NYJetsFan.com Forums: Futuristic High-Speed Tube Travel Could Take You From New York To Los Angeles In 45 Minutes - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

Jets vs Chiefs Sunday 4:30est
MikeGangGree... Icon : (16 September 2016 - 10:09 AM) good
MikeGangGree... Icon : (16 September 2016 - 10:09 AM) Best day of the week is the day after a Jets Win!
Jetsfan115 Icon : (16 September 2016 - 10:12 AM) Rob you think the offense started off ugly? we scored on our first 4 drives, and controlled the ball 80% of the time the first half. We didn't even punt until the 2nd half
ROBJETS Icon : (16 September 2016 - 10:21 AM) I meant the hits on Fitz at on the first Drive or two with the fumbles and almost fumbles....The Tom Brady rule where balls that used to be fumbles are incomplete. We recovered the ball on all but one but it was ruled incomplete
ROBJETS Icon : (16 September 2016 - 10:26 AM) The offensive line stepped off after Hughes got hurt for however long he was out. I don't blame J. Marsh for that fumble because that was just a hell of a play. Imo Fitz had a career best game even with only 1 td passing. Never seen him so accurate. So yeah when I meant ugly I meant dline penetration and the 1st two drives ending up in fieldgoals
ROBJETS Icon : (16 September 2016 - 10:30 AM) But 31 points given up passing by the defense passing was bad. It wasn't just 2 long bombs and that defensive touchdown leading to 21 points. 3q1 against a bad team was terrible for the defense. Without the offense putting up 37 the Jets,would have lost so yeah I consider it an ugly start on both ends
ROBJETS Icon : (16 September 2016 - 10:32 AM) I'm glad like everyone else that the Jets won. Especially with getting with by the Bills multiple times it was nice revenge.
ROBJETS Icon : (16 September 2016 - 10:34 AM) Just saying that the Bills look like a bad team this year and the Jets have to face a lot of teams that are probably playoff bound again so yes there is a lot of concern
Jetsfan115 Icon : (16 September 2016 - 11:39 AM) fitz look good and lets not forget the 50+ yarder to decker that was called back on a BS holding penalty. plus if you rewatch it, the jets d-line was getting held like crazy and never got calls. I seen McLendon, williams, and wilk all complaining about it
azjetfan Icon : (16 September 2016 - 12:32 PM) I think the game plan for the D was to keep Taylor in the pocker
azjetfan Icon : (16 September 2016 - 12:33 PM) They didn't want him running around when they only rushed 3-4 guts
Jetsfan115 Icon : (16 September 2016 - 12:37 PM) bills fired their OC today after the loss yesterday lol
Jetsfan115 Icon : (16 September 2016 - 12:38 PM) yeah we didn't really rush, we just tried to keep contain on the outside and collapse the middle
Jetsfan115 Icon : (16 September 2016 - 12:38 PM) on the salas TD, one of our LBers went for the sack and broke contain and pryor got away and made the play
Jetsfan115 Icon : (16 September 2016 - 12:39 PM) when we did rush which was rare, we had a spy
ROBJETS Icon : (16 September 2016 - 11:11 PM) As far as the Bills firing the oc I'm not sure I agree with it with Watkins having major foot problem with a steel rod in his surgically repaired foot but I dont follow the Bills so cant really say. I do think they need to get rid of Rob Ryan though. He had a decent year with the Browns then was terrible with the Cowboys and Saints. He isn't half the DC that Rex is. I still think Rex can be a good head coach withe the right coaches and roster but Rob Ryan isn't the answer. But if Rex wants to ruin his chance of staying a head coach by keeping his brother on the coaching staff like he ruined his head coaching job keeping Sanchez as a starter then that's his stupidity
ganggreen2003 Icon : (17 September 2016 - 12:20 AM) The A Football Life of Curtis Martin is a MUST WATCH!!!!
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (17 September 2016 - 02:03 PM) They got rid of their OC after their defense was ripped apart
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:03 PM) Well hell that makes even less sense. The defense gets ripped apart so let's get rid of the oc instead of the dc.they didn't have much of a run game but a lot of passes yards. If they wanted to blame anyone for nearly 40 points against them it was their defense. But guess Rex used the ocean as the scale goat instead of his brother
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:04 PM) Oc not ocean. Damn Auto correct on phone
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:04 PM) And scape goatee
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:05 PM) Lol still can't get it right
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:13 PM) Not sure about anyone else but I'm extremely interested in the 49r/ Panther game at 1pm. Just want to see if the 49rs are actually good this year or if the Rams have become one of the worst teams in the league this year
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:16 PM) If the Rams have regressed that much then all the Todd Gurley owners in fantasy will likely have low points from him all year. Might even be worth trying to trade him early if they look just as bad this week before his stock drops
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:26 PM) I drafted him last year and also had David Johnson, Chris Johnson, Roetlesburger, Romo, Palmer, Barnage,, .....my whole team was stacked with starters. Entire team wasc stacked with starters. Even bench. Made tge Superbowl but did have a rough start at behinning of season when Romo and Roethlisberger wentvdown at the start of season also lost amazing starting rb and wr all within the 1st 4 games but worked the waivers really well..shut out until garbage time by a team that was terrible last year
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:28 PM) Last part meant Rams were shut out entire game even in garbage time against 49r backups
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 05:29 PM) Sorry about typos. Hard to type on small phone screen
MikeGangGree... Icon : (17 September 2016 - 06:00 PM) This is why I'm glad Rex is gone. Fire the OC after the D gives up 500 yards??
MikeGangGree... Icon : (17 September 2016 - 06:01 PM) UPDATE THE UPDATE!!!!
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 06:25 PM) Yep Rex isn't a bad coach but he needs to have all player and coach decisions as far as firing and hiring taken out of his hands. His problem is he doesn't know to separate the job from loyalty to players and is unable to let underperforming players go
ROBJETS Icon : (17 September 2016 - 06:27 PM) He was great as a DC because he wasn't in charge of roster and firing decisions. He will never make it as a good head coach until he can get rid of loyalty and run a team like any boss runs a business.
azjetfan Icon : (17 September 2016 - 07:16 PM) I loved Rex as a person. But he is severely handicapped in his skill set as a HC. He has not adapted and will not adapt. That's why he isn't here and will be fired from Buffalo.
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:05 AM) It's all guessing and I will like likely stick with my two starters that are injured and playing but D.Thomas looks like he is still in a lot of pain and Stewart is still in the locker room getting ankle treatment so both could be on a snap count
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:06 AM) I have good wr's on bench and good rb's on bench but they have bad matchups. Do t trust Diggs against Greenbay or Doug Martin against Arizona both on bench
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:08 AM) If I made changes I have Crabtree for Oakland Aagainst Atlanta and Abdullah for Detroit against 49rs as my two options I would choose if I made any changes
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:10 AM) Actually have it backwards with my running back teams
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:12 AM) Detroit vs Titans who I believe has a legit defense. Panthers have a better team but the ankle for Stewart and both the Titans and 49rs are ranked #1 against the run. Not a believer in the 49rs defensesthough
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:13 AM) Believe the Rams oline just sucks
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:15 AM) Abdullah splits carries but he did get 17 last week and also catches a lot of passes and has a better qb so could exploit the Titans still
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:16 AM) Will most likely do my own thing anyway just looking for input from those that actually study in fantasy if anyone feels like offering their opinions. If not it's cool too. Thanks
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 11:18 AM) If not for the injuries to the two players I'd keep them in for sure but all it takes for Thomas is a hit to the hip and a tackle by the ankle for Stewart if they aren't on a snap count already or if pain doesn't get to them.
ROBJETS Icon : (18 September 2016 - 12:45 PM) Well looks like leaving in Stewart was,a,bad move in locker room
MikeGangGree... Icon : (18 September 2016 - 04:54 PM) Good news! Dolphins suck
santana Icon : (19 September 2016 - 08:08 AM) Thanks professor
Jetsfan115 Icon : (23 September 2016 - 03:55 PM) updated roster. FB howsare released, TE bowman added to roster
Resize Shouts Area

