Did you propose a free market solution to an argument? I..I...was told that couldn't be done.

We are not burning coal because of stupid jackassery. We are burning coal because we have to.

Or did you think we could just shut off 1/3 of the power production in this country with no negative effect? Believe me, we understand your argument about coal being bad. Ok, fine: what's the alternative? How do you replace ~33% of power production with something better without seriously disrupting the electricity supply which seriously disrupts civilized society?

When it comes to security, one must always error on the side of caution. There are very strong signs and signals that there is a problem with Truecrypt. Those that don't heed that warning are placing themselves at risk.

The default position of everything is: insecure until proven otherwise. If there's a good chance something is insecure, then we assume it is. We don't want to error in the other direction because the implications are too great if we are wrong. This is where we are with Truecrypt. Those throwing caution to the wind - at this point - are doing themselves a disservice.

Keep dreaming with your head in the sand. If you can't buck up and admit there's a problem here, there is no hope for you. You're a partisan and your opinion is rightly devalued.

The IRS itself has stated Lerner's emails from 2009 - 2011 have been lost. That is a problem no matter who's side you are on. It's not about "pinning" something on Obama, it's about keeping the IRS (and all government agencies) in check so they aren't abusing their power.

Right. It's a PR stunt. For who, exactly?

We need to start differentiating between people we are rightfully scared of and those we are just mad at.

Who cares what PETA and their ilk spout.

PETA has shown itself over and over to be far beyond any rational thinking so I, like most other people, disregard everything they say. Frankly, I am surprised they garner as much attention as they do.

That company was formed back in 1992. Are you suggesting they formed that company for the purposes of polluting the environment and escaping liability by declaring bankruptcy? They thought of this 31 years ago and only now are implementing their plan?

Two questions: a) Are you serious? b) why would they wait so long for the grand prize? Why not pollute and go bankrupt in year 2 and save the trouble of the other 29 years?

Some non-owners are quite well informed and not hysterical.
Where are these people? We need their help bringing intelligence into this conversation. Unfortunately, I fear they are scared to speak up, lest they be tarred by the anti-gun proponents who revel in intimidation tactics.

In all seriousness, it would be nice to hear from non-gun owners who aren't hysterical and who do know the difference between a magazine and a bullet. They would be a welcome breath of fresh air into an otherwise tired debate.

Progressives are *not* anti-gun, neither are environmentalists
THIS IS NOT TRUE. They are absolutely anti-gun and anyone claiming otherwise, isn't paying attention. Teddy Roosevelt has almost nothing in common with today's Democrats and their progressive/environmental constituency. The fact that you try to tie the two together only further proves the point.

Only in your fantasy land.

Great hyperbolic story about "evil corporation$" but not remotely close to what would really happen. If you tried to do what you claim, you would find the regulation, permitting, and legal requirements would far outstrip your ability to meet them. You want to build a plant by a river? Hah! The EPA says otherwise. You want to handle poisons? Hah! OSHA will be all over you before you start. You want to put water back into a river? Go see the EPA again. Wash, rinse, and repeat until all government bureaucrats for all government agencies are satisfied.

Translation: you wouldn't even get to step 1 of your diabolical scheme because the world does not work the way you describe, even though it sounds great

Just like how the founding fathers did not do all that Independence stuff out of the goodness of their heart, all of there were filthy wealthy and were trying like hell to protect their wealth.

Wow, I am not sure I have ever seen a more cynically written explanation of the beginnings of our country. I'm not nationalistic zealot but I've read history. Ever heard of taxation without representation and King George VIII? I'd say the founding fathers were well justified by trying to keep their wealth instead of losing it to the state due to taxation. Or are you one of those types that believe all wealth belongs to the govt first who then doles out the riches?

Ask yourself this: how bad does it have to get in the 1700's for you to get on a ship and go to a newly found land to escape the clutches of a despot?

There is not one order book, there are fourteen order books (one per exchange)
Correct but those 14 exchanges are more than happy to sell "information" about the order book to any firm who will pay. Why are firms even allowed to buy information like that? Without access to that kind of information (ie the order flow), HFT doesn't exist.

I'll concede that this is arbitrage but it is 100% crooked arbitrage. By any measure, it is unrecognizable from front running.

Again the difference is that the HFT firms have access to information that gives them the ability to front run. Brokers have this same conflict of interest but they have decades of experience managing the conflict. Most of the time they get it right but there are definitely cases where a broker has front-run his clients. Unfortunately, HFT firms don't have to answer to customers like brokerage houses do. They can happily go along middling and fronting everyone they can without any adverse consequences.

What you describe is not arbitrage. Arbitrage would be buying stock on one exchange and selling it on another without knowing jack about the order book. By knowing about the order book (which the exchanges are oh-so-happy to sell for a fee) the HFT firms can easily middle us.

Think of it this way......why does the price of a stock change when an HFT is involved? The price changes because the HFT knows I am going to buy the stock and goes out to buy it before me only to turn around and instantly sell it to me at a slightly higher price. The problem is that I am the news that moved the price. Without my order, the HFT doesn't front me and the price doesn't move at all.

That is why this is front running and that is why it is a problem. If it were arbitrage between exchanges like you describe, nobody would have a problem with it as it provides an efficient mechanism for equilibrium. But that's not the case.

I may not be using the correct vocabulary. I am not in the industry. Whatever they are seeing, they are seeing information about the orders before the orders are executed.

Obviously what they are doing is not illegal as they are still doing it. They are very good at gaming the system.