What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[firespin]

I understand perfectly, you consider that a judge rendering a decision in his own financial self interest is just fine... So long as you agree with the decision.. I guess.

Ignoring the fact that the judge still has significant investments in Blackrock, the biggest shareholder of BP by far.

You remember how to play connect the dots yes?
The judge's decision directly affected BP's operations (as well as Exxon-Mobil who he scrambled to sell off before Annoucing his decision, not before making the decision, BP is largely owned by Blackrock investments, the Judge is significantly invested in Blackrock.

UD...come on man, try to pay attention here. A few things to consider:

1. You're almost off the Exxon thing, realizing that the moment a decision is announced is the key time for conflict of interest re: stock holdings. That's good.

2. BP is NOT "largely owned" by Blackrock investments. They own 6% of BP. (Most of Blackrock is in other stocks.) You are assuming Blackrock = BP, when Blackrock is a mutual fund that is largely immune to changes in a single stocks.

2.5. This just in. Blackrock isn't even the biggest shareholder in BP; JPM is. http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewNews/Whwns_BP__Biggest_Shareholder_is_JPMorgan_Chase_100612 and http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9010453&contentId=7019612

3. BP only has one exploratory well in the Gulf. The decision by the judge would have no material effect on BP's share price, certainly not relative to decisions made by organizations much more directly beholden to BP, such as the executive and legislative branches of the US government.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

UD...come on man, try to pay attention here. A few things to consider:

1. You're almost off the Exxon thing, realizing that the moment a decision is announced is the key time for conflict of interest re: stock holdings. That's good.

2. BP is NOT "largely owned" by Blackrock investments. They own 6% of BP. (Most of Blackrock is in other stocks.) You are assuming Blackrock = BP, when Blackrock is a mutual fund that is largely immune to changes in a single stocks.

2.5. This just in. Blackrock isn't even the biggest shareholder in BP; JPM is. http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewNews/Whwns_BP__Biggest_Shareholder_is_JPMorgan_Chase_100612 and http://www.bp.com/extendedsectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9010453&contentId=7019612

3. BP only has one exploratory well in the Gulf. The decision by the judge would have no material effect on BP's share price, certainly not relative to decisions made by organizations much more directly beholden to BP, such as the executive and legislative branches of the US government.

#1 is bullshit. the time for a judge to realize he has a conflict of interest is ideally before he hears a case, definitely before he's writing his decision. In the case that he finds out AS he's writing his decision that he has a possible conflict of interest he should then abort the hearing and have it reassigned to someone without a conflict, not attempt to divest himself of any holdings that would make him unable to make an impartial ruling. the rules governing judicial recusal don't even stipulate that there has to be an actual conflict, even the appearance of one is enough to warrant recusal.

#2 Blackrock still holds a significant amount of BP stock, this alone is enough to cause the judge to recuse himself, not mentioning of course the other investments with direct ties to oil exploration and drilling in the gulf.

#3 BP is not the only company affected by this decision, and not the only one which the judge has an interest in via his investments.

Your argument seems to be that the judges investment amounts were not enough to cause him to recuse himself. Funny, since in a statement to Congress on the subject of recusal it was pointed out that even a single share of stock in an interested party is enough to demand a judge recuse themselves from adjudicating a case. Judge Feldman owned MUCH more than one share in an interested party. in fact he owned many shares in multiple parties with an interest in striking down the moratorium on 33 wells.

The argument that this moratorium, which only affected 33 rigs, would adversely affect the industry in the Gulf with over 3000 wells still producing and unaffected by the moratorium holds no water, even if coated in oil.

Not only is the judge's decision suspect due to his investments in several oil companies, but his reasoning is nonsensical.

If an airplane was involved in an accident because the tail sheared off and it crashed would you claim that grounding all of those planes until a cause was found for the failure was "arbitrary, heavy handed and overbearing?"

Somehow I don't think so. I think it's irresponsible to allow continued deep water drilling without knowing the exact cause of this disaster and to make sure that safeguards, ones that actually work, are in place at the other deep water facilities.

 

[firespin]

So now you're writing your own material.

And it turns out that you and your ghost-writing, judge-hating friends don't really think the judge is corrupt or making incorrect rulings to pad his own pocket, you just don't like offshore drilling.

Your concern is not that the guy owns stock in a company that's party to a suit, it's that he had some shares in a mutual fund that also owned shares of a company in the same industry that could be affected by his decision by a tiny amount. By that standard, what judge could have any equity investments at all? How could they always hear only those cases that have no impact on any stock in any mutual fund they own?

