Politics
- Started
- Last post
- 33,772 Responses
- ********0
its all bullshit
- ********0
In regard to that paul krugman article
Its an opinion piece. Not much to be expected from such things where u can rant and say such things without any evidence backing or introspection into wether youre right or wrong. Costs or gains. Sounds like bizarro glenn-beck. I can say his agenda is crystal clear. The part that gets my attention most is this
"What’s going on here? The answer, surely, is that Wall Street’s Masters of the Universe realize, deep down, how morally indefensible their position is. They’re not John Galt; they’re not even Steve Jobs. They’re people who got rich by peddling complex financial schemes that, far from delivering clear benefits to the American people, helped push us into a crisis whose aftereffects continue to blight the lives of tens of millions of their fellow citizens.
Yet they have paid no price. Their institutions were bailed out by taxpayers, with few strings attached. They continue to benefit from explicit and implicit federal guarantees — basically, they’re still in a game of heads they win, tails taxpayers lose. And they benefit from tax loopholes that in many cases have people with multimillion-dollar incomes paying lower rates than middle-class families."
In those few paragraph he has taken every person out of the equation, including the ones granting, "Wall Street’s Masters of the Universe" all their power. We all share our own responsibilities. Including us who vote for larger governments and more oversight that helped create the systems of control that are so overcomplicated that helped some smart people fleece the system.Even the systems of controlled liek SEC with their gov employees werent smart enough to see what was going on when given evidence by private parties.
On one hand i cant really be upset by the bankers who excelled in their game. No rule agaisnt dunking, seven if they are the few who can why shouldnt they? The government largely created the game and capped all free market principles and in as much gave incentive to those ones who can find loopholes in regulations instead of by doing a good job. Really what is there to be upset about? If people could be proven of fraud than yes hold them to it, so few imprisoned because they did nothing illegal, just followed incentives that helped unethical behavior. Not only from the wallstreet crowd but also to everyone buying what they were selling. Bankers didnt force people to buy houses. It was market perversion that only could happen in the overcomplicated system of rules and regulations and false securities provided by the governments.
Of course i share his views on crony capitalism. Im agaisnt those lobbying and changing rules to benefit themselves. But as far the housing crisis it seems to be not from lobbying but from a very complicated system, complacency, and willful ignorance. I dont share his lack of responsibility blaming companies getting public funds by the peopel we vote for and support. We wanted the banks to take their losses but we were scared of the consequences.So we bailed them out and damn them for it. Nothing good can come from that logic. Like a woman who gets beat by her husband and damns him for it but wont walk away.
And in all of this instead of being a beaten house wife i can only suggest letting the comapnies fail. Losing government oversight and false protections (of course in a systematic way that doesnt distort the market in a more perverse way). Making thing less complex and more transparent for a populace to vote with their dollars and push the idea of personal responsibility, while cutting back the supply of politicans that find an incentive to legally pass laws that cause the problems. When loans arent backed by freddie mac and other gov agencies than banks will have to reign in the loan people into loaning more responsibly than pushing the incentive that more loans = more commissions = win for banks and loan people, ignoring to whom the costs go to. Have to say paul krugman does make a good point for free markets.
there u go jonny/kiino my 2 cents on it.
- Wow that was a fantastic read. I'm going to go hold hands with popfodders now.********
- But ill stick up for Beck because he laid all this stuff out. People that criticize him are people that dont watch the show********
- Ive seen him a few times. He has some good soundbytes he takes from people and turns it into theatre distorting any real principles********
- principles. But thats my take on him. Others do it to. I dont give much credence to the theatre men than highlighting the hypocrisy in backign men and not ideas********
- hypocrisy in highlighting the men and not the principles/ideas. I think beck understands less about whats he saying than stewart/oreilly.********
- stewart/oreilly/colb... types. He seems to pander more on fear and religious undertones. I prefer stewarts comedy to that.********
- Wow that was a fantastic read. I'm going to go hold hands with popfodders now.
- ukit20
I think if you read up you'll find the financial crisis happened because of LACK of regulation, not too much regulation.
Why would you assume that every distortion in the market can only be created by government? Or that the market itself will remain stable and self-regulating on its own?
This is the kind of explanation pushed by politicians like Ron Paul. It feels good in its simplicity but the evidence points in the other direction.
