Re: I have come to realize...
In the summer of 2003, leaders of the four federal agencies that oversee the banking industry gathered to highlight the Bush administration's commitment to reducing regulation. They posed for photographers behind a stack of papers wrapped in red tape. The others held garden shears. Gilleran, who succeeded Seidman as OTS director in late 2001, hefted a chain saw.
Gilleran was an impassioned advocate of deregulation. He cut a quarter of the agency's 1,200 employees between 2001 and 2004, even though the value of loans and other assets of the firms regulated by OTS increased by half over the same period. The result was a mismatch between a short-handed agency and a burgeoning thrift industry.
Banking Regulator Played Advocate Over Enforcer - washingtonpost.com
The whole of this article is good, full of facts and evidence. It only covers one small part of the overall scrapping of regulation and oversight of the financial industry that Bush was responsible for too.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3279/...10526fd1_o.png
Re: I have come to realize...
Say what you will Captain Happy but out of the Democrats' own mouths come the words that I can use against them. Fannie and Freddie ARE corrupt organizations and the reason why stems from the coupling of BUSINESS and GOVERNMENT...GSE's are WRONG!
Once again I don't say the Republicans are not at fault, I just say the Democrats need to admit that the Republicans aren't alone. I also say that the Democrats have fucked us over in continuously bailing out the Wall Street brats who sold EVERYBODY out!!!!
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Say what you will Captain Happy but out of the Democrats' own mouths come the words that I can use against them. Fannie and Freddie ARE corrupt organizations and the reason why stems from the coupling of BUSINESS and GOVERNMENT...GSE's are WRONG!
Once again I don't say the Republicans are not at fault, I just say the Democrats need to admit that the Republicans aren't alone. I also say that the Democrats have fucked us over in continuously bailing out the Wall Street brats who sold EVERYBODY out!!!!
F and F are far less corrupt than the rest of the system. Now that the US government is currently bailing out every major US bank not only F and F but the entire US banking system are now Government Sponsored Enterprises. So is GEC, the car industry, half the insurance industry, state governments, etc. They're all socialist now baby. And again, if F and F had never existed the exact same thing would have happened. They're just two more privately-owned financial companies that are now on government welfare.
Republicans are alone. Exactly who has bailed everybody out so far Lyle?
Here's a new newspaper report today. I'm guessing this won't get much TV coverage :
The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown, according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents.
“Expect fallout, expect foreclosures, expect horror stories,” California mortgage lender Paris Welch wrote to U.S. regulators in January 2006, about one year before the housing implosion cost her a job.
Bowing to aggressive lobbying — along with assurances from banks that the troubled mortgages were OK — regulators delayed action for nearly one year. By the time new rules were released late in 2006, the toughest of the proposed provisions were gone and the meltdown was under way.
“These mortgages have been considered more safe and sound for portfolio lenders than many fixed rate mortgages,” David Schneider, home loan president of Washington Mutual, told federal regulators in early 2006. Two years later, WaMu became the largest bank failure in U.S. history.
Bank regulators had proposed new guidelines for writing risky loans in 2005, but were rebuffed by the White House. The proposed regulations might have avoided the worst fo the housing and credit crisis, had they been enacted.
What was so especially damning was these proposals were all stripped from the final Administrative rules by the Bush White House. None required congressional approval or even the president’s signature:
• Before banks could purchase mortgages from brokers, they should verify the process to ensure buyers could afford their homes.
• Regulators told bankers exotic mortgages were often inappropriate for buyers with bad credit.
• Banks would have been required to increase efforts to verify that buyers actually had jobs and could afford houses.
• Regulators proposed a cap on risky mortgages so a string of defaults wouldn’t be crippling.
• Banks that bundled and sold mortgages were told to be sure investors knew exactly what they were buying.
• Regulators urged banks to help buyers make responsible decisions and clearly advise them that interest rates might skyrocket and huge payments might be due sooner than expected.
The banks that lobbied most aggressively against the rules reads like a who’s who of bankruptcy and FDIC conservatorship: IndyMac, Countrywide Financial, Washington Mutual, Lehman Brothers, and Downey Savings.
The Associated Press: AP IMPACT: US diluted loan rules before crash
Re: I have come to realize...
