DTEJD1997

Oh yes, most every attorney did not have health care where I worked. Those that did have it, had it through their spouses... I think most people have an incorrect view of the legal profession... Most attorneys (these days) are poor and DO NOT make a good wage. I am going to guess that the majority of people on this board who deal with attorneys, deal with what the industry calls "BIG LAW" type lawyers. These are the lawyers that bill out $300, $400+ per hour. This segment of the legal industry is about 10% - 15% of attorneys maybe? These attorneys frequently (not always) make a good living, and this is probably what most of the public thinks of when they envision what an attorney is/does. These attorneys usually go to a "tier 1" school and did very well in their class. If you DID NOT go to a top school, you can still sometimes make it in if you have very specialized knowledge (patent law) OR are connected somehow (politics or capital). Then you've got another segment of attorneys that work in smaller firms or specialized local areas. These are frequently "BIG LAW" type people who washed out or got out of the "BIG LAW" grind. This area of law also recruits from well regarded state schools. Go down another tier and you've got prosecuting attorneys and government attorneys. They frequently work decent hours and CAN make a decent living after some amount of time. These positions used to be easier to get than they are now. Graduates of a lot of schools, 1,2nd,3rd tier can get these jobs. Still very competitive though, especially these days. Very good to be "juiced in"...The lower the tier of law school you went to, the more difficult it is though. One problem with these positions is that a lot of government agencies do not have sufficient funding...thus you get the problem of starting prosecuting attorneys (Boston) being the LOWEST paid employee in the court house. Much lower starting wage than the janitor... You also start to have problems where the agency wants you to work for a year as an intern for FREE. This is the other level of attorney that a lot of people think of when you mention the word "attorney". Go down another level and you've got sole practitioners "hanging a shingle" and very small firms (1,2,3 members). These people are all over the board...but MOST of them do not make very much money. Some of them do make good money, but they are the exception. On yet another level are "contract" attorneys. This is what I did. We would work on a case by base basis preparing/helping for big, massive lawsuits. This used to be the exclusive domain of "BIG LAW". Newly hired "BIG LAW" attorneys would "make their bones" by doing this for a couple/few years and then moving up through the firm. About 15 years ago, this work started to get outsourced, Why have a junior associate at a "BIG LAW" firm in NYC do this for $150/hour when it can be "onshored" from NYC/DC to Detroit? Detroit has plenty of experienced attorneys who are hungry and will work for $20,$22, $23 (no benefits) an hour. Obviously, rent & infrastructure is cheaper in Detroit than it is in NYC/DC. Detroit is not the only place where this happens... There are THOUSANDS of attorneys who are doing this. Up to 100 attorneys will get packed into a large room, and each has a small desk/cubicle/work area to do their work. This is largely boring/tedious work sorting documents, doing low level analysis of communications/contracts, etc. It is crucial work that has to be done. I did it because I needed work at that point in my life. I also had some finance/banking experience which was needed on certain projects. I also was reasonably good at what I did, no drinking/fighting/cursing/yelling, showed up on time, did my work...so I got put on another project when one ended (rolled over). I would have work available 90% of the time. Those attorneys that did not do good work, or were difficult to work with, were only given work when "warm bodies" were desperately needed... The crazy stories I could tell about crazy attorneys could fill a book! One of the MANY crazy things about this work was that many attorneys regarded this work as desirable and "BIG KASH MONEY" work! WTF??? How could that be? A). Many attorneys simply never could get hired on anywhere for anything. Some of these people could be mistaken for hobos...but there were PLENTY of sharp, hard working people that this happened to. I made friends with a woman who graduated 3rd in her class and was in school on scholarship. She looked for work for over a year before she got hired on as a contract worker. She was in a desperate situation, and finally made it into contract work. B). There were "BIG LAW" type people who were let go in the great financial meltdown and simply could not find work anywhere else. People with shockingly good resumes. This frequently happens to older workers. There were attorneys in their 60's doing this... C). There were also plenty of people who "hanged their shingle" and were trying to make extra money. A lot of these people were really scraping by...These guys generally are not making much money, especially when you factor in expenses. D). Most shocking of all were the "sh!t law" people. These are the attorneys that work the DUI, bankruptcy, personal injury, criminal law, etc, at the "mill" firms. These were frequently fresh out of school people desperate for a job. Firm hires them at $28k, $32k a year...young attorney is happy to get a job in their field, even though it is a less than prestigious firm. What they DO NOT REALIZE is that they are working 80 hours a week. Working with desperate/screwy clients, desperate/screwy bosses. Sure, they make $30k a year, but they've got to put in 3,500-4,000 hours a year to get that money. They continue to slog through it, hoping to rise up the ladder. What they did not realize is that the business model is simply to burn through them. When they can't/won't take it anymore, there is another fresh/desperate graduate willing to work for that money. They are then replaced and the model churns ahead. They are/were expendable workers. There is no advancement/career path. So they move to contract work at a much easier work load and a lot more money. There are many of thousands of attorneys doing this. This is what was so shocking to me. E). Then you've got a segment of attorneys that simply can not get ANY work at all. F). Then you've got a segment of law school graduates who can't pass the bar, and thus can never work as an attorney. You would think this segment would be tiny, but it is not. So the well paying jobs in law go to about 10% or 15% of graduates...the rest fend for themselves. The other pressing problem is the mammoth debt levels that most younger attorneys have. So no, most attorneys that I worked with did not buy any health insurance. The other problem with Obama care is that after some level of benefits being paid out, the payout ratio switches from 80/20 to 20/80. Thus, if you get a 100K+ medical bill, you are likely to be wiped out financially anyway...so why buy it? The only way it would make sense financially is if you have a MODERATE bill (broken limb) or something like that. A minor illness would not meet your deductible. A MAJOR big time bill, and you are still wiped financially. Sorry for the long post, hope this is informative!