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Futuristic High-Speed Tube Travel Could Take You From New York To Los Angeles In 45 Minutes

#41 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 03 June 2013 - 10:11 PM

View PostMr_Jet, on 03 June 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:

I'd rather my taxes go towards infrastructure projects and rebuilding America. I don't want to wait until some private company can get the funding. Europe and China would just continue to zoom past us even further and faster when it comes to infrastructure. While our roads and bridges continue to crumble. As I said in my first post, thankfully we didn't think that way when we were building this country's infrastructure in the past.

But if we did use private would it have been better? That is a question we will never know the answer to. Also unions would not have been dictating the terms of labor price like they do now. Much different time. As far as the waiting for lending or anything else it would be the same time period either way. By the time the planning and labor force was assembled the loan would long be done.
Posted Image
0

#42 User is offline   Mr_Jet Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,331
  • Joined: 31-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

  • NFL Team:

Posted 03 June 2013 - 10:37 PM

View Postazjetfan, on 03 June 2013 - 11:11 PM, said:

But if we did use private would it have been better? That is a question we will never know the answer to. Also unions would not have been dictating the terms of labor price like they do now. Much different time. As far as the waiting for lending or anything else it would be the same time period either way. By the time the planning and labor force was assembled the loan would long be done.


Better than what train tracks that were built decades ago? That's not saying much. I don't believe that any private company in this country could find the financing, the support from both congress and the president (:hysterical:), be able to make MULTIPLE state governments happy and be able to navigate through those different states' interests and regulations, find enough cheap non-union (because their evil and everything) LEGAL labor, and be able to withstand the "not in my back yard" critics of this project they WILL come up against. I'll believe it when I see it, but history is on my side. Just like I'll believe a private company will be able to fly to the moon and build towns there when I see that. I don't think I'll live long enough to see either of these happen.

