Free ★■◆● By Hammer Smith

[woodchip]

Obama, as best as I can tell, is and has been the ONLY political player even attempting to get this message across. The fix isn't going to be fast, it isn't going to be easy, and it will require sacrifice by ALL citizens to work.

So the message is to go green power, give 500 million to Solyndra and watch it fail. Even in the throws of failure Obama was considering giving it more money.

"Shortly after receiving the loan guarantee, Solyndra closed a factory and canceled plans to go public, leading critics in Congress to charge that the loan guarantee -- a substantial expense to taxpayers -- had gone to a demonstrably unqualified company. "

Then we have Sunpower getting a 1.2 billion loan guarantee even though:

"How did a failing California solar company, buffeted by short sellers and shareholder lawsuits, receive a $1.2 billion federal loan guarantee for a photovoltaic electricity ranch project—three weeks after it announced it was building new manufacturing plant in Mexicali, Mexico, to build the panels for the project."

"According to the Department of Energy (DOE) website, the CVSR project will create 350 construction jobs during the two-year build and 15 permanent jobs—presumably those are the squeegee men for keeping the panels clean."

The construction jobs will end so that leaves you with 15 permanent jobs. I'll let you do the math on what those permanent jobs cost. Then there is the green car company getting a 500 million .loan and then announcing it is moving to Finland.

I realize Slick, you think Obama is the smartest guy around but the reality is he is just another stupid political hack trying to push his particular agenda and could give a ★■◆● about anything but himself. Give me all that money and I'll stick it in a bank and the interest alone will pay for 800 $50k lifelong jobs. Obama has done nothing to date to generate real growth as evidenced by his Obamacare agenda back when the Dems controlled everything. Too bad they didn't focus on jobs back then. Of course back then Obama had 4 years until re-election so he could do the Alfred E Neuman "What, Me Worry?" routine.

[Tunnelcat]

Quit blame casting. It's not just Obama's fault.

http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/15/sol ... -timeline/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2011/ ... _jobs.html

What's sad in all this political backstabbing is that this country NEEDS to turn to green energy to power the future. Fossil fuels will run out eventually.

[callmeslick]

wow, Woody.....it's almost unfathomable than someone could misread simple words so completely, but you do. Further, you then launch into the same sort of ideological drivel that has been an anchor on the nation, so thanks for the demonstration of my point, on that much at least. What you decry in Obama is the measures he has had to resort to for short term stimulus. While, as I note, he has been the only adult in the room crying out for a long term plan, he hasn't succeeded whatsoever in getting that message to sink into anywhere near enough folks. I suppose that Obama should be faulted for some of that failure to sell the long-term plan, but let's be honest: long term planning and sacrifice aren't the easy answers Americans like to hear. Much better to rail about communists, leftists, tax and spend liberals and the like, right? Oh, and have no fear, I give the same dressdown to hardcore Progressives, who want to babble about doing away with corporations, communal living and organic food production on a planet with 7 billion people trying not to starve. Ideology sucks all intelligene out of real problem solving. Now, Woody, with that in mind, would you actually like to address my suggestions for a way forward, or keep taking the easy way out and Blaming Someone.

[Ferno]

"The luxury tax was meant to soak the blue-blazer crowd when it went into effect in 1991. Instead, it slammed into the boating industry with the force of a northeaster, leaving the scattered debris of decreased sales and lost jobs.

Before the tax went into effect, there were 600,000 people employed in the marine industry nationwide. The recession cost 100,000 jobs, and the luxury tax resulted in the loss of another 25,000, the National Marine Manufacturers Association estimates. Boat sales nationally dropped 42 percent during the period, from $17 billion in 1989 to $10 billion in 1992."

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-0 ... g-industry

Does 25k jobs sound like small potatoes Ferny?

three things are apparent here. one, it looks like the recession itself did most of the damage, and two, this isn't just one 'big boat manufacturer' as you put it but the entire marine sector, and three.. where'd the other ten thousand come from?


------------------

well first off the Drugs they will be screening for are illegal. so if he wants government assistance (tax payer money) should we not do a background screen and make sure he's not involved in illegal activities???

If you want that, we should screen EVERYONE who wants government assistance, regardless of circumstance, and regardless of type. Grants? screen them. Scholarships? screen them.


