That is a tough one. You can't be on the internet as long as I have been and not heard the suicide story a dozen times. The old internet adage is this is nothing more than a cry for attention and to ignore them. I've never been comfortable with that adage. It seems just to cold, even for me.
I have no advice to give you on this. I won't tell you not to worry about it because I know first hand this never works. I hope you hear from her soon and she is okay.
You don't know the half of it. I scored 98 out of 99 on testing for science. Out out 99 on grammar and spelling, I scored 35. My spelling and grammar are atrocious. In my defense I do work at it, but seems I have a lot more work to do.
One of the things to do to stave off mental rot is to try to take contrary positions and run with them. Turns out, it's also sound policy because the majority are wrong the majority of the time. Gotta stay ahead of the curve:-)
I would argue that, that is the wrong thing to do. I agree with your assertion that mot of the time the majority are wrong on most things. To me the thing to do is to listen to both side, not stating where my option is, then make up my own mind. That is what works for me.
But that is me, you option might work well for you. Barbara, I'm going to do something that I rarely do. I'm going to apologize to you. I'm sorry if my "passive aggressive" stance has offended you.
I think you for the correction an I will keep it in mind. In turn I would like to leave you with this, it's the guiding philosophy of my life. "True wisdom is knowing what you don't know." I believe that quote is by Confucius.
This is the internet. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen
Can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Are you serous? You really went there. That is just so, adorable.
Being offended when corrected
Trust me, I'm in way offended by your correct. If you will notice I have correct the reference. Just for future references as you can note I have been on/. for a very long time. Before that I participated in, and even incited, some of the greatest flame wars in the history of Usenet. The great comp.sys.amiga split, scientology vs ars,alt.flame.. oh those where good times.
Well, where I'm going with this, there is nothing you can say or post that has any chance of annoying me or offending me in any manner. Point blank, its all been said to me in the past.
But thank you for the correction. I will remember it. An thank you for the chuckle. You brought back so many good memories.
You are quite correct. I just tossed that one up there because I couldn't find the one I was looking for. You have probably been around a long time so you should know the article I was looking for. It was a manners FAQ that used to circle around usenet.
I remember every September that one would make the rounds.
I asked the original poster to cite his evidence so that I might learn where he got his extra ordinary clam that 75% of Trumps business fail. To date, he has yet to post that evidence. If you have a extra ordinary clam that you clam is fact then you need to be prepared to if someone calls you on it.
You, on the other hand, have no ideal why I asked for that. What you saw is some one that might not have agreed with your view point. Did it not occur to you that I might be generally interested in where the poster got his information?
As for my evidence being, weak as you put it. It does no such thing. In 2005 Trump filed a tax return for over 150M in personal income. Every business reputable publication and source cites him as being worth at least 3B in assets. You don't get that rich and keep it by being incompetent in business.
So, yes, he clearly knows what he is doing in this area. If this will translate into a successful political career remains to be seen. So far I see there might be some issues in this translation.
Documents 6 bankruptcies, and 13 businesses that closed up shop - at the very least suggests he doesn't know what he's doing
While I admit you do have a point but bankruptcies and closing business doesn't necessary mean he doesn't know what he is doing. It could be just the opposite, and show he clearly knows what he is doing.
You have to find out how Trump got into these business and what was happening before hand. Where these business in trouble before he bought them? If so then using the bankruptcy laws to shield himself from debtors while he rearranges the business is a correct and proper business move.
So is knowing when to cut your losses. So closing up show also can show that he knows what he is doing. If the market has changed and there is no hope left, know when to quit is a good thing to know.
Having a business in bankruptcy isn't always a sign that you don't know what you are doing. It could simply mean market forces changed in a way that you didn't see. Or some other crises, that you didn't foresee, have affect your business plans in a manner that you can't adapt to fast enough.
Invoking bankruptcy protection while you change your business around is often used practice. There are a number of highly successful business out there that got a fresh start by going through the bankruptcy process.
