Newsgroup: italia.genova.discussioni
Titolo: Ma che schifo, scfifo, schifo!

Che schifo che mi fa a sentir parlare Berlusconi in piazza. Un conato
di vomito proprio dopo mangiato. Dovessi pure perderci dei soldi sono
sempre piu' convinto che deve essere sostenuto il governo Prodi. 
La virulenza antidemocratica di Berlusconi, il suo linguaggio da golpe
sudamericano, il suo ribaltare sugli avversari i difetti e le colpe
che specificatamente gli apparetngono, non si smentiscono. 
Si ripresenta in piazza per dimostrare quanto sia peggiorato e quanto
sia ancor piu' inattendibile.
LG. 

 di vomito proprio dopo mangiato. 
...anche tu hai notato il pettine...??  :-)))



Quello a cui sono venuti tutti i nodi che ci ha lasciato?
LG

 ...anche tu hai notato il pettine...??  :-)))
sottile!
LOL!
-- 
fuzzy694ATliberoDOTit

 sempre piu' convinto che deve essere sostenuto il governo Prodi.
Grazie, sei il mio mito.
Per i tuoi soldi, tranquillo che ci penso io!
Romanuccio tuo 

Per i tuoi soldi, tranquillo che ci penso io!
Meglio che li tieni tu che il BelRuscone, che vuol mettertelo in culo
con la demagogica caprirola dello sconto. Oltre all'ICI, le tasse,
dirette e indirette, agli italiani e' pronto a ridurre nuovamente
anche i peli che hanno sul culo (la sai quella dell'erba che non
rinasce sulla terra battuta...). 
Meno male che lo abbiamo mandato a casa, anzi... in piazza!
La fiera delle vanita' scesa in piazza. Te lo sei guardato il - come
si chiama - Giaminardi (?), come gli s'e' allungato il prognatismo
boccale da tapiro, ora che gli hanno tolto il careghino di sotto il
culo? L'UDC ha glissato la manifestazione, ma lui c'era - altroch'e'
se c'era - a gridare "A casa, a casa". Lui a  casa e' stato mandato di
malavoglia, e ne vorrebbe uscire. Chi assaggia ritorna.
Ciao Romy, riguardati.
LG

 LG
Sono nelle tue mani
continua così
;-)


E' una vittoria risicata, praticamente invisibile. L'Italia è spaccata in 
due come una mela... ricordalo.
Non c'è molto da gioire ma solo da preoccuparsi, sia a destra che a 
sinistra. 

 Che schifo che mi fa a sentir parlare Berlusconi in piazza. ...
O no l'è ätro che 'n misero mussolinetto da trapasso. ;-)
-- 
Ciao  :-)
Angelo
A mæ patria à l'é Zena, a "Superba"!
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤øø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`
Il GenovaForum:
http://angelot.altervista.org/phpBB2/
Il sito TuttoGenova:
http://xoomer.virgilio.it/xpavese/index.html

Sono nelle tue mani, continua cosě
L'importante e che la Destra piu' sporca (FI e Lega) non riesca - le
sue mani - a ristringercele sul collo.
(A proposito, in piazza, oltre a Giovanardi, te lo sei visto il Bossi
- che va gia' bene se riesca a stare in piedi - che ha gridato.
"Silvio, ce lo abbiamo duro!". Ma pare che Berlusconi, ad avercelo
duro come il Boss,i non gradisca :-)).
LG

due come una mela... ricordalo.
E a quanto pare Berlusconi vuole spaccarla del tutto con la virulenza
della retorica e della demagogia. 0ormai non e' che un caso personale,
come un flamer da NG (stesso linguaggio). Bruttissima situazione. 
Mi pare che oltre il 50% dei titoli di Stato siano piazzati
all'estero. Se per il recente declassamento di due agenzie di rating,
e non certo per le colpe dell'attuale Governo di recentissima nomina
(e' dura farla credere diversa da cosi', dopo tutta la "finanza
creativa" di Tremonti) gli acquirenti esteri temono per la
solvibilita' dell'Italia e deviano dall'acquisto del "debito"
italiano, ci puo' persino essere il pericolo di un effetto a cascata,
con un grave tunnel recessivo. 
Quindi vedi bene che non la prendo affatto sottogamba. E' la Destra
che pensa la si possa prendere sottogamba, cioe' strumentalizzarla
solo per far cadere il Governo. Poi nei 6-9 mesi di ponte che cosa
capiterebbe?
LG