But if we did that, we expose a problem. we assume everyone is on drugs the minute they walk into a welfare office or need any other type of assistance. You really want to accuse everyone who asks for assistance if they're on drugs? As for your seatbelt analogy, how is the safety of all involved in any way related to screening those who want assistance for drugs? Come on man.. It's a westbro-baptist-church level of terrible.

[flip]

You should see the way physicians are treated when it comes to pain management. Those guys are in fear of their job which hinged on my behavior. Ferno's got a point, once you start where does it stop?

[CUDA]

well first off the Drugs they will be screening for are illegal. so if he wants government assistance (tax payer money) should we not do a background screen and make sure he's not involved in illegal activities???

If you want that, we should screen EVERYONE who wants government assistance, regardless of circumstance, and regardless of type. Grants? screen them. Scholarships? screen them


But if we did that, we expose a problem. we assume everyone is on drugs the minute they walk into a welfare office or need any other type of assistance. You really want to accuse everyone who asks for assistance if they're on drugs?.

I'm good with that. hows it any different than someone that wants to loan?? everyone has to have their credit checked to get one. do you really want to ask if everyone that wants to borrow money if he has the ability to pay it back, if the government is giving you FREE money then you need to have a check. besides the fact that Welfare is not the same as a grant or scholarship. welfare is usually an ongoing support that is given to the individual for them to spend. where the other dispersal's you mentioned do not go to the person in need, they go the the institution that that person chooses to go to the educate them self.

As for your seatbelt analogy, how is the safety of all involved in any way related to screening those who want assistance for drugs? Come on man..

people that don't wear seatbelts do not impact the safety of those that do not. where people that are under the influence of Drugs CAN and sometimes DO impact the safety of others. beside the fact that OBVIOUSLY the point that the government MAKES you wear them was missed by you. Come on man, do you really want to force everyone to wear seatbelts.

[flip]

I think making people piss in cups is a step towards women having to display proof of menstrual blood. Who cares if they get free money, it hasn't hurt my life any and besides that the friggin game is rigged. Ideology means nothing if things are slighted. It's obvious if someone is intoxicated or not, what they do on their own time is their business.

[CUDA]

what they do on their own time is their business.

that's not whats in question. what's in question is are they getting Government money to do it. People as well as Governments need to be accountable

[snoopy]

I want to add to my rant above, which I also posted elsewhere, the explanation I gave to folks there of how I came to these ideas. It doesn't involve 24 hour News Channel soundbites or radio talk host thinking. To wit, I stated:






......my view of how capitalism and economics work was formed by my upbringing. Primarily, by learning from my Dad, who retired in 1981 from DuPont as VP of Research, and from observing the operational practices of the bank which my family owned for several generations(now, part of PNC). What I saw was long-term planning. In other words, companies that planned for income and profitablity for years to come. DuPont was famous for this. The pipeline was put in place, at great short-term cost, that yielded a constant flow of new products. And, boy, did they make money. Likewise, on a much smaller scale the bank. We were profitable from 1870 until purchased in 1975. Always profitable, too, no matter what the economic picture in the present tense was. That was, at one time, how ALL successful businesses were modelled. We have evolved, over the past 30 years into a culture/society which values immediate gratification and short term riches, and are willing to ignore and even risk our future to do so. This goes to current corporate behavior, and carries on to the individuals using home-equity and credit cards to get the things they think they deserve now. That culture will not change without a mix of regulation,sacrifice and restraint. I thinik, or at least hope, that the current downturn has woken most folks up to the personal restraint part, if only by force of harsh realities. However, corporate culture will not change without strong regulatory pressure, and rebuilding the damage done by shortsighted management of our industrial base and national infrastructure is going to cost real money which only government can or will be willing to provide.

now, the usual suspects can feel free to deride the above for it's 'leftist' philosophies and radical thinking. I tend to see it as rooted in an Eisenhower Republican view of governance, and an ideal of capitalism rooted in traditional American values. YMMV.

I agree.

I also think that you're stating a different angle on Cuda's abundance to complacency; complacency to apathy; apathy to dependence. In my view complacency, apathy, and dependence all ignore the long-term in favor of short term convenience.


This intrigues me, though, because most of the time I disagree with a lot of what you have to say. It seems to me that the large majority of us start from the same place, and differ on what we think the government should do about it.

