Zuzu, actually those changes make sense to me. How can you categorize an Army Sargent drawing a paycheck for 30 years as not employed? That is just crazy.

Also, they made the correct decision on the "discouraged worker" thing. How can you be considered "unemployed" is you aren't looking for work? The Bureau of Labor Statistics says a discouraged worker is someone who has not been actively seeking employment. How can they be "unemployed" if the aren't even looking!! Anyway, if you want to see how many "discouraged workers" are out there, the BLS keeps track of that too, so its not like it is being hidden.

There are lots of areas of the world that have much, much higher natural background radiation than "nuclear power installations" (as mentioned in #3). The bugs have done just fine in those spots for millions of years.

What does George Bush have to do with it?

He shouldn't have used the "c" word, obviously, but the rest of the email is about as mild a "screed" as I've read on the 'net.

I here much worse daily in online discussions about the Red Sox.

That is one of the most truly horrible things I've ever seen.

Very cool.

Leroy Neimanesque...

SPINOBOBOT:

I don't know what comments you've been reading, but it seems everyone agrees that mortgage brokers and agents shouldn't game the system or the AUS. Further, I think everyone agrees that if bosses are encouraging such things then they too are wrong. However, what the thoughtful folks are saying (and the anti business folks don't ever notice) that there are certain systems where the incentives are for acting in certain ways are different. A mortgage broker might have alot of reasons to sell loans to crappy customers, whereas a bank who holds the loans would have just the opposite incentive. Further, there are some banks who don't hold the mortgages so there incentives might be closer to that of the mortgage broker.

The complexity of the system is what makes it interesting to comment on. Why does every comment on BB have to be "evil bank president"? ... boring.....

And this Cynthia Newton worked at CHASE!

Not gonna be a good week for her...

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/6/2a7/314

Check out this mortgage service:

Use the drop down menu and you'll find a Bradd Newton!!

http://www.cmgfs.com/broker/broker-request.html

BCXIZEMO:

The way the system is supposed to work is if you are at the "edge" you won't necessarily get a "no", you'll just have to pay a higher interest rate because the bank is taking on more risk.

The reason an AUS is vastly superior to a human is because you can program it to price the risk exactly how you wish it to. The problem is that individuals who enter the data may have reason to "game" the system because their financial interests (commissions) don't match up with the financial interests of the bank's trying to control risk.

That is why it is important for any AUS to have a method to determine if the system is being "gamed".

Excellent discussion here:

http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/2008/03/more-on-chase-and-zippy-tricks.html

The guy knows his stuff and asks a superb question of Chase:

If this AUS [automated underwriting system] really does allow multiple resubmissions with increasing stated income each time without setting off the red fraud flags, this is a very big deal for Chase. I'm here to suggest that Chase's regulators need to look into that. As I said, given the chance that the memo is a "joke," it's possible that the thing [Chase's AUS] handles re-runs better than it sounds like it does. But Chase should have to answer this question now that the memo is on the table.

That doesn't look like and official Chase memo to me. Looks like something informal that some employee sent around. Apparently she's been fired... GOOD.

If you are in the subway and something starts to smolder and smoke, get the hell out or find a fire exstinguisher.

It has nothing to do with "fear of terrorism" and everything to do with concern for fire and smoke in an enclosed place.

If something catches on fire in a subway, and am out of there (and leave the REALLY brave to make bold comments on the Internet).

aluxeterna, I have no problem calling out big business when it is applicable, but this lawsuit is actually the reverse. It is GMAC (a multi billion dollar corporation) that is suing a little guy mortgage broker.

The problem with the "big business is evil" in this mortgage mess is the fact that most of these crappy loans were done by independent mortgage brokers and mortgage brokers companies of very small size. Even large companies like Countrywide relied very heavily on "little guys" to write these mortgages.

This dirt bag of a mortgage broker is a "CEO" in name only...

Also...

Tin Men

but mostly, Glengarry Glen Ross

And people borrowed money from that guy?!!??

If he offered to lend me money I'd say "no thank you" and keep on walking.

The ability of people to throw common sense out the window when it comes to money is mind boggling.

The number of pure fallacies in this discussion is remarkable.

