₦airaland Forum

@topic,

Now about the crosshairs.  It is interesting to find out that what Sarah Palin used on her website was just a surveyor's symbol that the ignorant, and feverish Left have now termed crosshairs.  Unfortunately for them, it was the DNC who in 2004 used a traditional bull's-eyes in laying out Republican targets.  You will find details of that here: http://thespeechatimeforchoosing./2011/01/09/listen-up-lefties-the-difference-between-the-dncs-bulls-eyes-and-sarah-palins-surveyors-crosshairs/

Isn't it ironical that the same DNC used the phrase "Behind Enemy Lines" to describe the Republican targets?  Obama was keeping to the template when he used the same term "enemies" to describe political opponents.  Did someone here just say he mispoke?

@topic,

As I said earlier, common sense is not common at all, and we see evidence of that from Leftists everyday.  For instance, someone is trying to convince us that the people killed were only collateral damages.  Do you understand what that phrase mean? You only have collateral damage as a by-product of your primary action.  If someone was hit by a shell from the bullet that was meant for the Congresswoman, then you call that collateral damage.

This is someone who first hit the Congresswoman, then turned his gun at others.  Killing or shooting any other person was not required to attack the Congresswoman. If a bomb was used in the attack and others are killed from the shrapnel even though thy were not the primary target, then you call that collateral damage.  Shooting one person, then turning the gun on others, while actually trying to reload and shoot more is anything but collateral damage.

@topic,

I was planning to come by here and defend Sarah Palin again.  I intended to do just that until I came across the following statements she made recently. How can I excuse someone who said the following:

"If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"

"My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks"

"I don't want to quell anger.  I think people are right to be angry.  I'm angry!"

"If La'tinos sit out the election instead of saying we're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends"

Oops my bad.  The above are not Sarah Palin's words.  They are actually Obama's.  Is Obama fueling violence by his rhetorics?

@montelik,

@ pres. Please before you have to back pedal any further. Stop pointing d finger until d police at least investigate. It really sad that so many peoples reaction to this has been to drag politics and ideology into the matter, before we have even had a chance to investigate. Christ, please just wait until they investigate and conclude, then you can finger point to your hearts content.

What you have written above is a product of common sense. Unfortunately, not many people's got it. Is this the time to drag people's hard earned name in the mud just to score a political point? Human life to some is nothing more than a number which explains why some will approve of the killing of babies in their millions every year but will come here and shed crocodile tears when another life (which helps their political standing) is lost.

Before accusing Palin of being responsible, did any of these accusers confirm that the gunman visited Palin's website to obtain his target list? It also begs the question if the Judge, the kid and all other victims of this rampage were listed on Palin's website. Can they also tell us why the congresswoman was not on the guy's list of public officials he threatened in the past?

There is nothing common about common sense. Some people just make that plain every day.

Bumping

Bump.

@Ejadadi,

You've got mail.

@Asiwaju,

If you knew the details, why then did you make such an offer? If you are still interested in the truck for your mom, I will accept N1m after I use the car for 3 weeks in March. That is still a great deal.

@femmy2010,

N800k for a Tokunbo 2002 Explorer?
That is an unfair pricing

Thanks jare. The guy sounds sincere even though misinformed to offer such a price. That is not how to bargain.

I might consider such offer if I don't sell the car now and instead drive it around for 2 weeks when I visit Naija in March. I will listen to this kind of offer then when I will really want to dispose of it.

@Asiwaju,

How much are you selling last? i can give you 850k to 900k,after my cousin inspect the car,i lived in Vienna and i need the car for my mum.

Seriously!? N900k  That is just $6,000.  Consider the following:

Shipping the car from Minneapolis to Baltimore - $425
Shipping cost from Baltimore Port to Lagos Port by RORO - $950
CTN fee - $406
Clearing Costs at Lagos Port (N350k) - $2,333

You can see from the above that it cost me $4,114 just to ship the car to Lagos.  That means you are offering me just $1,886 for the Ford Explorer. Please visit http://www.kbb.com/used-cars/ford/explorer/2002/private-party-value/pricing-report?condition=good&id=3949&mileage=103000 to see that the car is worth $5,500.  Are you asking me to take a $3,000 hit for you?