This judge has been around for years, with no ethics issues that any of your gung-ho bloggers have managed to surface. (It has been more than ten days since May 14, right?) You just look silly trying to claim you understand judicial ethics much better than people who do this for a living.

And re: airplanes, planes do have mechanical failures. (example here.) Your own example disproves your point. (Nicely done! It does show why you try to steal work by others whenever possible, but even they make similar mistakes in their zealous froth.) When mechanical failures happen, they don't shut down all flights by all planes of similar size, manufacturer, etc. Just doesn't happen. In this case, the judge is saying that we won't penalize companies doing the right thing just because some other company didn't do the right thing. And after what's going on with BP, what oil company would cut corners again? The whole moratorium thing is a political stunt, and the judge called them on it as illegal.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Teach them how to weld!

Biden just said, AGAIN, that a lot of those jobs aren't coming back.




We can't all be tinkerers so teach them to work the dole...
__________________
We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we're asking young people to do. Don't go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we're encouraging our young people to do that.
Michelle Obama

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

So now you're writing you own material.

And it turns out that you and your ghost-writing, judge-hating friends don't really think the judge is corrupt or making incorrect rulings to pad his own pocket, you just don't like offshore drilling.

Your concern is not that the guy owns stock in a company that's party to a suit, it's that he had some shares in a mutual fund that also owned shares of a company in the same industry that could be affected by his decision by a tiny amount. By that standard, what judge could have any equity investments at all? How could they always hear only those cases that have no impact on any stock in any mutual fund they own?

This judge has been around for years, with no ethics issues that any of your gung-ho bloggers have managed to surface. (It has been more than ten days since May 14, right?) You just look silly trying to claim you understand judicial ethics much better than people who do this for a living.

And re: airplanes, planes do have mechanical failures. Your own example disproves your point. (Nicely done!) When mechanical failures happen, they don't shut down all flights by all planes of similar size, manufacturer, etc. Just doesn't happen. In this case, the judge is saying that we won't penalize companies doing the right thing just because some other company didn't do the right thing. And after what's going on with BP, what oil company would cut corners again? The whole moratorium thing is a political stunt, and the judge called them on it as illegal.

Good lord you're a first rate bullshit artist, I'll give you that much.

This wasn't an outright ban on offshore drilling, since it affected a total of 33 rigs engaged in deep water operations while leaving 3000 others unaffected. It's not about hating offshore drilling, it's about making sure it's fucking safe. It was targeted specifically at rigs engaged in the same type of activity as the one that exploded, sank, and caused this massive spill.

First of all, the rules governing judicial recusal are very clear. If a judge's decision is called into question with grounds (i.e. he owned stock in an interested party), even if no real impropriety is proved, just the appearance of impropriety, the judge must recuse himself. He apparently [bknew[/b] that there was at least an appearance of impropriety, otherwise why would he have instructed his broker to dump incriminating stock before he announced his decision? Note, he didn't sell the stock before he MADE his decision, just before he announced it.

Next, you trying to equate this catastrophic failure to a simple mechanical breakdown in an airplane is ludicrous. It would be just as insane to try to equate a hangnail to a decapitation.

But we're not talking a simple mechanical failure, the rig that exploded and later sank had several of those before the disaster that caused this now epic spill in the gulf (estimates have placed the amount of oil now leaking on par with the Exxon Valdez every four days!). We're talking a massive catastrophic failure resulting in lives lost and countless billions in damages. You know, like a tail section shearing off in flight and causing a horrible crash say, into a school full of children, not a simple mechanical failure that resulted in a delayed takeoff. Entire fleets of airliners have been grounded for much less until a cause was found and procedures in place to prevent another such catastrophe. It was a nice attempt to equate two very different things as if they were the same though.

Ok, not really. It was a lame attempt, I mean REALLY bad.

What oil company would cut corners again after what's happened? Simple, BP would, and did, they had a similar failure in another deep water well recently. Although the spill wasn't nearly as catastrophic. Wouldn't you know it, they used the very same model shut off valve that failed there in the well that failed in the gulf. Except that the one in the gulf had been modified, was plagued by leaking hydraulic fluid, malfunctioning parts and poor maintenance, according to preliminary findings by a congressional inquiry. The well had failed two separate pressure tests in the hours before the explosion. A 2001 document obtained by the committee from Transocean, the drilling company that owned the rig, identified 260 separate ways that the blowout preventer could fail. The last line of defense had 260 different ways to fail to do it's job!? NINE YEARS AGO? That's inexcusable.

 

[firespin]

Good lord, you're such an uncomprehending moron.

