Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:sigh... (Score 1) 940

The only reason that banks do this is because government bail-out programs have made it more profitable to let it rot than to sell it -- primarily, this was accomplished with the suspension of mark to market during the crisis.

Basically, these properties were all allowed to sit on bank's books as though they were worth whatever was paid for them rather than their actual value (because if all of the banks had been forced to write down all the property on which they lost >50% of their investment, they would all have been insolvent)

Heh, which basically means they were insolvent. They probably still are. And yet their executives probably think the poor are a bunch of moochers, suckling at the government teat!

Comment Re: sigh... (Score 1) 940

You realize the government (and hence the taxpayers) made lots of money off the bailout? The bailout was a loan that turned out to be a great investment. It was not a gift. Also, several banks were forced to take money at that time that they didn't need or want. Wells Fargo was very unhappy about this in particular. I'm tired of hearing the implication that the banks somehow got something for free. They paid a lot for that bailout - the interest they paid essentialy paid for the auto manufacturers bailout.

It's not nearly that simple. Yes, the initial loans were paid back. But there were myriad programs for buttressing the banks, some of them secret. The Fed still won't disclose how much and to whom they lent money. The Fed engaged in massive quantitative easing for years, which basically translates into free money for the banks. They also maintain a zero interest rate policy which is another huge subsidy to the banking industry. They can do things as mundane as borrow for free and turn around and buy Treasury bonds. Sure, it's only .25%, but you can make it up in volume. The banks literally have a money machine, which is the only reason they can still be in business.

Comment Re:sigh... (Score 1) 940

Honestly? I'd rather it collapsed. I think it would have woken up the majority of America in a way that it desperately needed.

That's partly why they didn't let it collapse. Not only did they save a handful of connected companies, they avoided the blame for the downturn being directed at those responsible. If Goldman Sachs, AIG, BoA and whomever else had been put into receivership, their shareholders wiped out and their bondholders clipped, it would have caused immediate and obvious pain. It would have caused people to sit up and notice and demand to know how we got into this situation. The PTB can't have that because it would have exposed the shenanigans they engage in to make so much money.

Comment Re:Unhealthy food is tasty. Healthy food is boring (Score 1) 244

So, you expect the broccoli will let you live forever? Or just drop-dead some day without a need for anyone to change your diaper?

Actually yes, that is the goal. Not to live forever, of course. But maintaining health into old age, and avoiding "lifestyle" diseases, is part of the reason I work out and try to eat healthily. Besides, being physically fit makes life easier (not that I'm some triathlete, but I think I'm in better shape than most people my age). I enjoy a little bit of ice cream here and there and still love chocolate. I just don't eat the entire pint or bar in one sitting. I hit the gym twice a week and pay attention to what I eat, that's all. It's not really a big deal, you just have to be mindful.

Comment Re:Unhealthy food is tasty. Healthy food is boring (Score 1) 244

Is this some kind of natural law?

Nope, not a law at all. Healthy food can be quite delicious. But you can't get it out of a bag or a can. Doritos taste good because they are chemically engineered to be that way, and then focus-grouped to refine the flavor. Fruits, vegetables and legumes are the way they are. It up to the person to combine them in a tasty way.

I don't think Americans eat the way they eat primarily because of the flavor of the food. It has more to do with ease, convenience and price.

Comment Re:My developers work 37 hr weeks (Score 1) 381

Yeah, I just turned down a job offer that sounded remarkably like this. And they could not understand why I *want* to work remotely, and on a flex schedule.

Nor could they understand why I do *not* want to work for control freaks. Bet you can't, either.

Isn't it nice that not everyone has to work for Shawn Anderson? He said his employees appreciate the schedule. You would not. That's fine. It doesn't make him wrong or a control freak. It's almost as if different people have different wants and needs and should work for an employer that fits their situation. Strange, eh?

Comment What do you expect? (Score 1) 381

"We are a tired, stressed and overworked nation, which has many negative consequences for our personal health and the care of our children. As a nation, we work harder and longer than almost all of our competitors, and much of that work is uncompensated."

What do you expect when you allow business interests, almost exclusively, to have their voices heard and set the agenda? There is an attitude in this country that seems to hold that the population exists to be employees, rather than businesses existing to serve the population. Its upside-down. But it shows how far out of whack this country's priorities are.

Comment Re:So what's that in metric? (Score 1) 409

There is no such thing as "good weight". People like Michael Clarke Duncan still die "young" from heart problems. The strain on the heart for pumping blood is related to the mass pumped through, not the percentage of it that's "fat". Arterial constriction/hardening through lipid action is a separate issue, but for general heart failure, and a variety of heart diseases, there's nothing that indicates there's "good" weight, just that any added is harder.

There is certainly good weight. As with many things, it is a matter of degree. Michael Clarke Duncan was a bit of an extreme case, at 6' 5" and 315 lbs. The thing about muscle weight is that you have to work to get it, as opposed to fat weight where you just have to eat. Building muscle also strengthens the cardiovascular system while eating pie does not. So I would still agree that everyone should do some sort of weight training. You don't have to get huge, just put some muscle on your frame. It strengthens your joints and bones as well.

Having a decent baseline of strength makes life easier, helps prevent injury and will carry you into old age as a healthier person. You don't need or want to get as big a Dwayne Johnson or whomever. You can't get that big without a huge commitment, and steroids and hormones anyway. What I'm talking about are people like Jack Lalanne. He was strong and fit his whole life and lived well into his 90's. He wasn't a bodybuilder, but he was strong and healthy. He was also an extreme case, but he set an example that people would do well to follow.

Slashdot Top Deals

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo. - Andy Finkel, computer guy

Working...