• Marshall Plan: Cost: $12.7 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $115.3 billion
• Louisiana Purchase: Cost: $15 million, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $217 billion
• Race to the Moon: Cost: $36.4 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $237 billion
• S&L Crisis: Cost: $153 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $256 billion
• Korean War: Cost: $54 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $454 billion
• The New Deal: Cost: $32 billion (Est), Inflation Adjusted Cost: $500 billion (Est)
• Invasion of Iraq: Cost: $551b, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $597 billion
• Vietnam War: Cost: $111 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $698 billion
• NASA: Cost: $416.7 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $851.2 billion
TOTAL: $3.92 trillion
World War II: Original Cost: $288 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $3.6 trillion
Total cost : $7.52 trillion.
Nov. 24 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. government is prepared to provide more than $7.76 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers after guaranteeing $306 billion of Citigroup Inc. debt yesterday. The pledges, amounting to half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, are intended to rescue the financial system after the credit markets seized up 15 months ago.
The unprecedented pledge of funds includes $3.18 trillion already tapped by financial institutions in the biggest response to an economic emergency since the New Deal of the 1930s, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The commitment dwarfs the plan approved by lawmakers, the Treasury Department’s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. Federal Reserve lending last week was 1,900 times the weekly average for the three years before the crisis.
When Congress approved the TARP on Oct. 3, Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson acknowledged the need for transparency and oversight. Now, as regulators commit far more money while refusing to disclose loan recipients or reveal the collateral they are taking in return, some Congress members are calling for the Fed to be reined in.
Bloomberg.com: Exclusive
Re: I have come to realize...
So congress is now calling for the Fed to be reined in but did they or did they not vote to bail out companies only AFTER putting in a little pork just to win some more votes over.
Oh it's mighty scary how much power the Fed Chairman wields now. But to not give any blame to the people that voted for these big bail outs is wrong.
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
I dislike the entire idea of "reality tv" they are hybrid of 3 things which aren't that great to begin with #1 Reality, tv was invented to get us away from reality without the use of drugs/alcohol...reality tv should really be the NEWS (in the best case) #2 Game Shows...I suppose with the exception that you need talent to win on some game shows #3 Gossip and inane blabber about worthless people ie Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, etc.
All I am saying is if this is what they plan on feeding the masses then bring back the lions! Is nobody with me???
I'll admit I like SOME reality TV, but it really depends on how it is produced. I don't like anything on MTV they pass off as reality. Primarily because it's not geared to my age group. But also because it in no way shape or form resembles reality. Cops is reality (except for when the cop decides to get extra flexy when he brings down a baddy), Taxicab Confessions is reality, Intervention is hella reality. The only show I can really think of that is more like MTV is Scream Queens and it's for a very specific reason: it's more of a gameshow than reality. They are competing for a definite, real prize; a starring role in a hit movie franchise (Saw series). It's not trying to improve a group of crazy women (Charm School) or picking off fatties one by one (The Biggest Loser). Sure 'Loser' has a prize at the end, but the purpose of the show is to help these people lose weight. Why are they being eliminated then? Shouldn't they all stay on the show and the person who loses the most at the end win? If the 'Charm' girls need this help, why boot them? Because it's about something other than this alleged improvement they state. At least with 'Queens' we have a defined task and only one can win. It makes sense that they be elminated one by one. Who the hell cares who wants to be Paris Hilton's next best friend who she'll be dumping on sometime in the coming year? And the dating shows are the worst. My parents hate my girlfriend so much they set me up to go on a date with two other girls. No, in REALITY, my parents wouldn't allow my girlfriend in the house if she were an uber-bitch. And don't stick my whiny ass in a house with a bunch of whiny 20 somethings. I used to love 'Real World', hell, I wanted to be on the show, but now I would be terminally bored.
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
I dislike the entire idea of "reality tv" they are hybrid of 3 things which aren't that great to begin with #1 Reality, tv was invented to get us away from reality without the use of drugs/alcohol...reality tv should really be the NEWS (in the best case) #2 Game Shows...I suppose with the exception that you need talent to win on some game shows #3 Gossip and inane blabber about worthless people ie Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, etc.
All I am saying is if this is what they plan on feeding the masses then bring back the lions! Is nobody with me???