In reality, it's exactly the kind of assumptions that led to the crash in the first place. Listen to Greenspan's mea culpas where he basically admits this.
- ********0
Yes every failure is do too people ability to not be able to see the future and prevent what can or will happen. I think thats an illusion. A board of people debating laws and runnign through legislature can never be as efficient as a free market dictating with every purchase and decision. As far as not enough regulation i cant relaly argue about it. There was plenty fed could do government could do but didnt. they could force investments banks to not be publicly traded companies, maybe that would help. But that wont stop new issues.
Free markets arent utopian. There is ups and downs but the ups and downs are smaller and will likely not fall on future generations of tax payers. And recovery will be quicker.
What would u suggest that a bureuacrat with no economic training could have done to regulate the system? Why wasnt the fed able to alleviate the situation which it was created to help prevent? Why did it seem to help it? Foresight vs hindsight. I cant help but think a large dynamic system operating on mutual positive incentives is far better a regulator than a few people sitting at a table looking only at their incentives which is to sway voters so they can keep there jobs. Its all about promoting positive incentives and instead of subsidizing losses letting those who fail, really fail.
Is what youre talkign about where greenspan talked about his inability to control peoples natural response to negative incentives. Where he stated something along the lines that what he thought he was doing with low interest rates to benefit people turned out badly? Good intentions normally end up going south, but better to let many people decide on whats right than a few. If subsidizing losses works it will work better along a larger spectrum of small failures than a few huge ones.
- There are no real free markets, the Gov. is owned by corporations and wealthy 1%.utopian
- there is no 100% free markets. But look at countries that practice a high level of them. countries practicing british common law seem to be doign well********
- common law seem to be doing well.********
- WE have tons of government control utpoian. Why did it fail? Because it wasnt enough? What men with what ability to create laws could have altered it********
- alter it were there? will they always be there? will they always be elected?********
- And how will they react when there performance isnt based on results but positive election results********
- everything seems to point to less is more. think of it as far as design. why do people refuse to do so? fear?********
- If u want to take the power from the rich 1% u need to take their political power********
- ukit20
I was talking about the comment where Greenspan said he fundamentally misjudged human nature. Assuming that financial people would care about the long term stability of their companies when in reality they went for the quick profit. Or made short-term decisions that were irrational even destructive because they bought into bubble based thinking.
Isn't that kind of the opposite of the idea of the invisible hand self-regulating everything? How does a completely deregulated market deal with that tendency? Or are we stuck in a cycle of boom and crash for the financial system, and what impact does that have on the rest of the economy.
- And what regulations would prevent a person like greenspan from making such a decision/error?********
- i think thats the fundamental view between our views. U have hope in people. I dont. I think a more natural system works than regualted by fallible people********
- than fallible men. All nature is proven to self correct, even when men fail. thats why i lean that way.********
- not to say with really really really smart men we cant benefit in central planning, its jsut highly unlikely********
- look at msot of the GOP candidates. media and technology is altering the states with how one values********
- its getting worse, and as such i support a natural eco system of free trade even more so, and rely less on politcians to change things********
- change things********
- And what regulations would prevent a person like greenspan from making such a decision/error?
- ********0
Oh yea thats what i meant on greenspan. Couldnt think of his words but thats what i was talking about.
Well for starters greenspan made a huge mistake. Hopeful with good intentions doesnt change the fact it was a dumb decision. As far as self regulating system dealing with it i dont think it was self regulating enough. Low interest rates are a nice thing to promote growth but than there are handfuls of other things like gov guaranteeing loans. These things give an appearence of free markets but really its just a badly rigged system.
Think about gaming. And how in multiplayer people use glitches to abuse the system. Its unethical but legal. They fuck up game play. For all people. Now if u aim more for a free market system u get less bad coding style rules and less glitches(I know theres something there on metaphor but dont think im explaining it well)... ill work on it later....
