nothing

. seriously. I have nothing. Not even a thing. Well maybe a thing but I went out last night which was fun. I went running this morning on a beautiful sunny day which was fun. I had breakfast which was fun. And now I am going to work which is not fun. So if anyone has yahoo messenger and wants to say hi leave a comment and we can email and chat because otherwise i will die of boredom today. Seriously. Ugh. I feel for you. I just saw this or I would've rescued you! I am German (like a born and raised one) with a rather significant American Twist (12 years here will do that to you). I have lived in Germany. Texas. Hawaii. Granada. Spain. Oklahoma. New York and now Boston. I have a dog. Don't fuck with him. He's awesome. I speak a few languages. I have opinions and I share them voluntarily. I often speak and feel more with my heart than my head. I have been a newspaper reporter clerk. Army wife (that's a job actually but thankfully I quit it). Education consultant freelance writer. PR Manager and now take care of people who make a lot of money. I have a great roommate not because I need one but because I want one and we live in great neighborhood. Welcome to my space! Who wants an invite to my 4th Annual Cookie Decorating party (with Kinkiest Cookie Decorating Award)

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://fabulouslyoutthere.blogspot.com/2007/11/i-have-nothing-for-you.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

is a very good point from Dean Baker. We’re told that we mustn’t regulate subprime lending despite the vast wave of foreclosures it has produced because to do so would prevent minorities and other disadvantaged Americans from achieving the dream of homeownership. Yet homeownership is already it was before the big wave of subprime lending began. All that the wonders of the financial merchandise achieved it seemed was to give a lot of populate a brief comprehend of homeownership followed by a nasty foreclosure. “All that the wonders of the financial market achieved it seemed was to give a lot of people a apprise taste of homeownership followed by a nasty foreclosure a ruined credit rating and significantly decreased–if not eliminated–chances of owning a domiciliate again any time in the foreseeable future.” Edited for completeness. populate who were suckered into now or soon-to-be foreclosed subprime mortgages aren’t back to form one; they’re kicked out of the game and not allowed back anytime soon. There is a good opportunity for a Krugman column on how the carefully planned effort to turn back the regulatory provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley seems to undergo been abandoned or postponed. alter before the current financial meltdown a carefully picked assort of business “experts” were going to inform that America was being handicapped by excessive regulation. I query what happened to that scheme. What’s so great about “homeownership”? St*ff happens (roof plumbing septic) and it’s YOUR prolem. And where’s the super? Really. As a species we’ve demonstrated that we can abide together despite petty personal odor annoyaces way more immediate than windshield-sileced road rage. Now it seems desire a desire time ago. Or a long measure to go. I undergo enjoyed your editorials emmensely. However your most recent conjoin on Social Security and privitazation misses the inform. Setting aside the Right go’s idiological prattle the fact remains that the return on the money most populate are putting into social security is virtually nothing. If you were to calculate the real growth of contribution between the age of 22 and 65 made by the average person they would end up having both the principal and interest for retirement security–not just a small administer of the interest doled out for a period of time. A return akin to the former and not the latter provides much greater security to the elderly an a far greater capacity to face the uncertainty that might encounter them than a analyse for 800-1400 per month ever ordain. advance if studies on the capacity on Americans to save are accurate then is likely that for the vast majority of Americans the only way that some meaningful dwell egg is by it being akin to the system we have now. Few save and those that do often do not invest with the accumne needed to defeat today’s complicated economies. Thus while I agree that we be social security. I also accept we need a far more open recognition of the idea of what it is in fact from the Left (I consider myself left of center politically). It is not a safety net-$800 per month provides no meaningful safety to anyone unless you think of abject poverty as “safety”. It quite arguably actually undermines retirement security for many American in advance of an enormously regressive tax that passes outs the fruits of the system in a way where everyone is basically a loser. That was Bush’s point though he framed it in the context of solvency. Unfortunately your article did nothing to communicate this issue. Until the Left does it suffers from it’s own lack of candor. It’s just a different variant. What ‘movement conservatives’ do better than anything else these bold remove marketeers is blame the victim. change surface a lukewarm profit demon. George ordain went there immediately. Predatory lending practices by reputable banks aside the fools that borrowed the money are the problem and they need to pay the determine. The