I'll admit I like SOME reality TV, but it really depends on how it is produced. I don't like anything on MTV they pass off as reality. Primarily because it's not geared to my age group. But also because it in no way shape or form resembles reality. Cops is reality (except for when the cop decides to get extra flexy when he brings down a baddy), Taxicab Confessions is reality, Intervention is hella reality. The only show I can really think of that is more like MTV is Scream Queens and it's for a very specific reason: it's more of a gameshow than reality. They are competing for a definite, real prize; a starring role in a hit movie franchise (Saw series). It's not trying to improve a group of crazy women (Charm School) or picking off fatties one by one (The Biggest Loser). Sure 'Loser' has a prize at the end, but the purpose of the show is to help these people lose weight. Why are they being eliminated then? Shouldn't they all stay on the show and the person who loses the most at the end win? If the 'Charm' girls need this help, why boot them? Because it's about something other than this alleged improvement they state. At least with 'Queens' we have a defined task and only one can win. It makes sense that they be elminated one by one. Who the hell cares who wants to be Paris Hilton's next best friend who she'll be dumping on sometime in the coming year? And the dating shows are the worst. My parents hate my girlfriend so much they set me up to go on a date with two other girls. No, in REALITY, my parents wouldn't allow my girlfriend in the house if she were an uber-bitch. And don't stick my whiny ass in a house with a bunch of whiny 20 somethings. I used to love 'Real World', hell, I wanted to be on the show, but now I would be terminally bored.
As close as I get to reality TV, is Survivor Man, I used to watch Man Vs Wild, until it came out the whole thing was more or less canned,ruined it for me.
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
I dislike the entire idea of "reality tv" they are hybrid of 3 things which aren't that great to begin with #1 Reality, tv was invented to get us away from reality without the use of drugs/alcohol...reality tv should really be the NEWS (in the best case) #2 Game Shows...I suppose with the exception that you need talent to win on some game shows #3 Gossip and inane blabber about worthless people ie Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, etc.
All I am saying is if this is what they plan on feeding the masses then bring back the lions! Is nobody with me???
I'll admit I like SOME reality TV, but it really depends on how it is produced. I don't like anything on MTV they pass off as reality. Primarily because it's not geared to my age group. But also because it in no way shape or form resembles reality. Cops is reality (except for when the cop decides to get extra flexy when he brings down a baddy), Taxicab Confessions is reality, Intervention is hella reality. The only show I can really think of that is more like MTV is Scream Queens and it's for a very specific reason: it's more of a gameshow than reality. They are competing for a definite, real prize; a starring role in a hit movie franchise (Saw series). It's not trying to improve a group of crazy women (Charm School) or picking off fatties one by one (The Biggest Loser). Sure 'Loser' has a prize at the end, but the purpose of the show is to help these people lose weight. Why are they being eliminated then? Shouldn't they all stay on the show and the person who loses the most at the end win? If the 'Charm' girls need this help, why boot them? Because it's about something other than this alleged improvement they state. At least with 'Queens' we have a defined task and only one can win. It makes sense that they be elminated one by one. Who the hell cares who wants to be Paris Hilton's next best friend who she'll be dumping on sometime in the coming year? And the dating shows are the worst. My parents hate my girlfriend so much they set me up to go on a date with two other girls. No, in REALITY, my parents wouldn't allow my girlfriend in the house if she were an uber-bitch. And don't stick my whiny ass in a house with a bunch of whiny 20 somethings. I used to love 'Real World', hell, I wanted to be on the show, but now I would be terminally bored.
As close as I get to reality TV, is Survivor Man, I used to watch Man Vs Wild, until it came out the whole thing was more or less canned,ruined it for me.
The only reality TV I watch is the news. Those other reality shows I stay away from. I find nothing more tedious than watching stupid people with nothing to say. And putting them in bizarre locations is just futile too.
I would love it if we could put all of these people into a situation where their life depended on a single question though. And the minute they get the question wrong, their brains are blown out live or even prerecorded on television. Now that would be reality TV I might tune into. ;)
Its all bollocks.
They have this show here that my wife watches and its basically famous people sharing a house and the cameras observe them eating yoghurt. I refuse to watch it and typically resort to posting on the internet!