 LG
Senti, televisorino, ma tu ti prendi davvero sul serio?
Nel caso, siamo in due!
:-)
Non cambiare mai!
Tuo per sempre
Romy 

 Senti, televisorino, ma tu ti prendi davvero sul serio?
Mo č il suo bello!
-- 
"Quella troia di tua sorella" (c)
Sistema testato per eliminare le teste di cazzo.

 O no l'č ätro che 'n misero mussolinetto da trapasso. ;-)
Da trapasso?


 Che schifo
D'altronde, prima o poi, uno specchio dovevi pur comprarlo.


 con un grave tunnel recessivo. 
Ci sarà senza dubbio, anche per l'aumento delle tasse ed il clima di
incertezza dato da un governicchio di quaqquaraqua.
Le agenzie di rating valutano la solvibilità dell'emittente, ovvero
valutano la probabilità *futura* che il debitore rientri di quanto dovuto.
E' quindi evidente che la *sola* interpretazione possibile che si può dare
a questo declassamento è "non siamo tanto sicuri che un paese con un
deficit vergognoso e che ha *questo* governo, che fa *questa* finanziaria,
restituirà i soldi che vi chiede in prestito".



wrote:
Non sei che un piccolo giuda che scimmiotta il grosso giuda Tremonti
(ma tu proprio le persone non le sai giudicare, sei ottenebrato; non
le vedi muoversi e parlare in TV? Sei sempre a guardare sui NG?!). 
Hai mangiato la merda berlusconiana, l'ha trovata buona, e adesso ne
fa volontariato e propaganda. 
Ma vai a cagare, ballista. 
LG. 

