DTEJD1997

I"ve got a problem with this, AND with the "no fly" list. If people are to be banned from flying, or buying guns, or watching videos on the inter web, etc....they need to have a judicial proceeding to deny them of their liberty. You can't have the government just taking away liberties. That is unconstitutional. If somebody is guilty of terrorist support, fine, have a proceeding/trial and get a verdict.... NOTE: this does not apply to non citizens....

The problem with your argument is that it's not the people in the terrible parts of town that desire to be gun owners, nor are they the most vocal about 2A rights. It's people in rural areas that are politically conservative that are most likely to be vocal in this issue. It is not solely a utilitarian or safety issue, but the simple fact that some people just like guns and view it as a fundamental right. Not an existential battle to survive. Privileged people also want guns! I can assure you that people in less affluent areas of town want guns too! Frequently, they have them also.... You are right however that there are MANY facets to the gun discussion. Some people collect them, some people are hunters, target shooters, some are business people, others want it for defensive purposes. I would argue that when government does NOT protect it's people, does not keep civil order, citizens ABSOLUTELY have a right to self defense. Finally, in a side note, several posters can't seem to discuss this in a civil/rational manner. This board is supposed to be better than the general internet rabble....

Hey guys: Before this goes too far off the rails....I would caution members to "check their privilege". I am going to guess that most members of this forum come from a middle class or higher background. I grew up in Detroit in the late 70's and early 80's. The city was an ABSOLUTE nightmare. Violence was absolutely almost out of control. Society seemed to be coming apart at the seems. Police were almost ineffectual. The area I grew up in was the highest end part of Detroit, "Indian Village". Very beautiful, very large houses built by industrialists in the very early part of the 20th century. It was about 3 blocks wide by 12 blocks long. It was surrounded on 3 sides by ghetto. Over the years, on every block, people were killed, shot at, bludgeoned, etc. Break ins and property crimes were too numerous to even keep track of. Once my father was shot at by a thief breaking into his car. Luckily, he was not hit, and the thief took off after firing. When the police were summoned, they asked if anybody was wounded, was the thief still there? If not, they would be there sometime that night, they came 3 hours later. Gun ownership was not that common amongst the homeowners. It should have been. Why should people not be allowed to arm themselves if police are ineffectual? People have a right to protect themselves and their property, rich & poor alike. I think that some people who live in good areas and have led "sheltered lives" tend to forget about this...

I thought that was a given and didn't need to post examples. That is why I would love to see them debate each other. The best comedy on prime time. The Onion has a rather extensive coverage of Mr. Biden. One of the funniest pranks I ever played.... I had a salesman once who was an Intelligence Officer in VietNam. A real "straight shooter" and patriot. A great guy! Anyway...there was an Onion article about how Biden was out & about one day in the presidential limo. He saw an abandoned sofa by the side of the road and directed the Secret Service to stop the limo, put the sofa in the trunk, and help him bring it back to the Whitehouse. Unfortunately, it was infested with bedbugs....the Whitehouse had to be fumigated, and Obama was furious with Biden. I copied the article, got rid of the Onion markings, and pasted an AP byline on it. Gave it to my sales guy. He read it and his face turned read. He started yelling obscenities about Biden. I had to calm him down by telling him it was fake. That is what sometimes makes the Onion so funny. The stories, while fake, are close enough to the truth to be believed.

hey all: One fundamental problem with this thread & the question of who to vote for is the PRESUMPTION that Hillary gets the democrat nomination. While I think it is STILL likely at this point...the odds of her stepping down OR being indicted have gone up considerably (Email & charity problems). Additionally, should she lose the primary in California, that could put pressure on super-delegates to switch to Bernie Sanders. While I don't think it likely that Bernie can win the nomination, he still has a chance, ESPECIALLY if super-delegates panic and are willing to jump ship. Finally, the powers that be, might panic and tell Hillary to get out. I don't think that is likely, but the odds are greater than zero. I would put the odds at something like drawing to an inside straight, mid single digit percentages. Add it all up, and Hillary has some real problems. She does not have it "locked up" at this point. One final thing....this is a real "cage match" election. Hillary MUST WIN...for if she does not she has two problems: A). Trump has said he wants her arrested and charged. B). A lot of very powerful backers have given her & Bill quite a bit of money on the presumption that she will become president. If she doesn't, they are going to be very, very upset on their investment.

I do have digital access, and I do use it. HOWEVER, I much prefer the print edition. With the print edition, I find myself reading more articles, and having a better appreciation for what is going on. Digital is GREAT for something with a narrow focus. I find print to be much better for a broad outlook/understanding.