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
I'll admit I like SOME reality TV, but it really depends on how it is produced. I don't like anything on MTV they pass off as reality. Primarily because it's not geared to my age group. But also because it in no way shape or form resembles reality. Cops is reality (except for when the cop decides to get extra flexy when he brings down a baddy), Taxicab Confessions is reality, Intervention is hella reality. The only show I can really think of that is more like MTV is Scream Queens and it's for a very specific reason: it's more of a gameshow than reality. They are competing for a definite, real prize; a starring role in a hit movie franchise (Saw series). It's not trying to improve a group of crazy women (Charm School) or picking off fatties one by one (The Biggest Loser). Sure 'Loser' has a prize at the end, but the purpose of the show is to help these people lose weight. Why are they being eliminated then? Shouldn't they all stay on the show and the person who loses the most at the end win? If the 'Charm' girls need this help, why boot them? Because it's about something other than this alleged improvement they state. At least with 'Queens' we have a defined task and only one can win. It makes sense that they be elminated one by one. Who the hell cares who wants to be Paris Hilton's next best friend who she'll be dumping on sometime in the coming year? And the dating shows are the worst. My parents hate my girlfriend so much they set me up to go on a date with two other girls. No, in REALITY, my parents wouldn't allow my girlfriend in the house if she were an uber-bitch. And don't stick my whiny ass in a house with a bunch of whiny 20 somethings. I used to love 'Real World', hell, I wanted to be on the show, but now I would be terminally bored.
As close as I get to reality TV, is Survivor Man, I used to watch Man Vs Wild, until it came out the whole thing was more or less canned,ruined it for me.
The only reality TV I watch is the news. Those other reality shows I stay away from. I find nothing more tedious than watching stupid people with nothing to say. And putting them in bizarre locations is just futile too.
I would love it if we could put all of these people into a situation where their life depended on a single question though. And the minute they get the question wrong, their brains are blown out live or even prerecorded on television. Now that would be reality TV I might tune into. ;)
Its all bollocks.
They have this show here that my wife watches and its basically famous people sharing a house and the cameras observe them eating yoghurt. I refuse to watch it and typically resort to posting on the internet!
I think that was the show Johnny Rotten got kicked off of,for,well,being Johnny Rotten.
Id LOVE to see those episodes
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
I dislike the entire idea of "reality tv" they are hybrid of 3 things which aren't that great to begin with #1 Reality, tv was invented to get us away from reality without the use of drugs/alcohol...reality tv should really be the NEWS (in the best case) #2 Game Shows...I suppose with the exception that you need talent to win on some game shows #3 Gossip and inane blabber about worthless people ie Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, etc.
All I am saying is if this is what they plan on feeding the masses then bring back the lions! Is nobody with me???
I'll admit I like SOME reality TV, but it really depends on how it is produced. I don't like anything on MTV they pass off as reality. Primarily because it's not geared to my age group. But also because it in no way shape or form resembles reality. Cops is reality (except for when the cop decides to get extra flexy when he brings down a baddy), Taxicab Confessions is reality, Intervention is hella reality. The only show I can really think of that is more like MTV is Scream Queens and it's for a very specific reason: it's more of a gameshow than reality. They are competing for a definite, real prize; a starring role in a hit movie franchise (Saw series). It's not trying to improve a group of crazy women (Charm School) or picking off fatties one by one (The Biggest Loser). Sure 'Loser' has a prize at the end, but the purpose of the show is to help these people lose weight. Why are they being eliminated then? Shouldn't they all stay on the show and the person who loses the most at the end win? If the 'Charm' girls need this help, why boot them? Because it's about something other than this alleged improvement they state. At least with 'Queens' we have a defined task and only one can win. It makes sense that they be elminated one by one. Who the hell cares who wants to be Paris Hilton's next best friend who she'll be dumping on sometime in the coming year? And the dating shows are the worst. My parents hate my girlfriend so much they set me up to go on a date with two other girls. No, in REALITY, my parents wouldn't allow my girlfriend in the house if she were an uber-bitch. And don't stick my whiny ass in a house with a bunch of whiny 20 somethings. I used to love 'Real World', hell, I wanted to be on the show, but now I would be terminally bored.