Hey all: I am surprised there is not more of a "rebellion" against Obama Care or whatever it's replacement will be. Every single attorney (mainly very late 20's or early mid 30's) that I worked with and would discuss it, was paying the penalty. NOBODY that I worked with bought insurance. The premiums were so expensive and the DEDUCTIBLE so high, you could make a plausible argument that it was not really insurance at all. Simply moving wealth from one group to another. If Trump is not careful, he is going to have a problem with this.

Hey all: I briefly looked at this book and it seems like a waste of time & effort. One example was that he profiled a mining company with something like $300k in revenue. These are largely "pump & dump" stocks. They were also sub $.01 stocks with hundreds of millions of shares outstanding. There is absolute gold in OTC & nano cap stocks...but you've still got to have MILLIONS in revenue, not thousands. For most people on this board, I think this book would be a waste of time. I am mainly invested in nano-caps. I've posted several of these in the past, but the vast majority of members just seem to have no interest in them...

Haha, I wish it was that easy! The only player pool in the world where that would be enough to become a winning player is playing it against the aforementioned 85 IQ players who just got the 10 minute explanation. Whoops! I should have correctly completed that thought/sentence! Please add: "If you followed those rules to a "T" and did not make any deviation from the strategy". I know a guy who plays in local casinos, his street name is "Big Bet Bob". 98% to 99% of the time he simply folds his cards. When he does bet, he will bet at least $100, to all of his money (most likely). He may be betting $100+ into a pot of only $5, it does not matter. He simply waits for super premium hands (A,A K,K Q,Q AsKs) and he fires away. Incredibly simple strategy...He also picks his room/time well for the promotions. He claims to win 80%+ of the time and over the long run makes $16 to $18 an hour. This is an incredibly simple strategy to plan and understand...more difficult in the execution of it. HOWEVER, it is a winning strategy for him because he has incredible discipline. He can easily sit for 6+ hours and only play 4-5 hands the whole time. It is VERY hard to follow correct strategy all of the time and to walk away from money that you have invested in the pot. I am very good at this, but I also make this mistake from time to time. For example: I flop a set (3 of a Kind) of Aces...and there is $300 in the pot....The next two cards come out and there is a possibility of somebody having a flush AND the possibility of somebody having a straight. BOTH of these hands beat 3 Aces....but I simply can't get away from it because: A). I've got a lot of money in the pot already (sunk cost fallacy) B). 3 Aces is a very, very good hand, and I haven't been getting any good cards all night! C). I'm not going to let those goofs (my opponents) get one over on me! D). It is only another $150, so why not? I don't make this type of mistake often, but I admit I've been guilty of it in the past. How many other people make this same mistake? Many, many, many players do. It is easy to see the mistake, easy to write about it, but hard to get away from it in real life situations. Similar mistakes happen in investing all the time....

