Maybe they have and moved on without us knowing it. It’s too speculative. Would a microbe know that it’s being observed by a human under a microscope?
edit:
Anyways, the probability of life evolving > 0%. We already have evidence i.e. us. With an infinite sample size, the probability of life approaches 100%.
I saw “Thor”.
They’re out there… Looking… Watching… Waiting… And one of them has a helluva hammer.
Idk about everyone else but I invest in stocks besides trading forex. So here’s a good read also political 
Good point. As the sample size approaches the infinite, might not the evolution of intelligence also approach the infinite? And what would that be – some kind of hyper-intelligent pan-dimensional energy? As you say, such a being may have observed us and moved on. Or maybe we are under its “care” right now, and the earth is some kind of cosmic nature preserve. But what if this intelligence decides it doesn’t like people? Then I guess we wouldn’t stand a chance.
Unfortunately if earth history is anything to go by the more powerful species that is new to an area will destroy the weaker one that is already there. This isn’t just a human trait, it also applies to rats in New Zeeland, rabbits and cane toads in Australia, the domestic cat in the Americas, Australia, and other places.
Interesting article here.
Kinda scary stuff when you read it. Some things happening behind the scenes we are not aware of. I find it odd the prominent members of the NRA are getting death threats. Aren’t the people that are against the NRA supposed to be against violence too? Ironic to say the least.
And stupid…
for some reason your link didn’t work for me. I fixed it below
Scary stuff, indeed. I’m not sure what’s scarier — psychotropic drugs or psychotic Obama.
Take a moment to ponder. There are thousands of conspiracy yahoos on Youtube etc. Why isn’t the govt killing them all? Why only bother killing a solitary no-name?
Very Scary. Noveske made some great firearms and accessories. Prayers to his family. Hopefully his company continues on.
Same with the manager for FPS Russia.
Apologize if this is old news to some, but a new bill has been jointly introduced in the House to revive the Glass-Steagall Act.
Bill to Reinstate Glass-Steagall Reintroduced in 113th Congress
Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee and Senate Banking Committee have been floating the view that a “clean-break” Glass-Steagall separation would be preferable to the regulatory death spiral of Dodd-Frankenstein.
And some vocal Dems like Elizabeth Warren are also coming out in support Glass-Steagall.
I had no idea what glass steagall was so I googled it
-wikipedia
Definition of 'Glass-Steagall Act’
An act passed by Congress in 1933 that prohibited commercial banks from collaborating with full-service brokerage firms or participating in investment banking activities.
Investopedia Says
Investopedia explains 'Glass-Steagall Act’
The Glass-Steagall Act was enacted during the Great Depression. It protected bank depositors from the additional risks associated with security transactions. The act was dismantled in 1999. Consequently, the distinction between commercial banks and brokerage firms has blurred; many banks own brokerage firms and provide investment services.
so is this good or bad? to me I am afraid of over regulation but limiting banks abiity to speculate might be a good thing idk
And some vocal Dems like Elizabeth Warren are also coming out in support Glass-Steagall.
Like
Quick reply to this message
if dems like it, it must suck than!
My understanding is that Dodd-Frank, while offending just about everyone associated with the financial markets with its 2000 +pages of new regulation did not adequately address the need for separation of deposit and investment banking activities. Republicans are looking at revival of Glass-Steagall as part of their efforts to get rid of Dodd Frank. My personal experience with Dodd Frank has of course been as a Forex trader. Everyone has a particular DF reg they hate the most. Mine has got to be the “no margin trading for spot metals” rule. Zero margin? ZERO…Are you kidding me? That was such a blatant example of how the exchange/brokerage cartel in this country manipulates regulations made me just want to puke.
Dodd-Frank absolutely and totally sucks! If I was King for a day, my first decree would be to have Dodd-Frank “hung, drawn, and quartered” then tossed into a 3000 degree incinerator for good measure. If there was anything left of it at that point I would strap a hydrogen bomb to its back, use a refurbished Saturn 5 rocket to launch it into deep space and sell tickets to watch the explosion!