As close as I get to reality TV, is Survivor Man, I used to watch Man Vs Wild, until it came out the whole thing was more or less canned,ruined it for me.
I prefer Survivor Man too. And not only because Bear Grills goes to a hotel every night. Survivor Man is out there all by himself; he's his own camera crew and if he gets in over his head he calls for them to come scoop him up. I'm telling you, Intervention is one of the most compelling reality shows you can find. A lot of them are whiny, but they're almost all stories that will draw you right in. These are people who are completely self-centered, who accept no personal responsibility for the situation they are in. But the impact on their families is where you have the meat of the situation.
Like for instance this one where this guy was an alcoholic. He'd been an avid body builder for years and even owned his own gym. But then one of the drugs he used was illegalized and the guy went on a downward spiral. He had a shitty upbringing, of course, and had had to drop out of school to take care of his entire family because his father left and his mother was pretty much useless. He never had a childhood and the guy wound up dying not long after getting booted out of the rehab clinic. The damage had been done; he had bruises all over his body from where the alcohol was wailing on him. Pretty much taking him off vodkie then was pointless.
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
As close as I get to reality TV, is Survivor Man, I used to watch Man Vs Wild, until it came out the whole thing was more or less canned,ruined it for me.
The only reality TV I watch is the news. Those other reality shows I stay away from. I find nothing more tedious than watching stupid people with nothing to say. And putting them in bizarre locations is just futile too.
I would love it if we could put all of these people into a situation where their life depended on a single question though. And the minute they get the question wrong, their brains are blown out live or even prerecorded on television. Now that would be reality TV I might tune into. ;)
Its all bollocks.
They have this show here that my wife watches and its basically famous people sharing a house and the cameras observe them eating yoghurt. I refuse to watch it and typically resort to posting on the internet!
I think that was the show Johnny Rotten got kicked off of,for,well,being Johnny Rotten.
Id LOVE to see those episodes
What show was he on? Im sure I heard about him being on some show or other.
I was referring to this silly show with a bunch of Korean "pop" stars with mullets sitting on a sofa sharing yoghurt and talking about makeup tips. Horrible stuff and enough to make a man want to put a foot into the TV.
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
The only reality TV I watch is the news. Those other reality shows I stay away from. I find nothing more tedious than watching stupid people with nothing to say. And putting them in bizarre locations is just futile too.
I would love it if we could put all of these people into a situation where their life depended on a single question though. And the minute they get the question wrong, their brains are blown out live or even prerecorded on television. Now that would be reality TV I might tune into. ;)
Its all bollocks.
They have this show here that my wife watches and its basically famous people sharing a house and the cameras observe them eating yoghurt. I refuse to watch it and typically resort to posting on the internet!
I think that was the show Johnny Rotten got kicked off of,for,well,being Johnny Rotten.
Id LOVE to see those episodes
What show was he on? Im sure I heard about him being on some show or other.
I was referring to this silly show with a bunch of Korean "pop" stars with mullets sitting on a sofa sharing yoghurt and talking about makeup tips. Horrible stuff and enough to make a man want to put a foot into the TV.
Had to look it up,but he was on "Im A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here"
I would kill to see those episodes. I know he got kicked off,for well, being Johnny Rotten.
I think that was his entire goal in the first place,he does stuff like that all the time.
Thats the whole reason he does the Pistols reunions,to ruin the aura of the Pistols for kids who got a Pistols t-shirt at Hot Topic.
The guy lives to be a smart arse
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
I'll admit I like SOME reality TV, but it really depends on how it is produced. I don't like anything on MTV they pass off as reality. Primarily because it's not geared to my age group. But also because it in no way shape or form resembles reality. Cops is reality (except for when the cop decides to get extra flexy when he brings down a baddy), Taxicab Confessions is reality, Intervention is hella reality. The only show I can really think of that is more like MTV is Scream Queens and it's for a very specific reason: it's more of a gameshow than reality. They are competing for a definite, real prize; a starring role in a hit movie franchise (Saw series). It's not trying to improve a group of crazy women (Charm School) or picking off fatties one by one (The Biggest Loser). Sure 'Loser' has a prize at the end, but the purpose of the show is to help these people lose weight. Why are they being eliminated then? Shouldn't they all stay on the show and the person who loses the most at the end win? If the 'Charm' girls need this help, why boot them? Because it's about something other than this alleged improvement they state. At least with 'Queens' we have a defined task and only one can win. It makes sense that they be elminated one by one. Who the hell cares who wants to be Paris Hilton's next best friend who she'll be dumping on sometime in the coming year? And the dating shows are the worst. My parents hate my girlfriend so much they set me up to go on a date with two other girls. No, in REALITY, my parents wouldn't allow my girlfriend in the house if she were an uber-bitch. And don't stick my whiny ass in a house with a bunch of whiny 20 somethings. I used to love 'Real World', hell, I wanted to be on the show, but now I would be terminally bored.