So i dont think there was a healthy invisible hand regulating itself. And all invisible hand will be somehow regulated. A lot of regulation can do as much damage as a few bad regulations. I think what needs to be done is to scale back the complexity of regualtions, open transparencies and identify the types of incentives they lead to. Most regulation nowadays seems to promote detrimental incentives. Take health insurance. So many tax incetives for companies to provide it. I just want some contacts that cost liek 100 bucks. Id have no problem buying them on my own but i do pay a little for insurance. The eye company can run a ton of tests and charge the insurance like 500 bucks. My incentive is to continue with this gross perversion of markets because i get insurance cheap through a company that gets hell tax incentives to provide it. Costs would less. Simple. But my incentives to cave to bad policy i continue to do because it is a positive incentive to me with losses passed on to all people.
I think free markets dont come without a boom and bust. i do think the boom and bust is smaller and the losses arent passed on to others. But its hard to say.
How would a more free market work today to prevent collapse? I dont think it can. We're already so infalted that if we went more free market we'd take a hit. All the government employees would need to find a job, we'd have to find a balance with the world labor rates. It would be tough. But better in long run for more stability and less boom and busts. A price to pay for our forced growth. Unless we could do it in a smart way, and i pray the deregualtors look at all consequences and arent lobbyied.
On the other hand we can keep passing the buck and get closer to a giant total collapse. Grow government, print more money for the rich to buy a ton of commodities until our paper currency collapses. And we will than really see a wealth gap and what happens.
Ukit i know free market isnt without its negatives, i jsut think the negatives are less than the current setup. Look at where we are and u can try to blame free markets which always seems to be the culprit. But it never is. Example how many bankers/managers were arrested for what they did? Not any because it was all legal and guided by current policy.
- ********0
Oh yea thats what i meant on greenspan. Couldnt think of his words but thats what i was talking about.
Well for starters greenspan made a huge mistake. Hopeful with good intentions doesnt change the fact it was a dumb decision. As far as self regulating system dealing with it i dont think it was self regulating enough. Low interest rates are a nice thing to promote growth but than there are handfuls of other things like gov guaranteeing loans. These things give an appearence of free markets but really its just a badly rigged system.
Think about gaming. And how in multiplayer people use glitches to abuse the system. Its unethical but legal. They fuck up game play. For all people. Now if u aim more for a free market system u get less bad coding style rules and less glitches(I know theres something there on metaphor but dont think im explaining it well)... ill work on it later....
So i dont think there was a healthy invisible hand regulating itself. And all invisible hand will be somehow regulated. A lot of regulation can do as much damage as a few bad regulations. I think what needs to be done is to scale back the complexity of regualtions, open transparencies and identify the types of incentives they lead to. Most regulation nowadays seems to promote detrimental incentives. Take health insurance. So many tax incetives for companies to provide it. I just want some contacts that cost liek 100 bucks. Id have no problem buying them on my own but i do pay a little for insurance. The eye company can run a ton of tests and charge the insurance like 500 bucks. My incentive is to continue with this gross perversion of markets because i get insurance cheap through a company that gets hell tax incentives to provide it. Costs would less. Simple. But my incentives to cave to bad policy i continue to do because it is a positive incentive to me with losses passed on to all people.
I think free markets dont come without a boom and bust. i do think the boom and bust is smaller and the losses arent passed on to others. But its hard to say.
How would a more free market work today to prevent collapse? I dont think it can. We're already so infalted that if we went more free market we'd take a hit. All the government employees would need to find a job, we'd have to find a balance with the world labor rates. It would be tough. But better in long run for more stability and less boom and busts. A price to pay for our forced growth. Unless we could do it in a smart way, and i pray the deregualtors look at all consequences and arent lobbyied.
On the other hand we can keep passing the buck and get closer to a giant total collapse. Grow government, print more money for the rich to buy a ton of commodities until our paper currency collapses. And we will than really see a wealth gap and what happens.
Ukit i know free market isnt without its negatives, i jsut think the negatives are less than the current setup. Look at where we are and u can try to blame free markets which always seems to be the culprit. But it never is. Example how many bankers/managers were arrested for what they did? Not any because it was all legal and guided by current policy.
- ukit20
"And what regulations would prevent a person like greenspan from making such a decision/error?"
I was looking at it more in the sense that Greenspan himself was working to end regulations. He ignored any of the issues with housing market and was opposed to regulating deriviatives. Greenspan was basically an Objectionist/libertarian and even collaborated with Ayn Rand on a book they wrote together.
It's funny because at the time everyone hailed him as a genius, whereas in retrospect he helped create the biggest financial collapse in recent history.