Hey all: Playing no-limit Texas Hold-Em poker is relatively simple. I can explain it to anybody with an 85+ IQ in maybe 10 minutes? You would know enough of the game to be able to play it correctly & according to rules & form. That certainly would NOT make you a winning player.... To add strategy on to that would maybe take 1-2 hours. That would make you good enough to be an overall winning player... To become a better player would take many, many, many more hours of practice & study. Even with the practice & study, it is easy to read about it. It is slightly more difficult to do it on a simulation for no money....It is entirely a different thing to do it in a casino, for real money, under stress & distractions. Even most of those who fancy themselves experienced & learned players can't be successful in the long run because they lack discipline. Easy to play right for an hour, especially when you get good cards. What happens when you have tough opponents and mediocre/bad cards and you've been playing 5-6 hours straight? Can you still keep discipline and be watchful? 85% of players simple can't do this... I can't tell you how many "pros" I see lose their discipline after several hours...OR go on "tilt" after a setback. Eventually they walk away after losing all their money. I suspect something similar happens in the investment world. Easy to read, easy in simulation, very difficult to accomplish in real situations. Poker & investing is a HARD way to make an easy living...

Hey all: I've got a family who has a rather substantial investment portfolio. He is a self directed investor. He does not trade very often. Most years he makes a few trades....no trades the last year or so... Anyway, he uses various discount brokers and the last 3 years he has NEGATIVE costs for trading! He recently received $5k to move his two accounts to Scottrade AND got 250 free trades. Of course, he will never need anywhere near 250 free trades. He would probably be content with 10 free trades! He has done this 3 times now and his costs for trading were silly low before, something like .00015 of assets under management. Now, he gets paid to move his accounts and gets free trades. So no fee for the little bit of trading that he does, and the brokers pay him for the privilege! Anybody else doing this?

Hey all: I've got an unfortunate update on the bug & worm selling scheme... I bumped into the guy's wife the other day and she updated me as to what is going on. A). Most of the BBQ & Siracha meal worms remain uneaten. The children refused to touch them and almost panicked when they were being cooked. They barely ate for days as they were worried that the worms would be "worked into" other foods to be gotten rid of. I.E. grind up the meal worms and put them in spaghetti sauce. So big problem there.... B). The dude actually ate a bunch of the stuff and could barely choke it down. The chocolate dipped scorpions remain untouched. None of the stuff is "tasty", it is just a question of how much of it can be eaten. C). He ordered about 1/2 of the supplies to get growing meal worms. So now there is a bunch of plastic tubs & stands & lights. I then asked the guy behind the scheme how everything was going a few days later in person. He got rather defensive and said he is going "my own speed". So he wasted a bunch of time & $. He pissed off his wife and got his children all worked up. WHO WOULD HAVE EVER THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE PROBLEMS? Oh well, onto the next idea...

Hey all: I've got some "associates" who swear by FN 5.7! Has anybody ever tried a P90? A FN 5.7 pistol? Very interesting design/engineering. I've heard the Secret Service uses these items...

I would disagree with that....When I was a Costco member (2 years) could I find cheaper prices on items somewhere else? Well, yes, I certainly could...but I would have to hunt & drive to find it. On certain things...individual hummus & guacomole cups, Costco can't be beat for price & quality...house brand laundry detergent, Perrier, soda....and many other things they were either the cheapest/best or very close to it. Costco also has excellent clothes & office furniture (shelving & such). They have some good spices, Indian food, bulk rice & noodles & such that I have not been able to find cheaper. Their price on meats was good...could be beat...but the freshness & cleanliness simply could NOT be beat. The problem for me was buying in bulk. What the hell is a single guy going to do with 5 lbs. of ground beef? OR 12 lbs. chicken wings? I also noticed that a lot of Indian folk & other Asians shop at Costco. In my area, these folks have a "reputation" for finding good deals on items. Costco also tends to have more "upscale" clients than Sam's Club...at least where I am at. Of course, Detroit is kind of it's own unique area...so perhaps Sam's Club is different in different areas of the country. I also know a Costco employee. He says you have to "audition" on a part time basis for about a year for relatively low wages. If you "make it" after your audition period, then you go to full time employment & benefits. The wages are very, very good after you've worked there a few years. Certainly much higher than Sam's Club. Costco employees actually seem to be loyal & motivated...not so much with Sam's Club. Just my observations from Detroit!