Add the car cost of $5,500 to the shipping costs of $4,114 and you will see that the N1.65m ($11,000) that I am asking for is very reasonable.

Bumpity bump!

@ejadadi,

The SUV is now cleared from the Port.  You can call Deji @ 0702-912-7703 to see the truck.

By the way,  would you mind giving me your email address first and I can send you a private email?  For personal reasons, I do not want to display my email address here for all to see.

Thank you.

Here is a link to the Carfax report: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-278233.2528.html#msg7425595

Report for the following VIn will be highly appreciated!

VIN# - 1FMZU62E52ZC30361

Last set of pictures.

More Pictures attached.

More pictures.

More Pictures are attached.

Hello People,

I have a 2002 Ford Explorer available for sale.  It is now at the Lagos Port and will be cleared by tomorrow (That should have been done yesterday but for the public holiday).  Truck is now cleared from the Port and is available for viewing.

This is a one-owner truck and is well taken care of.  It was shipped to Naija as soon as the owner sold it.  VIN # is 1FMZU62E52ZC30361.  Mileage < 102,000 miles.

The truck has only one flaw, the windshield is cracked, which is why I am asking for N1.65 million for it. Let me know if you are interested, and I'll give you the name and contact details of the relevant party in Lagos.  Pictures are attached below:

@Katsumoto,

Whilst there is no impetus in this tax cut extension, it can be argued that allowing the tax cuts to expire will hurt the economy more.

In other words, the tax rates during Clinton's era are a bad idea. Also, Bush's tax cuts were a great idea. See how everyone is running a way from Clinton's tax rates? Bush reduced it for everyone, while the Dems think they can play politics of envy with it by sticking it to the so-called rich. If making more than $250K yearly is a crime, why not legislate to strip the money form the owners?

It is obvious that you are not a fan of Obama but implying that Obama is the problem is disingenuous. The problem with America today started during the 8 years of republican rule and it will take more than two years for any human to fix the problems.

I am not a fan of liberals, period! It does not matter whether the liberal is Obama, Clinton, Reid or Pelosi. Obama is a problem so far as his ideology is. It's like saying Mohammed is not the problem even though Islam is. How do you separate a man from his ideology! He may mean well, but the effects of being wrong is the same, even if you are sincerely wrong!

If the mortgage crisi led to the economic crash, can you tell us how that is related to tax cuts and to Bush? We all know that the subprime mortgage sold by the Banks was only their response to Clinton's ammendment to the Community Reinvestment Act which was put into law by Carter (all Dems)! We know how Obama was involved in law suits threatening the Banks to honor the law. How can you blame Republicans for this social engineering borne of Dems?

@Katsumoto,

At this point in time, America does not need any deep-seated political ideology; what it needs are actions that will kick-start the economy and influence job creation.

Can you tell me what on earth Obama has done to kickstart this economy. While I may have butt heads with cap28 on this topic, the truth is that I agree with a lot of things that he said. I just can't believe he thinks tax cuts and bailouts are synonymous terms. Obama has spent trillions of dollars and unemployment is still as high as when he started spending, if not worse.

When that is done, then there can be fights over political ideology. The republicans are very inconsiderate and only care about wealthy Americans, their main sponsors. Extending the cuts for the rich is wrong, in that America has a ballooning debt crisis and only extending the tax cuts for the very rich is morally wrong. But Obama's hands are tied.

America's problem is not the rich. It is the government. Future generations of Americans are indebted to China, not because of a rich man, but because of an out of control government. The government will not pull the country out of this mess, it will take the private sector to do so. Common sense dictates then obstacles should be removcved out of the way for this productive sector of the US to make a come back. Increasing their taxes is not the way to do this.

@Katsumoto,

Obama did not have a choice with regards to the tax cuts. The Republicans were prepared to let the Tax cuts expire if they were not renewed for everyone.

Which would have been a good idea considering that the Republicans would have legislated for the tax cuts to be made permanent for everyone once they control the House. And guess what, that legislation would have passed both in the House and the Senate.

If Obama played the same game, there would have been tax rises for everyone, including many middle and low income families.