As close as I get to reality TV, is Survivor Man, I used to watch Man Vs Wild, until it came out the whole thing was more or less canned,ruined it for me.
I prefer Survivor Man too. And not only because Bear Grills goes to a hotel every night. Survivor Man is out there all by himself; he's his own camera crew and if he gets in over his head he calls for them to come scoop him up. I'm telling you, Intervention is one of the most compelling reality shows you can find. A lot of them are whiny, but they're almost all stories that will draw you right in. These are people who are completely self-centered, who accept no personal responsibility for the situation they are in. But the impact on their families is where you have the meat of the situation.
Like for instance this one where this guy was an alcoholic. He'd been an avid body builder for years and even owned his own gym. But then one of the drugs he used was illegalized and the guy went on a downward spiral. He had a shitty upbringing, of course, and had had to drop out of school to take care of his entire family because his father left and his mother was pretty much useless. He never had a childhood and the guy wound up dying not long after getting booted out of the rehab clinic. The damage had been done; he had bruises all over his body from where the alcohol was wailing on him. Pretty much taking him off vodkie then was pointless.
I swear drug companies should do more research before they release stuff to the general public.
I used to use the hell out of Andro,and got good results from it.
Now its classified as a steroid
It wasnt when I was taking it.
Not only did it screw with my hairline(which is back to normal,thanks for asking) but every athletic achievement I had during that period is now suspect to me.
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
As close as I get to reality TV, is Survivor Man, I used to watch Man Vs Wild, until it came out the whole thing was more or less canned,ruined it for me.
I prefer Survivor Man too. And not only because Bear Grills goes to a hotel every night. Survivor Man is out there all by himself; he's his own camera crew and if he gets in over his head he calls for them to come scoop him up. I'm telling you, Intervention is one of the most compelling reality shows you can find. A lot of them are whiny, but they're almost all stories that will draw you right in. These are people who are completely self-centered, who accept no personal responsibility for the situation they are in. But the impact on their families is where you have the meat of the situation.
Like for instance this one where this guy was an alcoholic. He'd been an avid body builder for years and even owned his own gym. But then one of the drugs he used was illegalized and the guy went on a downward spiral. He had a shitty upbringing, of course, and had had to drop out of school to take care of his entire family because his father left and his mother was pretty much useless. He never had a childhood and the guy wound up dying not long after getting booted out of the rehab clinic. The damage had been done; he had bruises all over his body from where the alcohol was wailing on him. Pretty much taking him off vodkie then was pointless.
I swear drug companies should do more research before they release stuff to the general public.
I used to use the hell out of Andro,and got good results from it.
Now its classified as a steroid
It wasnt when I was taking it.
Not only did it screw with my hairline(which is back to normal,thanks for asking) but every athletic achievement I had during that period is now suspect to me.