I am just outside of Detroit, and yes we have water & power. MOST of Detroit has water & electricity...only most... I know for a fact this is not a problem limited to Detroit. I had terrible problems in Houston.

Hey all: Here is something that just popped into my head today regarding print media, specifically newspapers & other periodicals NOT sent through the mail (Barrons, local papers, business journals). These guys could be facing an industry catastrophe because they can't get their stuff delivered. When I was a kid, I delivered papers. I had friends that delivered papers. That was often a first job for people. I don't think any teens deliver papers these days... I've tried to get a subscription to Barron's both in Houston and Detroit. Houston had TERRIBLE problems being delivered, but eventually kind of got it worked out. That was maybe 3 years ago or so. Fast forward to today. I simply can't get Barron's delivered AT ALL in metro Detroit. Perhaps this a problem for the industry as a whole. There is nobody willing to deliver stuff. Perhaps a delivery model is simply not feasible any more. Nobody is willing to deliver a paper for $.50, even if they have a route of 100 people? So maybe the days of paper delivery are over with. Papers will have to be on the internet period.

I don't agree, and even if I did, are we to convict them for crimes they might commit? Maybe we need to stop expecting our elected leaders to be role models and paragons of virtue and instead focus on what effects they can wield with policy. First of all, it is not proven that he lied under oath. Secondly, even if he did lie, I do not consider it a serious matter because the topic he lied about was not a serious matter. Well, there you go. I couldn't have said it any better myself!

A man that is willing to cheat on his wife might be willing to do other things...A man that is willing to lie to 330mm Americans might be willing to do other things to. You seriously don't think Billy lying about what was going on in the Oval Office under oath was a serious matter? If push comes to shove, you don't think Bill would lie about other more important issues? He & Hillary have been involved in one shady, crooked, unethical deal after another, after another, after another. If she gets elected, it is simply going to continue. She & Billy need to be in the dustbin of history.

Yes, it is a deeply personal decision to stay with a cheating spouse. HOWEVER, there had been numerous reports, stories, rumors, HECK, even a 60 minutes interview about "Bill's cheating ways". Bill has/had been unfaithful to Hillary on NUMEROUS occasions. Why would she stay with a serial cheater? Yes, everybody might have an error in judgement, a lapse, a temptation. Heck, maybe even twice...but how many times with Bill? As to Hillary being upset, that was surely not the first time. She may have been upset because she feared the gravy train was over. She may also have been upset because there some semblance of deniability with Bill's affairs previously, now that was all over with. Yes, it is Hillary's decision to stay with Bill. Color me skeptical though. Finally, are these the type of characters we want in the White House? In addition to Bill, Chelsea & her husband are up to all sorts of hijinx. Ok, yes, everyone knows that Bill cheated on Hilary multiple times and she stuck with him. Whatever her reasons are are hers. On the flip side you have Trump. He cheated on his wife. While he cheated on his wife he had at least another girlfriend. So he cheated on his wife with let's say his mistress, and then at the same time he cheated on his mistress with another woman. Then according to him he cheated on both of those women with a whole slew of other women because apparently he was irresistible to the fairer sex, like a gift to women from God, whatever Now your choices for president are Hilary Clinton or Donald Trump. I don't care what your fantasies may be. Those are your choices and one of those two will be the next president. You point out the fact that Hilary stood by her philandering husband. Ok. Is Donald, the master philanderer a much better choice from your righteous point of view? I'm not even going to touch all the other blaring facts about his ridiculous attitude towards women that have been thoroughly documented. Having said all that, this whole attitude is ridiculous. You're electing a presidents. Whom he or she fucks or doesn't or stand by or doesn't is irrelevant. The job of the President of the United States does not have anything to do with fidelity or attitude towards a spouse. The president is supposed to do right by the people. Why do you people obsess so much about who blew who instead of focus about who will do right to the American people? Did Bill Clinton do right by the American people? Was he a good stewart of the country? Are Hilary's policy proposals good? Are Trump's policy proposal's good (does he have any?)? Aside from this, why does it matter who blew whom and who did whom, and who stood by whom? You are electing a president, not a spouse! RB: I think you are missing the whole point of what I am saying, and trying to bring across. Yes, Donald Trump has had affairs & such. He is not a saint. HOWEVER, to my knowledge, he has never been pushing an agenda of "fidelity" in the past... Contrast that to Hillary Clinton. In the past, she has held herself up a feminist. She has stated time & again that she believes in those ideals. Fine. HOWEVER, read & listen to her words and then look at her ACTIONS. Her actions go totally AGAINST what she has held herself out as, and claimed to be a member of (feminist movement). While I would argue that "cheating" is a problem for BOTH Trump & Hillary, it is doubly so for Hillary. Her actions go against her "principles". Trump has probably always been a "cad". I don't think he has EVER said that he wasn't. Bill being a philanderer is a problem...but that is not the point I'm bringing across. Hillary has claimed to be a feminist, but her actions are anything but....She is therefore a hypocrite and an especially poor example for young women...Couple this with her taking in the massive foreign donations. What does this woman stand for? And I further disagree with you that the race will be between her & Trump. I will concede that is the MOST LIKELY result...but not 100% certain. Further, I think it not a 0% or 1% chance that she is indicted. While I think it is small, I don't think it is insignificant. Maybe a 10% to 20% chance? Hard to say... That may be one reason why Bernie is staying in till the convention....

