They are based on real money, but when the stock market goes down nobody is expected to pay out $590 Billion dollars. The money simply disappears into the ether - it's a paper loss. If Microsoft stock goes up 10%, then Bill Gates gets 10% richer, but if he tried to cash in all of that wealth over a short period the stock value would fall and he would end up poorer. But when an earthquake happens, people expect to receive real money, not pieces of paper, and they expect to get it quickly.

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that the people who are promoting this idea had better be very careful. At some point cash is going to be due. You can't just make money appear when a disaster happens.

...without makeup, fancy hairstyling, and a gown designed to hide every imperfection (not to mention camera angles that flatter, and sometimes even computer enhancement to change flaws). But natural isn't "in" right now. I was listening to a local right wing radio station (for traffic reports) and the lead bimbette (trust me, the description fits) was waxing on about how people should lay off Hewitt because it's okay to be a little plump and have cellulite. I got the definite impression the Hewitt had let herself go, but she should be given a break. Then I saw the photos. Good grief - how many women would look that good coming out of the water? No wonder so many women have negative body images. If Hewitt is "fat", then our standards as a society have gotten to the point where no woman can meet them.

Is it just fun? It might be. But given the current right-wing noise about Obama being a Muslim, I'm not sure I like the implications of this video. It makes it look as if he is running for office in India. You and I both know that India isn't a Muslim nation, but how many Americans really make a distinction between one brown-skinned eastern nation and another? If it were any other candidate, I'd be sure it was just a game. In this case...

What is the coming catastrophe? Are we talking about the end of humanity as we know it, or the death of millions, or simply forced migration from low lying area. What is the disaster, when will it happen? What needs to be done? When? If they can pinpoint 2o12 as "too late", then they should be able to tell us what it is too late for. There just isn't enough known to panic over. A lot of people accept that global warming is real, but are unsure of what is happening and when it will happen. Before I panic, I need to know exactly what I'm panicking over. Warnings that "it may be too late" are simply not enough.

I had to read that section twice because I couldn't believe what I was reading. Then there is the reassurance that it doesn't actually cost anything to do this. The very nicely confused the issue of how this mortgage is actually paid for. I read that twice and I'm still not sure exactly who pays for what. The part about taking out a reverse mortgage even if you don't need the money was also priceless. Reading this really helps me to understand how so many people were tricked into taking out mortgages that were totally inappropriate for them. This brochure, printed material, reads like a con, and I can only imagine what kinds of things are being said in person. I had actually considered a reverse mortage for my mother, but at this point I will strongly recommend that she not consider this option until it is more widely regulated.

Can we stop pretending that Obama's past drug use is some kind of a Clinton whisper campaign. It hasn't been a secret for quite a while. He wrote it into a book. I thought that primaries were designed to assess the candidates qualifications and weaknesses and determine who to run for your parties candidate in the general election. If one campaign isn't allowed to mention what will end up being a major issue in the election, I don't know what the purpose of having primaries is.

I can't watch a movie in which a german shepherd dies. It would bring back too many memories I've recently learned to deal with and it would haunt me in ways I don't want to be haunted. I think that, in some cases, the need of people to be warned of things that may hurt them trumps the need to avoid "spoilers".

Good point about mangling science fiction. I haven't read the book upon which this movie is based, but I'm a big Asimov fan and was furious when I found out that the "I Robot" movie had totally violated the spirit of Asimov's robot books. Asimov wrote about how human beings came to terms with new technology, not technology turning on human beings. The technology he wrote about was overwhelmingly beneficial to humans. He never wrote anything like the I Robot movie, and would have strongly objected to the movies portrayal of robots as malignant beings.

I'm not sure that the people who advocate torture are really interested in saving lives. They seem to care more about scoring points. X number of confessions + Y number of dead "ragheads" + Z number of weapons caches = Success in "War on Terror". If they were really interested in saving lives they would focus more on ways to reduce violence instead of focusing on revenge.