I just do not believe that a private company would be able to fund and build a project that goes from New York City to Los Angeles, California. I'll say that again for emphasis. I do not believe a private company would be able to fund and build a project that goes from New York City to Los Angeles, California. We're not talking about a skyscraper or football stadium here. We're talking about something that will be thousands of miles long and make stops in Chicago, Philadelphia, D.C., Boston, St. Louis, Dallas, Phoenix, S.F. No freaking way any private company is building that on their own. I'm sorry I just don't believe it. There is only one entity in this country that will ALWAYS have the money and time to build something that massive. The United States federal government.

View PostFlyHiJets, on 01 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

You're the scumbag that thinks everyone should kiss the as$es of a bunch of criminals but I'm a dumbass. Yeah okay douchebag. Go give some illegal wetback or Revis another blowjob. But then again.....don't you live in an entirely different country but yet think you can tell us how to live? Go fvck yourself little boy. You're likely still living with mommy & daddy. Pu$$y.


View Postazjetfan, on 02 July 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

There are a few things I have realized about Mr. Jet over a few topics.

1) He is a racist. By constantly using race as a battling tool.
2) He is an extreme Liberal. If you are on either extreme you are probabaly more wrong than right.
3) He is one of those people who will never admit fault, error or defeat.
4)His life sucks and he takes it out on people who don't share in his views.
0

#43 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 04 June 2013 - 08:45 AM

View PostMr_Jet, on 03 June 2013 - 10:37 PM, said:

Better than what train tracks that were built decades ago? That's not saying much. I don't believe that any private company in this country could find the financing, the support from both congress and the president (:hysterical:/>), be able to make MULTIPLE state governments happy and be able to navigate through those different states' interests and regulations, find enough cheap non-union (because their evil and everything) LEGAL labor, and be able to withstand the "not in my back yard" critics of this project they WILL come up against. I'll believe it when I see it, but history is on my side. Just like I'll believe a private company will be able to fly to the moon and build towns there when I see that. I don't think I'll live long enough to see either of these happen.

I just do not believe that a private company would be able to fund and build a project that goes from New York City to Los Angeles, California. I'll say that again for emphasis. I do not believe a private company would be able to fund and build a project that goes from New York City to Los Angeles, California. We're not talking about a skyscraper or football stadium here. We're talking about something that will be thousands of miles long and make stops in Chicago, Philadelphia, D.C., Boston, St. Louis, Dallas, Phoenix, S.F. No freaking way any private company is building that on their own. I'm sorry I just don't believe it. There is only one entity in this country that will ALWAYS have the money and time to build something that massive. The United States federal government.

Once again we can agree to disagree. To be clear I never said Unions were evil, Just they would increase the labor cost.
Posted Image
0

#44 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 04 June 2013 - 10:58 AM

Bank net asset size.

JPMorgan Chase $2.389 trillion
Bank of America with $2.17 trillion
Citigroup with $1.88 trillion and
Wells Fargo with $1.43 trillion.
Plenty of funding. Also keep in mind this does not need to be funded from one entity.

We seem to be getting stuck on the funding. To recap I also said the government could be the funder. The comment about support from both congress and the President would hold true even if it were a government project. They cant even agree on a budget. How are they going to agree on something half (I am guessing on %)of the population would not think was a need.
Posted Image
0

#45 User is offline   Mr_Jet Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,331
  • Joined: 31-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

  • NFL Team:

Posted 04 June 2013 - 04:09 PM

View Postazjetfan, on 04 June 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

Bank net asset size.

JPMorgan Chase $2.389 trillion
Bank of America with $2.17 trillion
Citigroup with $1.88 trillion and
Wells Fargo with $1.43 trillion.
Plenty of funding. Also keep in mind this does not need to be funded from one entity.



You mean the banks that went crazy in the 2000s and then when the shit finally hit the fan, they went to the inefficient federal government for a bailout (or as I and others like to call it, corporate welfare)? The same banks who gave out loans to people they knew would not be able to pay them back? Excuse me if I don't have the same faith in these banks doing the good and right thing when this project hits the inevitable snag. I see no reason to leave it to the banks (especially those banks) to fund this massive, cross continent infrastructure project. Other than just to involve the banks so they can get in on a piece of the action and make them happy (since we have to keep them happy). The company might as well get most of their funding from the government if the banks are going to be at all worried about owning this system if the company fails.

Quote

Oster and his team are selling licenses for the rights to build the tracks and tubes, but says the ultimate network will need both private and public funding. He also plans to start a Kickstarter campaign in hopes of raising funds for a documentary about ETT.

http://www.huffingto..._n_1385661.html

Even the guy proposing this thinks he's going to need some public funds too. Even he knows he's not going to get enough private funds to build this thing on his own. He might as let the gov't give him the majority of the funding.

