News Stories

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Gaddafi government in talks with France: report
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...76A00020110711
Is France changing his position ?

Wouldn't surprise me if they've considered it. The only reason they ever got involved in the entire mess was for the oil, but the fight with Gaddafi's been going on for quite a while now, and they're prolly starting to see that it's better for them to hold some kind of negotiations so they can have access to the oil faster.

[Anh_Minh]

It's possible France's started considering negotiation, though I haven't heard anything about it here yet. But I'd just like to point out that Saif al-Islam doesn't speak for France.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

I am usualy saying than tabloids are shity newspapers but to tallk of them as ''polution''... the classified advertissement section can't be as bad as the others sections, no ?

Tabloids should be considered pollution. I hate reading those stuff and they get in my way of reading newspapers.

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

There's a reason for that. Universities are trying to lower their standards so that more students get a higher grade, and that in turn makes their rank in the listings even higher. The uni I went to, for instance, hardly ever changed the question sets in every exam year after year on purpose so that students knew ahead of time what would come for them. There would be some differences in the questions themselves, but the topics covered in the exams would never change. This was done so that students would have better chances of getting higher grades. It surprised me quite a lot that people still got C grades in exams because of that.

Some of the students who get C grades are those who can't be bothered, or knew that the system is junk. The time spent for studying can be better spent at working part time or on their hobby.

I am one of those students. Bs & Cs all the way.

Honestly speaking, universities should maintain their grade scheme no matter how much they want to increase their rankings. I don't mind failing a couple of courses to learn a few concrete things.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Actually there are situations where holding long term debt is acceptable, and even desirable. If you have low enough interest rates, and you know any excess capital you have will accumulate more income if you invest it, then there's no point in paying off your debt. The only point when you should start paying off your debt is when you make more income by paying it off then by investing your profit elsewhere.

If you ever play a game like Railroad Tycoon 3 this is quite apparent. I often max out my loans when the interest rate gets low enough.

In this way it's very easy for a company to accumalate large amounts of debt.

Actually what I know is that in buying debt (Economic term is bond investment), foreign investors are looking for interest rates. Interest rates is also known as the cost of borrowing money; and with a higher one of that, the total revenue generated from buying debt will result in a larger payout.

I forgot what is it called, I think it is "return on savings" when investors throw in money at places with high interest rates. This leads to something called "twin-deficit cycle", where high government deficit > rising interest rates > increase in foreign investment > increase value of currency > reduced export + increased import > trade deficit > lowered GDP > increased unemployment > reduced tax revenue. Then it goes back to higher government deficit again.

Of course you shouldn't be taking out debt to cover actual regular expenditure, and you should be careful with the type of debt you take out (fixed rate is likely a much better choice).

Fixed rate loans are often measured against future inflation, so in total amount repaid, it can be might higher than adjustable rate loans. The best time to use this loan when interest rates are low, but since interest rate is often calculated as Prime Interest + Risk, the risk rate might balloon the overall interest rate.

Like what an ex-banker friend of mine said, "Do the fucking math before you borrow money. If you can't calculate something that simple, just slash your wrists."

I recall a guy who built himself a "buy to let" empire during the boom, whereby he'd buy properties, charge rent on them, and use that income from previous properties to secure against 100% loans to get even more properties. In all cases his income from rent was always greater then his expense in interest, so he just kept on buying more properties with money he essentially didn't have. A clevel scheme, but unfortunately he used variable loans and when interest rates went up....

There is also another guy who had many credit cards, but he is prudent in using them :

1. He pays his bills on time to avoid accumulating borrowing costs
2. He only takes a few cards out everytime he leaves home.
3. He uses to cards to get points, then applying them for discount, thus reducing his cost of living and increase his credit worthiness as his monthly pay are kept at an above-sustainable rate to pay his monthly credit card bills.

It is financial discipline, like what many call it. But apparently people are too easily swayed by advertisements to buy something they don't need with money they don't have.

Originally Posted by Archon_Wing

That implies they knew what it meant in the first place. I think you're giving them too much credit here.

Me thinks a used condom is more useful at running the country than them.

What if the condom is shaped like Jesus?

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

What if the condom is shaped like Jesus?

A rather hard thing to make, no.
I can't tell if some of the Bible Belt nuts would see this as a miracle or a sacrilege

[Jinto]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

1. He pays his bills on time to avoid accumulating borrowing costs
2. He only takes a few cards out everytime he leaves home.
3. He uses to cards to get points, then applying them for discount, thus reducing his cost of living and increase his credit worthiness as his monthly pay are kept at an above-sustainable rate to pay his monthly credit card bills.

I am not sure if this is applicable outside the USA. Because typically shops have to compensate the credit card company whenever a credit card is used as means of payment (e.g. Amex being one of the more expensive cards here in Germany).

Points for discount is bullshit, at some point you paid already for that "discount". If you go to a normal shop the prices will be high enough to compensate for additional costs like credit-card e-cash. This is why credit cards are accepted only in some shops here in Germany (i.e. some gas stations will take credit cards, others not... the cheaper one's are typically not taking credit cards).

