Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Moominoid who wrote (68107)	8/25/2005 10:14:24 PM
From: shades	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

"The feminist movement can be partly blamed or credited for that reversal, as women entered the work force in droves, contributing more income to the household, but fewer babies." HAHA - like that recent NYtimes article on korea beggin women to have kids again - HAHA - Ayn Rand said she didn't need kids - she loved her BOOKS - they were like her children - HAHA! Her books are not gonna buy her bonds or pay income taxes for her medicine are they? HAHA So many rand lovers here on SI - they see trees - not forests and its all about scale. I used to argue with this guy on sci.econ about the brittney generation not buying the bonds and such to keep him coasting into a good retirement and he would tell me the same as this article - chindia would buy them - HAHA! Everywhere I have read - the population explosion in the past 50 years - the planet earth will never have those levels ever again. No more population explosions to create economic units - much slower growth here on out.

To: Moominoid who wrote (68107)	8/26/2005 4:37:18 AM
From: shades	Respond to of 74559

Shades have no doubt she offered lots of sex, but shades think this the TREE type person, not the FOREST type person that the world really need - at 32 her DNA is not as vibrant as at 22 eh? And everyone wonder why we having all these babies with lots of mental problems - I think it correlated to all these OLDER woman having babies - and babies not getting good young incubating belly - hehe. Shades also take issue with her claim that sex is everywhere - she is LA LA land - shades try to understand how this MEME get implanted in this woman and here shades theory - to her SEX is EVERYWHERE - cause she a woman - but the man who STARVING for it - sex is nowhere - cause there too many like her that are 32 year old virgin. So she confuse her PERSONAL experience and project that onto all the rest of people in society - she thinks it easy for her - so it must be easy for everyone - this is her mistake. Shades used to think programming and computers easy for him - so they should be easy for everyone - then as he get older he meet many people that no matter how many times you teach them lesson - they never grasp concept. Shades compare this to fish in fishbowl in the middle of desert of thirty lions - to fish in small personal perspective - water is everywhere - but to the other animals of the desert - they are about to thirst to death and fish cannot understand what their problem is - WATER EVERYWHERE - hehe. news.yahoo.com A neo-feminist's view of abstinence By Elizabeth Sandoval Fri Aug 19, 7:24 AM ET I don't want to have sex. Clarification: I do want to have sex, but only with my husband. And I don't have one of those yet. ADVERTISEMENT No, I am not an ultraconservative who is cohabitating with a houseful of cats and TiVo'ing Lifetime movies. I'm a middle-of-the-road 32-year-old who likes tattoos and loud music. And yes, I am cute (I've been told by friends and strangers alike). So you can put aside the notion that I'm bitter about not being offered the chance to have sex. What I am is a neo-feminist. Definition: "One who respects her body so much that she won't allow it to be used as someone's playground." Handsome Man at a Bar, you think I'm cute? Thanks. Do you appreciate me or the idea of having sex with me? Because your thinking has likely been influenced by the cavortings of Samantha and Co. in the "city" or the women in most rap videos. I am not those women. If you want a workout, go get a one-day pass at Bally. It's free. Members of the "Sex is Natural and Fun and If It Makes You Happy, It Can't Be That Bad" club want sex so badly that they willingly and repeatedly live out the following scenario: Things go "great" for a month or two. Sex quickly becomes a part of your interactions. Maybe he even meets your parents. And then, well, things just change. He dumps you or you dump him. Regardless of why the relationship died, you are now one of many women whom he could point out on the street. "See her?" he can tell his buddies. "She's cute, huh? Yeah, I had her." I never want to be "her." The "You Have to Know if You're Sexually Compatible or the Marriage Will Be Doomed" club will argue that one out of two marriages end in divorce, so you have to know that you're sexually compatible before you can even contemplate marriage. Well, maybe one out of two marriages end in divorce precisely because people are too free with sex. Many people don't take time to establish real communication with one another. It's false intimacy. Many women today are weak-minded in that they readily accept society's portrayal of sexual norms. The people on The O.C. are doing it. Paris Hilton, as she's hosing down that Bentley, appears ready to do it. And more important, many people they actually know are doing it. The sheer prolificness of sex seems to make the decision for them. Women are non-self-respecting because they willingly sacrifice such an important part of their being for just a few moments of pleasure. And they're oblivious because they don't contemplate the profoundness of sex. Women give it up as if it's nothing. When in fact, it is everything. Elizabeth Sandoval is a writer who lives in Los Angeles.

To: Moominoid who wrote (68107)	8/26/2005 10:55:59 AM
From: Slagle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Moominoid Re: "RYWBX" I bought some Rydex "weak dollar" leveraged mutual fund. (200% $USD Reuters index). Interesting discussion on the QQQQ board by Terry. The dollar may be weakening again and last time it did this back in 2001 I began buying GIM, FAX, FCO, BEGBX ect. and still hold some. But, these foreign government bond funds don't seem to be responding much this time. May be just because they are bond funds. Slagle