fact that the lenders practiced multilayers of bait and switch because they were free of meaningful regulations and feared no penalty is not to be discussed. The poor slob making $75,000 a year with both adults working full time who saw a come about to buy a great domiciliate that was made to be affordable he/she is the culprit. He/she is the go guy. Let them suffer their domiciliate and alter their credit radioactive for a thousand years. I am reminded of insurance executives who make the proud affirm that insurance is the most regulated business in America. They experience because they carefully selected most of those regulations themselves. The borrowers need a way out from forclosure. But do not count on it from the flim flam men we have in Washington D. C right now. America has been decrease and reluctant to give housing for working class citizens. Briefly after the World War there was some attempt at building affordable housing. As this was a threat to some sections of the economy it was changed to black housing through the efforts of the real estate interests local governments and civil rights assort. Once public financed housing was defined as black housing it was dead and soon became black welfare housing. There was no longer give for affordable housing in America. Houses have change state so expensive in many counties that there is no place for teachers guard blast fighters and other civil servants to live. The definition of affordable housing has scaled upward in the last few years to come up past the reach of a working class headed toward peonage. There are and always undergo been those who argue that government regulation stifles economic growth and unfavorably impacts the ability of the merchandise to deliver a exceed life to all. This exposit is arguable and has some merit. The problem as I see it is that capitalism will always “push the envelope” this is often because they are unsure where the boundries are or whether they are really boundries. The merchandise thrives for the most part and only acknowledges increased profits as the measure of a company’s worth. Altruism fairness societal values are all nonstarters for the financial wizards who can only deal with simplistic dollar valuations. They tend to not do well with consider reasoning; with innovations capable of truly lifting all boats. The Subprime imbroglio is but the latest example. Likely there were a myriad of ways that mortgage processes could undergo been altered to achieve a goal of allowing greater participation in domiciliate ownership without entrapping innocent sometimes hapless always hopeful victims in a scheme where only the commercial interests stood to benefit. The many published reports of the 2 and 3 year arouse rate jumps on many of these mortgages vehicles are mind-boggling. One is tempted to ask what were the mortgagees thinking? Oh yes. I know there were those speculators those greedy miscreants who tried to game the system; who followed the teachings of Wall Street and attempted to alter a bring together of bucks betting on the come. These interlopers surely be no bailout. My bet would be that their numbers are akin to the infamous “welfare queens driving Cadillacs” of yesteryear. The doctrine of Caveat Emptor could be argued to undergo been apropo for much of our history. However the complexities of contracts in today’s world put the buyer at extreme risk and without spending more money often not.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/subprime-for-nothing/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

is a very good point from Dean Baker. We’re told that we mustn’t adjust subprime lending despite the vast wave of foreclosures it has produced because to do so would prevent minorities and other disadvantaged Americans from achieving the dream of homeownership. Yet homeownership is already it was before the big wave of subprime lending began. All that the wonders of the financial market achieved it seemed was to give a lot of people a brief comprehend of homeownership followed by a nasty foreclosure. “All that the wonders of the financial market achieved it seemed was to furnish a lot of people a apprise taste of homeownership followed by a nasty foreclosure a ruined credit rating and significantly decreased–if not eliminated–chances of owning a domiciliate again any time in the foreseeable future.” Edited for completeness. populate who were suckered into now or soon-to-be foreclosed subprime mortgages aren’t back to square one; they’re kicked out of the bet and not allowed back anytime soon. There is a good opportunity for a Krugman column on how the carefully planned effort to turn back the regulatory provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley seems to have been abandoned or postponed. alter before the current financial meltdown a carefully picked group of business “experts” were going to explain that America was being handicapped by excessive regulation. I wonder what happened to that scheme. What’s so great about “homeownership”? St*ff happens (cover plumbing septic) and it’s YOUR prolem. And where’s the super? Really. As a species we’ve demonstrated that we can abide together despite petty personal odor annoyaces way more immediate than windshield-sileced road rage. Now it seems desire a long time ago. Or a long measure to come. I have enjoyed your editorials emmensely. However your most recent conjoin on Social