This is so lame.  If Obama was concerned about people's taxes, why did he wait till now to start dealing with that issue?  He was more concerned about making a name for himself by pushing the monstrosity we call Obamacare.  Thank God it is on the way to be repealed.

That would have had a devastating effect on an economy that is stuttering and needs some kind of impetus. If that happened, Obama would have borne the brunt from most Americans. He is already taking the flak for problems that existed before his presidency. Americans have very short memories and would have punished Obama and the Democrats in two years time

Let's get something straight.  There was no impetus in this tax compromise.  What this was all about was maintaining the existing tax rate.  Damn, some tax rates even went up!!!  If he wanted real impetus, he should have called for a tax cut. How people refer to maintaining the same tax rates that have been in place for the past 8 years a tax cut is beyond me!!!  Want a real impetus, request a tax cuts across board!

@Katsumoto,

I get your argument but shouldn't individuals who profit more from the system not pay more into the system? Even Peter Peterson of the Blackstone Group argued in an interview on Bloomberg last week that the rich most pay more taxes. He argued in favour of a progressive tax system. At the end of the day, capitalists use infrastructure more than average workers.  Since their benefit is higher, shouldn't their contribution be higher?

I do not agree with this argument at all.  If anything, I believe rich people use less government services than the rest of us, just as the middle class use less govt services than the poor.  For instance, I send my kids to private school despite the fact that I pay taxes that go into funding public schools.  I don't use the serives even though I pay into it.  Chances are that many children are in the public schools even though their parents pay no dime in taxes.  Infact they get food stamps, unemployment checks, section 8 housing and free day care despite the fact that they do not pay a dime into running the system.

You do realise that the proportion of revenue that goes into welfare programs is much smaller than other programs.

That is not true.  The biggest chunk of the budget goes to service welfare programs that the rich do not partake of.  See the following chart http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/welfare_budget_2010_4.html

America spends a lot on it defence budget. Whose assets are being protected by that defence spending?

That is true and I believe that we can find some savings here as well.  Everything should be on the table.

If North Korea bombs Seattle, who has more to lose -Bill gates or the security guards at the reception of Microsoft?

You'd be surprised.  In these days of bailouts, I won't be surprised if old Bill ends up with more bills at the end of the day  !  See why I am against bailouts?

@Katsumoto,

Sorry I have to be breaking up my responses.  I seem to be having problems with posting lengthy responses on the website.

In 2003, 450 economists argued against the tax cuts on the basis that it worsened the debt position. Bush argued on the basis of the laffer curve but we know that the laffer curve is not too relevant with regards to small increases and decreases. The laffer curve is very relevant when the tax percentages are huge. The costs of extending the tax cuts to the top 2% is $80 billion over two years and $830 billion over ten years.

I am sure that you are aware that the letter by those economists provoked a response by another 250 who opposed their position.  In these days when we cannot even believe our Scientists to tell us the truth about the so-called Global Warming, I always take anything that even professionals say with a pinch of salt.  Many now stake  their positions not on the facts, but on political leanings and persuasions.

These same people convinced us that unemployment will not exceed 8% if we passed the stimulus bill.  I guess we are all wiser now.  Have you noticed how every time there is a release of new economic data, it is always preceeded by the term "unexpected".  An unexpected jump in unemployment, jobless claims, sales etc,   We can't trust anybody anymore.  We have to use our common senses to draw conclusions that sit well with us.  Our Politicians, Economists, Scientists, Investors are all compromised!!!

@Katsumoto,

All through this recession why is it that luxury good corporations did not suffer? It is because the rich were/are not affected yet there is a recession. That implies that the spending habits of the rich does not drive the conomy.

This is so not true.  While I can point to many luuxury goods and services that have taken a hit here in the US, I think I'll just share the following link with you from the BBC: The global recession has taken a toll on many big industries, the luxury sector being amongst the hardest hit.  Consulting and business strategy firm, Bain & Co, has estimated sales of luxury goods dropped by as much as 20% in just six months.  Prospects for the industry are looking brighter, with sales poised to grow by 1%. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8629956.stm

Secondly, the US has a budget deficit of approximately 11 percent of GDP and a total congress approved debt of $14 trillion. It is not brainer that the US must reduce its budget deficit and total budget. Does it make economic sense to extend tax cuts to people who will spend regardless of the economic climate?