Yes, it is a deeply personal decision to stay with a cheating spouse. HOWEVER, there had been numerous reports, stories, rumors, HECK, even a 60 minutes interview about "Bill's cheating ways". Bill has/had been unfaithful to Hillary on NUMEROUS occasions. Why would she stay with a serial cheater? Yes, everybody might have an error in judgement, a lapse, a temptation. Heck, maybe even twice...but how many times with Bill? As to Hillary being upset, that was surely not the first time. She may have been upset because she feared the gravy train was over. She may also have been upset because there some semblance of deniability with Bill's affairs previously, now that was all over with. Yes, it is Hillary's decision to stay with Bill. Color me skeptical though. Finally, are these the type of characters we want in the White House? In addition to Bill, Chelsea & her husband are up to all sorts of hijinx.

Hah, you could replace Clinton with Trump and vice versa and your have my situation, but I live in the NYC bubble so I don't know what the rest of the country is thinking. But seriously, what are you fucking thinking? The man referenced the size of his penis in a speech. He hinted that a moderator was on her period when she challenged him in a debate. He basically called Ted cruz's wife ugly in public. That's your leader? Jesus... What the fuck am I thinking? What the fuck are you thinking? Hillary is an absolute toxic candidate. What kind of example is she for young women? What kind of example is she for feminists? If she is so smart & capable, why didn't she kick Bill to the curb? Why didn't she go out on her on own? Instead, she sticks with Bill to get ahead. In fact, it is worse than that. She actively enabled his behavior! She was in charge of going after several of the women that accused Bill. She knew what was going on...but she compromised her feminist principles in order to get ahead. Further, how much money has she & Bill accepted from the Saudis? I have no idea, but it is in at least the tens of MILLIONS. How can she be for "womens rights" & gay rights yet she is accepting all that money from these guys? How can she be "for" gay rights, when it is punishable by death in Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia is one of her major sponsors! If you accept the idea that Saudi Arabia is NOT for women's rights & gay rights....why are they donating money to somebody who ostensibly is? I don't know...could it be buying influence? What is Hillary even doing accepting money from foreign governments/entities? Her "charity" has been the subject of NUMEROUS articles questioning it's finances. In 2013, it took in $140MM and spent $9MM in direct aid... What is Hillary even doing setting up a server in her bathroom? What about the Arab Spring? What about the death of Americans & the embassy being overrun in Libya? This could go on & on. No wonder Bernie is doing well! Go Bernie go!

The above can be said of Hillary. This describes her perfectly. Additionally, when was the President of America a family run business? Nobody has been bringing this up. What about Hillary's "charity"? By some estimates, 94% of the money received goes to overhead & such. This isn't a $10,000 mini-charity either. We are talking about HUNDREDS of millions of dollars. How this can be called a "charity" is absolutely hilarious. What kind of example does Hillary set for young American women? She is a TERRIBLE role model! She has absolutely betrayed the "feminist" cause. If she is smart & capable, why did she ride on the coattails of Bill? She should have ditched his sorry self DECADES ago. But no, she stuck with him because that is the only way she could get anywhere. So the message to young women is to put up with a terrible husband if he is powerful... What about Hillary & the women that Bill had affairs with? All the crazy, sordid accusations? She worked ACTIVELY to discredit these women! I thought women were to be believed about the accusations of rape & sexual harassment... What example is she setting when she is taking in tens of millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia & other Islamic countries? I think women are forbidden from driving in Saudi Arabia, but here is Hillary taking tons of cash from them and acting as their friend. It is quite obvious that KASH MONEY trumps ideals with her. It is just so shocking that it is right out in the open. So there we go...a few things to think about.