Quote

We seem to be getting stuck on the funding. To recap I also said the government could be the funder. The comment about support from both congress and the President would hold true even if it were a government project. They cant even agree on a budget. How are they going to agree on something half (I am guessing on %)of the population would not think was a need.


Well the one thing congress and the president (whoever it is) can agree on is they like to take the credit for the things people like. People like better roads, bridges, electrical, water and sewer systems, etc. I remember those Republicans who bitched and moaned to the public about how bad the stimulus was back in 2009. But then in private asked for some stimulus money (Paul Ryan), and then when those funds came to their states and districts they were right there posing with those big golf tournament checks for the newspaper photos. Or when they were all smiles at those ribbon cutting ceremonies for things that the stimulus money helped build. Those things make them look like they're doing something. Bringing tax dollars back to the tax payers. Bringing home the bacon so to speak. Congress and the president couldn't take credit for something a private company built, that wouldn't help them get re-elected. Congress and the president can all agree that they want to make themselves look good to the voters. The easiest way to do that is to bring money and projects (work) into the district. When the public sees with their own eyes tax dollars benefiting them, I rarely hear of them complaining to congress and the president.

View PostFlyHiJets, on 01 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

You're the scumbag that thinks everyone should kiss the as$es of a bunch of criminals but I'm a dumbass. Yeah okay douchebag. Go give some illegal wetback or Revis another blowjob. But then again.....don't you live in an entirely different country but yet think you can tell us how to live? Go fvck yourself little boy. You're likely still living with mommy & daddy. Pu$$y.


View Postazjetfan, on 02 July 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

There are a few things I have realized about Mr. Jet over a few topics.

1) He is a racist. By constantly using race as a battling tool.
2) He is an extreme Liberal. If you are on either extreme you are probabaly more wrong than right.
3) He is one of those people who will never admit fault, error or defeat.
4)His life sucks and he takes it out on people who don't share in his views.
0

#46 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 04 June 2013 - 04:31 PM

View PostMr_Jet, on 04 June 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

You mean the banks that went crazy in the 2000s and then when the shit finally hit the fan, they went to the inefficient federal government for a bailout (or as I and others like to call it, corporate welfare)? The same banks who gave out loans to people they knew would not be able to pay them back?


You do realize the government made a huge profit from TARP loans right? Those were interest bearing loans. Why do you think they were paid back so quickly.

You say in one hand "they went to the inefficient federal government for a bailout" but yet the same government you want to build something this massive. The same government that relaxed the regs on subsidized loans (people who should not have qualified) to the point where the whole economy failed. The aggressive banks and credit unions all had to keep making these poor loans to stay competitive due to the lack of proper foundation set by the government. The conservative financials (banks) did not take TARP funds and now are being heckled for being conservative. Mmmm seems interesting.




View PostMr_Jet, on 04 June 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Even the guy proposing this thinks he's going to need some public funds too. Even he knows he's not going to get enough private funds to build this thing on his own. He might as let the gov't give him the majority of the funding.


Of course he wants public funding. Who would not? The more funding he gets the more $ in his pocket. It would seem he needs some partners to make this float. Your boy Warren Buffet (who I have a great deal of respect for) would need financial help with this.

View PostMr_Jet, on 04 June 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Well the one thing congress and the president (whoever it is) can agree on is they like to take the credit for the things people like. People like better roads, bridges, electrical, water and sewer systems, etc. I remember those Republicans who bitched and moaned to the public about how bad the stimulus was back in 2009. But then in private asked for some stimulus money (Paul Ryan), and then when those funds came to their states and districts they were right there posing with those big golf tournament checks for the newspaper photos. Or when they were all smiles at those ribbon cutting ceremonies for things that the stimulus money helped build. Those things make them look like they're doing something. Bringing tax dollars back to the tax payers. Bringing home the bacon so to speak. Congress and the president couldn't take credit for something a private company built, that wouldn't help them get re-elected. Congress and the president can all agree that they want to make themselves look good to the voters. The easiest way to do that is to bring money and projects (work) into the district. When the public sees with their own eyes tax dollars benefiting them, I rarely hear of them complaining to congress and the president.


Lets try to keep the Republican VS Democrate out of this conversation. Different topic. I am sure we could both scour the web finding all kinds of anti whatever articles and info.
Posted Image
0

#47 User is offline   Mr_Jet Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,331
  • Joined: 31-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

  • NFL Team:

Posted 04 June 2013 - 06:30 PM

View Postazjetfan, on 04 June 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

You do realize the government made a huge profit from TARP loans right? Those were interest bearing loans. Why do you think they were paid back so quickly.

