if spending is 3 and income is 1, then the right thing to do is balance those so s=2, i=2. this is how families do it. the job of the republicans is to decrease both, after they are balanced. democrats have the opposite job, but both parties should be working to shrink the gap right now. maybe im stupid and oversimplifying it, but to me this is a clear goal. after that we can argue about which way we need the government to go.

without the bank bailouts, everyone's bank balance would be zero. with the bank bailouts, we got to keep our money (yeah i know how it sounds, but i think its a true statement) and the government made a nice profit on those loans. i balked at the auto bailouts, but i cant argue with the result. mostly paid back, and lots of jobs.

Bozo B learns right away to not do what Bozo A did, so that Bozo B can get reelected. congressman apply their critical thinking abilities not to the problems of this country, but the problems of reelection. unfortunately a side effect of seeking reelection is casting votes.

there was a great question proposed during the founding of this country. does a "good" congressman vote how his constituency wants him to vote? or what he feels is best for the country? that question was also the basis for the founding of the electorate college. voting the former would increase his "credit score", voting the later would increase his "balls score". of course most times these two are not in conflict. especially with two highly polarized parties. i feel that all candidates just tow the party line. (not a recent development). i would be more interested in the "balls score". see HW Bush for a relatively recent and memorable example of "political balls", while it may be good for the country, candidates like that rarely get reelected. its unfortunate.

id argue the other way, they were greedy for campaign funds. thats the beauty of the pledge. (within the current rules of campaign finance). he created a prisoners dilema for all repulicans.

i still use word perfect. being completely OCD about formatting, i cannot stand anything but that old standby. using word is just frustrating. how come my table just got deleted? why is it typing in italics now? everytime i use it, these questions just take more of my time than actually typing the document. with word perfect, there is a legitimate explanation every time this happens, and since you can see all the markup codes, it most likely wont happen.

fully functional? have you built a C3PO to translate those beeps?

correction, 20 of your friends get pulled over after a party the next week, all are drunk, and all of them testify that you drank too much the previous week. they all get deals, and you get screwed.

i've watched enough law and order to know that a body of evidence consisting solely of co-conspirator testimony does not meet the burden of proof. but the USADA is not held to this higher standard. i smell a spin-off.

law & order: ADA. they make the rules and enforce them

It already has. Eyewitness testimony can often trump scientific results. Scientific results come with a margin of error, eyewitness testimony does not.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/Eyewitness-Misidentification.php

somehow (just speculating here), im guessing that does not come into play here.

it would be nice to see consistent rules being followed, regardless of what i actually think happened (knowing no facts). i tend to believe armstrong's characterization of the USADA's vendetta against him. it sorta reminds me of the RICO statute.

what you described is computer operation, not computer science.

this doesnt seem like a good solution for the ailing news sites. murdoch has been beating this drum for a while in the US, and nobody is listening.

however, the sites producing content are not getting compensation for doing so, is this just a paradigm shift, or can something be done to protect some of their revenue?

great point and rhetoric, but it wasnt hft.

the market isnt going to cater to the small players, because the small players are not the main users of the market. and a lottery to settle trades? you are free to make your marketplace work that way (in fact you can start your own stock exchange), but i guarantee that nobody would want to trade there.

thats why they only do this when a stock moves a certain amount in a certain period of time. in effect they are retroactively suspending trading on that stock after that threshold is crossed, until the market can stabilize. they do not reverse individual trades, because of fat fingers, sitting on the space bar, or any other reason. they do this only when it benefits all market participants.

vwap is not high frequency. it is intended to aquire a certain amount of shares with some risk guarantees. hft does not intend to aquire a certain amount of shares, it is essentially day trading (you cash out at the end of the day), but on a much smaller scale.