expert on global warming?

I don't know the "facts". I posted the links to the history of US Energy Subsidies - exactly what you said (doesn't exist) and then you said, they exist but are bad. Now, if we can get you to they exist (and can be good or bad) life as we know it can go on (until the sun dies and takes the earth with it).

Yes, you posted links to your propaganda, and all they proved is that energy subsidies are a corrupt boondoggle. They didn't support your point. The fact that you didn't know that only shows what a complete dumbass you are. The oil industry didn't start getting subsidies until 50 years after it became a large flourishing industry. It didn't get them prior to that.

In short, the facts prove you wrong, but you're too much of a dumbass to know it.

Look, you need to know when you've lost. People were burning coal long before it was - an industry. And when oil became a big deal here - with cars, the Federal government jumped in. Solar has been around for ages but now it's an industry (one that China supports heavily) and the Feds should be supporting it like they do all other sources of energy.

The fact that you don't like that doesn't matter. Solar wasn't invented yesterday. Like oil it had been around but now (like then) it started to matter and the Federal government took action. That is the history and it ***** you right up the ass.

 

[RightyTighty]

Here's a good one for the big dumbo, Bripat.

Long History Of U.S. Energy Subsidies | December 19, 2011 Issue - Vol. 89 Issue 51 | Chemical & Engineering News

This one is easier to read - the children here will like it better.

There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies

I've already dealt with your horse manure, shit for brains.

And, the real truth gets posted but - Bripat runs away from it. As expected.

Take me on little injun.

I will make you cry again..

Why do you run from me?


View attachment 130617


.

Run from you? I'm always the last to post (and I always win). Care to tell us all how that is "running"?

And respond quickly (I have a house to sand before painting it).

 

[Wyatt earp]

Here's a good one for the big dumbo, Bripat.

Long History Of U.S. Energy Subsidies | December 19, 2011 Issue - Vol. 89 Issue 51 | Chemical & Engineering News

This one is easier to read - the children here will like it better.

There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies

I've already dealt with your horse manure, shit for brains.

And, the real truth gets posted but - Bripat runs away from it. As expected.

Take me on little injun.

I will make you cry again..

Why do you run from me?


View attachment 130617


.

Run from you? I'm always the last to post (and I always win). Care to tell us all how that is "running"?

You care to rephrase that drunk injun?


You always run from me..