IMO this is the bottom line: The majority of the individuals of the US are complacent, apathetic, and just want the quick buck that will take care of them without regard for their children or grandchildren. As long as the majority of the people in the US live this way, the government will follow suit, and the nation as a whole will continue to go downhill.

[Tunnelcat]

IMO this is the bottom line: The majority of the individuals of the US are complacent, apathetic, and just want the quick buck that will take care of them without regard for their children or grandchildren. As long as the majority of the people in the US live this way, the government will follow suit, and the nation as a whole will continue to go downhill.

Well, that's human nature. When you're comfortable, why rock the boat? Nothing is going to change until people's little comfort zones are impacted. That's the result of a long standing middle class that's never seen adversity. They've become complacent. They're happy, why bother? As long as most people have a decent income, food and a roof over their heads, they're not going to see a reason to start a revolution.

[CUDA]

TC the only problem is when people start calling for reform of the dependency system they are called mean or hateful. that has even been demonstrated on this BB.

[flip]

that's not whats in question. what's in question is are they getting Government money to do it. People as well as Governments need to be accountable

The trend for the last 50 years has been heading towards a welfare state. I would go so far as to say that was the whole intention of the New Deal, any forward thinking individual would have realized what the Federal Reserve Act was gonna bring about, so they put in social safety nets. America became a little more socialist then.
At this point in I have never seen America with such political stagnation and no sense of direction. What happens if our economy collapses, or Europe's? At that point a great deal of people could end up on government assistance. Are you willing to have your privacy totally violated because you need assistance? I think it's a slippery slope when you start collecting bodily fluids from people.

[CUDA]

if either economy collapses one will take down the other and Government assistance won't matter. there's won't be any money to give any assistance. we are almost there now.

[callmeslick]

[Well, that's human nature. When you're comfortable, why rock the boat? Nothing is going to change until people's little comfort zones are impacted. That's the result of a long standing middle class that's never seen adversity. They've become complacent. They're happy, why bother? As long as most people have a decent income, food and a roof over their heads, they're not going to see a reason to start a revolution.

and, therein lies the illusion that has been crumbling, fast. There is quickly becoming no such thing in the US as a middle class.
Most folks who imagine they are middle class are actually plummetting, economically speaking, like freaking lawn darts. You will get to the tipping point sometime, and I suspect that time is coming more quickly than many might assume. This OWS stuff isn't some sort of feel-good aberration, it's the beginning.

[flip]

If it does collapse, it will be crazy for awhile but people will want to restore order quickly. At that point we will all get assisted somehow I'm sure. I hope against it but it's in the script.

[flip]

and, therein lies the illusion that has been crumbling, fast. There is quickly becoming no such thing in the US as a middle class.
Most folks who imagine they are middle class are actually plummetting, economically speaking, like freaking lawn darts. You will get to the tipping point sometime, and I suspect that time is coming more quickly than many might assume. This OWS stuff isn't some sort of feel-good aberration, it's the beginning.

Agreed Slick. You would think this ruling elite would have enough sense not to create such a great divide. They simply would not end up with the numbers.

[callmeslick]

Agreed Slick. You would think this ruling elite would have enough sense not to create such a great divide. They simply would not end up with the numbers.

most members of what could be called the 'ruling elite' that I've ever exchanged thoughts with seem to rather smugly feel that controlling all the resources trumps the numbers. They may be right. I am among the minority who doesn't wish to see the end result of the sorting-out, as I suspect they are partly right, but at the cost of the sort of society they are used to, and that generations of their forbearers struggled to achieve.

[Tunnelcat]

TC the only problem is when people start calling for reform of the dependency system they are called mean or hateful. that has even been demonstrated on this BB.

I, and most sensible liberals by the way, also want to reform the system, if only so that it won't bankrupt our country and fail for future generations. But what I hear from most conservatives is that they just want to get rid of it all together. Because they don't want to pay for all those they consider "freeloaders" to the system, which they consider just about anybody on Medicare or Social Security. I can assure you that not every senior citizen or impoverished person is a "freeloader". That's the sticking point. I know that most of these social and medical safety nets have been a thorn in the side of conservatives ever since FDR and Johnson brought them into existence, and that conservatives want them GONE, not fixed. You're going to get nasty reactions to proposed extreme solutions. They want to burn down the house to kill all the bedbugs.

and, therein lies the illusion that has been crumbling, fast. There is quickly becoming no such thing in the US as a middle class.
Most folks who imagine they are middle class are actually plummetting, economically speaking, like freaking lawn darts. You will get to the tipping point sometime, and I suspect that time is coming more quickly than many might assume. This OWS stuff isn't some sort of feel-good aberration, it's the beginning.