 Ma vai a cagare, ballista. 
Scusate, non posso postare il link perché l'articolo è disponibile per i
soli abbonati. Non taglio l'articolo perché non ho voglia di perder tempo. 
Chi se lo volesse legger tutto scoprirebbe un'ulteriore prova che LG è una
povera merdaccia che non ha altro sollazzo, nella vita, che lanciare
insulti gratuiti. Come sembrano gratuiti a lui quelli che gli lanciano
tutti, dato che è così imbecille ed ignorante da non potersi rendere conto
dell'entità delle sue disgrazie. Ma questo immagino sia risaputo...
Financial trades
Why didn't I think of that?
Dec 16th 2004
From The Economist print edition
Were these the best financial trades ever carried out?
THE history buff is in no doubt: the greatest trade ever was the Louisiana
purchase in 1803. It was certainly a splendid deal for America, which
picked up a great whack of land between the Mississippi and the Rockies for
a song. But was it a trade? More of a treaty with a sale-and-purchase
agreement tacked on, actually, as was the snapping up of Alaska from the
Russians some 60 years or so later. To qualify as a trade—at least for the
purposes of this article—a deal must be a financial transaction designed
and executed using financial instruments to profit from an insight into a
market opportunity. In other words, it cannot be something that happened by
accident or sheer luck. And it cannot be a deal—a breathtaking takeover, an
audacious property punt or an early investment in Google. Any of these
might be both clever and lucrative, but it would not be a trade.
Unfortunately, that rules out one of history's quirkiest exchanges. In
parts of 15th-century Africa, salt was more precious, because scarcer, even
than gold. Traders determined enough to transport salt a thousand or so
miles from the north found they could exchange the white stuff for its
equal weight in gold—surely one of the best deals ever, reckons Peter
Bernstein, whose book on “The Power of Gold” includes this tale. True, but
it was sheer luck combined with grim effort, not special financial skill,
that brought wealth to those fortunate barterers. Nor were financial tools
essential.
Also ruled out must be the group of middle-class women running a charity in
Arbois, a small town in France, two centuries ago. In the autumn of 1807
they noticed that bad weather was threatening the grain harvest. Fearing
that high prices during the winter would stop their distribution of food to
the poor, they went to the local market and paid well above the prevailing
price in order to lock in future supplies—an early example of futures
trading. During the winter, prices indeed shot up. Had they been
speculating, they would have made a fat profit. That was not their aim,
though, and there is no evidence that they continued to trade.
No, to be among the greatest trades, there must be something of that
special characteristic that makes observers wonder why they had failed to
think of it themselves. The quality that elicits admiration may be just the
simplicity of the idea; or it may be the sheer imagination that constructed
a complex set of interactions designed to bring about a specific profitable
outcome. Trades involving the modern mechanisms for trading commodities are
certainly eligible to be called the greatest: some of the biggest, boldest
and most secretive traders are to be found in the oil and metals markets.
So, too, are deals involving derivatives, for they are more than mere
mechanisms for executing trades, often using extra techniques to boost
returns.
Soros sets a standard
Some trades are already well known, and deservedly so. George Soros became
a household name after he made Britain's chancellor of the exchequer look
an idiot by forcing the pound out of Europe's exchange-rate mechanism in
1992. Mr Soros is reckoned to have made a profit of $1 billion by borrowing
heavily to bet that sterling would be devalued. That sets a testing
benchmark against which to measure other candidates.
But plenty of traders have made tidy sums and had arguably brighter ideas.
Often they wish to remain anonymous, either embarrassed by their success
or, more likely, anxious to avoid the attentions of mendicants. A fine
example is the young Morgan Stanley man who retired after the 1987
stockmarket crash. His insight was that the heady levels of the market were
strikingly reminiscent of an earlier boom that had gone spectacularly bust
in 1929.
He used his knowledge of the market to load up on put options (those that
give the holder the right to sell) on the S&P 500 share index, and even
persuaded his mother to buy some. The options were ridiculously cheap
because no one thought they would ever be exercised, so far would the
market have to fall for them to be valuable. Fall it did, and the trader
had the nerve to wait for Black Monday—October 19th 1987—rather than cash
in during the tremors of the previous week. Having sold his options for
about 800 times what he had paid for them, he is said to have walked away
with $13m and was last heard of living on a ranch in Montana.
That combination of pluck, tenacity and reserve is powerful. But $13m is
small change for Mr Soros. Moreover, the winner of the biggest-trade title
will get no prize for modesty. In fact, most traders are far from shy about
their talents. Remember the Big Swinging Dicks made famous by Michael Lewis
in his novel, “Liar's Poker”? One BSD merits such a mention. In the 1980s
Andy Krieger was a star at Bankers Trust, an investment bank that later
imploded. In his heyday there, Mr Krieger made hundreds of millions of
trading profits, before resigning in 1998—to go, as it happens, to work for
Mr Soros.
Putting the kiwi to flight
Mr Krieger is scarcely remembered these days except perhaps in one country,
New Zealand. The trade for which he deserves mention involved the kiwi, as
the New Zealand dollar is known in currency markets. And here is a measure
of just how big a BSD Mr Krieger was. During 1987 he sold short (hoping to
buy back more cheaply in future) more kiwis than the entire money supply of
New Zealand. So huge were his bets against the currency that it is not
really surprising that they succeeded, causing the kiwi to collapse. It is
said, apocryphally, that New Zealand's finance minister telephoned Bankers
Trust to complain and beg for mercy. In fact, the government was privately
pleased, because the weaker currency gave a helpful push to the country's
struggling exports.
To put Mr Krieger's effrontery into context, he was just one trader in a
veritable sea of them on Wall Street, in London and elsewhere. In a sense,
he took on his entire industry and won. But some context is important. Mr
Krieger was on to options early, and he soon realised that the youngish
options market was inefficient, not least in its failure to ensure that
options prices were a fair reflection of prices on the underlying cash
markets. Much of his success came from his readiness to make maximum use of
that inefficiency by placing huge bets.
Having sold his options for about 800 times what he had paid for them, he
is said to have walked away with $13m and was last heard of living on a
ranch in Montana
It would be impossible to repeat his feats today. One reason is that banks
are far warier and no one is usually accorded the almost limitless freedoms
Mr Krieger enjoyed. When big trades are done, they are often seen
afterwards as failures of risk management. Another reason why the world
will probably not see another Mr Krieger is that today's markets are much
more efficient: the excess returns that he scooped up are no longer on the
table, and only if new markets emerge will there be fresh sources of profit
for pioneers. Indeed, a feature of modern financial markets is that they
are tending to become more efficient, and that has made great trades harder
than ever to concoct. That is one reason why those that do occur get big
rewards.
Most great trades are done in secret by highly paid traders working for
investment banks, hedge funds and so on. Rarely does this institutional
activity cross paths with the world of retail finance. But for
inventiveness in linking the two activities, one trade clearly stands out.
It originated in 1992 when the Italian government changed its previously
lax rules on withholding tax for Eurobonds. At that time some specialist
teams in London and other big financial centres did nothing but seek out
tax arbitrages: by buying this bond here and moving it there, it was often
possible to avoid taxes at the point of purchase and thereby earn extra
returns. Exploiting Italy's rules had been one of the neatest such wheezes,
so when it was thwarted several of the tax teams found themselves wondering
what to do next.
Among them was Ludovico Filotti, who worked for Barings. In 1993 Mr Filotti
was on holiday in Italy. Reading the local newspaper, something caught his