Next, you trying to equate this catastrophic failure to a simple mechanical breakdown in an airplane is ludicrous. It would be just as insane to try to equate a hangnail to a decapitation.

Simple mechanical breakdown? From the article I linked:

"Uncommanded rudder hardovers are widely suspected of causing two unsolved 737 crashes: United Airlines Flight 585 in Colorado Springs, Colo., on March 3, 1991, which killed all 25 on board; and USAir Flight 427 in Pittsburgh, on Sept. 8, 1994, in which all 132 on board were killed. "

Why, that seems way worse that the drilling platform explosion somehow. The guys on the rig know it's a hazardous occupation. The folks on the plane didn't have the same understanding.

But to you, it's a hangnail. You're pathetic.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Good lord, you're such an uncomprehending moron.



Simple mechanical breakdown? From the article I linked:

"Uncommanded rudder hardovers are widely suspected of causing two unsolved 737 crashes: United Airlines Flight 585 in Colorado Springs, Colo., on March 3, 1991, which killed all 25 on board; and USAir Flight 427 in Pittsburgh, on Sept. 8, 1994, in which all 132 on board were killed. "

Why, that seems way worse that the drilling platform explosion somehow. The guys on the rig know it's a hazardous occupation. The folks on the plane didn't have the same understanding.

But to you, it's a hangnail. You're pathetic.

Nice attempt at a spin.

A rudder failure is not a "simple mechanical problem", especially if it causes a crash and loss of life. But you knew this. In fact, it's exactly the sort of catastrophic mechanical failure I used as an example for the grounding of an entire fleet of planes until the cause and precautions to prevent future events is in place. Very much like the moratorium on deep water gulf drilling.

A "hangnail" comparison would be a failure on the runway that causes a delay, not a major in flight failure that causes an actual crash. But gain, you know this as well.

All in all a pathetic attempt at shoving words into my mouth and deliberately making a false comparison and claiming it is your opponent's position, something you have a habit of doing to those you disagree with.

 

[RightField]

Good lord, you're such an uncomprehending moron.



Simple mechanical breakdown? From the article I linked:

"Uncommanded rudder hardovers are widely suspected of causing two unsolved 737 crashes: United Airlines Flight 585 in Colorado Springs, Colo., on March 3, 1991, which killed all 25 on board; and USAir Flight 427 in Pittsburgh, on Sept. 8, 1994, in which all 132 on board were killed. "

Why, that seems way worse that the drilling platform explosion somehow. The guys on the rig know it's a hazardous occupation. The folks on the plane didn't have the same understanding.

But to you, it's a hangnail. You're pathetic.

UD is a hard-working man of the people. He's a maintenance man on a boiler and does pool maintenance in his spare time. He's one of those guys who zips around the corners of the office when someone complains that the room is too hot or cold. His footsteps are quiet in his rubber-soled shoes, but you know he's there because you can often hear the jingling of the keys that he keeps on the belt loop of his trousers. He's a good man who cares, but there's little you're going to do to change his mind. Let him have his say and move on.

 

[firespin]

Nice attempt at a spin.

A rudder failure is not a "simple mechanical problem", especially if it causes a crash and loss of life. But you knew this. In fact, it's exactly the sort of catastrophic mechanical failure I used as an example for the grounding of an entire fleet of planes until the cause and precautions to prevent future events is in place. Very much like the moratorium on deep water gulf drilling.

A "hangnail" comparison would be a failure on the runway that causes a delay, not a major in flight failure that causes an actual crash. But gain, you know this as well.

All in all a pathetic attempt at shoving words into my mouth and deliberately making a false comparison and claiming it is your opponent's position, something you have a habit of doing to those you disagree with.

LOL...you're the guy who called it a simple mechanical breakdown. Look up about three posts.

Oh, and they didn't put a moratorium on all flights, or even all flights by this plane ("grounding a fleet of planes"). Another thing you would have learned if you could actually understand what you read, rather than just copying and pasting it.

Why do I even bother poking sticks in your cage?

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

UD is a hard-working man of the people. He's a maintenance man on a boiler and does pool maintenance in his spare time. He's one of those guys who zips around the corners of the office when someone complains that the room is too hot or cold. His footsteps are quiet in his rubber-soled shoes, but you know he's there because you can often hear the jingling of the keys that he keeps on the belt loop of his trousers. He's a good man who cares, but there's little you're going to do to change his mind. Let him have his say and move on.

An awesome demonstration of exactly how little you know about me.

 

[firespin]

An awesome demonstration of exactly how little you know about me.