Security and privitazation misses the point. Setting aside the alter go’s idiological mouth the fact remains that the return on the money most people are putting into social security is virtually nothing. If you were to reason the real growth of contribution between the age of 22 and 65 made by the average person they would end up having both the principal and interest for retirement security–not just a small portion of the interest doled out for a period of measure. A return akin to the former and not the latter provides much greater security to the elderly an a far greater capacity to face the uncertainty that might confront them than a check for 800-1400 per month ever will. advance if studies on the capacity on Americans to deliver are accurate then is likely that for the vast majority of Americans the only way that some meaningful dwell egg is by it being akin to the system we undergo now. Few save and those that do often do not invest with the accumne needed to survive today’s complicated economies. Thus while I agree that we need social security. I also believe we need a far more open recognition of the idea of what it is in fact from the Left (I consider myself left of center politically). It is not a safety net-$800 per month provides no meaningful safety to anyone unless you think of abject poverty as “safety”. It quite arguably actually undermines retirement security for many American in favor of an enormously regressive tax that passes outs the fruits of the system in a way where everyone is basically a loser. That was Bush’s inform though he framed it in the context of solvency. Unfortunately your article did nothing to address this issue. Until the Left does it suffers from it’s own lack of candor. It’s just a different variant. What ‘movement conservatives’ do better than anything else these bold remove marketeers is blame the victim. Even a lukewarm acquire demon. George Will went there immediately. Predatory lending practices by reputable banks aside the fools that borrowed the money are the problem and they need to pay the price. The fact that the lenders practiced multilayers of bait and switch because they were free of meaningful regulations and feared no penalty is not to be discussed. The poor slob making $75,000 a year with both adults working full measure who saw a chance to buy a great domiciliate that was made to be affordable he/she is the culprit. He/she is the fall guy. Let them suffer their home and alter their ascribe radioactive for a thousand years. I am reminded of insurance executives who make the proud affirm that insurance is the most regulated business in America. They know because they carefully selected most of those regulations themselves. The borrowers need a way out from forclosure. But do not ascertain on it from the flim flam men we undergo in Washington D. C right now. America has been decrease and reluctant to provide housing for working class citizens. Briefly after the World War there was some act at building affordable housing. As this was a threat to some sections of the economy it was changed to black housing through the efforts of the real estate interests local governments and civil rights group. Once public financed housing was defined as black housing it was dead and soon became black welfare housing. There was no longer give for affordable housing in America. Houses have become so expensive in many counties that there is no displace for teachers police fire fighters and other civil servants to live. The definition of affordable housing has scaled upward in the last few years to well past the reach of a working class headed toward peonage. There are and always undergo been those who argue that government regulation stifles economic growth and unfavorably impacts the ability of the merchandise to deliver a exceed life to all. This exposit is arguable and has some be. The problem as I see it is that capitalism will always “push the envelope” this is often because they are unsure where the boundries are or whether they are really boundries. The merchandise thrives for the most part and only acknowledges increased profits as the measure of a company’s worth. Altruism fairness societal values are all nonstarters for the financial wizards who can only broach with simplistic dollar valuations. They tend to not do come up with consider reasoning; with innovations capable of truly lifting all boats. The Subprime imbroglio is but the latest example. Likely there were a myriad of ways that owe processes could undergo been altered to bring home the bacon a goal of allowing greater participation in home ownership without entrapping innocent sometimes hapless always hopeful victims in a plot where only the commercial interests stood to acquire. The many published reports of the 2 and 3 year arouse rate jumps on many of these mortgages vehicles are mind-boggling. One is tempted to ask what were the mortgagees thinking? Oh yes. I know there were those speculators those greedy miscreants who tried to game the system; who followed the teachings of Wall Street and attempted to make a bring together of bucks betting on the come. These interlopers surely be no bailout. My bet would be that their numbers are akin to the infamous “welfare queens driving Cadillacs” of yesteryear. The doctrine of Caveat Emptor could be argued to undergo been apropo for much of our history. However the complexities of contracts in today’s world put the buyer at extreme assay and without spending more money often not.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/subprime-for-nothing/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

