Use access key #2 to skip to page content.




February 06, 2008 – Comments (5)

Well, at least its NIMBY.

5 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On February 06, 2008 at 8:56 PM, AnomaLee (28.87) wrote:

My invesments thoughts are: This could be a great infrastructure play.

It could become an alternative low-cost bridge to Asia...

Report this comment
#2) On February 06, 2008 at 9:00 PM, abitare (29.51) wrote:

Sounds like a new place to scuba dive, there has to be lots of dead  and sick marine life to look at?

Report this comment
#3) On February 06, 2008 at 9:30 PM, dwot (28.81) wrote:

Amazing, this was found in 1997 and that's the first time I've heard of that.  I believe that it often takes about 20 years from when something is discovered until the masses catch on...


Report this comment
#4) On February 07, 2008 at 8:59 AM, devoish (65.42) wrote:


I have no idea how to relate this one to investing. But after watching this A Daily Show skit of our TV news outlets spending all day on what might happen, to culminate in ten minutes of what did happen and return immediately to what might happen, a pattern which will continue for 75 more days because it is cheaper than actually investigating news, I thought I could take a few minutes of your time to report something has happened. No, wait, I got it. Invest long term in cancer drugs as the carcinogens in the plastics get released into the environment and find their way into our food. No better still, the health insurers that collect payments when you are healthy but cut you off when you start missing them because you are to sick to work.


Perhaps a discussion from Ron Paul on whether or not he feels this sort of thing needs to be cleaned up, and if so should it be paid for by a general tax on everyone, or a tax directly on manufacturers so we know what it actually costs us to pollute. Also will RP appoint someone to head the EPA who comes from Dow chemical or the Sierra club?

And I know that sounds snotty so I would also like to add that I absolutely admire your dedication to your candidate, and your and RP's focus on RP's attributes rather than passing along misleading half truths designed only to make his opponents look worse than they are. If I was a registered Republican (and did not kill myself because of what my party is) I would have vote for RP in the primarys.


I am already unhappy enough with the work of the Dept. of Unregulated Markets (DUM) that I am already very worried about what the next 20 years will bring us, and I am pretty sure that a depression, if we get one, will be the least of our problems.

Thank you for listening, we now return you to your previously scheduled programming.


Report this comment
#5) On February 07, 2008 at 10:20 PM, abitare (29.51) wrote:


Do not confuse Dr Paul with these other crooks.

Where is the love? 



Common sense is a dish best served OFTEN, so I'm glad to see RP poking his head up here and there to remind us that Washington is only 99.9% asshats.

Why Dr Ron Paul?

He has never voted to raise taxes.He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.He has never voted to raise congressional pay.He has never taken a government-paid junket.He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.He voted against the Patriot Act.He voted against regulating the Internet.He voted against the Iraq war.He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.


Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners