To: carranza2 who wrote (70853 ) 12/22/2008 1:16:03 PM From: Maurice Winn 2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74559 C2 those are beautifully oratorical jury-swindling words. We don't have a jury to test whether you are right and the average man in the street can be conned by such silver-tongued leading down the garden path. Those are the sort of words which led so many astray. You are right that people are generally limited in their ability to figure out what's going to happen, especially in the face of lies about being "on plan" [Bernie Schwartz] which I took with a grain of salt as I didn't think their pricing would work. A lawsuit showed I had a valid case and Bernie did pay me money [albeit a tiny portion of what I paid for GSTRF stock]. It's easy to imagine people believing "houses never go down in price" repeated by seemingly intelligent people, including the lenders who were willing to loan 100% and more on a property which is ipso facto, ultra vires, infra vide, casus belli, inter alia evidence of their belief that property prices would not go down. We all struggle to get a grip on reality and struggle even more to correctly predict what will happen years from now in ordinary things, let alone abstract and arcane shenanigans of financial relativity theory. The man in the street has no chance of figuring it out. The best they can do is guess correctly using Forrest Gump analytical principles. 1 kg of wet chemistry in our skulls is simply not up to the job. But that doesn't mean it's better to hand the keys to the Ferrari and liquor cabinet to kleptocratic bureaucrats running the government suffocatocracy. Socialism, repression, Big Brother totalitarian control has been tried around the world and while the socialists are loving the current turmoil, it does NOT mean that it's better to give even more power to their ideologues who love nothing better than getting their greedy paws in the till. Part of competitive financial turmoil in capitalism is that people go broke and have to get real jobs. Sometimes that means a lot of them at a time. What they were doing can't be made good by edict of Big Brother. The government stimulus needed is to fire swarms of government spivs and bludgers to get real jobs looking after people doing real things. For example I could use a dozen people who are currently employed by government departments with nothing better to do with themselves than annoy me and make things worse. The Ministry of Women's Affairs could be closed and they could all be redeployed to my service. It has always baffled me that in an attempt to stifle sexism, a sexist ministry was created to arrange affairs for women. In my experience, it's easier for women to have affairs than men. Women pretty well just have to say "I'm available" and a dozen blokes will be panting offering their services. It's men who need help arranging affairs. Many men feel unfairly discriminated against as women favour the rock band leaders and other cashed up power brokers over the banal, prosaic, low-ranked bloke struggling by. . I need a driver, gardener, accounts person, tax return filer, painter, writer, car fixer, general help, house cleaner, butler, staff manager, investment analyst, investment manager, food buyer, cooks, shower and bath aasistants, massage therapists, medical advisors, food tasters, security patrol, communications managers etc, creche staff; Heck I can employ LOTs of them. It seems the stimulus is being given in the wrong way [as governments do]. I should do the stimulating and they should get real jobs working for me, not the reverse, which is their current plan. Mqurice