eye. An advertisement was encouraging companies to buy bonds issued by
Italy's Post Office. These bonds were postal savings bonds, rather like
Britain's national savings certificates, and carried the guarantee of the
Italian state. Mr Filotti was curious: normally such bonds would only be
for retail investors, so he wondered on what terms companies could invest.
Back in Britain, he sent his Italian father the equivalent of £100 and
asked him to nip down to a post office to buy a bond certificate so that he
could study the small print on the bond.
What he found was encouraging. The postal bonds were “zero coupon”, that
is, unlike most bonds, which pay annual interest instalments, they would
pay nothing until they matured, so investors would have to wait a set
period before pocketing their returns and recovering their original
investment. The bonds promised a return of three times the initial
investment after 12 years—a rate equivalent to 9.6% a year.
Back at his bank, Mr Filotti explained his discovery to a colleague, John
Hunter, who realised that this highly attractive rate would be even more so
if the equally juicy rates on Italian-government bonds were to fall. That
would open a spread between Italy's ordinary borrowings and the postal
bonds, just the kind of “arbitrage” opportunity traders love. But the most
remarkable feature of the offer was that there was no upper limit on how
much could be invested. Nor were there disadvantageous tax obligations for
foreigners.
In fact, the arbitrage quickly disappeared when Italy's interest rates rose
rather than fell. The trading idea sat on a shelf. But, towards the end of
1995, Italy's economy began its path towards convergence with those of the
other countries hoping to join the euro. That meant its interest rates
began to fall. And, in the summer of 1996, they started to fall
dramatically. Suddenly, the Post Office trade was on. Mr Hunter persuaded
his new employer, a big Japanese bank, to buy $50m of the postal bonds.
At this stage, his trade became one of the greatest ever. It also became
amusing. Mr Filotti, who had also gone to work at the same Japanese bank,
flew to Italy and, escorted by police, carried a banker's draft for the
equivalent of $50m into a post office. Queuing up alongside pensioners
claiming their modest weekly infusion, he exchanged the draft for a savings
bond. Soon the certificate was safely lodged in London. With no limit on
the amounts that could be invested, a huge and profitable arbitrage was
there for the taking.
Readers who are not financial experts need not worry about exactly how
banks can exploit such trades, while the experts will understand that the
bonds offered both option and swap opportunities to lock in big profits.
Around the time of the trade, there was also large and unusual activity in
the market for swaptions (options on swaps).
Mr Hunter, however, was unable to persuade his conservative masters to go
further. No matter: he sold the idea for the trade, first to a single rival
bank, then to several others. This set off a mad rush to buy the bonds
before the opportunity disappeared. Bankers flew in droves to Italy,
jostling to be in front of each other in the queue. In double-quick time
UBS bought over $1 billion-worth of the bonds. CSFB bought the most, but,
according to International Financing Review, a trade magazine, later gave
back its profits when the Italian government threatened to withhold
lucrative mandates for privatisations. Nomura made the biggest single
purchase, plonking down $1.1 billion on the counter of a bemused clerk, who
duly filled out a certificate for more than a trillion lire.
Of course, it could not last. After $3.6 billion of the bonds had been
issued in the space of a few days, the Italian government suddenly put a
ceiling on the amount that could be bought and made threats to the banks'
future fee income. Too bad. Mr Hunter, however, is now the chief executive
of Brains, a specialist broker that tries to make money by selling clever
ideas to other traders.
Bubble, bubble, short and double
However, an even better contender for the title must be the trade conceived
by Sir John Templeton to profit from the 1990s internet bubble. A renowned
investor, Sir John will be remembered for many trades, not least the one in
1939 in which he bought shares in 104 almost worthless, and in some cases
already bankrupt, New York stockbrokers. Hitler had just invaded Poland,
and the young Mr Templeton correctly foresaw that abundant surpluses of
goods and commodities would soon become scarcities, leading to a strong
recovery of financial-asset prices. Within three years he had turned a
profit on 100 of the 104 purchases.
Sixty years later, long experience suggested to Sir John that technology
and internet shares were an especially inflated part of a huge bubble. The
problem was to construct an investment strategy that could exploit this.
His solution was ingenious, so much so that it wins the “Wish I'd thought
of that” prize by a mile.
Nomura made the biggest single purchase, plonking down $1.1 billion on the
counter of a bemused clerk, who duly filled out a certificate for more than
a trillion lire
For every flotation there is a “lock-up” period during which insiders at
the company are forbidden to sell any of their shares. Sir John reasoned
that, in a bubble market, these insiders would generally be keen to sell
once they could. After all, this was their only way of getting a lot of
money out of their venture if it was unlikely to mature into a profitable
long-term business and, as insiders, they ought to know better than anyone
that few of their companies were likely to stay the course. So he
systematically sold their shares short just before the end of the lock-up.
That meant he could buy the shares back more cheaply if they fell in price,
as he reckoned they would.
Sir John acted with great discipline. First, he decided to sell only those
shares that were trading at more than three times their original price.
Then he set precise points at which he would take profits if prices
fell—and he would ruthlessly cut his losses if a particular share held up
unexpectedly. In the end he made 84 separate transactions, each for $2.2m.
The results were spectacular. Sir John made a return of almost 50% on his
$185m bet. On some positions, he made profits of more than 90%.
Not bad, but still pretty piffling by Mr Soros's standards. To outdo his $1
billion coup, consider a scheme whose returns have been so great they are
unmeasurable. Fittingly, as the winner of the “greatest trade” title, it
requires only brief description. In 1996 and 1997 Italy (yes, again) was
desperate to reduce its public-sector deficit so that the country would
qualify for entry into the euro. One unintended boost came from the sale of
the postal bonds described above—bizarrely, because they matured after the
euro deadline, they were not counted as current debt. But the stroke of
genius by officials in Italy's finance ministry was to enter into a secret
trade that simultaneously brought in cash, took some debt off the books and
deferred the repayment of the cash and the debt until after the euro
deadline had been successfully reached.
Many economists were amazed when Italy defied expectations to qualify for
the euro. And its admission into the system has been worth an incalculable
fortune. It has brought huge savings via systematically lower interest
rates and greater economic efficiency. Had Italy not qualified, its economy
might have crumbled. Certainly, its public-sector finances would be in dire
straits.
The trade itself was fairly simple, though complicated enough to ensure
that it came to light only in late 2001, when Gustavo Piga, an economics
professor, stumbled across it while studying public-debt policies.
Essentially, Italy used a swap to defer interest payments on an issue of
$1.7 billion of yen-denominated bonds that it had made in 1995, at the same
time taking an up-front payment for the swap that was later repaid with
interest. Thus was Italy able to make it into the euro, merely at the price
of a big repayment on the swap in 1998.
Think of the various elements of the trade. It was bold and risky. It
relied on secrecy. It was brilliantly conceived to solve a specific, and
apparently insurmountable, problem. It was executed with great skill. And,
for a fee, it gave Italy the opportunity to be part of the euro system,
with its incalculable rewards. Part of its appeal is that the profits came
not from the counterparty on the trade itself, but from the economic
consequences of the trade.
Of course, it was also thoroughly dodgy—had it been done by a company, the
management would probably be in prison for cooking the books—though the
Italians have always maintained that it exploited weak rules, rather than
broke strong ones. But there is no need to be churlish. This was, after
all, the greatest trade ever. Bravissimo!