Hey all: My Costco membership ended and I didn't renew as I got a FREE membership to Sam's Club. Here in the Detroit area, the Sam's Club locations are simply terrible. The workers are lackadaisical, hard to find, and simply don't give a damn. The lines to check out are silly long. I frequently spend a lot MORE time waiting to checkout than I do shopping. Selection is somewhat more limited, same thing with quality of the product. I will probably re-up with Costco and stop shopping at Sam's Club, even though it is FREE.

Hey all: Sorry for the lack of updates & promised pictures. I will be adding some this weekend. In the spirit of the topic of the thread, I am also going to expand it to show other "odd" things that have happened in Detroit. A few examples.... A). There are abandoned sky scrapers in Detroit. Not just 1 or 2 either! In the past few years though a few of them have been torn down, and a few have been rehabbed. HOWEVER, there are still several still standing. Some of them are also not 100 years old. There is one near where I sometimes play poker that I think was built in the 60's. A relatively modern looking 20 story building. Totally vacant except for cell phone antennae on the roof. B). There have been PRIME lots of land along the Detroit river that have been for sale as long as I've been alive. I can remember walking past them and seeing "FOR SALE" signs as a very small child. 35+ years later they are still "FOR SALE". Assuming there was 1 owner, there is no WAY they can make their money back after paying property taxes for 35+ years. C). I and my father used to live in a CO-OP on the Detroit River. A very nice luxury building...After the great recession, many units were simply given back to the CO-OP board as there was simply no resale market for them. If these were in NYC, they would be million dollar units. Property has come back to life in Detroit, and the vacancy rate has gone from 35% to now maybe 5%. Value of the units has also come back, but still a crazy situation. Dad bought his unit(s) around 1985. He sold in 2007. He got about what he paid. There was almost no price appreciation in 20 years. This was also before the great recession hit. I am sure I will have some other examples too. This weekend I am going to try and take some photos of stuff so readers will have examples of what I'm talking about....

Hey all: Everything is progressing...just taking a LOT more time & energy than initially expected. Got the first water & sewer bill the other day....This is reason # 5,796,473,954 why Detroit & Michigan have sunk so far into poverty & despair. Total bill was almost $110 for 35 days of water & sewer. Water use was just above nothing. A lot of days there is NO water used at all. The vast majority of time, I am the only one there. She then informed me that consumers have to pay for pensions AND all the unpaid water bills in Detroit...There were 90,000 unpaid water bills in Detroit according to the NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/04/opinion/going-without-water-in-detroit.html?_r=0 keep that in perspective. Detroit now has about 700k residents, down about 65% from it's peak population. If there are two residents per household, that means that about 26% of Detroit households are not paying their water & sewer bills. Water & sewer in Detroit is MUCH more expensive than in Las Vegas and Texas. Finally, consider that Detroit sits atop the best fresh water resource(s) in the WORLD. Also consider that the infrastructure is probably 100+ years old and has certainly been paid off by now. The major spending is on maintenance & upkeep, no huge capital outlays needed to build it. I am going to guess that if there weren't MASSIVE problems here, you would not be able to buy commercial buildings for $11/sq. ft.

Unless a massive trade war breaks out, I am not so sure manufacturing capability for USA clothing retailers will be that important. Even when there were lots of USA jobs in clothing production, they typically were not well paid/good jobs. It is one thing to lose a sweat sock manufacturing job ($9/hour), and another thing to lose an automobile/steel production job ($29/hour). I think that "heavy industry" jobs/production capability will be more important going forward. I also have been poking around at some of the retailers lately...but have not pulled the trigger on anything, and have found some of them to NOT be that compelling an investment even with price declines. I think the best one I've found so far has been Guess? (GES).

Hey all: I had a friend buy a timeshare maybe 10 years ago? It was a very nice place...BUT...with all the maintenance fees & special assessments, you could stay at a nice hotel for the SAME PRICE, or even cheaper if you were very skilled on searching the interwebs. He was apoplectic when I showed him this...and this was a while ago, so it's probably gotten worse. You always lose money with a timeshare, only a question of how much...

Hey all: Looks like AAPL is up $6 this AM. Turns out this was the guy's "last stand".