In my group of family, friends & associates I don't know a SINGLE person who is actively supporting Hillary. Many are supporting Trump, some Bernie Sanders. A few said they MIGHT vote for Hillary, but really don't like her & the associated scandals & sleaze.... I think Bernie is a fool when it comes to economics, but at least he is honest.... I think a lot of things are going to change when it is Trump vs. Hillary in the debates. He is the only candidate that will go after her for the scandals. If Bernie was more effective in attacking her, he very well might have won the nomination. There is also a chance (small) that Hillary is indicted over her server. There is also a small chance that an indictment comes over the Clinton foundation. I've been hearing rumors about that for a while now... We'll see. This is going to be the most interesting race in many, many years!

There were some major blowups in the "for profit" educations sector. COCO went bankrupt. I think there was another one. Most of the others are of 90%+ from their peaks. Industry outlook does not look good either.

Yeah, pretty much this. And now you can buy back the position again. ;) And it's not a real nano-cap if it's trading couple hundred shares a day. Real ones don't trade for weeks. :P But yeah, happens. Sold most of my positions in two nanocaps recently. One ~100% up in two days. One maybe 25% up. The second one back down (I'm not rebuying since I don't like it that much). Was small positions and even with that it took effort to sell close to ask in reasonable size. I kinda see how oddball likes these. 8) Yes, I can get back into the position. HOWEVER, you are most assuredly wrong about it being a nano-cap. If this is not a nano-cap, I don't know what is....It's market cap is under $5mm. It is about 15 miles from where I live, I've seen it. It is a real company. Has earnings, no debt, cash in the bank, and has been paying a dividend for YEARS. Also has a very highly regarded product with lots of history. So I'll be looking to trade in & out of it in the coming years. HECK, I wouldn't mind owning the whole company outright!

Hey all: I bought in a real nano-cap company a month or two back. I just took a starter position as it was a bit more than I wanted to pay, but I saw an opportunity to pick up some shares. I took it. The company has decent earnings, a good dividend, and an absolute fortress balance sheet. An incredible product & company... So a bit of time passes...stock starts to nudge up just a bit. Bear in mind that on any given day, there is a good chance the stock will NOT trade. Volume is extremely small. So one day it spikes up maybe 12% or so. No news. Towards the end of the day I check the bid/ask. Both have jumped tremendously. Ask is up nearly 100%. So I place an order for the next day at $.50 below the ask of $5. So my $4.50 sell order is almost 100% higher than when I bought a month previously. There is no news that I can find out. Next day, the most shares trade that I've ever seen. Maybe 10k shares! That is maybe 20X normal volume. My order is executed just before lunch. By the end of the day, ask is down mid 3's. I could not have timed the order better if I had written it. I was very happy! Volume dries up, but still trading a few hundred shares. A week later, it is just about the same price as when I bought it. So what explains this crazy price movement? Only two things I can think of: A). Somebody wanted into a position BAD, real bad, and would pay almost anything to get it.... B). Some possible computer driven program gone awry? Neither one makes any sense to me. Market cap is to low & small to attract "traders". As to somebody having to establish a position, why pay 100% above market? Anybody got any experience with this?

Jurgis: Yes, I do have access to the online version, but it is not quite the same. I enjoy perusing the print. I find that I wind up reading many more articles in print than I do online. Many years ago, I was a paper delivery boy. I don't think they exist these days, the delivery is handled by adults. Barrons is also orders of magnitude more expensive than the paper was/is. I would try and get to know/tip the delivery person, but I've never got an issue in Detroit!

Hey all: I am wondering if anybody else has problems with the print version of Barron's magazine? Years ago, I was living in TX and was given a subscription as a gift for Christmas. In June, I was asked how I liked the paper by the giver. Whut whut? I never got a single issue. I was not aware I was supposed to even get it... After some amount of calling & prodding. I eventually got most of the issues. Not 100% but maybe 90%. OK. Now I live outside of Detroit. Same thing. EXCEPT THIS TIME, I knew I was supposed to get it. I've also called 4 times now. Each time I'm assured it will be delivered. They have the right address... I've asked a supervisor/management to call me back. They never do. I've got to wonder if Dow Jones does not also have a problem with the WSJ? I've lived in 2 different geographic areas, and had SEVERE problems getting a product. Anybody else have this problem?

A slightly different tack you can take is to invest in USA & Canadian listed companies with all, or a vast majority of their sales & earnings in Africa. I have done this for several years and have had mixed results. Of course, this is heavily skewed towards commodities.... Two stocks that you could look at would be: A). Nevsun (Copper, Gold, Zinc) miner in Eritrea. It is listed on NYSE as NSU. The stock pays a healthy dividend, has a healthy balance sheet and could be crazily cheap! B). Caledonia Mining (Gold Mining) in Zimbabwe! It is silly cheap and is listed on Toronto and USA OTC (CAL.to & CALVF). I've done very well with this one. It is a very exciting stock. Very good balance, crazy good dividend, good earnings. Of course, investing in ANYTHING to do with Africa carries an additional layer of risk.