 Ma vai a cagare, ballista. 
Quasi quasi vi ri-riporto e traduco il periodo finale (relativo alla truffa
agli investitori fatta dal centro-sinistra) dell'articolo, che, ripeto, la
cita come la più brillante e cospicua operazione finanziaria mai fatta.
Da notare che, nonostante questa megatruffa, il nostro rating non è sceso
fino al ritorno del saccheggiatore dell'IRI & kompagni.
Chiaramente, era assolutamente truffaldino - l'avesse fatto una società
privata il management sarebbe probabilmente in galera per FALSO IN BILANCIO
- anche se gli Italiani hanno sempre sostenuto che [l'operazione] aveva
sfruttato REGOLE deboli, non infranto REGOLE forti [maiuscolo mio]. Ma non
c'è motivo di essere così pignoli. Questa è stata, in fondo, la più grande
[grossa e vantaggiosa] transazione finanziaria mai fatta. Bravissimo [in
Italiano]!
Of course, it was also thoroughly dodgy—had it been done by a company, the
management would probably be in prison for cooking the books—though the
Italians have always maintained that it exploited weak rules, rather than
broke strong ones. But there is no need to be churlish. This was, after
all, the greatest trade ever. Bravissimo!


 Da trapasso?
Oopss! vočiva dī: da strapasso. ;-)