You say in one hand "they went to the inefficient federal government for a bailout" but yet the same government you want to build something this massive. The same government that relaxed the regs on subsidized loans (people who should not have qualified) to the point where the whole economy failed. The aggressive banks and credit unions all had to keep making these poor loans to stay competitive due to the lack of proper foundation set by the government. The conservative financials (banks) did not take TARP funds and now are being heckled for being conservative. Mmmm seems interesting.


I was being sarcastic when I called the federal government inefficient. I was mocking the folks who complain about the government being inefficient and can't do anything right.

But you mean to tell me the government relaxed (and even got rid of altogether) regulations on the banks, allowing them to run wild? I wonder why?

Reagan's 1st treasury secretary - Don Regan (CEO of Merrill Lynch)
Reagan's 3rd and Bush Sr.'s only treasury secretary - Nicholas Brady (Chairman of the Board of Dillon Read & Co. Inc.[now part of UBS])
Clinton's 1st treasury secretary - Lloyd Bentsen (President of Lincoln Consolidated Inc.)
Clinton's 2nd treasury secretary - Robert Rubin (Co-Chairman of Goldman Sachs and later worked for Citigroup)
Clinton's 3rd treasury secretary - Lawrence Summers (Chief Economist at the World Bank, would also advise Obama during his 1st term)
Bush Jr.'s 2nd treasury secretary - John Snow (a director at NationsBank)
Bush Jr.'s 3rd treasury secretary - Hank Paulson (Chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs)
Obama's 1st treasury secretary - Tim Geithner (President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, very close to Citigroup executives)
Obama's 2nd (and current) treasury secretary - Jacob Lew (a COO at Citigroup)

It should come as no surprise that banks have heavy influence over the government (the entity that is supposed to regulate them). With all these bankers and people associated with banks in and around the government for the last 30 years, we basically have had the foxes guarding the chicken coop for 30 years. You won't get any argument from me that the government is just as responsible as the banks are for the economic catastrophe. That's because they've been in bed with the banks for way too long. That's the problem. They need more separation. If they had had that separation during these last 30 years, there wouldn't have even been a need for TARP. The banks wouldn't have been able to get out of control. But the banks bought (campaign donations) and infiltrated (gov't jobs and a powerful lobbyist) the government and that caused the problem. The government didn't do all that deregulation just because they wanted to. The banks influenced them to do it.


Quote

Of course he wants public funding. Who would not? The more funding he gets the more $ in his pocket. It would seem he needs some partners to make this float. Your boy Warren Buffet (who I have a great deal of respect for) would need financial help with this.



That's why the gov't might as well just fund the damn thing. The U.S. federal gov't will always have enough money to fund this.


Quote

Lets try to keep the Republican VS Democrate out of this conversation. Different topic. I am sure we could both scour the web finding all kinds of anti whatever articles and info.


As I said all these things are intertwined. You can't expect politicians not to think politically.

View PostFlyHiJets, on 01 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

You're the scumbag that thinks everyone should kiss the as$es of a bunch of criminals but I'm a dumbass. Yeah okay douchebag. Go give some illegal wetback or Revis another blowjob. But then again.....don't you live in an entirely different country but yet think you can tell us how to live? Go fvck yourself little boy. You're likely still living with mommy & daddy. Pu$$y.


View Postazjetfan, on 02 July 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

There are a few things I have realized about Mr. Jet over a few topics.

1) He is a racist. By constantly using race as a battling tool.
2) He is an extreme Liberal. If you are on either extreme you are probabaly more wrong than right.
3) He is one of those people who will never admit fault, error or defeat.
4)His life sucks and he takes it out on people who don't share in his views.
0

#48 User is offline   HarlemHxC814 Icon

  • 06 Best Avatar Award / N.O.P. GUARD
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 5,173
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 05:34 AM

In my opinion this is exactly the kind of thing taxpayer money is supposed to be used for. Considering some of the other shit our money is wasted on, I would be ecstatic if government money would be used for something as efficient as this.
Posted Image
0

#49 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 08:11 AM

View PostMr_Jet, on 04 June 2013 - 06:30 PM, said:

I was being sarcastic when I called the federal government inefficient. I was mocking the folks who complain about the government being inefficient and can't do anything right.

But you mean to tell me the government relaxed (and even got rid of altogether) regulations on the banks, allowing them to run wild? I wonder why?

Reagan's 1st treasury secretary - Don Regan (CEO of Merrill Lynch)
Reagan's 3rd and Bush Sr.'s only treasury secretary - Nicholas Brady (Chairman of the Board of Dillon Read & Co. Inc.[now part of UBS])
Clinton's 1st treasury secretary - Lloyd Bentsen (President of Lincoln Consolidated Inc.)
Clinton's 2nd treasury secretary - Robert Rubin (Co-Chairman of Goldman Sachs and later worked for Citigroup)
Clinton's 3rd treasury secretary - Lawrence Summers (Chief Economist at the World Bank, would also advise Obama during his 1st term)
Bush Jr.'s 2nd treasury secretary - John Snow (a director at NationsBank)
Bush Jr.'s 3rd treasury secretary - Hank Paulson (Chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs)
Obama's 1st treasury secretary - Tim Geithner (President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, very close to Citigroup executives)
Obama's 2nd (and current) treasury secretary - Jacob Lew (a COO at Citigroup)

So we agree the regs were to loose?