That's problem with most people and families in the middle class. They haven't dealt with really bad adversity for over 50 years, so they sit in their warm homes fat and happy while things start to crumble around them. They just don't see it yet, but as the numbers of unemployed rise and funding for the social commons evaporates, crime and poverty will be knocking on their cozy little doors. Only when that happens, we will see a revolution.

The middle class needs to recognize that about 50% of people in this nation, mostly conservatives, are of the persuasion that everyone should be doing things for themselves or that everyone should be on their own in life and that the winner's among us should take whatever they want. They could care less about the commons or societal functioning for the masses at all. Unfortunately, that will be to their detriment. The wealthy are cutting off their noses to spite their own faces. They don't see that investing in society reaps prosperity and stability. Without that, they'll have to live behind high security walls to keep out the huge numbers of poor and destitute that used to be part of the stable middle class.

[CUDA]

TC the only problem is when people start calling for reform of the dependency system they are called mean or hateful. that has even been demonstrated on this BB.

I, and most sensible liberals by the way, also want to reform the system, if only so that it won't bankrupt our country and fail for future generations. But what I hear from most conservatives is that they just want to get rid of it all together. Because they don't want to pay for all those they consider "freeloaders" to the system, which they consider just about anybody on Medicare or Social Security.

I don't know where you heard that from. if you have a link where they say do away with I'd like to see it. most of the people that I see and talk to want a Major reform

[flip]

I myself would call them Nicolaitians. Yes, the whole idea is destined to fail. What kind of person actually debates that resources will trump numbers over the masses? Not the kind of mindset I would want to be of, I myself would rather encourage, exhort and edify. See. These 2 thoughts are at direct opposition to each other. My way of thinking is guaranteed victory in the long run.

[woodchip]

"The luxury tax was meant to soak the blue-blazer crowd when it went into effect in 1991. Instead, it slammed into the boating industry with the force of a northeaster, leaving the scattered debris of decreased sales and lost jobs.

Before the tax went into effect, there were 600,000 people employed in the marine industry nationwide. The recession cost 100,000 jobs, and the luxury tax resulted in the loss of another 25,000, the National Marine Manufacturers Association estimates. Boat sales nationally dropped 42 percent during the period, from $17 billion in 1989 to $10 billion in 1992."

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-0 ... g-industry

Does 25k jobs sound like small potatoes Ferny?

three things are apparent here. one, it looks like the recession itself did most of the damage, and two, this isn't just one 'big boat manufacturer' as you put it but the entire marine sector, and three.. where'd the other ten thousand come from?

First off did I imply one industry let alone one boat company? What the salient point is (again taking the boat industry as one of many possible examples) while the recession indeed caused a large number of job losses, the govt. desire to then increase it's tax revenue via the luxury tax caused another loss of jobs. I'm not sure what you are trying to argue at this point.

[callmeslick]

I myself would call them Nicolaitians. Yes, the whole idea is destined to fail. What kind of person actually debates that resources will trump numbers over the masses? Not the kind of mindset I would want to be of, I myself would rather encourage, exhort and edify. See. These 2 thoughts are at direct opposition to each other. My way of thinking is guaranteed victory in the long run.

you might want to put 'your way of thinking' into more cohesive sentences, as I, for the life of me, can't figure out your point at all. Especially the words after the word 'masses', and I disagree with your assumptions in the first two sentences and could easily point to lots of examples wherein controlling the wealth(resources) keeps massive numbers of people in servitude.

[Tunnelcat]

TC the only problem is when people start calling for reform of the dependency system they are called mean or hateful. that has even been demonstrated on this BB.

I, and most sensible liberals by the way, also want to reform the system, if only so that it won't bankrupt our country and fail for future generations. But what I hear from most conservatives is that they just want to get rid of it all together. Because they don't want to pay for all those they consider "freeloaders" to the system, which they consider just about anybody on Medicare or Social Security.

