In economic terms, the U.S. could get out of debt fairly easily, even with today's economy.
There isn't anything resembling the political will necessary to do it (one immediate effect would be an enormous negative impact on standard of living, for nearly everyone). It will happen anyway, as the cost of borrowing goes up, making it less and less attractive to borrow.
In a sense, I am just quibbling over what 'exact' means (which isn't very interesting, but your first comment is a lot more open to it than this one, as it (the first comment) talks about the securities in a very general fashion).
I'm not entirely convinced that recent recessions will be a great guide for foreclosure rates, home values were way out of whack, and this recession looks to be pretty severe, so the models are getting pushed on from both sides.
From the perspective of the label, the supply is arbitrary (which is much more fun than infinite), so they can (and really, should) ride the demand curve.
They could start songs at $3 and get lots of sales (people are spazzes) and then three months (or whatever) later have them at $0.50 and they would make plenty of money.
It doesn't entitle them to anything, it just makes it more attractive. "Hey, I could spend $1,000 putting music on my iPod, or I could just take it. Hmmmmmm."
There is competition, just not exact competition. If you have $5 to spend on music and enjoy 15 different songs about the same amount, you will maximize your enjoyment if you buy the cheapest songs. That's incredibly contrived, but I don't think it is completely ridiculous.
They don't have exact values; as the default rates of the underlying mortgages change, the value of the security changes. Selling foreclosed homes into a depressed market exacerbates this (because you have to throw out your old estimate of what you were going to recover).
If you don't know where the economy and the housing markets are going (and no one knows), you can't put an exact value on the securities.
I fail to see how anyone would be willing to throw away their career for an 85 year old has been.
Re:There you go again!
on
Twitter On Scala
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If you announce it to the world, it isn't 'hidden'. He may very well have an agenda, but he isn't being particularly disingenuous about it.
And really, Twitter never said 'Ruby and Rails don't scale', they said 'This other stuff works better for what we are trying to do, for various reasons'.
Isn't Newsweek relaunching themselves (or whatever) with a high end target demographic and a more serious focus? I think they are even planning on charging more.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, except for prostitutes, and perhaps, kept women/men.
Or perhaps just more lucrative. There are, at least, stories of stolen organs out there.
On the other hand, if it reduces rejection that much, it also makes legitimate organs more available/useful.
In economic terms, the U.S. could get out of debt fairly easily, even with today's economy.
There isn't anything resembling the political will necessary to do it (one immediate effect would be an enormous negative impact on standard of living, for nearly everyone). It will happen anyway, as the cost of borrowing goes up, making it less and less attractive to borrow.
In a sense, I am just quibbling over what 'exact' means (which isn't very interesting, but your first comment is a lot more open to it than this one, as it (the first comment) talks about the securities in a very general fashion).
I'm not entirely convinced that recent recessions will be a great guide for foreclosure rates, home values were way out of whack, and this recession looks to be pretty severe, so the models are getting pushed on from both sides.
From the perspective of the label, the supply is arbitrary (which is much more fun than infinite), so they can (and really, should) ride the demand curve.
They could start songs at $3 and get lots of sales (people are spazzes) and then three months (or whatever) later have them at $0.50 and they would make plenty of money.
It doesn't entitle them to anything, it just makes it more attractive. "Hey, I could spend $1,000 putting music on my iPod, or I could just take it. Hmmmmmm."
There is competition, just not exact competition. If you have $5 to spend on music and enjoy 15 different songs about the same amount, you will maximize your enjoyment if you buy the cheapest songs. That's incredibly contrived, but I don't think it is completely ridiculous.
They don't have exact values; as the default rates of the underlying mortgages change, the value of the security changes. Selling foreclosed homes into a depressed market exacerbates this (because you have to throw out your old estimate of what you were going to recover).
If you don't know where the economy and the housing markets are going (and no one knows), you can't put an exact value on the securities.
I fail to see how anyone would be willing to throw away their career for an 85 year old has been.
If you announce it to the world, it isn't 'hidden'. He may very well have an agenda, but he isn't being particularly disingenuous about it.
And really, Twitter never said 'Ruby and Rails don't scale', they said 'This other stuff works better for what we are trying to do, for various reasons'.
To me, diet pop isn't any better (but I might drink it over water if I want some caffeine).
They show ads on news searches (and they also show matching news articles on regular searches).
I love it when rites and ceremonies devolve into slavish obedience to old rules.
"This introspection is hard because of my habit, but I'd rather not think about the habit."
Me, I sleep the blissful sleep of the wicked.
With the increase in childhood obesity, Type II lost the "Adult onset" moniker.
Masochism is even safer (Oh, and hydrate; a glass of water before your stomach gets angry does wonders).
The problem with what you are saying is that huge swaths of people are perfectly happy with drug laws that are used to selectively enforce morality.
The caffeine in a single can of diet coke is going to be similar to the amount of caffeine in an entire pot of decaf, probably more.
Strong tea could easily have twice the caffeine per unit of volume.
If you like sweet, alcopops taste just fine.
My coffee maker doesn't say cup, it says servings. I think this is pretty common, and then people call them cups instead of servings.
I would think you would notice it getting (at least a little) easier to breathe.
Does diet pop taste so good that you absolutely must not drink water? Most places have it next to the lemonade...
Isn't Newsweek relaunching themselves (or whatever) with a high end target demographic and a more serious focus? I think they are even planning on charging more.
I get warm fuzzies by picking the loser and complaining.