Hey all: As stupid as Trump as...he beat Hillary soundly. What does that say?

Packer,... You see, I was looking on YouTube all year long at the hearts and minds of the "real" people,... the heartland/ flyover nation,...and sensed, that remarkable history will be made. I was silently cheering, go, go, he will make it over the finishing line first. I kept politely silent, realizing most people in media have no clue about the underlying dynamics. Counting Hillary and Trump Yard Signs in PA ----- Counting Hillary and Trump Yard Signs in PA - Volume 2 There was a similar thing going on here in Michigan. A couple of weeks before the election, I was in a prosperous suburb of Detroit. At a MAJOR intersection, there were a couple of hundred Trump supporters waving signs, waving to traffic, and walking through the intersection (when allowed by traffic light) carrying their signs. Maybe 2/3 of these supporters were women. They largely looked like "real" women from that area and not paid or bused in demonstrators. These people were enthusiastic, energetic, and looked they wanted to be there. Conversely, the only spontaneous demonstration that I saw for Hillary was a couple of "cat ladies" dejectedly waving Hillary banners. They did not look enthusiastic. They too were at a major intersection in a different part of town. Not very effective. In the democrat primary, Bernie Sanders beat Hillary in Michigan. It was one of the largest political upsets in history. Going into the primary, the "media" had Hillary over Bernie by 20+ points. So here in Michigan, the "media" simply had absolutely no idea what they were talking about, both with Bernie & Trump. Not even close...

This sounds like it makes sense, but it really doesn't. I repeat--Vancouver, where guns are illegal, hasn't had a single cop shooting for 30 years. This area includes the east side, called by the BBC the "Drug Central" of North America. DTEJD1997, in places where law enforcement is incapable of protecting its citizen, I'd suggest making guns illegal throughout the country to make the job far easier for law enforcement, increasing taxes and throwing the money toward cop and judges, and federally prosecuting corrupt cops and judges. If the cops can't OR WILL NOT protect the citizens now...what makes you think they will do it when/if guns are illegal? I wish the police well, and support them in their (legitimate) job, but I will protect myself and family. In my (family) experience, we have very little faith & trust in the police. How is making guns illegal going to make them do a better job? How is giving them more money going to accomplish that? They get a TON OF MONEY right now, in my city, where their effectiveness is marginal. Order is largely kept during the day, and you can't be flagrant in your law breaking...if you operate at night and are sneaky...it is wide open. There are major theft rings operating with impunity. Drug dealers operate almost openly...Don't speed though, you'll get a ticket! In Detroit proper, things are even worse... So no, no more centralized police power...power to the people.