Here you go. I was referring to the leaking of his 2005 tax returns last week. If you refer to paragraph six, you will see the references to the numbers I was referring too. Specifically, to the over 100M and the over 30M numbers I stated.
So, there you go. You, in a round about way, said I didn't cite my sources and ask me for them. So there you go.
What I find interesting the reaction of some of the other people in this tread. I asked this one person to cite their sources and people are losing their mind. The snoops article that was linked to had some good points and was a good read.
But I'm still not seeing this 75% failure rate. I'm still interested in this evidence.
No, that is just you being wrong, period. An just like so many others of your mind set when you find someone who won't be beaten in to submission you resort to personal attacks.
Documents 6 bankruptcies, and 13 businesses that closed up shop - at the very least suggests he doesn't know what he's doing
Lets see, in 2005 he paid over 30 million in taxes on a income of over 100 million. He has several properties in down town New York, that is worth several million dollars. You're own link clearly states that bankruptcies are nether a indicator of success or failure. With a income of at least 100M that we know of, and possible billions elsewhere, I believe we can clearly say he knows what he is doing.
Lets go ahead and cut to the chase. I'm fond of saying site your sources so let me put up before I have to shut up. Here is the exact text of the ACA, complete with subtext, and related bills. Start reading and tell me you understand all this mess.
He couldn't pour piss out of a boot with the instructions written on the heel.
THIS is the exact reason Trump is sitting in the White house. It will of the reasons he will be sworn in, in 2020 for a second term. You constantly underestimated Trump from the time he threw his hat in the ring all the way up to election night. You where so sure that you had this in the bag you where already celebrating while he was mopping the floor with you.
More over you are letting your hatred and bitterness, this oppose Trump at all cost, blind you to what is coming down the road. Everyday people are getting tired of it. Even people like me who didn't vote for Trump, and who didn't think he would have made a good President, are starting to change our minds.
Americans don't like losers, but we detest sour losers. And that is exactly what you are coming off to be. The oppose Trump at all costs, instead of working with him is going to cost you more than the Whitehouse. When the next elections come around Americans are going to remember this, and are going to start removing the obstacles. Meaning Democrats.
Funny thing is, those of us who don't subscribe to any real political party see this. But democrats don't, Other libertarians in my group, we predicted that Trump would win. We are also predicting he will win in 2020.
The Harry Potter series was actually a good read. The ACA was one of the worse pieces of legislation to ever come out of Washington. Nancy Pelosi herself said we have to pass it to understand it. So clearly, those that passed it didn't under stand it ether.
If the full concept of the ACA was understood when it passed it wouldn't be such a mess. So, no, no one person understands that mess. People may have read it, but they don't understand it.
Obama "made the effort" to close Gitmo throughout his whole presidency, does he get credit for that?
Obama made no "serous" effort to close Gitmo. If he did, it would be closed. Gitmo is a military base, it is completely under the control of the President. Congress can make bills and approve them requiring it to stay open but Obama could have vetoed them.
Obama used Gitmo as a political tool all through his presidency.
I don't believe that any one really expected the repeal to get through on the first try. The ACA is 3500 pages that no one person really understands. It honestly wouldn't surprised if it took years to unravel that mess.
The chairman's revelations served to partly vindicate Trump's March 4 claim on Twitter about being incredulous that President Obama had sunk to "a new low" by ordering a wiretap of his phones before the election.
I find that part of the story very interesting. Also facts that seem to point at contacts with in Russa to the Trump campaign. Seems this pig might have caught the scent of a truffle. I say we sit back and see how this plays out.
Slashdot Mirror
That is a tough one. You can't be on the internet as long as I have been and not heard the suicide story a dozen times. The old internet adage is this is nothing more than a cry for attention and to ignore them. I've never been comfortable with that adage. It seems just to cold, even for me.
I have no advice to give you on this. I won't tell you not to worry about it because I know first hand this never works. I hope you hear from her soon and she is okay.
You don't know the half of it. I scored 98 out of 99 on testing for science. Out out 99 on grammar and spelling, I scored 35. My spelling and grammar are atrocious. In my defense I do work at it, but seems I have a lot more work to do.