I don't know where you heard that from. if you have a link where they say do away with I'd like to see it. most of the people that I see and talk to want a Major reform

Well, Ron Paul has outright stated that desire. I'm sure that most other "free market" Republicans, for example, Rep. Joe Heck of Nevada and Presidential hopeful Rick Perry, have made statements about those "ponzi scheme" socialist programs. Too many of them are mouthing that the "free market" can do better than the government. Connect the dots here. Get rid of government, let the free market take over and you get rid of the social safety nets, period.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/ ... -medicaid/

[flip]

What I'm saying is that people who actually think in their minds that they can rule the masses by controlling the resources and keeping people in servitude are not good people. That's evil to think like that. Good is going to triumph over evil every time because whether people believe in God or not, they still believe in good. Go ahead and give your examples, but I'm betting they will not apply the same way in this new brave world as they did in the past. All the game rules are going to change. I'm betting numbers.

[Tunnelcat]

OK, how do you take care of the less fortunate and aged in our society? Is it wrong to take care of our own when they fall on bad times or get sick or old? If we don't want to take care of them because we think they don't deserve it, what does that say about compassion in our society?

[callmeslick]

What I'm saying is that people who actually think in their minds that they can rule the masses by controlling the resources and keeping people in servitude are not good people. That's evil to think like that. Good is going to triumph over evil every time because whether people believe in God or not, they still believe in good. Go ahead and give your examples, but I'm betting they will not apply the same way in this new brave world as they did in the past. All the game rules are going to change. I'm betting numbers.

he who doesn't learn from history is doomed to repeat it. We'd all love to think that good will triumph over evil, but it seldom has, when you think about it. More often than not, evil patiently bides its time and takes over eventually. I realize that I'm sort of channelling Hobbes and Locke era thinking, but it just appears that way to me. Tell me, Flip, why are you so bullish on the game suddenly changing at this juncture?

[flip]

Because the masses are extremely educated compared to the past and they have seen greener pastures. They have not been made to feel inferior and subservient since the day they were born and classes are no longer accepted as the status quo. At one point in time it was widely accepted that some would have to give up their seat on the bus to others, it's not like that now. People are not gonna keep taking ★■◆● and saying thank you at the same time. People are much more fierce these days and godless. A God fearing man appeals to God for justice, an unbeliever secures his own. I could go on and on but the Rich have excluded themselves from the mainstream and are having romantic fantasies of moats and castle towers. No one respects the rich anymore.

[Tunnelcat]

The "religious right" is an oxymoron.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

I reject your promise of seeking God for justice flip.You don't have to be God-fearing to be a good person. And I've seen a lot of God-fearing people who were basically evil towards others. They are not necessarily mutually compatible states of being.

You're also making assumptions about God. For all we know, we are some alien being's lab experiment and it's out there watching us while drinking a beer, laughing and waiting to see if we'll survive or destroy ourselves. It may even be stirring up the pot to speed things up. Start a few wars, create food shortages, mess with the climate and create a few natural disasters. It also may soon tire of the experiment and terminate the whole damn thing. The laugh's on us. We don't really know do we?

[flip]

I base my assumptions on personal experiences actually. I started believing when I was 6 years old and even remember the day. No one in my family encouraged me, I decided it on my own. I'm now 41 and have found no reason to believe differently. I don't feel like I'm a raving lunatic, I try mostly to be reasonable and strike a balance, but if there is no God, I must be one masterpiece of evolution, because everytime I have went to God's counsel, I left with the wisest of answers and everytime I asked of something I needed or desired I got it, and that short time. So if there is no God my powers of evolution have usurped yours and you must submit. :LOL. Na really God is good and yearns to fellowship with his creation

[Tunnelcat]

Na really God is good and yearns to fellowship with his creation

If there is a God, and I do believe there is some supreme being involved, I sure hope so.

[flip]

I've seen nothing more powerful than faith, hope and love.

[CUDA]

He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.

[woodchip]

OK, how do you take care of the less fortunate and aged in our society? Is it wrong to take care of our own when they fall on bad times or get sick or old? If we don't want to take care of them because we think they don't deserve it, what does that say about compassion in our society?