Okay, I suppose that you can argue that statistics about homicides by guns are completely irrelevant to a discussion about homicides by guns. It's not the way I would approach the discussion if I wanted to prove my point, but you and I think differently. Since you prefer the murder rate, USA has about 5 murders for every 2 that Canada has. Therefore, I'll assume that you'll concede the point that gun-control makes sense if you actually care about keeping people alive. (Some fun trivia: on February 2nd, we'll hit the 30th anniversary of the last time a cop was killed by a gun in Vancouver. Also--since we care about all cop murders, not just gun ones--the last time a cop was killed in Vancouver.) I see. As long as you exclude every place that you don't like, and restrict the area of comparison to a tiny geographical area comprised of less than 0.5% of the country's population, then gun ownership doesn't matter at all. Are you listening to yourself? Next time you analyse a business, I suggest you exclude all the money the company spends on salaries--it'll make it look really profitable! So what you're saying is that the US is inherently more violent, and so therefore it's great to ensure all these inherently violent people have guns? Hmm. It kind of amuses me that Trump's been implying that the immigrants are the criminals, but from what you say, it would probably be better diluting the inherent American aggressiveness by increasing the number of peaceful immigrants. :) With respect to the UK, let's look at the situation. (I know you tend to throw out statements out without bothering with facts or evidence, but it's helpful to me when the conversation is actually grounded in reality.) http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/04/24/article-2313942-1974D490000005DC-694_634x522.jpg So, this chart isn't adjusted by population size. Thus, all else being equal, you'd expect every line in this chart to trend up as the population increases. Yet what do we see since the 1997 gun ban? Homicides down. Violent crimes went way up, and then down. Net of everything, violent crimes are up about 10-15% despite the population growth since 1997. So this doesn't support your argument either. At best, we have lower homicides and roughly equivalent violent crimes. That said, I'm starting to understand why you throw out these statements without any supporting evidence. You know, I understand that with you, when there's a conflict between your ideology and facts, ideology always wins. But you'd save everyone some time and be more persuasive if next time, you'd just say, "I think freedom to bear arms is more important than reducing the number of men, woman, and children who die from guns." (Seriously. I can respect that position over these half-hearted attempts to pretend that gun control wouldn't work. I think, for instance, that privacy should trump spying on Americans in an attempt to root out terrorists, even if allowing Americans privacy would result in more Americans being killed by terrorists. That's basically a completely parallel argument to the one you should be making on gun control.) That's a valid point. It certainly wouldn't be easy getting to reasonable gun control, and may not be worth the effort. This is a lot of mingled garbage. Let's isolate Chicago. Where the majority of gun related violence occurs with non-registered guns. Lets look at NY; doh, same thing. California, doh, same thing. Funny, all are huge liberal hubs as well. Why don't we break down Texas by county/region/(dare I say it, Republican vs Democrat territory) as well. Oh, you get the same thing. Heck even compare gun violence within NY to upstate vs NYC. But I suppose if we look at it from this angle we're being racist or whatever... Are you like a dumbass? Cities tend to be liberal and gun violence tends to occur more often in cities. Without diving into your level of deplorability, I would politely point out that I simply referred to the misnomer that restricting gun ownership is the answer as in all these crime ladel hell holes the majority of these crimes occur with unregistered guns. Which will continue even if you take away all the guns owned by law abiding citizens. *I appreciate the editing of your post. With the original tone I would have had nothing left but to assume you where one of the deplorables who voted for Trump... Just to further add to the gun ownership thread!!! What would the response be to people who want to own guns to protect themselves/property? Maybe members of this board don't know or appreciate...but there are areas of America where law enforcement can't/won't protect the citizens. I know this for a fact as I live in one of those areas...What would you do about Detroit? I would posit that citizens have the right to protect themselves if the police can't or won't.

I watched the video, here's where I see camera cuts: 0:08, 0:26, 0:58, 1:13, 1:23, 1:38, 1:57, 2:39, 2:50, 3:01, 3:09, 3:37. They should release the full video in addition to this edited version. That said, most of his comments are opinion or conjecture, not an admission or fact. The context of busing voters seems to very clearly relate to NYS assembly primary candidates. The full fraud quote is "You can see a lot of fraud. Not just voter fraud, all kinds of fraud" and the response was "what a waste of taxpayer money," his comment is not specific to state issued IDs. Given O'Keefe's track record, I see no reason to give him any benefit of the doubt that this conclusively proves vast voter fraud. I will concede that it might not be VAST voter fraud, BUT that is certainly evidence that things are going on in NYC. If buses of people are being moved around in local elections, might that not be going on in national elections? This coming from one of the guys in charge of voting! What he is saying could be termed "an admission against interest"... If you don't think that video is alarming, I guess we just see things differently. It seems pretty clear that the difference between local elections and state/national elections are that a few people can make a difference in the prior, whereas it takes tens or hundreds of thousands to make a difference in the latter. The Trump campaign asked its supporters to be poll watchers on election day, how come none of them were able to spot massive irregularities - like the busing of thousands of people across different polling places? A few thousand people can make a difference in a national election. Trump won by narrow majority in MI & WI. As to not seeing anything "weird" going on at the polling place in NYC...who knows...maybe people were inside & did not see out a window...perhaps a bus left people a 1/2 or 1 block away? Maybe they didn't take a bus? Maybe they rode in a van, subway? Also, NYC probably went very, very heavily for Hillary & against Trump, heck, there were districts in OH & PA where 100% or 99.9% of the votes went Democrat, maybe there was not a Trump poll watcher at all districts? What is not in contention is what the election commissioner said. Of course, maybe he was just making all that stuff up. If you also think that a political machine that will "rig" local and state election is suddenly NOT going to do anything in a NATIONAL election, I've got bad news for you.