- ********0
I thought greenspan in his youth agreed with rand but cut ties long before this. Wether that true or not doesnt change the fact he made a dumb decision ignoring mans nature. And going along with the justification that good intentions trumph results.
I agree he failed. Like i said a lot of problems due to lots regulation can also be had by a less regulations but a few really bad regulations. This helps promote the idea less regulation is a bad idea in general consensus leading to more regulation and complexity. Id prefer to focus on what was the cause rather than the symptoms. No real truth can be had focusing on level of regulation.
Which at face value seems to be what i am doing. But im not. Im speaking generally that less regulation keeps a market more able to decide for itself. Which is true. And im not against regulation but poor regulations. Ones that create negative incentives.
I hear people saying all we need is more regulations, but not knowing what regulations those are. Setting up the incentives for politicians to create regulations that promote their own ends. And claiming its for the greater good with good intentions. I dont underestimate their reality that its good, and i also look at what they get in return for their merit of the greater good. People can easily convince themselves there gain isnt for themselves bu the greater good. And i think thats wrong. I would rather talk about individual regulations and how they effected things on their own and with other regulations in order to prevent repeating the same mistakes.
The fact is no amount of regulations can keep a person like greenspan or a president from promoting bad regulations. Wether it be really sincere or smokescreen so they can sleep at night. What controls those who make the rules that cause harm. Why i still stand strong on the idea that a free market voting everyday with there dollars is far more efficient regulating system than a government on economic policy. Its not perfect and you cant control the major regulations, but those few are more in the spotlight to be discussed and analyzed. And god hopes we have a smart enough people to realize the ends of such policies when voting. And i may be pulling a greenspan when i hope that populace is more educated than focusing on short term gains given by politicians to see the larger problems. Which currently i think i would be doing...
Which is a whole nother argument on how education is the primary foundation against what we're going through. It goes hand in hand but branches off in so many more tangents that isnt possible to grasp with differing philosophies and views in this medium. All i can suggest with the current education system is to focus less on federal policy and more on a state level. need competition of ideas to help change what is. But like i said a whole different conversation.
- ********0
the ending sums up my view on correct government planning. really a great episode on many levels. and people say u cant learn anything from cartoons
- +1********
- who said you cannot learn from catoons?********
- people who think cartoons are only a medium for kids.********
- +1
- ********0
Egypt Church Slams Authorities for Allowing Repeated Attacks on Christians
http://www.foxnews.com/world/201…Egypt's Coptic church blasted authorities Monday for allowing repeated attacks on Christians with impunity as the death toll from a night of rioting rose to 26, most of them Christians who were trying to stage a peaceful protest in Cairo over an attack on a church.
The spiritual leader of the Coptic Christian minority, Pope Shenouda III, declared three days of mourning, praying and fasting for the victims starting on Tuesday and also presided over funerals for some of the Christians killed. Sunday's sectarian violence was the worst in Egypt since the uprising that ousted Hosni Mubarak in February.
- ********0
SPIN METER: Obama's disconnect in jobs sales pitch
http://www.chron.com/news/articl…In President Barack Obama's sales pitch for his jobs bill, there are two versions of reality: The one in his speeches and the one actually unfolding in Washington.
When Obama accuses Republicans of standing in the way of his nearly $450 billion plan, he ignores the fact that his own party has struggled to unite behind the proposal.
When the president says Republicans haven't explained what they oppose in the plan, he skips over the fact that Republicans who control the House actually have done that in detail.
And when he calls on Congress to "pass this bill now," he slides past the point that Democrats control the Senate and were never prepared to move immediately, given other priorities. Senators are expected to vote Tuesday on opening debate on the bill, a month after the president unveiled it with a call for its immediate passage.
- ********0
Fast and Furious weapons were found in Mexico cartel enforcer's home
http://www.latimes.com/news/nati…High-powered assault weapons illegally purchased under the ATF's Fast and Furious program in Phoenix ended up in a home belonging to the purported top Sinaloa cartel enforcer in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, whose organization was terrorizing that city with the worst violence in the Mexican drug wars.