And what happens when the govt. can no longer afford to take care of them TC? We are nearing 15 trillion in debt with no end in sight. When the govt. becomes the only game in town and 3/4 of the population is dependent on them....just look at Greece to what will happen. Only in our case no one will be able to bail us out..

[callmeslick]

And what happens when the govt. can no longer afford to take care of them TC? We are nearing 15 trillion in debt with no end in sight. When the govt. becomes the only game in town and 3/4 of the population is dependent on them....just look at Greece to what will happen. Only in our case no one will be able to bail us out..

what is informative to consider in the cases of Greece, Italy and the US is tax revenue collection. Both Greece and Italy are hampered by extremely high rates of tax evasion. The US is hampered by a tax code that gives away massively to the wealthiest 5% of the population, compared to a not-so-far-off time when our books were balanced. The bottom line is that we CAN afford to take care of 'them', we ought to feel a moral obligation to take care of 'them' and a lot of 'us' ought to realize that a few breaks here and there can make 'us' one of 'them'.

[CUDA]

what is informative to consider in the cases of Greece, Italy and the US is tax revenue collection. Both Greece and Italy are hampered by extremely high rates of tax evasion. The US is hampered by a tax code that gives away massively to the wealthiest 5% of the population,

it's the same problem in both countries. it's just looked at differently. what one country calls tax evasion the other country call tax breaks to the wealthy. it's just semantics. plus this country has taxed corporations so highly that they have chosen to "evade" those taxes by going over seas with their business's

[callmeslick]

Because the masses are extremely educated compared to the past and they have seen greener pastures. They have not been made to feel inferior and subservient since the day they were born and classes are no longer accepted as the status quo. At one point in time it was widely accepted that some would have to give up their seat on the bus to others, it's not like that now. People are not gonna keep taking **** and saying thank you at the same time. People are much more fierce these days and godless. A God fearing man appeals to God for justice, an unbeliever secures his own. I could go on and on but the Rich have excluded themselves from the mainstream and are having romantic fantasies of moats and castle towers. No one respects the rich anymore.

like they ever did, in some sense. And the stuff about the Rich excluded from the mainstream implies that you have no concept of life in prior eras. Take a look at how the Vanderbilts and such lived during the era of sweatshop labor. Or, how the European royalty lived during the 17th century, relative to the masses. As for the education bit, I would argue that the gap in education is worse in this nation between rich and everyone else than it was one hundred years ago. Finally, the fact that the 'common man' has seen 'greener pastures' and thus be willing to fight for them is a riot. What they've seen is the glimpse that all sorry-ass wannabes get, of how others manage to really live, who can afford to. The God business, as always, strikes me as meaningless.

[flip]

We will see what we will see. :p

[Ferno]

First off did I imply one industry let alone one boat company? What the salient point is (again taking the boat industry as one of many possible examples) while the recession indeed caused a large number of job losses, the govt. desire to then increase it's tax revenue via the luxury tax caused another loss of jobs. I'm not sure what you are trying to argue at this point.

on a re-read you did say 'companies', but it means very little as my point still stands. The fact remains you still blamed one thing that you've shown all of us to be a smaller part in the whole. and you still haven't answered where the extra ten thousand came from.

so unless you have more to back up your case than what you've given us, i'd have to say you're pulling this kind of stuff out of your ass again.

[Heretic]

As for the education bit, I would argue that the gap in education is worse in this nation between rich and everyone else than it was one hundred years ago.

So you admit about 100 years after it's creation the Department of ED when it was moved into the white house Education has been going down hill. Even faster now that you can't fire a teacher.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/2 ... 19336.html

[woodchip]

First off did I imply one industry let alone one boat company? What the salient point is (again taking the boat industry as one of many possible examples) while the recession indeed caused a large number of job losses, the govt. desire to then increase it's tax revenue via the luxury tax caused another loss of jobs. I'm not sure what you are trying to argue at this point.

on a re-read you did say 'companies', but it means very little as my point still stands. The fact remains you still blamed one thing that you've shown all of us to be a smaller part in the whole. and you still haven't answered where the extra ten thousand came from.

so unless you have more to back up your case than what you've given us, i'd have to say you're pulling this kind of stuff out of your ass again.

What "10,000" are you referring to?