Well said. The vast majority of people don't vote rationally. Trump's taking advantage of this. Also, the discussions on Trump's wealth vs. what it would be if he invested in the S&P ignores that he's lived like a king for most of his adult life. He's supported multiple wives, five kids, etc. I don't know how you properly account for that. I think he deserves quite a bit of credit for his business career. People don't vote rationally? Maybe... But does is it such a STRETCH to think some people are fed-up with the system? That a lot of people are angry with the direction the country is going? That a lot of people remember the Clinton's first time in office and don't want a replay of that? Is it outside the bounds of comprehension that some people do not want Hillary in charge, no matter what? That Trump, while not a perfect candidate, offers a chance? That faced with the prospect of Hillary that they are willing to give Trump a chance?

While I don't think Trump is the ideal candidate, at least the USA has a chance with him...If Hillary gets in, there is not a doubt in my mind catastrophe will ensue. Additionally, what type of example does she set for younger women? Instead of being inspirational, she is a disgrace. She sets the examples of: A). Tie your horse to a powerful man, piggyback on him. B). Stay in a abusive & humilating relationship if there is something in it for you. C). She enabled Bill's bad behavior by smearing all the women that Bill was fooling around with. That is not an example for ANYBODY these days. Then you've got a list of scandals that goes on & on & on. Then you've got the email server in her bathroom closet... I just don't know what is going to happen to the USA....

Hey all: In the short term, I think there will be few consequences. In the long term, I think all sorts of craziness will happen. How will people retire/build for their future? Pension plans will be absolutely ruined. GM is expecting to get a 6.5% return on their capital. Might be pretty hard to do. Additionally, let us say that you are an individual. You work hard all your life, save & invest your money. As you get towards retirement, you start pulling your money out of the market. Where do you put it? In a negative interest rate account? That is going to incentivize people keeping capital in the market at all times. What happens if the market goes down 30% a couple of years before you retire? Then you are going ot have all sorts of problems with cash. The big wigs will want to get rid of it, control it. I used to work in a business where cash was needed. It was need for several reasons. Some of the customers/suppliers we were working with were of "sketchy" financial standing. They weren't doing anything illegal per se, they just had TERRIBLE credit. Their businesses were under capitalized. We were also dealing with used items. Items sold on an "AS-IS" basis. So you did not want to take a check, you didn't want to risk a chargeback or dispute with a credit/debit card. Cash worked... Of course, the higher ups don't have to deal with such trivial matters. I also think that getting rid of cash, or restricting it is going to REDUCE trust/belief in the government. It might breed open revolt, but it is going loosen social cohesiveness. People are also going to revolt at "favored" borrowers getting paid to borrow money. The common schleb in the street is still going to pay high rates. Favored borrowers always paid less, but they still paid something. When the common man sees that the government or AAA borrowers get paid to borrow, and they have to pay 8% on their auto, there is a psychological threshold that is crossed. They get PAID, I got to pay...is not going to play out well. You are also going to have lots of capital flowing into gold/silver/diamonds/bitcoin, etc. Negative interest rates are not going to end well.

I fully agree that it is good to be frugal. However, at some point it crosses the line. In my personal life, I know some people who are extremely cheap. For example, one of them was invited to an incredible restaurant in Downtown Detroit. He lives about 8 miles away. The event was a family/friends gathering and it was FREE. All he had to do was show up. He didn't want to do it because it would cost him gas to get there. Maybe 1 gallon. So while he saved $2.50, he missed an incredible meal, friendship and has alienated some people. He won't be offered the invitation in the future. This same fellow in the past has invited people to dinner at a restaurant. They show up, and he just gets water to drink and will then he eats at his house, with his guests in tow. This makes some of his friends uncomfortable. This guy is certainly not rich, but he does have a decent job and certainly can afford gas and can afford to eat out from time to time with friends. I have another acquaintance who is worth many millions. He frequently won't flush the toilets to save water. He also frequently eats plain oatmeal for lunch/dinner to save money. He also rarely turns on the air conditioning and will sit sweating in his house. He RARELY has anybody coming over to visit... In another time, these people would have been called misers. So these guys are so obsessed with saving pennies that it is cutting into their interactions/relationships with others. What is the point of having money/capital if you deprive yourself of things and never use it?