In all, 100 assault weapons acquired under Fast and Furious were transported 350 miles from Phoenix to El Paso, making that West Texas city a central hub for gun traffickers. Forty of the weapons made it across the border and into the arsenal of Jose Antonio Torres Marrufo, a feared cartel leader in Ciudad Juarez, according to federal court records and trace documents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
-------------
This fucking moron needs to be fired!
http://www.latimes.com/news/nati…
- TheBlueOne0
THERE IS NO MARKET WITHOUT THE GOVERNMENT.
For an example please point me at any area of the earth that has no government and also a functioning market. Go ahead, I'll wait.
Corporations exist at the fiat of the State.
Market infrastructure is created by the state because no individual actor would ever create a "free market"
Governments don;t distort markets as much as they provide context/environment for markets to exist by insuring commerce and contracts.
But you go ahead and think markets are some sort of Platonic reality like economics assumes "rational human actors".
Until the ideology and yes it's an ideology - of some sort of platonic free market state as some sort of prima facia thing in human existence disappears - we will suffer with this shit and with the bullshit that deathboy, viking and popfodders need ot believe in.
Markets are not laws of nature, they are human inventions. You remove humans and their are no markets in nature. You remove humans and their is still gravity. One is a natural law and the other is a social construct.
and nice handles - death, tyrants of marauding hordes and inconsequential pop "fodder". Kinda telling if you ask me.
- Nice post.kgvs72
- TheBlowHard, once again blows. Ideology my ass. Go spout your unpopular beliefs elsewhere. Good luck that!********
- ********0
Pelosi’s disclosure belated in husband’s land deal
Partner is father of favored envoy
http://www.washingtontimes.com/n…House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s husband, a real estate developer and investment banker, stands to make millions of dollars in a previously undisclosed residential real estate project in California as a partner with the father of a woman Mrs. Pelosi helped become ambassador to Hungary, records show.
Paul F. Pelosi’s investment in Russell Ranch is worth at least $5 million and possibly as much as $25 million in a deal put together by his friend and longtime business associate, Angelo Tsakopoulos, patriarch of a multimillion-dollar real estate development firm, according to Mrs. Pelosi’s latest personal-disclosure statement.
Mr. Pelosi said in an email from his wife’s spokesman that initially he invested between $1 million and $5 million in the project a dozen years ago, although its value has shot up recently as the undeveloped land moves closer to being annexed by a nearby city.
- Hey kids, protest that! Nepotism at it's fucking finest...!
*crickets from the protest support gallery******** - You should support quid pro quo, being a conservative and all. If she did anything shady, she should be punished.DrBombay
- Hey kids, protest that! Nepotism at it's fucking finest...!
- ********0
Herman Cain Rips Harry Belafonte And Cornel West: ‘They Don’t Want Black People To Think For Themselves’
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/herma…-----------------
Harry Belafonte To Joy Behar: Herman Cain Is A ‘Totally False’ ‘Bad Apple’ In The Black Community
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/harry…WHAT, FOR BEING SUCCESSFUL and using his brain and doing it on his own!? Fucking imagine that...!
- you are an idiotRamanisky2
- wow, what an intelligent retort to a legitimate post.********
- zzzzzjonnypompita
- Herman Cain got his education in the military, SOCIALISM!DrBombay
- ukit20
Rick Perry's new ad against Romney
- saw that, really getting dirty between those two, meanwhile Cain, etc. are benefiting from the shit throw.********
- also think that it's terrible they are blasting him for being a Mormon. hypocrites themselves.********
- Republicans are fucking bottom feeders, what do you expect?DrBombay
- this commercial is ridiculous... lightning, mirrors... really? hahahahahahhhh********
- saw that, really getting dirty between those two, meanwhile Cain, etc. are benefiting from the shit throw.
- ********0
^>
Scarborough Denounces Pastor's Questioning of Romney's Faith
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCov…Jeffress throws Jesus under the bus
http://dyn.politico.com/printsto…“Judge not that ye be not judged”; so said Jesus. But don’t try telling that to Southern Baptist pastor Robert Jeffress.
-------------
That hypocritical pastor needs to revisit his dogma.- But questioning Obama's faith is ok? Who's the hypocrite now?locustsloth
- WTF are you talking about!? I could care less what "faith" Obama is, he's a meat puppet.********
- "Couldn't care less" is the phrase, lizard brain.DrBombay
- BonSeff0
you dumbfucks splitting hairs on who's imaginary friend is more gooder is hilarious.