Take this one for instance, "People are losing their homes because the economy is in bad shape." That is not true. People are losing their homes because they took out a mortgage they could not afford and will never be able to afford. That is why foreclosures are up. Not because of a bad economy. If you don't know what they problem is, how can you possibly offer a solution.

As for the government helping the "fat cat bankers", tell that to the owners of Bear Stearns LL...

There is a huge difference between "bailing someone out" (which the government has specifically not done) and providing liquidity to the system. It is the liquidity that will allow mortgages to be rewritten and refinanced. ll f y b-hng about helping out small borrowers should be in favor of more liquidity. Bt thn gn, f y dn't vn knw th vry bscs f wht th prblm s, hw cld y pssbly dntfy pssbl sltn vn whn t s bng crrd bfr yr vry ys.

"The Bush regime encouraged the financial system to rip off people by not requiring adequate explanation"

Please show me where the disclosure requirements for home mortgages were less under Bush than under Clinton.

Second, mortgages don't need explanation and they are not complex. You borrow money and pay it off over thirty years. You can either have a fixed payment or a floating payment. That is all you really need to know.

To the buyers: get a mortgage you can afford.

To the lenders: make sure the borrower can afford it.

To the investment banks: accurately price the risk of mortgage back securities.

To all three groups: you made this bed, lie in it.

Great discussion... but not alot of light be shed on the issue.

- First, whoever said Bear Stearns is insulated from their actions, they lost 98% of their value and lost the company over the course of 12 months. That is not insulation, so your argument fails.

- Second, to the person who said that you can't rent in the Inland Empire with a low FICO score...LOL.. people are begging for renters in that area right now. If you thought you could afford a house, you can definitely afford to pay rent.

- Third, no matter what government program is installed, people who don't pay their mortgage will have to leave one way or the other. Why should I pay for someone else's mortgage? We have government programs to assist people to buy homes that entail having to learn how to actually buy a house wisely. I suggest folks use them.

Oh brother, here we go... anti-Bush conspiracy theories rehashed. Boring...

Anyway... These software programs (according to NPR) are also designed to track the money movement of PEPs (politically exposed persons) as an added layer of security.

The film questions whether hoarding is a symptom of mental illness or a revolt against the material recklessness of consumerism.

Yeah, it's a revolt against the material recklessness of consumerism... that's the ticket!

Is it really a fingerprint or just a scan like Disney does? At Disney, the scans of the print creates numerical information about certain points on the print and the image itself is not stored.

I smell HOAX...

I heard this on the local radio in Boston.

What is most annoying is that the story there and here don't say how many seats were saved and how many seats there were in the auditorium. If Comcast saved 25 out of 100 seats, that would be bad.

If they saved 8 of 200, it is a complete non-story.

I don't have "a fervent dislike of people who have ideological goals". I have QUESTIONS for people who have ideological goals. I admire these folks. I am simply wondering why they have chosen the "business" strategy they have and what will happen should their do-gooder instinct come into conflict with the way most commercial enterprises must be run in order to succeed.

On the contrary, my post was not trolling. I guess that "troll" is a label that some here use when they disagree with someone.

The project's own OSE proposal specifically states that they are supporters of the Global Villages philosophy of Nahrada (not to be confused with Hillary Clinton's philosophy). They themselves indicate that their project's philosophy is the "opposite" of the global supply chain upon which globalization depends. I have no problem with either concept, but to ignore these philosophical underpinnings of the project is unwise.

Further, their concept of neo-commercialism is not the same as commercialism.

But none of this goes to my primary point which is the balance between this project's desire to help people while at the same time attempting to live up to a new philosophical paradigm.

Should these two laudable goals come in to conflict, which gives?

The whole anti-commercialization feel of it leaves me wondering what the true purpose of the effort is.

Is it to truly help people or is it to make anti-globalization first-worlders feel good about themselves?

If the project can help people, all the more reason to add the profit incentive and get it out to even MORE people in need.

Michael Powell had nothing to do with it.

Some of you continue to mention the US Constitution as though it applies to unlawful combatants captured on a foreign field of battle, it clearly does not. I know of no accepted legal theory in US history in which captured enemy combatants are afforded Constitutional protection. Some of you may think it SHOULD afford such protection, but then your argument is with Madison, Hamilton, Jay and Morris.