Again, your premise in bold is wrong which nullifies the point you are making.  Tax cuts to the so-called rich will deprive the govt of additional $700 billion over ten years.  That pales in comparison to the $14 trillion debt.  It seems to me that spending cuts are more needed than taxing people who know how to make money.  I guarantee you that $700 billion in the hands of these investors will yield a higher return and more jobs for the country than it can ever do iin the hands of the govt.

@Katsumoto,

I am sorry but you are wrong on so many accounts. The republicans are just bent on making life difficult for Obama which consequently makes life more difficult for the average American including those republican supporters who do not understand a damn thing. You argued that the republicans are right in discussing tax cuts first before any other proposals. Does that sound right? The only reason republicans want to discuss tax cuts first is because that affects them and their supporters more. The tax cuts being proposed by Obama are fair in my opinion because they extend tax cuts to 98% of people who will be able to have extra disposable income which will in turn drive the economy. Supply side economics can be argued in the case of tax cuts to 98% of tax-payers but not to 2% tax-payers who earn over $250,000.

Why $250K?  Why not $100K, $200K, $300K or $1,000K for that matter?  So someone who makes $255K has disposable income but one who makes $247K does not?  What is the rationale behind this magic number of $250K? From all indications, it has to do with the number of voters.  It smirks more of a political decision rather than economics.

Imagine this.  If I found out that I have made $250k by November and that anything I earn after that will be taxed at a higher rate, the tendency is there to just take the whole of December off rather than continue working for diminishing returns.  This is almost the same principles some low-income earners adopt in which they go off work when they realise that they will start paying taxes at a particular income threshold.  What will be fair and equitable for everyone is a flat tax irrespective of you income level.

@tpia1,

not at all surprised to read this. cap28 is a loose cannon. usually very loud and with limited cognition. He overcompensates for this with bullheadedness

I wish you had given me this advise before I spent some time trying to hold a discussion with him. That's some few minutes I can never have back!

@cap28,

I am tired of going back and forth with someone who clearly cannot read or at best has a problem understanding simple english. You have accused me of supporting bailouts when I have consistently opposed it. Please point out anywhere in my post where I called for bailouts. And please shove it if you can't.

I have just now learnt of the death of bawomolo and I am really tired and feeling sick to my stomach. I do not have the strength to continue to suffer fools.

@topic,

@bawomolo,

who gets to define marriage. heterosexuals?

And who should define it, the Judge? Even if we accept that society is free to make changes as social evolution often dictates, is it up to a single Judge to make that call? The society, very well and better represented by the electorate made the call, and the minority represented by an interest group and an activist Judge feel like they know better.

We've heard about the tyranny of the majority. What do we make of this tyranny of the minority?!

The above was my last exchange with bawomolo.  I can't help but wonder how we will treat people differently if we knew our contact with them will be the last!

@topic,

I don't believe this.  I have been catching glimpses of the headline of a Nigerian killed in Chicago but I never imagined it'll be so close to home. Bawomolo, may your soul rest in perfect peace.  How can one make sense of this?  This hurts really, really bad!

@cap,

Up until about 2 years ago, I owned 4 properties here in the US. I have close family members and friends that work in the mortgage industry. I have now withdrawn virtually all the money I have in the stock markets with only a few thousand dollars. Do I know anything about Subprime mortgages and investment products derived from them? The answer is experientially (I hope you know the meaning of that word). As for you, I can tell all you know about them is whatever you may have dug up on wikipedia and allied websites.

And just as I said before, I will not waste my time trying to explain complex financial products to someone who does not know the difference between a tax cut and a bailout.

@cap28,

ha ha you make me laugh - why are you shying away from answering my question? let me try again, what is productive about a CDS, SIV or sub prime mortgage?

You are a lost cause aint you? You don't even know the basics and you are asking me to lecture you on the advance. This is like asking to do a Doctorate when you don't even have a first degree.

also why do you support tax cuts for the rich but do not realise that the $3trillion bail out (american tax payer money) was also a form of welfare given to undeserving greedy rich leeches?

So who is rich if I may ask? I can see you still have trouble distinguishing between tax cuts and bailouts. Come back here after you can tell the difference between the two!