He did call you hard working, a good man who cares.

Since he's so far off, I take it we should consider you a lazy apathetic SOB.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

LOL...you're the guy who called it a simple mechanical breakdown. Look up about three posts.

Oh, and they didn't put a moratorium on all flights, or even all flights by this plane ("grounding a fleet of planes"). Another thing you would have learned if you could actually understand what you read, rather than just copying and pasting it.

Why do I even bother poking sticks in your cage?

If you bothered to actually read what I posted instead of reading into it what you want, you would see that I was talking about catastrophic failures in aircraft, which have triggered the grounding of entire fleets.

You go on patting yourself on the back that you found an example when planes were not grounded en masse because of a catastrophic in flight failure, ignoring the fact that they have been at other times.

Also ignoring the fact that not every oil rig failure triggered a moratorium on deep water drilling. Otherwise the rig that exploded, sank, and is now responsible for billions in damage (the actual cost in environmental damage is immeasurable) would have been shut down when they first started having issues with the last line of defense, the safety shut off.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

He did call you hard working, a good man who cares.

Since he's so far off, I take it we should consider you a lazy apathetic SOB.

There's a saying about stopped clocks..

His stopped long ago.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

UD is a hard-working man of the people. He's a maintenance man on a boiler and does pool maintenance in his spare time. He's one of those guys who zips around the corners of the office when someone complains that the room is too hot or cold. His footsteps are quiet in his rubber-soled shoes, but you know he's there because you can often hear the jingling of the keys that he keeps on the belt loop of his trousers. He's a good man who cares, but there's little you're going to do to change his mind. Let him have his say and move on.

Oh jeez...I sure hope you swallow instead of spit, guy. It would really be awful for Fire to lose all that built-up, frustrated nut from his cock that you're sucking so good right now!

LOL...you're the guy who called it a simple mechanical breakdown. Look up about three posts.

Oh, and they didn't put a moratorium on all flights, or even all flights by this plane ("grounding a fleet of planes"). Another thing you would have learned if you could actually understand what you read, rather than just copying and pasting it.

Why do I even bother poking sticks in your cage?

Y'know, the old Firespin would've stat/chart/graph/diagram'd his way to a "win" about five or six posts ago. What happened to the Derek Jeter in you? You're making me lose my Vegas odds on you, here, meng.

 

[firespin]

Y'know, the old Firespin would've stat/chart/graph/diagram'd his way to a "win" about five or six posts ago. What happened to the Derek Jeter in you? You're making me lose my Vegas odds on you, here, meng.

I know, what's up with that? I did post a cute Brazilian girl a few pages back.

I blame Bush.

No, strike that, I blame UD for bringing up moronic issues.

How's that? Mo' betta?

 

[Bacetti]

Oh jeez...I sure hope you swallow instead of spit, guy. It would really be awful for Fire to lose all that built-up, frustrated nut from his cock that you're sucking so good right now!

Ha!

sorry...found that amusing.

 

[firespin]

Oh jeez...I sure hope you swallow instead of spit, guy. It would really be awful for Fire to lose all that built-up, frustrated nut from his cock that you're sucking so good right now!

Ha!

sorry...found that amusing.

And here I was thinking that there had to be a bigger circle of...well, you know...

(Is that Right Field? I'm surprised he uses that much eye shadow.)

Wheras the man-on-man crush was signified by posting a picture of applause.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

And here I was thinking that there had to be a bigger circle of...well, you know...

(Is that Right Field? I'm surprised he uses that much eye shadow.)

Wheras the man-on-man crush was signified by posting a picture of applause.

I don't think you really needed his help here, but dayum...you know it's a hot day in the summer when RightField has to get on his knees that desperately...

 

[unregistered]

 

[Beco]

I don't think you really needed his help here, but dayum...you know it's a hot day in the summer when RightField has to get on his knees that desperately...

More fantasies from IrezumiPiss

 

[IrezumiKiss]

More fantasies from IrezumiPiss

*sluurrp slurrrrp SLUUURRRRRRP*

Keep on sucking that cock in your eternal quest for relevance in the absence of nothing to say, Faneros...work that shit like a neckbone, you so damn good wit' your thin-mint lips, bwoy...

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

U_D, we hit 10,00 again...





AGAIN!!!

Read any Krugman lately? The beginning of the THIRD Depression.

I blame Obama. It's his economy now because it was his fix...

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Wonder what that jobs report is going to say?







I keep hearing such positive things about how the economy is going to kick in during the summer of OH-ten...

Of course, Gitmo has been closed for six months now too.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]