Fri, Oct 31, 2014, 4:54 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Akamai Technologies, Inc. Message Board

  • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Apr 1, 2010 1:04 AM Flag

    More issues affecting economy and stocks

    Do you think, after 165 replies, it's time to make this a new topic? :-) I'm replying to your 2:11 PM post of yesterday "Re: Issues affecting the economy and stock market (2)" (211857) at

    http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_A/threadview?m=tm&bn=700&tid=210499&mid=211857

    http://
    messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z
    %29/Stocks_A/threadview?m=tm&bn=700&tid=
    210499&mid=211857

    >>You're right, Waxman needs a big tent.<<

    Unfortunately, he hasn't summoned them all, just a select few to serve as intimidating examples. In case tracking the companies' stocks should prove interesting, I assembled a Yahoo stock list of them. Beneath each stock's line you'll see a line that says (a variation of):

    No such ticker symbol. Look Up Symbol for "($31 million)"

    In other words, I included the charge that each company is taking or the warning it issued, so those lines alternate with the stock data lines. I don't know whether your version of Safari supports the copying of nonbreaking spaces. If it doesn't, then some of those charge/warning lines might be broken into two or more lines and look like a mess, but the information will be decipherable.

    Bottom line, if the link works, everything should look right, so bookmark it if you want to look at it now and then. If the link gets obfuscated, the resulting copy-paste might result in broken lines.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/cq?s=AKS+($31 million)+BA+($150 million)+CAT+($100 million)+DE+($150 million )+MDT+(1000 layoffs)+MMM+($90 million)+PRU+($100 million )+T+($1 billion)+VLO+($15–$20 million)+VZ+(warned employees)&d=e

    http://
    finance.yahoo.com/q/cq?s=AKS+($31 million)
    +BA+($150 million)+CAT+($100 million)
    +DE+($150 million )+MDT+(1000 layoffs)
    +MMM+($90 million)+PRU+($100 million )
    +T+($1 billion)+VLO+($15–$20 million)
    +VZ+(warned employees)&d=e

    >>What? Oh look over there, it's a Christian militia attacking a Girl Scout Troop.<<

    Is that the kind of stuff those FBI investigations amount to? I've seen an article that says the Christians are preparing for end times and others that say they have guns (authorities won't say whether they found explosives) and were plotting to levy war against the US.

    If Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, a decorated flight surgeon — NOT retired — "charged with caring for Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey's pilots and air crew" (WND) is able to carry out his intentions, that could get explosive. His vague 'press release' via the American Patriot Foundation ("a non-profit group incorporated in 2003 to foster appreciation and respect for the U.S. Constitution") states that Lakin, refusing all military orders because "he feels his orders are unlawful, and thus MUST be disobeyed," is inviting his own court martial. The Foundation has set up a legal fund for him. No mainstream medium, and only one conservative one, WorldNetDaily, has carried the story. The blogs, including Orly's, are relaying it.

    His PR is at:

    http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/press-release.html

    http://www.
    safeguardourconstitution.com/press-release.html

    WND reports:

    <A top-ranking, highly decorated officer in the U.S. Army says he's now refusing all orders until President Barack Obama finally releases his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate to prove his eligibility to serve as commander in chief.

    . . .

    "If he is ineligible, then my orders – and indeed all orders – are illegal because all orders have their origin with the commander in chief as handed down through the chain of command."

    . . .

    Lakin is the highest-ranking officer to go public over Obama's legitimacy and the first active-duty officer to do so. . . .>

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=134593

    http://www.
    wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=134593

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • >> . . . Son of Wilson has wreaked far more destruction on us. . . .<<

      I think of him as son of Carter . . . Wilson was a WWI version of FDR WWII, both respected for their war records.

    • >>It happened in 1913 under Woodrow Wilson, one of the worst presidents ever (because he was what is now called a progressive, meaning socialistic). He also gave us the Federal Trade Commission, the graduated income tax and WW I. Why, because he didn't like capitalism any more than Obama.<<

      Hmmm. Wilson is both a ray of hope and a nightmare. Hope because the country survived him and nightmare because his legislation still exists, never got repealed. Son of Wilson has wreaked far more destruction on us. Given his allegedly illegal status and the awareness and loathing his despotism has engendered, does the country have a better chance of recovering from him than from Wilson?