Then we will just have to agree to disagree. But what is this "gospel of wealth?" You have used that term twice and I'm still unsure what it means.
Preview button. It's there for a reason! I must use it more. That should read I'm in no way offended by your correction.
One of the things to do to stave off mental rot is to try to take contrary positions and run with them. Turns out, it's also sound policy because the majority are wrong the majority of the time. Gotta stay ahead of the curve :-)
I would argue that, that is the wrong thing to do. I agree with your assertion that mot of the time the majority are wrong on most things. To me the thing to do is to listen to both side, not stating where my option is, then make up my own mind. That is what works for me.
But that is me, you option might work well for you. Barbara, I'm going to do something that I rarely do. I'm going to apologize to you. I'm sorry if my "passive aggressive" stance has offended you.
I think you for the correction an I will keep it in mind. In turn I would like to leave you with this, it's the guiding philosophy of my life. "True wisdom is knowing what you don't know." I believe that quote is by Confucius.
This is the internet. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen
Can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Are you serous? You really went there. That is just so, adorable.
Being offended when corrected
Trust me, I'm in way offended by your correct. If you will notice I have correct the reference. Just for future references as you can note I have been on /. for a very long time. Before that I participated in, and even incited, some of the greatest flame wars in the history of Usenet. The great comp.sys.amiga split, scientology vs ars ,alt.flame .. oh those where good times.
Well, where I'm going with this, there is nothing you can say or post that has any chance of annoying me or offending me in any manner. Point blank, its all been said to me in the past.
But thank you for the correction. I will remember it. An thank you for the chuckle. You brought back so many good memories.
You are quite correct. I just tossed that one up there because I couldn't find the one I was looking for. You have probably been around a long time so you should know the article I was looking for. It was a manners FAQ that used to circle around usenet.
I remember every September that one would make the rounds.
So in other words, you can't.
I asked the original poster to cite his evidence so that I might learn where he got his extra ordinary clam that 75% of Trumps business fail. To date, he has yet to post that evidence. If you have a extra ordinary clam that you clam is fact then you need to be prepared to if someone calls you on it.
You, on the other hand, have no ideal why I asked for that. What you saw is some one that might not have agreed with your view point. Did it not occur to you that I might be generally interested in where the poster got his information?
As for my evidence being, weak as you put it. It does no such thing. In 2005 Trump filed a tax return for over 150M in personal income. Every business reputable publication and source cites him as being worth at least 3B in assets. You don't get that rich and keep it by being incompetent in business.
So, yes, he clearly knows what he is doing in this area. If this will translate into a successful political career remains to be seen. So far I see there might be some issues in this translation.
Okay. Explain. In what way is my logic faulty.
Documents 6 bankruptcies, and 13 businesses that closed up shop - at the very least suggests he doesn't know what he's doing
While I admit you do have a point but bankruptcies and closing business doesn't necessary mean he doesn't know what he is doing. It could be just the opposite, and show he clearly knows what he is doing.
You have to find out how Trump got into these business and what was happening before hand. Where these business in trouble before he bought them? If so then using the bankruptcy laws to shield himself from debtors while he rearranges the business is a correct and proper business move.
So is knowing when to cut your losses. So closing up show also can show that he knows what he is doing. If the market has changed and there is no hope left, know when to quit is a good thing to know.
Having a business in bankruptcy isn't always a sign that you don't know what you are doing. It could simply mean market forces changed in a way that you didn't see. Or some other crises, that you didn't foresee, have affect your business plans in a manner that you can't adapt to fast enough.
Invoking bankruptcy protection while you change your business around is often used practice. There are a number of highly successful business out there that got a fresh start by going through the bankruptcy process.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/taxes/pages-from-trumps-tax-returns-raise-a-decades-worth-of-questions/ar-BByFIXZ/
Here you go. I was referring to the leaking of his 2005 tax returns last week. If you refer to paragraph six, you will see the references to the numbers I was referring too. Specifically, to the over 100M and the over 30M numbers I stated.
