“Return on equity” doesn’t tell you a whole lot. “Equity” is simply assets minus liabilities. If one has a low equity one shows a higher return on equity than a company with a high equity, all other things being equal. XOM’s PE ratio at slightly less than 10 is nothing to write home about, which reflects a not-terribly-exciting prospect for the future in the eyes of investors.Google Finance, type in XOM, look on the right side towards the bottom.
Catholics who put bloated, bureaucratic government programs for the poor as their one Catholic issue of importance are able to ignore all of those other issues. If pressed, they’ll bring up Bush and Just War to try to claim they are for more than bloated bureaucracy.You are correct. In addition, what about the other non-negotiables that our current president supports? No one has mentioned those lately. And what about the current president’s war on the Catholic Church? One would think that Catholics would be a little upset about that.
Yes I know, Mary. It has been discussed ad nauseum earlier in this thread, and I continue to post reminders to those on the thread to not lose sight of the priorities here. Sadly, I haven’t gotten much traction with those criticizing the Ryan-Wyden Budget to acknowledge whether or not they understand that the right to life issue trumps the Budget a million times out of a million and thus the budget simply becomes a non-issue until after we get Mr. Obama out of the White House. Then we can have a more robust debate about the Budget’s minutiae.You are correct. In addition, what about the other non-negotiables that our current president supports? No one has mentioned those lately. And what about the current president’s war on the Catholic Church? One would think that Catholics would be a little upset about that.
Well now, is Romney really pro-life? Let’s look at his record. He says he is, but he says a lot of things doesn’t he. I know it sounds like I’m voting for Obama, but as I stated in previous post…I cannot vote my conscious for either candidate this election cycle. Obama goes against my religious views, Romney goes against my moral views. I know many people that are as conflicted as me, I’m not alone. I am sorry to you all. I truley feel our religious convictions are being used to say “Hey, we may totally destroy the social saftey nets for the poor and the elderly and disabled, and we may take away some peoples right to even vote, we may make things a lot harder for you and a lot better for the rich but, at least we’re pro-choice, so you HAVE to vote for us! ha ha ha!” The right is just too extreme right now for my taste.I would agree with you that the minutiae of Mr. Ryan’s plan can be debated openly, and I think we’re having a robust discussion about it on this thread.
I would again caution everyone to not lose sight of the fair more important point of the pro-abortion and the anti-religion platforms which our current president holds, and which far outweighs any discussion about the minutiae of Mr. Ryan’s budget.
Step 1 is voting out the pro-abortion/anti-religion president, and one should not make the mistake of giving Mr. Ryan’s budget priority over the right to life issue or the freedom of religion issue.
God bless.
-Paul
Return on equity is the return on the owners investment in the business. If I can invest $100k in a business, hire someone to run it and get $40k back that is an excellent rate of return. You are right, that we can always boost ROE by increasing debt (as long as we earn more than the cost of debt), but it is the measure that should be used in determining profitability.“Return on equity” doesn’t tell you a whole lot. “Equity” is simply assets minus liabilities. If one has a low equity one shows a higher return on equity than a company with a high equity, all other things being equal. XOM’s PE ratio at slightly less than 10 is nothing to write home about, which reflects a not-terribly-exciting prospect for the future in the eyes of investors.
I was around when Kennedy ran for president and the things that were said about him and about the Pope and the Church were nothing short of silly. It is easy to use one’s religion as a reason not to vote for them, particularly when one probably wouldn’t vote for him in any case.Exactly. Values matter, because they shape your decisions. Religious views don’t.
No. Not “the USCCB”. Two bishops, and on two issues only.Sorry, I thought you were referring to a different post. Yes, the US Conference of Bishops had spoke out on the Ryan budget as immoral. Dolan’s comments, I need to find the specific quote before I repost. I don’t want to be charged for spreading lies.
hmm. I will consider your comment.Yes, but the issues with the USCCB have been discussed before on this thread. The USCCB is largely run by the liberal lay staff, sadly. Several Bishop’s were critical of the USCCB’s jump to conclusion about the Ryan Budget and did not agree at all with its findings, and in fact admonished themselves about their inability to effectively take into account the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity that Mr. Ryan utilized in the formation of the budget.
Some Bishops went so far as to state that they and the USCCB probably should stay out of matters they do not particularly understand and let the experts on the matters do their best.
God bless.
-Paul
The Right is not extreme at all. If you read the links provided on this thread, indeed the one I posted a couple pages ago, it would be easy to see that this Ryan Budget is being demagogued in classic liberal fear-mongering style. Don’t believe the lies!!! They’ve been doing it to people for over 50 years!!!Well now, is Romney really pro-life? Let’s look at his record. He says he is, but he says a lot of things doesn’t he. I know it sounds like I’m voting for Obama, but as I stated in previous post…I cannot vote my conscious for either candidate this election cycle. Obama goes against my religious views, Romney goes against my moral views. I know many people that are as conflicted as me, I’m not alone. I am sorry to you all. I truley feel our religious convictions are being used to say “Hey, we may totally destroy the social saftey nets for the poor and the elderly and disabled, and we may take away some peoples right to even vote, we may make things a lot harder for you and a lot better for the rich but, at least we’re pro-choice, so you HAVE to vote for us! ha ha ha!” The right is just too extreme right now for my taste.