View PostMr_Jet, on 04 June 2013 - 06:30 PM, said:

It should come as no surprise that banks have heavy influence over the government (the entity that is supposed to regulate them). With all these bankers and people associated with banks in and around the government for the last 30 years, we basically have had the foxes guarding the chicken coop for 30 years. You won't get any argument from me that the government is just as responsible as the banks are for the economic catastrophe. That's because they've been in bed with the banks for way too long. That's the problem. They need more separation. If they had had that separation during these last 30 years, there wouldn't have even been a need for TARP. The banks wouldn't have been able to get out of control. But the banks bought (campaign donations) and infiltrated (gov't jobs and a powerful lobbyist) the government and that caused the problem. The government didn't do all that deregulation just because they wanted to. The banks influenced them to do it.


Again we agree the government dropped the ball on the regs and some banks ran with it. By some I mean the minority. If you count all the Wells, Citis, US Banks and BofA as one bank each, you will see most banks did not participate in the Tarp funds. With further research you will see even some of the ones that did, may not have needed it but took it because it was a cheap way to pay off other liabilities. Wells is a perfect example. Without the TARP funds paying off the NORWEST merger there is no way they would have the assets off the Wachovia merger. Again a bad move on the governments side. They created another larger bank.

Quote

_
That's why the gov't might as well just fund the damn thing. The U.S. federal gov't will always have enough money to fund this..

That thought process makes little to no sense to me. Can you define what you mean by funding?

Quote

As I said all these things are intertwined. You can't expect politicians not to think politically.

Everything is intertwined if you look deep enough. What I would like to do it keep this from turning into a war of the sides and keep this on track or on tube for this thread. :rolleyes:/>/>/>/>
Posted Image
0

#50 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 08:16 AM

View PostHarlemHxC814, on 05 June 2013 - 05:34 AM, said:

In my opinion this is exactly the kind of thing taxpayer money is supposed to be used for. Considering some of the other shit our money is wasted on, I would be ecstatic if government money would be used for something as efficient as this.

I believe the disagreement is not if the actual system would be efficient, but if the government can build it effeiently or if a private company would be better. Having the transport is pretty much agreed upon.
Posted Image
0

#51 User is offline   santana Icon

  • I'm batman
  • Icon
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 7,991
  • Joined: 03-June 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington DC
  • Interests:Keeping this place from breaking... and titties.

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 12:51 PM



holy shit if something went wrong in one of these things it would be incredibly brutal

this is still very fiction
Nyjetsfan.com Jets Fan Forum and Chat
0

#52 User is offline   Mr_Jet Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,331
  • Joined: 31-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

  • NFL Team:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 01:07 PM

View Postazjetfan, on 05 June 2013 - 09:11 AM, said:

So we agree the regs were to loose?


Because the big banks used their money to influence elected officials? Yep. That's why ever since the economy tanked I and many others have supported the full reimplementation of the Glass-Steagall Act.


Quote

Again we agree the government dropped the ball on the regs and some banks ran with it. By some I mean the minority. If you count all the Wells, Citis, US Banks and BofA as one bank each, you will see most banks did not participate in the Tarp funds. With further research you will see even some of the ones that did, may not have needed it but took it because it was a cheap way to pay off other liabilities. Wells is a perfect example. Without the TARP funds paying off the NORWEST merger there is no way they would have the assets off the Wachovia merger. Again a bad move on the governments side. They created another larger bank.


Your talking about the same Wells Fargo that avoided paying taxes during the Great Recession and laid offed people while increasing executive pay by 180% during that time? Yeah ITA, the government has made numerous bad moves where the big banks are concerned. Again I wonder why? Posted Image


Quote

That thought process makes little to no sense to me. Can you define what you mean by funding?


As long as there are millions of people paying taxes to the federal gov't, they will always have enough to fund the building and the maintaining of large public works projects.


Quote

Everything is intertwined if you look deep enough. What I would like to do it keep this from turning into a war of the sides and keep this on track or on tube for this thread. :rolleyes:/>/>/>/>/>/>/>/>


Everything is intertwined because as Mr. Oster said himself, the project would need both private and public funds. Those public funds would be given out by elected officials a.k.a. politicians.

View PostFlyHiJets, on 01 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

You're the scumbag that thinks everyone should kiss the as$es of a bunch of criminals but I'm a dumbass. Yeah okay douchebag. Go give some illegal wetback or Revis another blowjob. But then again.....don't you live in an entirely different country but yet think you can tell us how to live? Go fvck yourself little boy. You're likely still living with mommy & daddy. Pu$$y.