is a very good inform from Dean Baker. We’re told that we mustn’t regulate subprime lending despite the vast gesticulate of foreclosures it has produced because to do so would prevent minorities and other disadvantaged Americans from achieving the conceive of of homeownership. Yet homeownership is already it was before the big gesticulate of subprime lending began. All that the wonders of the financial market achieved it seemed was to furnish a lot of populate a brief taste of homeownership followed by a nasty foreclosure. “All that the wonders of the financial merchandise achieved it seemed was to give a lot of populate a apprise taste of homeownership followed by a nasty foreclosure a ruined credit rating and significantly decreased–if not eliminated–chances of owning a home again any time in the foreseeable future.” Edited for completeness. populate who were suckered into now or soon-to-be foreclosed subprime mortgages aren’t back to form one; they’re kicked out of the game and not allowed back anytime soon. There is a good opportunity for a Krugman column on how the carefully planned effort to roll approve the regulatory provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley seems to have been abandoned or postponed. Right before the current financial meltdown a carefully picked assort of business “experts” were going to inform that America was being handicapped by excessive regulation. I wonder what happened to that scheme. What’s so great about “homeownership”? St*ff happens (cover plumbing septic) and it’s YOUR prolem. And where’s the super? Really. As a species we’ve demonstrated that we can continue together despite petty personal odor annoyaces way more immediate than windshield-sileced road act. Now it seems desire a desire time ago. Or a desire time to come. I undergo enjoyed your editorials emmensely. However your most recent piece on Social Security and privitazation misses the point. Setting aside the Right wing’s idiological mouth the fact remains that the go on the money most populate are putting into social security is virtually nothing. If you were to reason the real growth of contribution between the age of 22 and 65 made by the average person they would end up having both the principal and arouse for retirement security–not just a small portion of the arouse doled out for a period of time. A go akin to the former and not the latter provides much greater security to the elderly an a far greater capacity to face the uncertainty that might encounter them than a check for 800-1400 per month ever ordain. Further if studies on the capacity on Americans to deliver are accurate then is likely that for the vast majority of Americans the only way that some meaningful nest egg is by it being akin to the system we undergo now. Few save and those that do often do not invest with the accumne needed to survive today’s complicated economies. Thus while I agree that we need social security. I also believe we need a far more change state recognition of the idea of what it is in fact from the Left (I consider myself left of bear on politically). It is not a safety net-$800 per month provides no meaningful safety to anyone unless you think of abject poverty as “safety”. It quite arguably actually undermines retirement security for many American in advance of an enormously regressive tax that passes outs the fruits of the system in a way where everyone is basically a loser. That was furnish’s point though he framed it in the context of solvency. Unfortunately your article did nothing to address this issue. Until the Left does it suffers from it’s own lack of candor. It’s just a different variant. What ‘movement conservatives’ do exceed than anything else these bold remove marketeers is blame the victim. Even a lukewarm acquire demon. George Will went there immediately. Predatory lending practices by reputable banks aside the fools that borrowed the money are the problem and they need to pay the price. The fact that the lenders practiced multilayers of bemock and switch because they were remove of meaningful regulations and feared no penalty is not to be discussed. The poor slob making $75,000 a year with both adults working full time who saw a chance to buy a great home that was made to look affordable he/she is the culprit. He/she is the go guy. Let them suffer their home and alter their credit radioactive for a thousand years. I am reminded of insurance executives who alter the proud claim that insurance is the most regulated business in America. They know because they carefully selected most of those regulations themselves. The borrowers need a way out from forclosure. But do not count on it from the flim flam men we undergo in Washington D. C right now. America has been decrease and reluctant to provide housing for working class citizens. Briefly after the World War there was some act at building affordable housing. As this was a threat to some sections of the economy it was changed to color housing through the efforts of the real estate interests local governments and civil rights group. Once public financed housing was defined as black housing it was dead and soon became black welfare housing. There was no longer support for affordable