If money is an issue, maybe you should forgo some of the luxuries in life, like cable tv, until you are on more stable footing.Well, because sometimes we can. We don’t live on weekly paychecks. We are self-employed seasonal business owners. The money is very unpredictable. If we did not have 6 children to support, maybe we wouldn’t worry so much about making sure we have food in the house. That’s the thing. Everyone is different, with different stories. You cannot say all people on food stamps just need to get a job.
Again, I was trying to point out that not all Catholics must agree on every issue. To have disagreements is not to disobey authority. I do not agree with Ryan’s budget. Do you now question my faith?No. Not “the USCCB”. Two bishops, and on two issues only.
And that was in a private letter from one bishop to another that was evidently leaked to the media. It did not meet the qualifications of a position paper of USCCB by a long way.
- Reduction of the INCREASE in food stamp funding from 12% to 8%.
- Elimination of payment of $1,000 per child to illegal immigrant parents.
What views of Romney’s do you find immoral?Well now, is Romney really pro-life? Let’s look at his record. He says he is, but he says a lot of things doesn’t he. I know it sounds like I’m voting for Obama, but as I stated in previous post…I cannot vote my conscious for either candidate this election cycle. Obama goes against my religious views, Romney goes against my moral views. I know many people that are as conflicted as me, I’m not alone. I am sorry to you all. I truley feel our religious convictions are being used to say “Hey, we may totally destroy the social saftey nets for the poor and the elderly and disabled, and we may take away some peoples right to even vote, we may make things a lot harder for you and a lot better for the rich but, at least we’re pro-choice, so you HAVE to vote for us! ha ha ha!” The right is just too extreme right now for my taste.
ROE is always just a “snapshot” at a point in time. Your business in which you invest $100,000 might not have the same ROE the very next week even if earnings stayed the same.Return on equity is the return on the owners investment in the business. If I can invest $100k in a business, hire someone to run it and get $40k back that is an excellent rate of return. You are right, that we can always boost ROE by increasing debt (as long as we earn more than the cost of debt), but it is the measure that should be used in determining profitability.
Of course, the mean stream media does not report this fact since it does not fit their agenda.Yes, but the issues with the USCCB have been discussed before on this thread. The USCCB is largely run by the liberal lay staff, sadly. Several Bishop’s were critical of the USCCB’s jump to conclusion about the Ryan Budget and did not agree at all with its findings, and in fact admonished themselves about their inability to effectively take into account the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity that Mr. Ryan utilized in the formation of the budget.
Some Bishops went so far as to state that they and the USCCB probably should stay out of matters they do not particularly understand and let the experts on the matters do their best.
God bless.
-Paul
rLg, not being Catholic I haven’t paid any attention to what the Vatican is investigating. If it is they are investigating nuns such as Sr Simone and those who were on the bus and out among the poor and who oppose Paul Ryan’s budget ideas, since the topic is Paul Ryan I could see where it could be somewhere near the the topic.I don’t think your allegations of the Vatican persecuting nuns by investigating them is anywhere near being on topic, though it is an interesting line of non-reasoning.
I don’t believe that was the point being made, DeSanto. It is okay to disagree with Mr. Ryan’s budget and have a debate about it, but one cannot use “the USCCB” as their justification for disagreement and try to add weight to the argument by attributing their positions to our shepherds, which simply is not the case.Again, I was trying to point out that not all Catholics must agree on every issue. To have disagreements is not to disobey authority. I do not agree with Ryan’s budget. Do you now question my faith?
Whatever made you think I was questioning your faith? I was only questioning the assertion that “the USCCB” declared Ryan’s budget immoral. I questioned that because it just plain didn’t.Again, I was trying to point out that not all Catholics must agree on every issue. To have disagreements is not to disobey authority. I do not agree with Ryan’s budget. Do you now question my faith?
Because it is clear that the Church has stated we cannot support a pro-abortion, gay marriage, etc. canidate unless there is some compelling reason. Period.Again, I was trying to point out that not all Catholics must agree on every issue. To have disagreements is not to disobey authority. I do not agree with Ryan’s budget. Do you now question my faith?
DeSanto, just because they’re not accepting your point and might not agree with you, doesn’t mean you’re not making it successfully.You’re right, not quite the topic. The point I’m trying to make, although not very successfully, is the fact that debates between issues within the church is not uncommon dating all the way back to the first century early Christians. There is a difference in questioning authority and disobeying.