View Postazjetfan, on 02 July 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

There are a few things I have realized about Mr. Jet over a few topics.

1) He is a racist. By constantly using race as a battling tool.
2) He is an extreme Liberal. If you are on either extreme you are probabaly more wrong than right.
3) He is one of those people who will never admit fault, error or defeat.
4)His life sucks and he takes it out on people who don't share in his views.
0

#53 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 01:56 PM

View PostMr_Jet, on 05 June 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

Because the big banks used their money to influence elected officials? Yep. That's why ever since the economy tanked I and many others have supported the full reimplementation of the Glass-Steagall Act.

Your talking about the same Wells Fargo that avoided paying taxes during the Great Recession and laid offed people while increasing executive pay by 180% during that time? Yeah ITA, the government has made numerous bad moves where the big banks are concerned. Again I wonder why? Posted Image

This is the same government we want to put in charge of this project? :banghead: And Yes that Wells Fargo. The one that still employs 270,000 Americans with awesome benefits. The one just like any business no matter how big or small will use what ever resources it has to make a profit. The whole reason a business exists.


View PostMr_Jet, on 05 June 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

As long as there are millions of people paying taxes to the federal gov't, they will always have enough to fund the building and the maintaining of large public works projects.


This is the same Federal Government that cannot balance a budget, Get us out of debt or agree on anything to do positive things. Our government is made to be ineffecient. From the ground up it was designed this way. I am not saying it is right, Just that it is this way.

View PostMr_Jet, on 05 June 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

Everything is intertwined because as Mr. Oster said himself, the project would need both private and public funds. Those public funds would be given out by elected officials a.k.a. politicians.

Lets just say government then, not Dems or Reps. I am sure from our conversations you probably think I am a Republican. I am not. I am as conservative as it gets fiscally but other than that I am pretty much in the middle of the road.
Posted Image
0

#54 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 01:59 PM

View Postsantana, on 05 June 2013 - 12:51 PM, said:



holy shit if something went wrong in one of these things it would be incredibly brutal

this is still very fiction


All I can think of is when one of those big bugs hit your winshield on the freeway X1000. :vava:
Posted Image
0

#55 User is offline   Mr_Jet Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,331
  • Joined: 31-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

  • NFL Team:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 02:37 PM

View Postazjetfan, on 05 June 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

This is the same government we want to put in charge of this project? :banghead:/> And Yes that Wells Fargo. The one that still employs 270,000 Americans with awesome benefits. The one just like any business no matter how big or small will use what ever resources it has to make a profit. The whole reason a business exists.


I never said put the gov't needs in charge of the project, I've said over and over let them fund it. Like they do with our roads and bridges. How many dirt roads did you drive on today? Apparently that's one infrastructure project that were able to do efficiently. I've seen multiple friends and family of mine graduate from PUBLIC schools and universities over the past month. Another thing the gov't was able to do efficiently. I saw President Obama and Governor Christie at the Jersey Shore last week less than a year after Hurricane Sandy. Who's funding the rebuilding of that? Who's going to fund the rebuilding of Moore, OK? The apparently more efficient than people realize government.


Quote

This is the same Federal Government that cannot balance a budget, Get us out of debt or agree on anything to do positive things. Our government is made to be ineffecient. From the ground up it was designed this way. I am not saying it is right, Just that it is this way.


Well the federal gov't did have not only a balanced budget but a surplus too back in 2000. Then in 2001 a guy came in after NOT winning the popular vote and decided that this country needed to give TWO tax cuts to the rich and not pay for them. Fight TWO wars overseas (one of which was totally unnecessary). Expand Medicare to primarily benefit health care companies and not pay for that. And finally let the banks run wild for most of the 2000s. So when he left in 2009 that balanced budget and surplus were long gone. I'm not going to name any names though, but until he came along we had a balanced budget.


Quote

Lets just say government then, not Dems or Reps. I am sure from our conversations you probably think I am a Republican. I am not. I am as conservative as it gets fiscally but other than that I am pretty much in the middle of the road.


Don't be sensitive about the words Democrat and Republican. There is nothing wrong with being one of them.

View PostFlyHiJets, on 01 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

You're the scumbag that thinks everyone should kiss the as$es of a bunch of criminals but I'm a dumbass. Yeah okay douchebag. Go give some illegal wetback or Revis another blowjob. But then again.....don't you live in an entirely different country but yet think you can tell us how to live? Go fvck yourself little boy. You're likely still living with mommy & daddy. Pu$$y.


View Postazjetfan, on 02 July 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

There are a few things I have realized about Mr. Jet over a few topics.