I watched the video, here's where I see camera cuts: 0:08, 0:26, 0:58, 1:13, 1:23, 1:38, 1:57, 2:39, 2:50, 3:01, 3:09, 3:37. They should release the full video in addition to this edited version. That said, most of his comments are opinion or conjecture, not an admission or fact. The context of busing voters seems to very clearly relate to NYS assembly primary candidates. The full fraud quote is "You can see a lot of fraud. Not just voter fraud, all kinds of fraud" and the response was "what a waste of taxpayer money," his comment is not specific to state issued IDs. Given O'Keefe's track record, I see no reason to give him any benefit of the doubt that this conclusively proves vast voter fraud. I will concede that it might not be VAST voter fraud, BUT that is certainly evidence that things are going on in NYC. If buses of people are being moved around in local elections, might that not be going on in national elections? This coming from one of the guys in charge of voting! What he is saying could be termed "an admission against interest"... If you don't think that video is alarming, I guess we just see things differently.

I don't think there is any question that voter fraud is occurring. The question is HOW MUCH of it is going on. How is that? A). A "bigwig" (Alan Schulkin, Commissioner of Board of Elections NYC) is caught on tape discussing how they bus people into certain districts to vote, he also goes on to discuss other types of fraud and that massive fraud is going on: http://www.dailywire.com/news/9876/watch-nyc-dem-election-official-caught-video-there-amanda-prestigiacomo Why did this not get more attention? Absolutely shocking.... B). Here in Michigan almost half of the voting districts in Detroit did not have their votes recounted as there were problems with the ballot box (being unlocked), the number of people showing up to vote didn't match the number of ballots cast, and on & on. Mind you, not all of this is due to voter fraud. Sometimes there was 1 more ballot cast than recorded, so that is more likely a clerical error than a scam going on....but there certainly were goofy things going on. Simply the fact that there is so much sloppiness & error is a scandal in of itself. C). Many, many states are embroiled in litigation in regards to voter ID. I have to show ID to enter federal buildings, courts, libraries, casinos, etc. How do so many people go through life without any ID? Are poor minority people of such destitution that they can't afford the $5 to get a state ID? How do they drive? They can't figure this out? Just pondering this out loud. Q: Why would you NOT want ID's to be checked when voting? A: In order to enable wide scale voter fraud. D). When I was living in Houston Texas, there were millions of illegal immigrants. Most of them were hard working, decent people. HOWEVER, you can't tell me that some of them aren't voting. Is it 10, 100, 1,000, 10,000, more? Nobody really knows. E). In the last election, there were districts in OH & PA where Mitt Romney (and others) received 0,1,2 votes. These were almost all in minority districts. No doubt, Obama was going to win these districts and win them heavily....but the Republican wouldn't get 1% of the vote? The Green party wouldn't get 1%? Obama got 100% or 99.9%? This wasn't 1 or 2 districts...this went on in many districts. If that happened in more than 1 or 2 districts, I would think alone would be evidence of fraud going on... This is just what I can think of off the top of my head. I am sure that there are other things going on. So yes, there is voter fraud going on, just a question of how much, and how much an effect it has on the outcome. There seems to be an incredible disconnect among those blasting a 'biased media' while at the same time advocating sources like James O'Keefe's Project Veritas to be factual. He's been criticized extensively for deceptive editing and framing by the Columbia Journalism Review and the Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting organization. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/30/james-okeefe-accidentally-stings-himself Part of the problem with the voter ID laws is that states have restricted them such that only certain forms of ID are acceptable. For example, in North Carolina government issued public assistance cards (with photos) were not permissible as valid forms of ID. It's not a coincidence that those with the public assistance cards were disproportionately minorities. Maybe Okeefe has engaged in shady things, perhaps that is true. If so, he should be held to higher scrutiny. HOWEVER, if you watch that video of the NYC election commissioner, he let the cat out of the bag. The video is about 4 minutes. There is NO WAY that thing has been taken out of context or misrepresented. The only way is if they somehow tricked him into reading que cards OR were holding a gun to his head. At the end of the video, he discusses that ALL SORTS of fraud is going on with the state issued ID's. It is not limited to voter fraud...