Anyway, this Forbes article goes into some detail on why we need to bring back Glass Steagall.
Yeah, To heck with Dodd-Frank. The irony of the law is that Chris Dodd and Barney Frank are partially culpable for the financial crisis and yet they come up with the regulations to stop it (which are senseless)
In my opinion, Glass Steagall wouldn’t be necessary if we didn’t have FDIC.
In a free market, people will stuff their money in the most trustworthy, secure banks. If one bank decides to take on massive gambles and blows the money, people will put their money in the most reputable, honest banks among other factors.
Under the current system with FDIC, bank depositors get bailed out if the bank makes stupid decisions and loses the money.
Today when people decide which banks to use, it doesn’t even occur to them if the bank is fundamentally sound or reputable. The only consideration is how many ATM machines, CD rates, savings rates and who has the coolest logo.
Nobody really cares what the bank does with their money because, if worse comes to worst, you will get your money from FDIC.
So we have basically taken away the risk in banking. If banks decide to gamble away money, they will just get a bail out or their depositors will.
Ideally we would go back to a free market and throw out FDIC along with a good portion of our bloated government
That said, the current crappy, semi-socialistic system with Glass - Steagall is better than the current crappy, semi-socialistic system without it.
I don’t know much about Glass-Stegall, other than it also allowed speculators to buy-sell oil without taking actual delivery, but isn’t the repeal of it in 1999 what allowed retail forex ( and stocks) to be traded by the common individual without having to purchase a seat on the exchange? Maybe not, as the bill seems very negative to the individual trader.
I chose my bank based on color and logo, hehe. Interest rates are so low with my small account the gains are negligible with either bank.
I thought the FDIC was to insure deposits in case the bank was robbed for lots of $$$. Of course, the bailouts just broke all rules and laws. The FDIC should not have responsibility to insure for bank’s gambles.
It basically insures deposits in banks for practically anything. It was part of the original Glass Steagall act in 1933. It was supposed to inspire confidence in people and stop bank runs. In reality they are just printing money to fill the holes.
Thanks to the FDIC, people now shop for the highest interest rates without any regard to the soundness of the banks. This gives the bank no incentive to be smart about their investment policies. Actually, it’s often the banks that are doing the dumbest things and have the low ratings that are offering the highest interest rates. And those banks attract the most customers and become the largest banks. So the largest banks are the ones who are engaged in the riskiest activity… In the end, if they go belly up, the depositors get bailed out through the FDIC.
It is a huge moral hazard. Where does FDIC get the money to insure depositors up to 250k? The taxpayer, the printing press or more debt.
If the economy really goes into the crapper and big banks start failing and people lose jobs at a larger scale than in the last financial crisis, what is going to happen? The govt can’t tax the heck out of people who are broke to bail out bank depositors. They will either print the money or borrow even more money. At some point we won’t have good credit and interest rates will have to go up. When that happens it will be like a house of cards because we will have to borrow even more money to pay the higher interest, creating even higher interest rates, inflation, etc.
Very true, Jollygreenfello…
I am trying to eliminate as much personal debt as possible, (just a mortgage left). I think having a source of income that is independent of anyone else as much as possible is a good idea, hence the interest in forex.
There was a big SVP (Senior Vice President) who resigned from his Britain post. He worked for Goldman Sachs for many decades. He wrote a public resignation letter which basically stated that he was leaving because what was once an honest business trying to help people had turned into a corrupt shark, looking for victims to dishonestly steal from. Here is his open letter:
This kind of corruption of business this guy resigned from can only end in destruction. It depends on destruction, instead of growth, through mutual beneficial relationship between two parties. Why do people think this way? Don’t they know they are making sure they lose in the end? At least this guy had conscience enough to walk away.