Like I said before, yeah, it would suck to be at Gitmo, but as for what someone said before about the "hazy legal standing" of Gitmo. I think there are lots of poor folk in US prisons who are - in practice - suffereing from similar hazy legal standings (especially the innocent ones). I'll save my tears for them.

And Rich, if you think that Gitmo is going to "destroy our Constitution" then you don't know much about either Gitmo, the legal status of the detainees, nor the 200 year history of the Constitution.

The Constitution will be just fine ....

JR --

You can call them anything you want. I call them prisoners of war because they are "prisoners" of a "war". Wars are seldom declared anymore, so lets spare each that go around. If I were to label them precisely, I'd probably call them unlawful enemy combatants, but not entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention as they clearly don't meet the requirements as per the Conventions own definitions.

JR and DC --

As for repatriation, I don't understand what you mean. Already, MORE than half of detainees have already been released. So to say they will be there indefinitely is factually inaccurate.

But this is all beside the point. My primary point is that the reputation of Gitmo as a hell hole is a myth. As a place to be detained, it is better than most prisons in the US. It would still suck to be there, but I'd rather be there than in San Quentin. I think that is why some of the staff at Gitmo take exception to the myth, when most thinking folks understand that there local prison is significantly worse (but Boing Boing doesn't care about that...)

I support the staff at Gitmo. Keep these prisoners of war locked up. Once hostilities cease, repatriate them. No big deal.

I'd rather serve time at Gitmo than at one of the insane maximum security prisons in the US. There really is no comparison. Gitmo is fastly superior.

Also, the movie looks funny as hell.

At this point, the story is meaningless in so far as it lacks any context. The story says they were "detained"... but for how long? 20 minutes? If so, the baby would have died waiting for the luggage instead of in a waiting room. Detained as in four days without medical care? THAT, would be meaningful and of great worry. But who knows? The story doesn't say.

At this point, there is way too little to go on (unless you have another agenda, if so, then flame away).

Some of you folks are jerks.

A problem was raised, they solved it. Get over yourselves.

You folks are bashing a guy because of his taste in art ... do you ever wonder if you suffer from mental illness? Really, I wonder.

The painting was once used to illustrate a story "A Charge to Keep". He likes it. So what?

I think some of you are truly nuts.

Those who think that broken city bureaucracies are the domain only of the US are fools or liars. Stay where you are, we don't need your kind of foolishness here.

This was about 8 weeks ago. So far they have not caught up. I was in a sports torrent group and they were very strict about maintaining a 1 to 1 ratio. All of sudden I couldn't seed once I had downloaded the entire file. The moderators of the site pointed me to uTorrent and told me how to configure it and it worked like a charm. I hope it lasts...

I used to use ABC as my torrent client and Comcast could block my seeding. But I switched to uTorrent and adjusted my preferences and options to allow me to seed unobstructed by Comcast's deviousness...

Higher food prices will lead to less obesity.

Cutting health care costs.

Lowering taxes.

Increasing economic production.

Spurring technological changes to reduce carbon emissions.

It's all good.

Never thought I'd see the homeopathy supporters here on BB.

Aren't there wizard and troll message boards that need their "scientific" input?

I'm still waiting for the homeopathy pushers to show us the double blind, unbiased studies to prove ANYTHING they claim....

How about one for Gimp???

I'll be flying at the end of January. The TSA is welcome to give me a secondary screen. It doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Good luck to the TSA and I, for one, appreciate what they do.

LOL... what a joke of a map!

Oh, if only I lived in Egypt or Libya, where I could be free! FREE I TELL YOU!!

Lol.

I like her. What a hot ticket.

I wish all those in prison where as productive.

The wrestling WWF changed its name to WWE because of a lawsuit from the World Wildlife Fund.

NOTE TO BOING BOING:

News media is reporting that the picture you are showing is of the OUTSIDE of the sweatshirt not the inside of the sweatshirt as you say in your "UPDATE: 3".

It looks to me that you can see pockets on the sweatshirt, so that makes it likely to be the outside...

Review of Darwin's Origin of Species. 1860. NY Times reviewer "remains unconvinced" but recognizes that the book builds a mighty "foundation" to change philosophic thought.

The first mention of the Adolph Hitler. 1922. Rumor of Henry Ford Financing Bavarian Anti-Semite