- choosing not to believe in anything is the same as choosing to believe in somethinglocustsloth
- nope. my fav quote is calling atheism a religion is like having a hobby of not collecting stamps.BonSeff
- You have faith that there is no omnipotent being. Without evidence to prove there's not.locustsloth
- Just like Christians have faith that there's a god without proof that there islocustsloth
- the correct anaolgy would be making a hobby collecting nothing, discarding anything that you might possess more than one of for fear that you would then be a collector of that thinglocustsloth
- one of for fear that you would then be a collector of that thinglocustsloth
- Frankly i don't care what you believe, i just get cheesed when anyone has the audacity to assume they're the only one who's rightlocustsloth
- who's rightlocustsloth
- locustsloth. I agree.********
- so i need proof that something that is not real is in fact, not real? that is fucking insane and impossible.BonSeff
- and negates the need for faithBonSeff
- even Einstein wasn't stupid enough to deny a supreme being.********
- but you have that insane logic going for you so its obviously impossible to debate.BonSeff
- i believe Elvis lives on the dark side of the moon, must be true, right?BonSeff
- absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But like i said feel free to believe whatever you wantlocustsloth
- just stop being an arrogant ass about it (i'd say the same to anyone touting any belief the way you are your non-belief)locustsloth
- i dunno, carbon dating is pretty damn evident to me.BonSeff
- i think your spin is arrogant, homie.BonSeff
- my spin is that you can't actually know 100%. Your spin is that everyone who doesn't think like you is a dumbfucklocustsloth
- One viewpoint leaves the options open for whomever to believe whatever the fuck they wantlocustsloth
- The other viewpoint limits the possibility to one (theirs) and mocks all otherslocustsloth
- Now, which one is more arrogant?locustsloth
- Incidentally, carbon dating doesn't disprove any religion's belief, just that religion's timelinelocustsloth
- And again, you are clinging on to your BELIEF that there is no god. It's still a belief.locustsloth
- You have yours, quit mocking others because of theirs.locustsloth
- i don't see non believers knocking on doors to convert.BonSeff
- it's not Carbon Dating, it's Potassium-Argon Dating, numb skull. C-Dating is far too weak for what you are implying********
- Incidentally, carbon dating doesn't disprove any religion's belief, just that religion's timelineBonSeff
- that's your belief and you are using it to mock mine.BonSeff
- You tell me, ignoring the Creationist timeline, how carbon dating eliminates the possibility for an omnipotent beinglocustsloth
- And i'm not mocking you, just saying you are being as arrogant about whatever you believe as those who go door to door are about what they believelocustsloth
- about what they believelocustsloth
- sure, right after you define what the hell an omnipotent being is.BonSeff
- is it the same one who created everything in 6 days and took a break on the 7th cause he was tired?BonSeff
- JazX totally busted himself as popfodders!DrBombay
- My point is that you are acting no different than any other proselytizerlocustsloth
- it's not about the validity of one belief vs another. It's about letting everyone have their own beliefs and not being an ass about itlocustsloth
- you do see the irony in your statement, right?BonSeff
- No, enlighten me.locustsloth
- Unless you're defending a belief that you should be an ass to everyone who doesn't believe what you believelocustsloth
- the irony is that you are coming off pretty damn rightous in your own rignt, my man. that is the irony.BonSeff
- you have called me an ass twice. how does that make you any different. now kindly fuckoff, sir.BonSeff
- I believe in unicorns, fuck you if you don't.DrBombay
- You are your own enemy, BonSeff. You act as those whom you detest act.locustsloth
- thanks dude. you should write for a fortune cookie company//BonSeff
- ********0
Ahhhhh, those zany, wild and crazy Chinamen!
OFC
This Exists: ‘Obama Fried Chicken’ Is China’s Newest Fast Food Craze
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/this-…The image of President Barack Obama as Colonel Sanders advertising a fried chicken restaurant would immediately be flagged as unacceptably racist, but that seems to be exactly what has popped up in Beijing. The Daily Mail reports that “Obama Fried Chicken,” complete with the President in suspenders and bow tie and the slogan, “We’re so cool, aren’t we?”
- so ll americans should stop buying shit made in china!!!74LEO
- impossible, wish I could.********