So, there you go. You, in a round about way, said I didn't cite my sources and ask me for them. So there you go.
What I find interesting the reaction of some of the other people in this tread. I asked this one person to cite their sources and people are losing their mind. The snoops article that was linked to had some good points and was a good read.
But I'm still not seeing this 75% failure rate. I'm still interested in this evidence.
No, that is just you being wrong, period. An just like so many others of your mind set when you find someone who won't be beaten in to submission you resort to personal attacks.
Documents 6 bankruptcies, and 13 businesses that closed up shop - at the very least suggests he doesn't know what he's doing
Lets see, in 2005 he paid over 30 million in taxes on a income of over 100 million. He has several properties in down town New York, that is worth several million dollars. You're own link clearly states that bankruptcies are nether a indicator of success or failure. With a income of at least 100M that we know of, and possible billions elsewhere, I believe we can clearly say he knows what he is doing.
I think /. url mangled my link.
http://www.albion.com/netiquet...
Try that link.
You are aware that it is the height of bad manners on the net to correct people for minor English mistakes. Please read the following link.
http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html/
Maybe that's why Obama didn't get a second term.
Okay, I think you are done here.
*plonk*
Lets go ahead and cut to the chase. I'm fond of saying site your sources so let me put up before I have to shut up. Here is the exact text of the ACA, complete with subtext, and related bills. Start reading and tell me you understand all this mess.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/3590/
He couldn't pour piss out of a boot with the instructions written on the heel.
THIS is the exact reason Trump is sitting in the White house. It will of the reasons he will be sworn in, in 2020 for a second term. You constantly underestimated Trump from the time he threw his hat in the ring all the way up to election night. You where so sure that you had this in the bag you where already celebrating while he was mopping the floor with you.
More over you are letting your hatred and bitterness, this oppose Trump at all cost, blind you to what is coming down the road. Everyday people are getting tired of it. Even people like me who didn't vote for Trump, and who didn't think he would have made a good President, are starting to change our minds.
Americans don't like losers, but we detest sour losers. And that is exactly what you are coming off to be. The oppose Trump at all costs, instead of working with him is going to cost you more than the Whitehouse. When the next elections come around Americans are going to remember this, and are going to start removing the obstacles. Meaning Democrats.
Funny thing is, those of us who don't subscribe to any real political party see this. But democrats don't, Other libertarians in my group, we predicted that Trump would win. We are also predicting he will win in 2020.
If the full concept of the ACA was understood when it passed it wouldn't be such a mess. So, no, no one person understands that mess. People may have read it, but they don't understand it.
Given his business track record (75% complete failure
Please site your sources on this. I would be interested in where you got these numbers.
Obama "made the effort" to close Gitmo throughout his whole presidency, does he get credit for that?
Obama made no "serous" effort to close Gitmo. If he did, it would be closed. Gitmo is a military base, it is completely under the control of the President. Congress can make bills and approve them requiring it to stay open but Obama could have vetoed them.
Obama used Gitmo as a political tool all through his presidency.
I don't believe that any one really expected the repeal to get through on the first try. The ACA is 3500 pages that no one person really understands. It honestly wouldn't surprised if it took years to unravel that mess.
Is that a reason to believe he gives a shit?
It's reason enough for me. He seems to be actually trying to pull off his campaign promises. We will see as time goes on.
I don't believe for a moment that Obama wiretapped his ass
Well now, seems I might be wrong about something.
http://www.npr.org/2017/03/22/521133929/house-intel-chair-trump-aides-swept-up-in-legal-u-s-surveillance/
The chairman's revelations served to partly vindicate Trump's March 4 claim on Twitter about being incredulous that President Obama had sunk to "a new low" by ordering a wiretap of his phones before the election.
I find that part of the story very interesting. Also facts that seem to point at contacts with in Russa to the Trump campaign. Seems this pig might have caught the scent of a truffle. I say we sit back and see how this plays out.