funny polls :) What I found interesting was the significant difference in ratings between republicans, and democrats. that would lead me to believe....both sides have some lying going on, or the definition of help and hurt varies by party.
another funny thing was trying to figure out what "help" and "hurt" mean ? money, health care, personally insulting...what ?
Even within the Gallup poll article (on their web site), they changed between...made things worse, harmed, and "more negative" (and better, helped, more positive). kind of confusing.
#$%$...what do you think "harming" meant ?
but, also better to not sell at a small loss, and watch it rise. I was poised right at that decision at a price of 54..that was my break even number. I held.
who knows what the future holds, but oil prices aside, the gbx revenue is not tied to in in the next ~ year timeframe....imo. And the news about another accident will just fuel the regulatory change fire...also imo.
oil will cause volatility for sure.
I am driving the price up by flash trading with myself...am about even right now, but going to make it up on volume !
Wish me luck.
you must have meant low volume...prices don't move on no volume. Pro trader lesson 2
this one is a mystery, you have to think as soon as you leave it alone it will move one way or the other.
I think of posts like this I have seen...maybe 5 % of the time insider selling preceeded a price drop that might have been due to factors known by insiders. Most of the time, just not a forebearer of anything.
I use to get stock options...90 % of people with options (and stock grants) excercise some each year that they are in the money. A conservative approach...but why bet the farm when you make good money already at the company, and you can bank a profit.
my two "sense" worth.
is that right ? So the GOP dissaproval rate is about the same as the obama dissapproval rate ? I looked it up
"Poll after poll shows President Obama is unpopular (54 percent disapproval in new WaPo-ABC poll) and the Democratic Party is a little more unpopular (61 percent). Neither, though, can touch the GOP, whose congressional contingent has a whopping 72 percent disapproval rating. Nearly half of Americans -- 47 percent -- say they "strongly" disapprove of the GOP"
I will note that the rate is for GOP congress...not the GOP in general.
it is too bad we put all republicans, and democrats, into one bucket. I know of carrying republicans, and me first democrats.
I'm a fiscally conservative democrat...and don't know what to do :) I am quite liberal about many things, and conservative about others...I often argue with myself.
sadly it might if oil continues to drop. But it might be good for the us economy in general. Some win, some lose and life goes on.
It could, but it would be just in general reaction to recent oil "news"...imo. companies revenue stream is intact for the next year or two, regardless of both regulation, and shale oil developments. Negative (and more possitive too) effects would be in 2015-2016. I think the one year cards are already on the table.
I'm think 65 is more probable than 40, and 80 than 30.
quite the down turn the last couple days...good luck.
"We are dismayed that discussions of climate change have become so polarizing and have receded from the arena of informed public discourse and debate. Political posturing and budgetary woes cannot be allowed to inhibit discussion and debate over what so many believe to be a salient national security concern for our nation. Each citizen must ask what he or she can do individually to mitigate climate change, and collectively what his or her local, state, and national leaders are doing to ensure that the world is sustained for future generations. Are your communities, businesses, and governments investing in the necessary resilience measures to lower the risks associated with climate change? In a world of high complex interdependence, how will climate change in the far corners of the world affect your life and those of your children and grandchildren? If the answers to any of these questions make you worried or uncomfortable, we urge you to become involved. Time and tide wait for no one."
Signed by 11 top military leaders.
nice work mr u8....congrats on your contribution.
according to the CNA Military Advisor Board, May 2014 "Projected climate change is a complex multi-decade challenge. Without action to build resilience,
it will increase security risks over much of the planet. It will not only increase threats to developing
nations in resource-challenged parts of the world, but it will also test the security of nations with
robust capability, including significant elements of our National Power here at home. Even though
we may not have 100 percent certainty as to the cause or even the exact magnitude of the impacts,
the risks associated with projected climate change warrant taking action today to plan and prepare
for changes in our communities, at home and abroad.
When it comes to thinking through long-term global challenges, none are more qualified than
our most senior military leaders. Not only do they have decades of experience managing risk and
responding to conflict on the battlefield, but they are also experts in geopolitical analysis and longrange
Military leaders typically look at challenges with imperfect or conflicting information. Despite not
having 100 percent certainty, they weigh the consequences of various courses of action—including
the consequences of no action—and make informed decisions based on their experience and risk
are you like...anti american security....or just uniformed ? I might be a bit harsh, but unless you have good qualitfications, or relavent first hand experience with global risk issues....your opinion is just idle #$%$ chat.
In only one sentance you mis quoted NASA three times ....."Climate change has NOT affected the abyss: Nasa reveals cold waters of Earth's deep ocean have not warmed since 2005
The temperature of the top half of the world's ocean above the 1.24-mile mark is still climbing
Ocean abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably
"Study coauthor Josh Willis of JPL said these findings do not throw suspicion on climate change itself.
'The sea level is still rising,' Willis noted. 'We're just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details.'
In the 21st century, greenhouse gases have continued to accumulate in the atmosphere, just as they did in the 20th century, but global average surface air temperatures have stopped rising in tandem with the gases.
The temperature of the top half of the world's ocean -- above the 1.24-mile mark -- is still climbing, but not fast enough to account for the stalled air temperatures.
Many processes on land, air and sea have been invoked to explain what is happening to the 'missing' heat.
One of the most prominent ideas is that the bottom half of the ocean is taking up the slack, but supporting evidence is slim.
This latest study is the first to test the idea using satellite observations, as well as direct temperature measurements of the upper ocean. Scientists have been taking the temperature of the top half of the ocean directly since 2005, using a network of 3,000 floating temperature probes called the Argo array.
'The deep parts of the ocean are harder to measure,' said JPL's William Llovel, lead author of the study, published Sunday, Oct. 5 in the journal Nature Climate Change.
Mr pants on fire....