1) He is a racist. By constantly using race as a battling tool.
2) He is an extreme Liberal. If you are on either extreme you are probabaly more wrong than right.
3) He is one of those people who will never admit fault, error or defeat.
4)His life sucks and he takes it out on people who don't share in his views.
0

#56 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 02:55 PM

View PostMr_Jet, on 05 June 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

I never said put the gov't needs in charge of the project, I've said over and over let them fund it. Like they do with our roads and bridges. How many dirt roads did you drive on today? Apparently that's one infrastructure project that were able to do efficiently. I've seen multiple friends and family of mine graduate from PUBLIC schools and universities over the past month. Another thing the gov't was able to do efficiently. I saw President Obama and Governor Christie at the Jersey Shore last week less than a year after Hurricane Sandy. Who's funding the rebuilding of that? Who's going to fund the rebuilding of Moore, OK? The apparently more efficient than people realize government.


So you expect the Government to hand out tax payer dollars and not be in charge? That would be a train wreck

How are you judging the efficiency of the roads? Because they are paved and “completed'? What about cost, the down time for rebuilding, sufficient lanes and markings, condition etc...


View PostMr_Jet, on 05 June 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

Well the federal gov't did have not only a balanced budget but a surplus too back in 2000. Then in 2001 a guy came in after NOT winning the popular vote and decided that this country needed to give TWO tax cuts to the rich and not pay for them. Fight TWO wars overseas (one of which was totally unnecessary). Expand Medicare to primarily benefit health care companies and not pay for that. And finally let the banks run wild for most of the 2000s. So when he left in 2009 that balanced budget and surplus were long gone. I'm not going to name any names though, but until he came along we had a balanced budget.


And yet we still want to have this government in charge of this huge project. Every comment you make like this just reenforces what I am saying.



View PostMr_Jet, on 05 June 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

Don't be sensitive about the words Democrat and Republican. There is nothing wrong with being one of them.

Its not a sensitivity issue. Its a "lets not muddy the water issue."
Posted Image
0

#57 User is offline   Mr_Jet Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,331
  • Joined: 31-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

  • NFL Team:

Posted 05 June 2013 - 09:46 PM

View Postazjetfan, on 05 June 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:

So you expect the Government to hand out tax payer dollars and not be in charge? That would be a train wreck

How are you judging the efficiency of the roads? Because they are paved and “completed'? What about cost, the down time for rebuilding, sufficient lanes and markings, condition etc...


You mean like FEMA helping to rebuild areas devastated by disasters? Do you mean like the Transportation Department giving Washington state $1 million to help start the rebuilding of the collapsed bridge? Both government organizations that despite handing out money for building projects, have managed not to be a "train wreck." I haven't seen any of the big banks jumping over themselves to give Washington state the money to rebuild that bridge. IDK maybe it's just me, but I like having paved roads and bridges and other infrastructure in my daily life? If it's going to be between government officials and bank executives in control of anything I'd rather choose the government officials. Government officials can actually still go to prison when they f*** up big time.


Quote

And yet we still want to have this government in charge of this huge project. Every comment you make like this just reenforces what I am saying.


No it doesn't because the person responsible for all those f*** ups is gone now. I never voted for him BTW. But you said the federal government couldn't balance the budget, and I pointed out they did balance the budget (and had a surplus). How? Because Bush Sr. raised taxes in 1990 and Clinton raised taxes again in 1993, and they both cut the DoD budget after the Cold War (because Reagan decided we needed to buy a bunch a bombs and shit without paying for them).

It always seems when these "fiscal conservatives" get in control of the government, they leave government with an even bigger deficit than when they came in. Maybe they're only fiscally conservatives when it comes to cutting social programs but not so much when it comes to giving tax breaks to the rich and buying guns and bombs. And yet some people keep on voting for them. But no let's lump them all together and blame everybody in government, rather than the ones actually responsible for making the mess, the so-called fiscal conservatives. No, everybody in government is not the same on budget matters.


Quote

Its not a sensitivity issue. Its a "lets not muddy the water issue."


Well I'm going to keep the words Democrat and Republican. Because even though both parties love and are influenced by big money donors, they still have different beliefs.

View PostFlyHiJets, on 01 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

You're the scumbag that thinks everyone should kiss the as$es of a bunch of criminals but I'm a dumbass. Yeah okay douchebag. Go give some illegal wetback or Revis another blowjob. But then again.....don't you live in an entirely different country but yet think you can tell us how to live? Go fvck yourself little boy. You're likely still living with mommy & daddy. Pu$$y.


View Postazjetfan, on 02 July 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

There are a few things I have realized about Mr. Jet over a few topics.

1) He is a racist. By constantly using race as a battling tool.
2) He is an extreme Liberal. If you are on either extreme you are probabaly more wrong than right.
3) He is one of those people who will never admit fault, error or defeat.
4)His life sucks and he takes it out on people who don't share in his views.
0

#58 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,197
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 06 June 2013 - 01:36 PM

We are just going in circles again. I am done. :trink39:
Posted Image
0

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users