I don't think there is any question that voter fraud is occurring. The question is HOW MUCH of it is going on. How is that? A). A "bigwig" (Alan Schulkin, Commissioner of Board of Elections NYC) is caught on tape discussing how they bus people into certain districts to vote, he also goes on to discuss other types of fraud and that massive fraud is going on: http://www.dailywire.com/news/9876/watch-nyc-dem-election-official-caught-video-there-amanda-prestigiacomo Why did this not get more attention? Absolutely shocking.... B). Here in Michigan almost half of the voting districts in Detroit did not have their votes recounted as there were problems with the ballot box (being unlocked), the number of people showing up to vote didn't match the number of ballots cast, and on & on. Mind you, not all of this is due to voter fraud. Sometimes there was 1 more ballot cast than recorded, so that is more likely a clerical error than a scam going on....but there certainly were goofy things going on. Simply the fact that there is so much sloppiness & error is a scandal in of itself. C). Many, many states are embroiled in litigation in regards to voter ID. I have to show ID to enter federal buildings, courts, libraries, casinos, etc. How do so many people go through life without any ID? Are poor minority people of such destitution that they can't afford the $5 to get a state ID? How do they drive? They can't figure this out? Just pondering this out loud. Q: Why would you NOT want ID's to be checked when voting? A: In order to enable wide scale voter fraud. D). When I was living in Houston Texas, there were millions of illegal immigrants. Most of them were hard working, decent people. HOWEVER, you can't tell me that some of them aren't voting. Is it 10, 100, 1,000, 10,000, more? Nobody really knows. E). In the last election, there were districts in OH & PA where Mitt Romney (and others) received 0,1,2 votes. These were almost all in minority districts. No doubt, Obama was going to win these districts and win them heavily....but the Republican wouldn't get 1% of the vote? The Green party wouldn't get 1%? Obama got 100% or 99.9%? This wasn't 1 or 2 districts...this went on in many districts. If that happened in more than 1 or 2 districts, I would think alone would be evidence of fraud going on... This is just what I can think of off the top of my head. I am sure that there are other things going on. So yes, there is voter fraud going on, just a question of how much, and how much an effect it has on the outcome.

Hey all: I think there is INCREDIBLE opportunity doing this... HOWEVER, you would have to have be very well capitalized. Buying a few thousand dollars or even $10k or $20k worth of stock would not simply be adequate in most cases. You would also need to be incredibly patient. You would probably need a time frame of YEARS. In order to get a position you would have to willing to buy ANY time shares became available. You would also have to be willing to go above a 5% position. You would also need to be closely working with an attorney. You would need to be willing to take legal action to enforce your rights/plans. I own stocks in companies that would/could be a target for activism. I have not yet taken any action. Perhaps later this year.

I used to count cards.... The "stacks" of cards are known as decks. Back in day, Blackjack was either 1 or 2 decks. At some point in the 70's, the casinos started using 4,5,6,8 decks dealt from a "shoe". This makes counting only marginally more difficult. You adjust the "count" to reflect the number of decks in use. In advanced counting systems, the count may change your "basic strategy". What DOES make 4,5,6,8 deck counting MORE difficult is that you have to hold your concentration for longer periods of time. In single deck, once the deck is shuffled, your count starts all over, in a shoe game, you might have to concentrate & count for 20+ minutes. As time has gone by, casinos have put in many different counter measures to combat counters. 1). They are changing the rules & payout on BJ. For example, BJ pay 6:5, NOT 3:2!!!! A rule change is that NOW dealers commonly hit on "soft" 17's. Another rule change is upping the minimum bet. For example, at MGM grand in Detroit, the MINIMUM bet is rarely less than $25/hand. On weekends the minimum bet is $50/hand!!! As a counter, you want to be the minimum (i.e. $5) and then when the count gets favorable jump you bet up to $100 or $200. At $25 or $50 a hand, you need to have a bankroll of $5,000+ every time you sit down to play. How many "counters" can do that? 2). Some casinos now use "CSM" or continuous shuffler machines. After every round of cards being dealt, the cards are fed back into the machine, shuffled, and then dealt out. Thus, there is almost no reasonable way to count the deck. 3). Casinos are much aggressive about "backing off" AP's & counters. In ALL jurisdictions, counting cards is legal, HOWEVER, in most jurisdictions, a casino does not have to gamble with you. They can "back you off". Thus, as a counter, you can't ply your trade.... 4). Finally, even if you are skilled counter, your advantage will rarely get more than 3% or so on the house. A good advantage for sure...but a string of bad luck can easily wipe you out. You need to have HUGE amounts of capital to deploy if you are going to be serious about counting... Thus, while counting cards is not dead, it is a shadow of it's heyday. AP's have largely moved onto Poker and sports betting for the most part...