soli abbonati
E cosa vorresti dimostrare, che non sei il solo ballista? Credevo ci
tenessi di piu' ai tuoi primati!
E chi l'ha scritto l'articolo in inglese, Pugnetta (Brune...)?! Sta' a
vedere che adesso anche la Destra finanziaria dell'accaparramento
economico,  dell'ultraliberismo spregiudicato e del conservatorismo -
quella che partori' la sciura Tatcher - diventa la bocca della verita'
(dopo esser stata nei secoli la Casa della Menzogna) solo perche' si
mette a parlare inglese. 
Ma ti pare che mi stia a leggere un lungo articolo in inglese?? Aho,
ma sei proprio fesso. 
Il "buco" lasciato dalla sinistra a quel galantuomo che e' Tretrucchi
doveva essere un cratere, una voragine, un abbisso, visto che neppure
i 5 anni di maggioranza assoluta di quel genio dell'economia del
Belruscone (povera innocente vittima sacrificale, dal limpidissimo
passato) e' riuscito a colmare. E se dovesse ritornare la Destra e
l'Italia andare a carte quarantotto, sarebbe ancora per colpa dei BOT
venduti alle Poste per mascherare il buco.
LG

un abbisso
Con due "b" tanto per darti quel senso di vittoria che provi quando
riesci a correggere un refuso d'ortografia :-). Ognuno s'accontenta
come puo'.
LG