So, at least where I live you'ld either pay more for your stuff on a daily basis and can use the credit card extensively or you buy cheaper and cannot use the credit card so often. In the end you have to calculate this very thouroughly to decide which way is the most economic alternative. And for someone who does not plan to incur debts, the answer could very well be to use no credit card at all. Because at the end of the day, the credit card is a service that someone has to pay for (and its not the credit card company).

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Jinto

Because at the end of the day, the credit card is a service that someone has to pay for (and its not the credit card company).

In America, that someone encompasses everyone who pays only the minimum payment month after month until it's paid off, they die, or they go bankrupt. Interest is the life blood of credit cards.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by GDB

In America, that someone encompasses everyone who pays only the minimum payment month after month until it's paid off, they die, or they go bankrupt. Interest is the life blood of credit cards.

You can't blame the credit company if someone ignores the "if you can't afford it then don't buy it rule" and ended paying a ton interest.

[GDB]

Where did I blame anyone? I merely said what kept the credit card companies in business.

[Solace]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

You can't blame the credit company if someone ignores the "if you can't afford it then don't buy it rule" and ended paying a ton interest.

I wouldn't say blame, but it wouldn't be a stretch to say that the average consumer (in America at least) has grown up in an environment that not only encourages you to use some form of credit, but in some cases punishes you for not using credit.

There's a reason why the savings rate in the nation is at an all time low, and it is largely because of heavy advertising for credit as "free money". Many of these lenders know exactly who to target: high risk borrowers with shaky and/or low income. Why? Because it's like handing a poor person a million dollars. They're more likely to not know how to manage it to last for a long time and more likely to spend it on impulse buys that yield little return for investment. It doesn't help that major media portrays the rich lifestyle as one of excess and indulgence, furthering the notion that if you come into a lot of money you should spend it on frivolous overpriced stuff.

Think about it...when was the last time you saw a credit card commercial that wasn't about buying expensive items or traveling somewhere? You'll never see one that talks about what many people actually use them for: paying the bills when the paycheck can't cover groceries.

So while I can't blame the consumer, or the company, I can blame the culture of both which has contributed to the average individual learning about financial discipline the hard way....sometimes too late.

[Irenicus]

Not to mention the whole notion that the way you can gain a good credit rating is by, well, utilizing credit.

So even if you have enough of your own money to pay for all your needs, you end up being better off if you still use the credit card, instead of just using a debit card or cash and don't bother with it.

Given that credit rating is the modern day version of class discrimination, a non-transparent number governed by a private institution that still greatly affects your life, and basically an adult version of your school grades telling you how you're doing at the whole "success" thing, providing privileges to those with a high score and punishing those who don't buy into the system, yeah.

I'm going to slap the next person who says capitalism makes sense to me really, really hard.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

I'm going to slap the next person who says capitalism makes sense to me really, really hard.

Like aristocracy, it makes a lot of sense. Provided you get to be an aristocrat.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Like aristocracy, it makes a lot of sense. Provided you get to be an aristocrat.

*SLA--

Oh.

Well if you put it that way, I can't really say anything back. Except perhaps to note that most people who say that in America belongs squarely in the exploited demographic, and they even believe what they say. Peasants defending the ancien régime indeed. ~_~

[Anh_Minh]

Well, it's the devil you know.

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

What if the condom is shaped like Jesus?

Then it gets burned at the stake for being a false prophet :/ Along with the user.

Never mind, we're past the stage of witch burnings. Oh wait...

[mechabao]

Lulzsec is back with another SQL injection attack.

[flying ^]

White House: we "win the future" by making ISPs into copyright cops


The White House likes the newly announced "six strikes" voluntary agreement announced today between major copyright holders and Internet access providers. That's no surprise—the US administration helped to broker the deal.

"The joining of Internet service providers and entertainment companies in a cooperative effort to combat online infringement can further this goal [of supporting jobs and exports] and we commend them for reaching this agreement," said Victoria Espinel, US Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, in a statement today. "We believe it will have a significant impact on reducing online piracy." .....

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by flying ^

White House: we "win the future" by making ISPs into copyright cops


The White House likes the newly announced "six strikes" voluntary agreement announced today between major copyright holders and Internet access providers. That's no surprise—the US administration helped to broker the deal.

"The joining of Internet service providers and entertainment companies in a cooperative effort to combat online infringement can further this goal [of supporting jobs and exports] and we commend them for reaching this agreement," said Victoria Espinel, US Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, in a statement today. "We believe it will have a significant impact on reducing online piracy." .....

Well, it's really not in the best interest of ISPs to give more than a half hearted attempt at cooperation here. Where are libertarians when you need them though?

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

Well, it's really not in the best interest of ISPs to give more than a half hearted attempt at cooperation here. Where are libertarians when you need them though?

Living free

Out in the Forests

Hunting

- Don Quigleone

[flying ^]

New Hampshire Planned Parenthood stops providing birth control
‎

"If they want to have a good time, why not let them pay for it?"
(Raymond Wieczorek of Manchester)



and in New Jersey...

Governor Christie Veto of Planned Parenthood Tax-Funds Upheld

[ganbaru]

News Corp may be at risk for U.S. probe over bribery
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...76A6PH20110712

As if the phone-hacking scandal in Britain wasn't enough .