    • >> . . . Whose desire was it to amend that law [state governments choose their senators] and why?<<

      It happened in 1913 under Woodrow Wilson, one of the worst presidents ever (because he was what is now called a progressive, meaning socialistic). He also gave us the Federal Trade Commission, the graduated income tax and WW I. Why, because he didn't like capitalism any more than Obama.

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Jun 30, 2010 2:28 PM Flag

      >>Guns [are how the liberals can keep their control over their 'government' and us serfs].<<

      Hah. Tell the libs we serfs can now take them on . . . the SC ruled 5 to 4 in our favor, we have a constitutional right to own and bear arms. A Rush headline yesterday said the vote should have been 9 to 0, and he's right. NO SC judge or any judge in any American court should rule against the Constitution.

      >>Minorities of any sort would lose their leverage over senators since the senators wouldn't depend on them for re-election. That'd free them up to do what is best for the state (which is what was intended by the unamended constitution) . . . and that isn't unlimited, unchallenged, illegal immigration.<<

      Ah, now I understand the sound reasoning behind the Constitution's original stipulation. Without millions of extra votes dangling in front of their avid eyes, the fedgov would not have the incentive to invite the illegals to sneak over their borders. And Arizona wouldn't need to write laws mandating that the federal laws be upheld, and no state would boycott Arizona for upholding the federal law. What ROT has infused into this country all because of people tampering with the Constitution. Whose desire was it to amend that law and why?

      >>Not in the US they don't. The solution is get the illegals back into Mexico where Mexico can do a proper job of protecting their interests.<<

      Mexicans are certainly Mexico's responsibility and not any other country's. But Mexico won't hesitate to butt in because both Bush and Obama have cozied with amigo Felipe. I bet juan_jose_mmm_mmm_si_se_puede is Felipe's alias.

    • >>Without political correctness, how could the liberals keep their control over their 'government' and us serfs? she asked, filled with curiosity.<<

      Guns.

      >>If senators were still appointed by the state governments, would Arizona be in its current straits?<<

      Minorities of any sort would lose their leverage over senators since the senators wouldn't depend on them for re-election. That'd free them up to do what is best for the state (which is what was intended by the unamended constitution) . . . and that isn't unlimited, unchallenged, illegal immigration.

      >> . . . [Mexico] has a right to intervene in U.S. domestic policy and challenge a law that is overwhelmingly popular with the American public because “Mexico has a right to protect the interests of its nationals” . . .<<

      Not in the US they don't. The solution is get the illegals back into Mexico where Mexico can do a proper job of protecting their interests.

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Jun 30, 2010 12:24 AM Flag

      >>Yes but like all things condemned as racist those tests or anything like them will never be revived (at least until we outgrow political correctness).<<

      Without political correctness, how could the liberals keep their control over their 'government' and us serfs? she asked, filled with curiosity.

      >>Sure and the senators from Texas would take them out. The point is the senators would be beholden to their state giving the state governments much more power. The states would all be different giving Americans who can move easily between them a big choice of lifestyles.<<

      If senators were still appointed by the state governments, would Arizona be in its current straits?

      >>For what, having immigration laws only a pale shadow of those in Mexico?<<

      Isn't it ironic?

      I found some clarification about Obama's encouragement of Mexico. But for the usual reason, you'll need to emigrate from here to:

      http://investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=2941&mn=276&pt=msg&mid=9207434

      http://
      investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=2941
      &mn=276&pt=msg&mid=9207434

    • >> . . . but on what did the blacks base their votes? Charisma and promises? . . .<<

      Yes but like all things condemned as racist those tests or anything like them will never be revived (at least until we outgrow political correctness).

      >>Can you imagine what kind of senators New York State's indigo blue government would appoint at any time, not just under certain circumstances?<<

      Sure and the senators from Texas would take them out. The point is the senators would be beholden to their state giving the state governments much more power. The states would all be different giving Americans who can move easily between them a big choice of lifestyles.