O no l'č ätro che 'n misero mussolinetto da trapasso. ;-)
 Ma possibile che non si riveda nelle registrazioni? Che nessuno del suoi
immagino moltissimi "curatori d'immagine" glielo faccia notare?
 Pari pari al Benito, stesse pause ad effetto, stesse domande retoriche alla
folla che risponde con boati ed invocazioni "SIILVIO, SIILVIO, SIILVIO!"
 Mah, probabilmente lui anzi ci tiene, ad evocarlo...
		pgg

fino al ritorno del saccheggiatore dell'IRI & kompagni.
Insomma: solo perche' fanno paura Prodi e i suoi alleati. E a chi
fanno paura? 
(ad es. a quelli che scrivono komunisti con la kappa? Ma tranquilli!
Non vi siete accorti che la roba di kappa e' sempre piu' imbrigliata
dalla maglieria democristiana? Di cosa avete paura, della vostra
ombra?)
Sei cosi' ingenuo da credere che il centrosinistra non sia in grado di
demolire le tesi della Destra con altrettanti articoli di opinionisti
a favore? E viceversa? Quanto piu' si naviga in un intorno dell'ex
centro democristiano tanto piu' si trovano mani sporche. Sullo sfondo
Prodi risulta uno dei piu' puliti.
Che poi ci sia stato un riassemblamento da una parte verso i kompagni
dall'altra verso i fascisti e' un dato di fatto (se vogliamo
continuare a menarcelo con queste categorie dello spirito). Che poi a
sinistra  ci sia uno slittamento verso il centro e a Destra uno del
centro verso la destra sporca berlusconiana, cortigiana  - con la
confusione delle acque tra populismo fascista e liberismo - mi pare
che sia un altro dato di fatto in bellavista. 
Credere che ci sia una soluzione economica indipendentemente dagli
schieramenti (una specie di ottimizzazione neutrale) e' pura utopia:
ci sara' sempre chi ci guadagna di piu' e chi di piu' ci perde, e chi
e' in Parlamento proprio per prendere le parti o degli uni o degli
altri. 
Il problema sta in quali ceti di reddito paghino maggiormente i debiti
che abbiamo sulla testa, in chi paga  lo stato sociale, quanto stato
sociale ci deve essere, e - in subordine ma sempre presente ad ogni
legislatura - chi piu' fa gli interessi della Chiesa e della sua
ideologia espansionista. Ecco il confronto tra Centrosinistra e
Centrodestra. 
Tu ovviamenti vai dove ti porta il cuore :-). 
LG

mette a parlare inglese. 
stai sbroccando.
quell'articolo è tratto dall'Economist, che tempo fa bastonò in modo
ugualmente duro Berlusconi (Why berlusconi is unfit to lead Italy) e
venne magnificato dalla sinistra come tempio dell'informazione
finanziaria corretta ed infallibile... insomma, non è roba presa dalla
Padania, dal Manifesto, da Liberazione o quelle schifezze lì.
poi se il problema è l'inglese, al limite te lo traduco io!
ps: ho ricevuto l'aggiornamento sulla questione "non si possono citare
articoli su internet", grazie: se passa l'emendamento e quella norma
viene cancellata potrai finalmente dirci l'autore di quell'articolo
famoso!