I understand what you mean, but you do realize that statement is completely laughable. It's the blindfolded leading the blind. They've learned from the cigarette companies well and know how not to know negative effects of their products. I was reading a fiction novel (I lost it somewhere) and one of the characters was researching a drug and the companies immediately began trying to buy the guy off. I know that's not real, but considering drug companies are making money hand over fist I can see this easily happening. Did you know it is illegal in Canada for drug companies to advertise? Why is it legal here? Well, if you think you have the symptoms described you go to your doctor and say, "I want a prescription for this!" And you may well have restless leg syndrome, but you may not and your doctor has one of two choices: give you a couple sampler boxes of the drug he got from the drug rep or tell you know and risk losing you as a patient as you shop for a doctor who will give you a sampler box. I think I may have ADD and I wanted to be tested. I wasn't looking for the drug, I only wanted a test to confirm one way or the other. My doctor at the time wrote me an Rx for a small box after asking me a few questions. Then she left it up to me to decide if I felt an improvement. Drug companies are able to create a market for their wares, rather than creating a drug to combat people's ailments. That's why they can pay multi-million dollar fines when they recommend their drugs to be used for unapproved uses with no problem. That's another thing that's begun. Say Viagra (I'm not suggesting it's true, just an example) has been alleged to clear up acne. It hasn't been submitted to the FDA for this purpose, which would probably take years to test and approve (unlike the current use for Viagra which was pushed through in a matter of months) but based on the strength of whomever's testimony they begin pushing docs to prescribe Viagra for acne. The fed steps in, fines Pfizer $7 mil, but that's not really a hindrance because profits specifically for scripts for Viagra in the cases of patients with acne tower over the meager fine. I can't site numbers as I heard the story some months ago, but this is essentially the gist of it.
Re: I have come to realize...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Killface
I prefer Survivor Man too. And not only because Bear Grills goes to a hotel every night. Survivor Man is out there all by himself; he's his own camera crew and if he gets in over his head he calls for them to come scoop him up. I'm telling you, Intervention is one of the most compelling reality shows you can find. A lot of them are whiny, but they're almost all stories that will draw you right in. These are people who are completely self-centered, who accept no personal responsibility for the situation they are in. But the impact on their families is where you have the meat of the situation.
Like for instance this one where this guy was an alcoholic. He'd been an avid body builder for years and even owned his own gym. But then one of the drugs he used was illegalized and the guy went on a downward spiral. He had a shitty upbringing, of course, and had had to drop out of school to take care of his entire family because his father left and his mother was pretty much useless. He never had a childhood and the guy wound up dying not long after getting booted out of the rehab clinic. The damage had been done; he had bruises all over his body from where the alcohol was wailing on him. Pretty much taking him off vodkie then was pointless.
I swear drug companies should do more research before they release stuff to the general public.
I used to use the hell out of Andro,and got good results from it.
Now its classified as a steroid
It wasnt when I was taking it.
Not only did it screw with my hairline(which is back to normal,thanks for asking) but every athletic achievement I had during that period is now suspect to me.
I understand what you mean, but you do realize that statement is completely laughable. It's the blindfolded leading the blind. They've learned from the cigarette companies well and know how not to know negative effects of their products. I was reading a fiction novel (I lost it somewhere) and one of the characters was researching a drug and the companies immediately began trying to buy the guy off. I know that's not real, but considering drug companies are making money hand over fist I can see this easily happening. Did you know it is illegal in Canada for drug companies to advertise? Why is it legal here? Well, if you think you have the symptoms described you go to your doctor and say, "I want a prescription for this!" And you may well have restless leg syndrome, but you may not and your doctor has one of two choices: give you a couple sampler boxes of the drug he got from the drug rep or tell you know and risk losing you as a patient as you shop for a doctor who will give you a sampler box. I think I may have ADD and I wanted to be tested. I wasn't looking for the drug, I only wanted a test to confirm one way or the other. My doctor at the time wrote me an Rx for a small box after asking me a few questions. Then she left it up to me to decide if I felt an improvement. Drug companies are able to create a market for their wares, rather than creating a drug to combat people's ailments. That's why they can pay multi-million dollar fines when they recommend their drugs to be used for unapproved uses with no problem. That's another thing that's begun. Say Viagra (I'm not suggesting it's true, just an example) has been alleged to clear up acne. It hasn't been submitted to the FDA for this purpose, which would probably take years to test and approve (unlike the current use for Viagra which was pushed through in a matter of months) but based on the strength of whomever's testimony they begin pushing docs to prescribe Viagra for acne. The fed steps in, fines Pfizer $7 mil, but that's not really a hindrance because profits specifically for scripts for Viagra in the cases of patients with acne tower over the meager fine. I can't site numbers as I heard the story some months ago, but this is essentially the gist of it.
Well now we're getting in to the realm of,how things are, and how things should be
But how things should be,if I pick up a totally legal supplement at my local GNC.
It should be just that, a totally legal supplement.
It shouldnt turn out 4 years later to be a steroid