      >>Speaking of the states, have you seen that Obama has, reportedly, encouraged Mexico to sue Arizona?<<

      For what, having immigration laws only a pale shadow of those in Mexico?

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Jun 29, 2010 12:00 PM Flag

      >>That's a good idea but can never happen because in the south in the early 20th century they did have such (literacy) tests the purpose of which was to keep blacks from voting. Such tests were abolished by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. <<

      That sounds like the humane thing to do, but on what did the blacks base their votes? Charisma and promises? Like 2008 all over again? Being informed, or at least attempting to be informed, is _critical_ to both personal and national survival.

      >>Yes plus the senators should be appointed by state governments as intended by the constitution before the 17th amendment. That would give back to the states some of the clout that's been stolen by the fedgov.<<

      I can see that it would rob the fedgov of its amnestied votes, but then what would happen when the amnestied get elected to their state governments?

      Can you imagine what kind of senators New York State's indigo blue government would appoint at any time, not just under certain circumstances?

      >>The purpose of the electoral college is to give low population states a little extra clout in national elections so they won't by ignored by the candidates. If a small population state like Wyoming didn't have the added clout of the two electoral votes they get for their senators, no one would ever campaign there. They'd just go to New York, California, Illinois, Texas and Florida.<<

      The founding fathers thought of everything, except term limitations.

      Speaking of the states, have you seen that Obama has, reportedly, encouraged Mexico to sue Arizona?

    • >>That sounds like a very fair idea, and I'd like to add political literacy to it. Voters should know at least a bare minimum — UNtainted by Commie 'journalists' — about the US Constitution, eligibility requirements for candidates, voting records of the candidates, significant current events. What would you add to that or subtract?<<

      That's a good idea but can never happen because in the south in the early 20th century they did have such (literacy) tests the purpose of which was to keep blacks from voting. Such tests were abolished by the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

      >>The other change I long to see is term limits for senators and representatives. . . .<<

      Yes plus the senators should be appointed by state governments as intended by the constitution before the 17th amendment. That would give back to the states some of the clout that's been stolen by the fedgov.

      >>What is your view on that? The Electoral College has never seemed fair to me, . . .<<

      The purpose of the electoral college is to give low population states a little extra clout in national elections so they won't by ignored by the candidates. If a small population state like Wyoming didn't have the added clout of the two electoral votes they get for their senators, no one would ever campaign there. They'd just go to New York, California, Illinois, Texas and Florida.

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Jun 28, 2010 6:43 AM Flag

      >>There isn't any right to vote and there isn't any one man one vote rule either. But I'm OK with that. In fact I think you shouldn't get a vote unless you pay income tax, and for every $10,000 you pay in taxes over the first $10,000 you should get an extra vote up to say five votes. Let the people who are paying the taxes get the most say in how the money is spent.<<

      That sounds like a very fair idea, and I'd like to add political literacy to it. Voters should know at least a bare minimum — UNtainted by Commie 'journalists' — about the US Constitution, eligibility requirements for candidates, voting records of the candidates, significant current events. What would you add to that or subtract?

      The other change I long to see is term limits for senators and representatives. I don't understand why the framers of our government rendered Congress so much like British royalty. Some of them are entrenched until rigormortis sets in.

      Do you realize your payment of income tax stipulation for votes could produce a balanced budget? Imagine all the tax cheats in DC needing to pay their income taxes in order to vote!

      Have you heard that a move is afoot to eliminate the Electoral College?

      <A four-year-old effort that effectively would turn the Electoral College out to pasture in the United States by arranging a direct vote of president by the people is gaining strength, and is poised to claim support from states that control 106 of the 270 votes now needed to claim the Oval Office.>

      http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=171493

      http://www.
      wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=171493

      What is your view on that? The Electoral College has never seemed fair to me, but Unruh thinks a popular vote could be easily manipulated.

    • View More Messages
 
AKAM
60.30+0.47(+0.79%)4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.