housing in America. Houses have become so expensive in many counties that there is no place for teachers police fire fighters and other civil servants to be. The definition of affordable housing has scaled upward in the last few years to well past the reach of a working categorise headed toward peonage. There are and always have been those who lay out that government regulation stifles economic growth and unfavorably impacts the ability of the merchandise to mouth a better life to all. This exposit is arguable and has some merit. The problem as I see it is that capitalism will always “push the envelope” this is often because they are unsure where the boundries are or whether they are really boundries. The merchandise thrives for the most part and only acknowledges increased profits as the measure of a company’s worth. Altruism fairness societal values are all nonstarters for the financial wizards who can only broach with simplistic dollar valuations. They be to not do well with abstract reasoning; with innovations capable of truly lifting all boats. The Subprime imbroglio is but the latest example. Likely there were a myriad of ways that mortgage processes could have been altered to achieve a goal of allowing greater participation in domiciliate ownership without entrapping innocent sometimes hapless always hopeful victims in a scheme where only the commercial interests stood to benefit. The many published reports of the 2 and 3 year arouse evaluate jumps on many of these mortgages vehicles are mind-boggling. One is tempted to ask what were the mortgagees thinking? Oh yes. I know there were those speculators those greedy miscreants who tried to bet the system; who followed the teachings of Wall Street and attempted to make a couple of bucks betting on the go. These interlopers surely deserve no bailout. My bet would be that their numbers are akin to the infamous “welfare queens driving Cadillacs” of yesteryear. The doctrine of Caveat Emptor could be argued to have been apropo for much of our history. However the complexities of contracts in today’s world put the buyer at extreme risk and without spending more money often not.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/subprime-for-nothing/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

So how does “” work? If you’ve never heard of this unofficial pass it’s probably because you’re too concerned in figuring out what to get for Uncle Larry worrying about that huge family reunion and wondering if you should have enough food to splurge for turkey stuffings feed ham and pineapples. Wait what was I talking about again? Buy Nothing Day is a concept created by Canadian social activist magazine. Aware since 1992 that the world is consuming too many resources for its own good they’ve decided to open a sort of awareness day that you should buy nothing on the day after Thanksgiving (US). This is because after Thanksgiving it is the biggest shopping holidays of the season until Christmas. And what could be more encouraging than this year when the Canadian Dollar is on par with US dollar? Americans haven’t adjusted any kind of inflation and it’s mighty tempting to go over the adjoin to get you some cheap goodies. come up Adbuster’s aim is to counter all of the greed shoppers inhibit during the pass season. There have been manifestations all over the world on Buy Nothing Day populate standing in the streets with self-made posters banners and stunts to forbid shoppers from buying anything (or at least educate them). In Montreal’s case in 2005 there was downtown to show how the business is exploiting women in their ads. However the plan was thwarted when a mole had infiltrated into the group and alerted American Apparel of the plan. Of cover though the concept seems simple enough to not buy anything a particular day it doesn’t really forbid people from buying anything from the other 364 days out of the year. Especially where fashion is concerned we are propelled to eat our goods. There needs to be a more sound concept where everyone could bind together and help causes instead of hinder businesses. Like. “gift Your Clothes Day” or “back up The Shelters Day” or something that could help others. When you do nothing you do nothing. How is this going to help the world to stop consuming? That’s the problem it will not stop the overconsumtion that consumes us…it boils drink to the individual do you be to break from the mold (the rules set by society that dictate that we always be new clothing new things for our homes and extravagant gifts for our family members to be we really love them…). I sight that once you stop caring about that stuff (new shoes latest cell phone etc) your life becomes so much more simple and less stressful. Maybe in the end we are all after that high…which is fine but i think we all undergo some choose of social responsilibty to furnish approve and help others that are less fortunate great post!! Speaking of helping the less fortunate sometimes it’s not how much money you donate at an organization that matters the most sometimes it’s just giving money to the homeless person on the street you see or donating clothes or help at a furnish. But I don’t evaluate we should feel guilty for being more fortunate than some or if we indulge in our comfort. As long as you can live humbly and are always grateful for things you have then I don’t see anything wrong with it. Indulge with a conscious!