  Mah, probabilmente lui anzi ci tiene, ad evocarlo...
Temo di sě. Lui od un altro, questo č ciň a cui siamo comunque
ineluttabilmente destinati, con questo deficit e questi rating. Peccato.


 		pgg
quoto, devi solo sostituire la parola folla con claque.
-- 
fuzzy694ATliberoDOTit

Che schifo che mi fa a sentir parlare Berlusconi in piazza.
Berlusconi ?
SANTO SUBITO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Benedetto Zaccaria


Speriamo! (prima c'e' una piccola formalita', poi la santificazione)  ;-)
-- 
fulmo

fulmo:

LOL!!!


poi se il problema è l'inglese, al limite te lo traduco io!
Il problema e' che io discuto altrove di molte cose, e vorrei darci un
taglio perche' mi prende troppo tempo. Su certe questioni
politico-economiche do un giudizio di sintesi complessivo, che mi pare
plausibile e giustificato, una volta individuate (anche tramite TV) le
personalita' in gioco. E quando faccio la comparazione della feccia ne
trovo piu' a Destra che a Sinistra. 
Da come la vedo io, il problema su larga scala - lo ripeto - sta in
quali ceti di reddito paghino maggiormente i debiti che abbiamo sulla
testa, in chi paga  lo stato sociale, quanto stato sociale ci deve
essere, e - in subordine ma sempre presente ad ogni legislatura - chi
piu' fa gli interessi della Chiesa e della sua ideologia
espansionista. Ecco il confronto tra Centrosinistra e Centrodestra.
LG

 Da come la vedo io,
Ma pensi che il giudizio di uno che chiude gli occhi e cerca di svilire
l'obiettività di un giornale che fino a ieri portava in palmo di mano possa
aver un qualunque valore? Neppure se tu non fossi un coglione ed una
merdaccia.


 puliti. 
Questa è una stronzata colossale che, se ce ne fosse bisogno, dimostrerebbe
quanto sei ignorante e coglione. Hai idea di cosa fosse l'IRI?
Era il braccio economico del Governo, quindi il posto da dove si potevano
fare le migliori porcherie, quasi meglio che nella sanità e senz'altro
meglio che coi decreti legge che devono pur sempre essere pubblici.
Hai mai sentito parlare di fondi neri dell'IRI?
Non ce la faccio più a leggere altre castronerie. Le sette righe seguenti
non dicono un cazzo di nulla, non citano un numero, ma in compenso sono
circonvolute e contorte.
Quelle ancora successive, ahimé, non lo saprò mai.
Mi sa sia tempo di reinstaurare la regola delle tre righe.


LG:

Non credo di averti mai rimproverato un errore di battitura (hai riletto
che bel titolo hai dato a questo thread?), salvo quando il risultato era
particolarmente comico. 
E' inutile che cerchi di spargere fumo. "Accidia" è solo uno dei tanti
termini desueti che utilizzi per fare il fico, ma di cui non conosci il
significato, merdaccia ignorante.



wrote:
Gne gne.
LG


wrote:
Gne gne
LG

 puliti. )

 Gne gne
Finalmente sei riuscito a sintetizzare il tuo pensiero.
Tutti i tuoi interventi si possono riassumere dicendo che ti lamenti perché
non è colpa tua se sei una merdaccia, ma è colpa di Berlusconi, fascisti,
democristiani, ferramenta, Bertolazzi, eccetera.
Ben venga un bel "gne gne", semplice, caratterizzante e pregnante.
Altro che polsini!
-- 
Scriviti questo sul polsino: 
"HA AH AH PRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!"
Svenati e scrivilo col sangue, che non ti si sbiadisca il ludibrio
delle genti.

Finalmente sei riuscito a sintetizzare il tuo pensiero.
Si', contestualizzato a misura dei tuoi problemi di comprensione.
LG

LG:

Ma perché cazzo devi "contestualizzare a misura", brutta bestia ignorante e
presuntuosa?
Perché non usi solo le 100 parole di cui conosci il significato?


Perché non usi solo le 100 parole di cui conosci il significato?
Perche' con te ne bastano molte di meno: due. Eccole:
gne gne
LG