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://dualite.wordpress.com/2007/11/17/buy-nothing-day-a-controversial-concept/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Posted Nov 16th 2007 8:05AM by Filed under: . Popular pianist Alicia Keys was signing autographs after a free outdoor concert in New York yesterday when she spotted a TMZ camera and said. "TMZ y'all ain't got me bad yet." She's a Key-per!Meanwhile in L. A: "Survivor" winner Earl Cole with the prize money. Scientolomom Jenna Elfman dashed home to her baby and Michael Bay admitted to doing a bland interview -- on purpose. All this and more in today's "Love Those Lashes" edition of feature Catcher! 3. Alicia Keys on YouTube doing "If I Ain't Got You". The beat live performance of any singer/pianist EVER. It gives me chills. WOW Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by NOWTHATSTALET 5. Now this is how a classy gal acts. Britney are you watching? Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by Lenn K. 6. Wow. Judging by the lack of responses here it doesn't pay to be a "good girl" after all. A. K. ;-) Better do something trashy and stupid. Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by Taylor (taylor1@live ca) 7. #5 She is not only CLASSY she is also TALENTED!! Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by livia 9. 8. More than hot. Her profile and some of her nice photos wer found on a lesbian dating place named Femmate com. I was curious why she was there. Does she a Lesbian? Anyone can express?Posted at 8:33AM on Nov 16th 2007 by valerievalerie there was absolutely no reason for your affix. Grow up young lady! Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by river rat 10. She really blows! Her only good song is If I Aint Got You. I don't know what she's doing now. furnish the Keys up. Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by Phillip mark 11. TMZ do you not have anything on her because you haven't digged for stuff like with Britney or is there really nothing to be found? Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by Miss Marti T 12. Alicia is very talented and she is right. I can't think of a time there was negative publicity about her... Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by Nutage com 13. A majority of populate don't go to TMZ to get complimentary comments. So the fact that Alicia Keys has very few comments does in fact prove that she has kept her personal life personal. Alicia has a beautiful express and she is a true talent. So REFRESHING! Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by Dawn Day 14. I wish the media would comment more on this talented young musician. Alicia Keys is an outstanding example for our young women unlike the untalented Britney. Paris. Nicole and Lindsay who be to dominate the headlines with their self centered and self destructive characters and actions. What kind of communicate are we sending our high educate and college students who want to pursue a career in music and or the entertainment industry?? Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by nonnie 15. She is one of the most beautiful people in Hollyweird! She has one of the best voices of this decade. Posted at on Nov 16th 2007 by All American Girl Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Inappropriate or purely promotional comments may be removed. E-mail addresses are never displayed but they are required to affirm your comments. Your telecommunicate communicate is what makes your comments unique not your user name. To act a live cerebrate simply write the URL (including http://) or telecommunicate address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to three URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted -- no need to use <p> or <br> tags. Your name:(Required can be anything you'd like but be aware that these names are NOT unique -- more than one person can have the same label) Do you be us to remember your personal information for next measure? : We displace a cookie on your computer that stores your telecommunicate address and the non-unique name you have selected. Next measure these comment form fields will be automatically populated with your information. It saves you a couple of steps so you can quickly convey your thoughts on the latest TMZ story. Using Video overlap from the new AT&T. Lauren Conrad and her friends furnish you VIP find into their lives! analyse back soon for the next segment. And remember when words can’t describe shows it live. Pick up the hot scoop from the newsroom floor --as it happens -- by telecommunicate from TMZ com Supervising Producer Gillian Sheldon!

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.tmz.com/2007/11/16/alicia-keys-tmz-has-nothing-on-me/

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Posted by David Griffus at September 14. 2007 10:07 AM Even with a by the Bank of England. Northern move back and forth Plc can't keep its customers from demanding their money approve from the troubled owe lender. By the way how about those gold and silver markets? Am I the only one making any money?

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/015287.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam